(or Fresno or Bakersfield)
California will lead this topic, so let's give them the trophy and throw it open to others.
Rochester, NY? [edit]oops - Seattle. Has to be Seattle if you ignore California.
Largest city that never had one is a more interesting topic, since it doesn't "penalize" cities for being on major routes that became Interstates. I wouldn't know where to start - Lake Havasu City? Keene, NH (for an older city)? Something on Long Island?
Assuming you're not counting Interstates, just has to be San Diego. Used to have US 80, US 101, and US 395, before the first was decommissioned in California, and the other two were truncated.
In the northeast: Waterbury, New Britain, Middletown, and Norwich, CT; Lawrence, MA; Newport, RI; all of LI (Hempstead, Islip,); Vineland, NJ; Rockville/Gaithersburg, MD.
I like the idea of "largest city never served by a US highway" better.
I can't think of a city in Kentucky bigger than Hazard that doesn't have a US route.
In Tennessee it's definitely Oak Ridge.
Quote from: Steve on January 26, 2013, 11:05:18 AM
I like the idea of "largest city never served by a US highway" better.
Well, Honolulu and Anchorage are #1 and #2 on that list.
Outside of Hawaii and Alaska the answer appears to be Chandler, AZ (reading down this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities_in_the_US)).
Now, tougher question is, what if we exclude cities that are suburbs of other cities from consideration?
Quote from: Duke87 on January 26, 2013, 08:04:06 PM
Outside of Hawaii and Alaska the answer appears to be Chandler, AZ (reading down this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_largest_cities_in_the_US)).
Now, tougher question is, what if we exclude cities that are suburbs of other cities from consideration?
Yeah, Chandler's BS. Got a list of only main cities in MSAs (those in the name) by population?
Continuing down the same list, the answer seems to be Waterbury, CT.
Well, in Indiana it's Bloomington. And unlike the interstates thread where B-Town will get itself a new interstate in a few years, there will be no U.S. highways there ever.
In Wisconsin, the most populous municipality to have never had a US highway enter its corporate limits is the City of Racine.
Mike
Tucson, AZ
Yuma, AZ
In Nevada, this would have to be Pahrump. (Although Pahrump is technically an unincorporated town, not a city.)
It's the only major populated area in Nevada that has never been served by a US highway.
The largest I've found in Michigan so far (excepting suburbs of larger cities) that's never had a US Highway is Owosso, MI. (pop. 15,024).
and US 89 through Tucson.
And US 95 currently goes through Yuma.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 26, 2013, 09:49:17 AM
In the northeast: Waterbury, New Britain, Middletown, and Norwich, CT; Lawrence, MA; Newport, RI; all of LI (Hempstead, Islip,); Vineland, NJ; Rockville/Gaithersburg, MD.
Hempstead and Islip are towns, not cities. The only cities on Long Island are Glen Cove and Long Beach. The latter doesn't even have a state route passing through it, much less a US route or interstate, although the proposed but unbuilt I-878 would have passed through it.
How about the boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, and Staten Island in New York City? True, they're boroughs, not separate cities, but in terms of both population and area they're substantially larger than many places that are considered to be cities.
Different states define "city" in different ways. Any incorporated place in Kentucky is a "city." Such isn't the case in, for example, New York.
New York's towns are more like townships in other states.
In Iowa, at least the eastern half, the largest would have to be Washington, population 7000 or so. The only other town I could think of is Williamsburg (I-80 passes right next to it, but US-6 always veered north towards Marengo), but I guess that only seems bigger than it is (pop. 3000) because of the outlet mall.
San Diego wins. Seattle is 2nd and wins non-California (as NE said). I don't see why these threads grow so big since there's only one answer.
Fresno, Honolulu, Anchorage, and Bakersfield are nowhere near as big as San Diego and Seattle.
QuoteI don't see why these threads grow so big since there's only one answer.
Stop being so judgemental and follow the evolution of the thread and name the biggest city that never had a US highway
Quote from: corco on January 27, 2013, 09:24:02 PM
QuoteI don't see why these threads grow so big since there's only one answer.
Stop being so judgemental and follow the evolution of the thread and name the biggest city that never had a US highway
Long Beach, CA? (Fresno had US-99. I believe US-101 was east of Long Beach, and I don't think Long Beach was as big as it is now when US-91 was a thing.) I have no idea how big Long Beach was in the early 60s, though.
Long Beach had US 6.
Long Beach had US 6 and US 91 (as well as US 101 Alt).
The largest city in Oklahoma appears to be Bethany, pop. 19,607, which is wholly encompassed by OKC. The next-largest is Mustang (17,190), another OKC suburb.
The two towns in Arkansas I found were Centerton (pop. 9,515, a late-growing suburb of NWA) and Heber Springs (pop. 7,165, a county seat in the middle of a popular recreation area).
Bloomington, IN is the largest city in Indiana I can think of that doesn't have a US hghway.
Quote from: corco on January 27, 2013, 06:36:36 PM
and US 89 through Tucson.
And US 95 currently goes through Yuma.
US 89 Has been Decertified South Of Flagstaff
And I Forgot US 95 Passed Thru Yuma
Quote from: dgolub on January 27, 2013, 07:45:30 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 26, 2013, 09:49:17 AM
In the northeast: Waterbury, New Britain, Middletown, and Norwich, CT; Lawrence, MA; Newport, RI; all of LI (Hempstead, Islip,); Vineland, NJ; Rockville/Gaithersburg, MD.
Hempstead and Islip are towns, not cities. The only cities on Long Island are Glen Cove and Long Beach. The latter doesn't even have a state route passing through it, much less a US route or interstate, although the proposed but unbuilt I-878 would have passed through it.
Hempstead is also a village, the state's most populous. Indeed, the town is also the state's most populous of those. Both entities have more residents than many true cities (the latter, all but one city, in fact).
Quote from: US 41 on January 28, 2013, 11:27:19 AM
Bloomington, IN is the largest city in Indiana I can think of that doesn't have a US hghway.
Yeah, Bloomington beats out Fishers by just under 4,000 people. Of course those are 2010 Census figures and the way Fishers is growing it's probably bigger now.
If you're talking about "now", then San Diego, CA (population 1,307,402) is probably the largest city without a U.S. highway, and has been since the 1960s (1964?) when U.S. Highway 80 was decommissioned and U.S. 101 and 395 were shortened. Other present-day California candidates include Long Beach (462,257), and Oakland (390,724).
CalTrans did an unbelievably effective job in eradicating U.S. highways from their system during that realignment.
For Colorado, I think it would be Arvada (101,000). Although I-70 passes through the south side of that city, it doesn't have U.S. 40 running concurrent with it at that point. For Minnesota, I'm looking at Eagan (66,000). Picky people might point out that the early routing of U.S. 65 pre-1934 (now MN-3 and MN-149) ran through what is now Eagan, but it wasn't incorporated as a city at that time. There was, however, an Eagan Township that became the city by the 1970s.
Tokyo, Japan
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
Tokyo, Japan
Ha!
For Utah:
Tooele--While US-40 once came close via UT-138, US-40, as far as I can tell, never actually went through Tooele itself.
Also, Hurricane.
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
Tokyo, Japan
Nope.
http://www.kictec.co.jp/varieties-road-sign/us-military-sign/
http://blog-imgs-35.fc2.com/m/o/n/monpa2008/daigakunomon02.jpg
Quote from: NE2 on January 28, 2013, 05:52:17 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
Tokyo, Japan
Nope.
http://www.kictec.co.jp/varieties-road-sign/us-military-sign/
http://blog-imgs-35.fc2.com/m/o/n/monpa2008/daigakunomon02.jpg
Military routes, not US Routes as approved by the BPR and AASHO.
Quote from: Brandon on January 28, 2013, 06:56:45 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 28, 2013, 05:52:17 PM
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
Tokyo, Japan
Nope.
http://www.kictec.co.jp/varieties-road-sign/us-military-sign/
http://blog-imgs-35.fc2.com/m/o/n/monpa2008/daigakunomon02.jpg
Military routes, not US Routes as approved by the BPR and AASHO.
The subject asked for a U.S. Highway. I think it's hard to dispute.
Mount Pleasant, MI is served by two freeways, but not either of them are interstates.
In the UP of MI you have Escanaba that is a large city by the region it sits in. The UP has less than 10 percent of Michigan's total population, from what I have read once, so in the Lower Peninsula Escanaba would not be a major anything, especially around Detroit it would be the smallest of the suburbs.
I guess it depends on the area, what is considered large as far as this topic is concerned as it was implied by some already.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 28, 2013, 07:15:08 PM
Mount Pleasant, MI is served by two freeways, but not either of them are interstates.
In the UP of MI you have Escanaba that is a large city by the region it sits in. The UP has less than 10 percent of Michigan's total population, from what I have read once, so in the Lower Peninsula Escanaba would not be a major anything, especially around Detroit it would be the smallest of the suburbs.
I guess it depends on the area, what is considered large as far as this topic is concerned as it was implied by some already.
MP has a US highway, and so does Escanaba.
Quote from: ftballfan on January 28, 2013, 07:16:56 PM
Quote from: roadman65 on January 28, 2013, 07:15:08 PM
Mount Pleasant, MI is served by two freeways, but not either of them are interstates.
In the UP of MI you have Escanaba that is a large city by the region it sits in. The UP has less than 10 percent of Michigan's total population, from what I have read once, so in the Lower Peninsula Escanaba would not be a major anything, especially around Detroit it would be the smallest of the suburbs.
I guess it depends on the area, what is considered large as far as this topic is concerned as it was implied by some already.
MP has a US highway, and so does Escanaba.
I thought this was the other thread about interstates. Duh! I am so used to seeing that thread, its in my mind too much.
Then pretty much all of Nassau County, NY fits this and Port Jefferson and Riverhead in Eastern LI as well.
Keene, NH, although it has NH 9 and NH 12 that are a regional network of roads in the New England States, though not US routes, but are NE's way of saying they do not need US routes, we have the same type of network.
Elmira, NY, Jamestown, NY, Rochester, NY(especially since US 15 no longer goes there and US 104 decommissioned),and even Utica, NY do qualify.
I believe Vineland, NJ is one being that US 40 does not technically enter its limits, but in fact comes close as it does pass through Malaga, a town just to the north of it on NJ 47.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 28, 2013, 07:15:08 PM
Mount Pleasant, MI is served by two freeways, but not either of them are interstates.
It's served by exactly one freeway.
Quoteso in the Lower Peninsula Escanaba would not be a major anything, especially around Detroit it would be the smallest of the suburbs.
This isn't at all true. There are at least 10 suburbs smaller.
QuoteI thought this was the other thread about interstates. Duh! I am so used to seeing that thread, its in my mind too much.
Perhaps you should calm your eagerness to post (and do a modicum of research) because that isn't the first time you've erred in that regard.
Quote from: kphoger on January 28, 2013, 05:00:22 PM
Tokyo, Japan
If you're going to go this way, wouldn't it be Shanghai?
and now I do wonder what the most populated city on the planet is which is not served by an interstate-quality freeway. Karachi looks somewhat underdeveloped.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 31, 2013, 01:46:05 PM
and now I do wonder what the most populated city on the planet is which is not served by an interstate-quality freeway. Karachi looks somewhat underdeveloped.
Define Interstate-quality.
Quote from: NE2 on January 31, 2013, 08:05:25 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 31, 2013, 01:46:05 PM
and now I do wonder what the most populated city on the planet is which is not served by an interstate-quality freeway. Karachi looks somewhat underdeveloped.
Define Interstate-quality.
Has to be Havana or Pyongyang.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 26, 2013, 09:49:17 AM
In the northeast: Waterbury, New Britain, Middletown, and Norwich, CT.
US 6 goes north of Waterbury around Watertown. US 6 merges/leaves I-84 at Exit 38 in Farmington, a good mile or more from the New Britain city line. US 5/CT 15 [Berlin Turnpike] gets as close as bordering Berlin and Newington. Yay? Finally, I think Norwich would be closer to US 1 as opposed to US 6 or 44.
If it means anything, New Britain has about ~72,000 or so.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 31, 2013, 08:50:32 PM
Has to be Havana or Pyongyang.
Havana's ring road not only exists (!) but looks to be a pretty well-done dual carriageway (!!)
it has cloverleaves, yes, but so does Boston's ring road.
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 31, 2013, 08:50:32 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 31, 2013, 08:05:25 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 31, 2013, 01:46:05 PM
and now I do wonder what the most populated city on the planet is which is not served by an interstate-quality freeway. Karachi looks somewhat underdeveloped.
Define Interstate-quality.
Has to be Havana or Pyongyang.
Both seem to have several full freeways in the area. Maybe none inside city limits, but the same can be said of Paris.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 31, 2013, 01:46:05 PM
Karachi looks somewhat underdeveloped.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Motorways_and_highways_of_Karachi
Kinshasa has 9 million people and no freeways it appears.
Quote from: InterstateNG on January 31, 2013, 10:38:23 PM
Kinshasa has 9 million people and no freeways it appears.
That and Dhaka look like the only two on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World%27s_largest_cities with no freeways. Kinshasa has a bigger population in the city proper, but Dhaka wins otherwise.
Dhaka appears to be trying to build an elevated expressway: http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=237153
Quote from: NE2 on January 31, 2013, 09:50:02 PM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on January 31, 2013, 08:50:32 PM
Quote from: NE2 on January 31, 2013, 08:05:25 PM
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 31, 2013, 01:46:05 PM
and now I do wonder what the most populated city on the planet is which is not served by an interstate-quality freeway. Karachi looks somewhat underdeveloped.
Define Interstate-quality.
Has to be Havana or Pyongyang.
Both seem to have several full freeways in the area. Maybe none inside city limits, but the same can be said of Paris.
Not only that, but Cuba has a partially completed motorway now running about two thirds of the length of the island between La Habana and Santiago, as well as one heading west out of the La Habana area.
Not interstate standard, of course, but a decent start, although it does look like they have not been worked on in many years. They are easily traceable with Google aerial images.
Mike
It's called the Autopista. A very well-known Cuban highway famous for being freeway no one in their right mind would drive in its entirety. Most everyone who travels from, say, Santiago to Havana goes by train.
Didn't Waterbury, CT have Alt US 6 at one time?
In Florida, the largest non-suburb I can think of that never had one is Fernandina Beach [pop. 11,624].
Quote from: florida on February 15, 2013, 01:51:23 PM
Didn't Waterbury, CT have Alt US 6 at one time?
I don't believe so.
That said, upon looking into it more, it seems as though US 6 itself did at some point in the distant past go to Waterbury, which removes that city from consideration.
Which means the question of "largest city that isn't a suburb of another city to never have had a US highway" is still unanswered, and tough to answer since no city in the US with 100,000 or more people fits that description.
Quote from: NE2 on January 26, 2013, 02:34:01 AM
Largest city that never had one is a more interesting topic, since it doesn't "penalize" cities for being on major routes that became Interstates. I wouldn't know where to start - Lake Havasu City? Keene, NH (for an older city)? Something on Long Island?
Quote from: Duke87 on February 15, 2013, 09:21:25 PM
Which means the question of "largest city that isn't a suburb of another city to never have had a US highway" is still unanswered, and tough to answer since no city in the US with 100,000 or more people fits that description.
Complicating things is the fact that, if we consider the whole history of US Highways, we'll likely find many cities that are now suburbs of others, but that weren't at the time they were served by US Highways. Or, they
weren't served by US Highways when they were standalone cities, but have seen service added after becoming subservient to larger metro areas.
In Oregon, neither Salem nor Eugene (alternately Oregon's 2nd and 3rd largest cities) have a U.S. highway although Salem once had U.S. 99E and Eugene had both U.S. 99 and U.S. 126.
Hillsboro and Beaverton (in 5th and 6th place) are only barely scraped by with U.S. 26 along their absolute northern border. However, both of these towns were much, much, much smaller in the 1950s and before and in the heyday of the U.S. Highway system U.S. 26 was a rural route well to the north of these small farming communities.
Portland (1st) and Gresham (3rd) have both U.S. 26 and U.S. 30 (although Gresham only barely with U.S. 30 as it is multiplexed with I-84) as well as U.S. 30 Bypass. Portland was formerly served by all U.S. 99, 99W and 99E.
Tucson, Arizona
Formally served by US 80 (Decertified in AZ & 89 (Decertified South of Flagstaff, AZ)
Fremont, CA. All the larger cities in California have or have had US routes in the past.
Quote from: JustDrive on April 09, 2015, 12:47:44 PM
Fremont, CA. All the larger cities in California have or have had US routes in the past.
The fun part of this is that Fremont was last served by a US highway in what, the mid-1930s with US 101E? (And before that with the short-lived US 48)
Albuquerque and Tucson (both about the same size) currently have no US highways in their city limits. And Prescott AZ would also qualify.
Quote from: sandiaman on April 10, 2015, 06:22:48 PM
Albuquerque and Tucson (both about the same size) currently have no US highways in their city limits. And Prescott AZ would also qualify.
Actually, ABQ has unsigned US 85, which is concurrent with I-25.
Quote from: TheStranger on April 10, 2015, 02:04:25 PM
Quote from: JustDrive on April 09, 2015, 12:47:44 PM
Fremont, CA. All the larger cities in California have or have had US routes in the past.
The fun part of this is that Fremont was last served by a US highway in what, the mid-1930s with US 101E? (And before that with the short-lived US 48)
If not Fremont, then it's Garden Grove.
From what I am understanding, I think Manassas (pop. 37,821) wins in VA simply because US 29 never enters the city limits.