AARoads Forum

National Boards => General Highway Talk => Topic started by: thspfc on December 13, 2021, 08:18:59 PM

Title: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: thspfc on December 13, 2021, 08:18:59 PM
Orlando and Milwaukee were the ones that came to mind for me.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: hotdogPi on December 13, 2021, 08:21:40 PM
Going down the list, it's Orlando.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
Metro areas with populations > 1M without I-x0 or I-x5s:

22   Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL MSA   2,673,376
35   San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA MSA   2,000,468
37   Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC MSA   1,799,674
40   Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI MSA   1,574,731
48   Hartford-East Hartford-Middletown, CT MSA   1,213,531 (the CSA has I-95)
52   Grand Rapids-Kentwood, MI MSA   1,087,592
54   Urban Honolulu, HI MSA   1,016,508
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331
56   Fresno, CA MSA   1,008,654

San Jose has three x0 3di highways
 
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: hotdogPi on December 13, 2021, 09:03:20 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331

I-40

Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
56   Fresno, CA MSA   1,008,654

I-5

And the Hartford MSA has I-95 even before considering the CSA.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: Scott5114 on December 13, 2021, 09:05:26 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 13, 2021, 09:03:20 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331

I-40

I don't give a damn what the Census Bureau says, I-40 in no way serves Tulsa.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: MikieTimT on December 13, 2021, 09:45:40 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 13, 2021, 09:05:26 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 13, 2021, 09:03:20 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331

I-40

I don't give a damn what the Census Bureau says, I-40 in no way serves Tulsa.

Tulsa itself, kind of a stretch.  Tulsa MSA, since they're including Okmulgee County in it, apparently so.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 13, 2021, 09:46:03 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 13, 2021, 09:03:20 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331

I-40

Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
56   Fresno, CA MSA   1,008,654

I-5

And the Hartford MSA has I-95 even before considering the CSA.

I-5 definitely does not directly serve the Fresno Area.  I would argue I-95 and I-75 more indirectly serve Orlando than I-5 does Fresno. 
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: thspfc on December 13, 2021, 09:56:10 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 13, 2021, 09:03:20 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331

I-40

Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
56   Fresno, CA MSA   1,008,654

I-5

And the Hartford MSA has I-95 even before considering the CSA.
In what universe, now?
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: Scott5114 on December 13, 2021, 10:00:18 PM
Quote from: MikieTimT on December 13, 2021, 09:45:40 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on December 13, 2021, 09:05:26 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 13, 2021, 09:03:20 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331

I-40

I don't give a damn what the Census Bureau says, I-40 in no way serves Tulsa.

Tulsa itself, kind of a stretch.  Tulsa MSA, since they're including Okmulgee County in it, apparently so.

I'd say including that part of Okmulgee County is kind of a stretch. I think Henryetta's existence is tied more to I-40 than it is to Tulsa. Other places further north in Okmulgee County make more sense to be included as part of the Tulsa MSA.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: SkyPesos on December 13, 2021, 10:18:37 PM
Pittsburgh could have either 0, 1 or 2 x0s, depending on who you ask.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: mukade on December 13, 2021, 10:33:53 PM
I had Pittsburgh in my original list, but when you look at a map, I-70 clearly goes through the metro area.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: thspfc on December 13, 2021, 10:38:59 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 10:33:53 PM
I had Pittsburgh in my original list, but when you look at a map, I-70 clearly goes through the metro area.
I-70 arguably does, I-80 obviously does not.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: bing101 on December 13, 2021, 11:02:48 PM
Honolulu, Hi is one of them.


All of their interstates are H1, H2, H3 designation.


Boise, ID because its main interstate is I-84.


Montpelier, VT is another one where I-89 is the major route in the area.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roads_in_Charleston,_West_Virginia


Charleston, WV has I-64, I-77, and I-79







Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: TheHighwayMan3561 on December 14, 2021, 01:44:04 AM
Honorable mentions:

Fargo/Moorhead
Boise
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 01:48:25 AM
On a side note, what would be the smallest with both a x0 and x5?

Cove Fort, maybe?
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: TheHighwayMan3561 on December 14, 2021, 01:53:05 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 01:48:25 AM
On a side note, what would be the smallest with both a x0 and x5?

Cove Fort, maybe?

The site has no permanent population, so that's arguably it.

Cities with under 20K:

Buffalo, WY (25/90; under 5K population)
Lake City (10/75)
Albert Lea (35/90)
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: Flint1979 on December 14, 2021, 05:33:37 AM
Quote from: 1 on December 13, 2021, 09:03:20 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
55   Tulsa, OK MSA   1,015,331

I-40

Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
56   Fresno, CA MSA   1,008,654

I-5

And the Hartford MSA has I-95 even before considering the CSA.
Neither one serves Tulsa or Fresno.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: GaryV on December 14, 2021, 07:28:45 AM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM

52   Grand Rapids-Kentwood, MI MSA   1,087,592


Why is it called Grand Rapids-Kentwood when Wyoming has a population 50% greater than Kentwood?
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: NWI_Irish96 on December 14, 2021, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
Metro areas with populations > 1M without I-x0 or I-x5s:

40   Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI MSA   1,574,731


I-94 is not technically an x0, but it functions like one.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: bassoon1986 on December 14, 2021, 08:31:26 AM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 14, 2021, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
Metro areas with populations > 1M without I-x0 or I-x5s:

40Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI MSA1,574,731


I-94 is not technically an x0, but it functions like one.
It's like the actual I-90, since there is no interstate 50 or 60.


iPhone
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: Flint1979 on December 14, 2021, 08:50:31 AM
Quote from: GaryV on December 14, 2021, 07:28:45 AM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM

52   Grand Rapids-Kentwood, MI MSA   1,087,592


Why is it called Grand Rapids-Kentwood when Wyoming has a population 50% greater than Kentwood?
Not sure but Wyoming is included as a principal city in the GR metro area.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: CNGL-Leudimin on December 14, 2021, 08:56:51 AM
Tulsa and Fresno are good examples of how the definition of core-based statistical area (by using only county or county-equivalent lines) is flawed. But those are nowhere near those of Denver-Aurora-Lakewood (which extends all the way to just outside Limon) or Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario (which includes far flung communities like Needles or Blythe, which in no way can be considered part of the Inland Empire). The latter could be better defined by using the boundaries of NWS San Diego's county warning area, which includes the truly urban parts of San Bernardino and Riverside counties.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: achilles765 on December 14, 2021, 09:58:58 AM
Quote from: TheHighwayMan394 on December 14, 2021, 01:53:05 AM
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 01:48:25 AM
On a side note, what would be the smallest with both a x0 and x5?

Cove Fort, maybe?

The site has no permanent population, so that's arguably it.

Cities with under 20K:

Buffalo, WY (25/90; under 5K population)
Lake City (10/75)
Albert Lea (35/90)

If we are talking populated places, how about LaPlace Louisiana for I 10 and I 55. Or Lake City Florida for I 10 and I 75.

Some other cities without an x5 or x0...
Wait. Question. Is it cities without either or without one of the two?
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: Max Rockatansky on December 14, 2021, 10:31:16 AM
Quote from: CNGL-Leudimin on December 14, 2021, 08:56:51 AM
Tulsa and Fresno are good examples of how the definition of core-based statistical area (by using only county or county-equivalent lines) is flawed. But those are nowhere near those of Denver-Aurora-Lakewood (which extends all the way to just outside Limon) or Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario (which includes far flung communities like Needles or Blythe, which in no way can be considered part of the Inland Empire). The latter could be better defined by using the boundaries of NWS San Diego's county warning area, which includes the truly urban parts of San Bernardino and Riverside counties.

Exactly, I-5 hits Fresno County but doesn't touch any major communities much less has a sphere of influence on traffic to the City of Fresno. Most people who use I-5 out of Fresno aren't even going hit it until Wheeler Ridge or Sacramento.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: roadman65 on December 14, 2021, 12:17:13 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 14, 2021, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
Metro areas with populations > 1M without I-x0 or I-x5s:

40   Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI MSA   1,574,731


I-94 is not technically an x0, but it functions like one.

Then you have I-45 that doesn't act like it should an is an intrastate serving two major Texas Metro Areas.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 12:35:04 PM
If we're deciding which non-x0s and x5s function like one now, here's my list...

Pseudo x0s: I-94, I-64, I-84

Pseudo x5s: I-29/49, I-77, I-81, Future I-69

Not-so fun fact: A completed I-69, including I-69E into its length, would be longer than all x5s except I-75 and I-95, and it's pretty close behind I-75's length. If you include all 3 branches, it may surpass I-95's length too.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: JayhawkCO on December 14, 2021, 12:37:54 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 12:35:04 PM
If we're deciding which non-x0s and x5s function like one now, here's my list...

Pseudo x0s: I-94, I-64

Pseudo x5s: I-29/49, I-77, I-81, Future I-69

Not-so fun fact: A completed I-69, including I-69E into its length, would be longer than all x5s except I-75 and I-95, and it's pretty close behind I-75's length.

I might add western I-84 to your pseudo x0s list.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: jmacswimmer on December 14, 2021, 01:03:54 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 14, 2021, 12:37:54 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 12:35:04 PM
If we're deciding which non-x0s and x5s function like one now, here's my list...

Pseudo x0s: I-94, I-64

Pseudo x5s: I-29/49, I-77, I-81, Future I-69

Not-so fun fact: A completed I-69, including I-69E into its length, would be longer than all x5s except I-75 and I-95, and it's pretty close behind I-75's length.

I might add western I-84 to your pseudo x0s list.

I might offer up I-44 as well?  I tend to think of I-44 as fill-in I-50, I-64 as fill-in I-60 (maybe it would have even been numbered such if not for US 60), and I-94 as fill-in I-100 (similar to US 101).  And the western I-84, per its original numbering, really does serve as an I-80 corridor branch towards Oregon & Washington.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: SEWIGuy on December 14, 2021, 01:19:43 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 14, 2021, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
Metro areas with populations > 1M without I-x0 or I-x5s:

40   Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI MSA   1,574,731


I-94 is not technically an x0, but it functions like one.


How does it "function" like one?  I-x0 and I-x5 function just like any other interstate.  The number just carries on longer.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 01:20:52 PM
Quote from: jmacswimmer on December 14, 2021, 01:03:54 PM
Quote from: jayhawkco on December 14, 2021, 12:37:54 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 12:35:04 PM
If we're deciding which non-x0s and x5s function like one now, here's my list...

Pseudo x0s: I-94, I-64

Pseudo x5s: I-29/49, I-77, I-81, Future I-69

Not-so fun fact: A completed I-69, including I-69E into its length, would be longer than all x5s except I-75 and I-95, and it's pretty close behind I-75's length.

I might add western I-84 to your pseudo x0s list.

I might offer up I-44 as well?  I tend to think of I-44 as fill-in I-50, I-64 as fill-in I-60 (maybe it would have even been numbered such if not for US 60), and I-94 as fill-in I-100 (similar to US 101).  And the western I-84, per its original numbering, really does serve as an I-80 corridor branch towards Oregon & Washington.
Added western I-84 in. Makes sense as a sort-of x0, as it used to be I-80N, and in my fictional planes, I thought it was important enough to carry the I-80 mainline west of SLC.

I-44, maybe, though it's shorter than the others by comparison, and imo I see it more taking a role like I-71 or eastern I-76, than a x0.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: Flint1979 on December 14, 2021, 01:59:01 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on December 14, 2021, 12:17:13 PM
Quote from: cabiness42 on December 14, 2021, 07:42:31 AM
Quote from: mukade on December 13, 2021, 09:00:04 PM
Metro areas with populations > 1M without I-x0 or I-x5s:

40   Milwaukee-Waukesha, WI MSA   1,574,731


I-94 is not technically an x0, but it functions like one.

Then you have I-45 that doesn't act like it should an is an intrastate serving two major Texas Metro Areas.
Yeah good point I didn't think of I-45 being so short when I saw this. I-94 indeed functions as a long haul route.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: paulthemapguy on December 14, 2021, 02:09:10 PM
Hell, I-94 has more tenacity than most x0's, surviving its detour around Lake Michigan without being deemed a different designation once it turns from southeast to northeast (or SW to NW).
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: mukade on December 14, 2021, 08:30:40 PM
It is interesting that the consensus is that highways such as I-64, I-69, I-81, and I-94 are essentially equivalent to I-x0 and I-x5 routes (Pseudo x0s and Pseudo x5s). Strong points have been made to support these beliefs.

I believe a lot of these weird numberings were a result of rules prohibiting the same Interstate and US numbers existing in the same state. For example, because Kentucky has US 60, there never could be an I-60 route in that state. Well that is all out the window with the I-41/US 41 and I-74/US 74 concurrencies.

With that said, the AASHTO applications all start with this statement:

Quote
The U.S. Numbered System was established in 1926 and the Interstate Numbered System was established in 1956. Both have reached the period of review, revision, and consolidation. They now need perfecting rather than expansion.

Perhaps that statement should be taken seriously to address some questionable choices that really should be reviewed.
Title: Re: Largest metropolitan area without an x0 or x5 Interstate
Post by: SkyPesos on December 14, 2021, 08:33:46 PM
Quote from: mukade on December 14, 2021, 08:30:40 PM
I believe a lot of these weird numberings were a result of rules prohibiting the same Interstate and US numbers existing in the same state. For example, because Kentucky has US 60, there never could be an I-60 route in that state. Well that is all out the window with the I-41/US 41 and I-74/US 74 concurrencies.
I-70 theoretically could've been I-60, if both it and US 60 didn't run cross-state in Missouri. It's pretty much the only state both routes have significant portions in, and even then, I-70 is way north of US 60, never meeting it. I-24 was allowed in IL since day one despite US 24, I don't see why not for "I-60" either.