Cities where development does not follow the freeway

[Urban Prairie Schooner]

Typically, as American cities have expanded, they have largely sprawled along freeway corridors, at least from the 1950s onward. (Obviously rail and other transport modes had a proportionately larger effect before that time.) But there are a few cities where despite the presence of interstates or other freeways, the primary direction of development has not followed those routes. Here are a few off the top of my head:

Lafayette, LA: I-10 and I-49 (formerly US 167 expressway) skirt the northern edge of the urbanized region, but most growth since their completion in the 1960s has largely been to the south and southwest. Evangeline Thruway (US 90) and Johnston Street (US 167) are the primary in-town commuter routes. Granted, Lafayette's downtown/urban core is not really well served by the interstates (at least this is the case until the I-49 extension is completed).

Tucson: I have no idea why the city grew to the east in the exact opposite location from where the freeway corridors were placed. I understand that several freeway projects proposed for the city in the past were quite unpopular with the residents there. Do people in Tucson just not like to live near freeways?

Birmingham: For the most part sprawl in B'ham follows the freeways, but apparently the US 280 corridor attracts a large amount of the recent growth the on the south side of Red Mountain, which of course lends to its well-known congestion.

I'm sure there are other cities with this type of atypical development, not counting of course cities that either do not have freeway systems or are not connected to the Interstate system, or for that matter cities that have grown so fast that they rapidly outgrew the rudimentary freeway systems provided them when they were much smaller (Las Vegas, Austin, Colorado Springs come to mind).

[roadman65]

Orlando fits that.  Of course I-4 is already taken.

[vdeane]

Utica and Rome too.  Of course, NY 840 and the Utica-Rome Expressway are both too new for development to have followed them, but NY 8, most of NY 12 (north of the plaza), and NY 5S don't really have development following them either.

[txstateends]

Canyon, TX -- One of I-27's last sections to be built was a bypass around Canyon (south of Amarillo) and down to Happy.  Since it was built (late 1980s-early 1990s) no new services/development have been built along it.  Most everything in Canyon is still along US 60-US 87 or the major cross-road, TX 217.  I haven't heard of any major discouragement of development by the city, but it could be the case.  I would think something at the TX 217 exit on I-27 would work since TX 217 goes east to the entrance to Palo Duro Canyon, one of the biggest tourist draws in that part of the state (average of 300,000 visitors annually).  TX 217 is also the first Canyon exit for I-27 traffic coming from the south; many would also exit here to go into town, some of which to visit or attend West Texas A&M, the main campus of which is just off TX 217 near downtown.  There have been 2 new chain hotels (the first chains to come to Canyon) built in recent years, but they are between I-27 and downtown.  No gas/food/lodging northbound on I-27 till you get closer to (or into) Amarillo.

Longview, TX -- I-20 brushes the far south side of town, with very little going on, but a few motels and gas/convenience places along it, and only 2 exits for services to choose from there.  Most all the happening stuff and development is on the north side, along and near Loop 281.  Two reasons that are likely: the river bottom/watershed of the Sabine River flows along/near the south side of Longview, crossing I-20 on the southwest side of town; also a big Eastman chemical plant takes up much acreage south of I-20 on Longview's southeast side.

Plano/Allen/McKinney, TX -- The current US 75 alignment in these cities has been present for many decades (1959 in Plano and Allen, the mid-1960s in McKinney), but yet, it took until just recent years for the 3 cities to fully embrace the corridor and it's possibilities.  Plano figured out there was a frontier west of US 75 by the early-mid 1970s but most of it's US 75 frontage wasn't snapped up until the last 5-15 years.  It's first mall, Collin Creek, opened along US 75 in 1981 but the beyond-ring-road development (part of which includes US 75's service road area) took a little while.  In Allen, nothing west of US 75 appeared until the last 10-25 years.  Now, not quite all, but most, of Allen's US 75 frontage has been developed.  Before all that, most services in Allen centered on at or near downtown along McDermott or Main Streets, east of US 75.  McKinney has had development west of US 75 for several years, and lots more recently along US 75's service road, but until the early-mid 1970s, there wasn't much to see or to be had in McKinney west of US 75; you had to go downtown or along McDonald (US 75's old alignment, now TX 5) or University (US 380) to get to any services there.

Tyler, TX -- For some reason which I've never really understood, I-20 was aligned a good 7-8 miles north of Tyler's urbanized area.  And the stranger thing, most all of Tyler's growth has been south/SW/SE, away from I-20, since then.  It has just been in very recent years that Tyler is trying to annex land along US 69 out to it's exit on I-20 (some of US 69 has been annexed for quite awhile, as the main plant for Tyler Pipe is along the highway).  But Lindale, the next town to the north, has seen the light much sooner, and developed along it's part of US 69 and on it's side of I-20.  There is word that Lindale isn't too happy that Tyler is trying to annex out to I-20, including 1 of the 4 corners at the I-20/US 69 crossing.  It would be interesting to see what Tyler would have looked like had it's big development all been north to (and along) I-20 instead of where the buzz has been there.  The only other part of Tyler near I-20 is a strand of annexed land along US 271-TX 155 out to it's split northeast of town.  The area where the 2 roads split is the home of the University of Texas at Tyler Health Science Center, the primary reason for the extension of Tyler's city limits to that area.  So far, no move has been made to try to add annexed land further along either of the split roads the rest of the way to their respective I-20 exits.

[Brandon]

Chicagoland.  The development started along the rail lines in the latter part of the 19th Century.  Later, some of the freeways and tollways were built parallel to these rail lines, but out and away from the downtown areas of many suburbs and the satellite cities.

[roadman65]

US 27 in Lake and Polk Counties in Florida have rapid sprawl changing once a rural 65 mph highway into an arterial.  In fact truckers who shunpiked used this section to avoid the nearby (but not along) Florida's Turnpike.  From Clermont to Lake Wales US 27 went from rural orange groves and trailer parks to bedroom community housing and shopping centers in practically a few years.

US 441 between Mt. Dora, FL and Leesburg, FL is also a non freeway corridor that has development along it! However, its because of it long range plans have  considered a freeway to be considered along this corridor and along FL 44 from Leesburg west to I-75 at Wildwood to maybe get built 100 years from now.

[Zmapper]

Fort Collins, CO - The city sprawled southward, with relatively little development occurring near I-25 to the east of the city. Exit 269 (CO 14) supported a typical assortment of highway-oriented motels and restaurants. Exit 267 (Prospect) has no development until Timberline Rd, two miles west. Exit 265 (Harmony) had a single gas station and a park-n-ride until a few years ago, when a Walmart was built, though long range plans exist for a large regional center southwest of the interchange.

[roadman65]

If I remember correctly that US 9 between Fishkill, NY and Poughkeepsie, NY has a lot of development making that stretch highly suburbanized in appearence. 

[hbelkins]

I'm in one tonight. Parkersburg, WV. There are a few motels and restaurants at the I-77 exits, but most of the development is along Grand Central Avenue (WV 14/former US 21) north of town toward Vienna and Marietta.

[Duke87]

Tucson: I have no idea why the city grew to the east in the exact opposite location from where the freeway corridors were placed. I understand that several freeway projects proposed for the city in the past were quite unpopular with the residents there. Do people in Tucson just not like to live near freeways?

Tucson has expanded to the south a bit along I-19 and to the northwest along I-10. I suspect the reason it has expanded east away from the freeways instead of southeast along I-10 is because of the presence of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. The city is starting to spill around it but it can't well expand into it. And mountains limit its ability to expand directly north or west.

If I remember correctly that US 9 between Fishkill, NY and Poughkeepsie, NY has a lot of development making that stretch highly suburbanized in appearence.

Yep. Poughkeepsie is not directly served by any freeway so everyone headed there was going up US 9 from I-84. That traffic meant customers. And now, thanks to all that development, US 9 is no longer the fastest way to get to Poughkeepsie (depending on where you're coming from, either Taconic to NY 55 or US 9W to Mid-Hudson Bridge is better).

[golden eagle]

While most development in the Jackson area is along the interstates, one high-growth area is along MS 25 (also known as Lakeland Drive), which is an at-grade highway. The area around Dogwood Festival Market is a good five or more miles ftom I-55, and maybe around 10 from I-20.

[Molandfreak]

Apple Valley, MN. Due to protected land, there was no commercial development near I-35E or at the southern fringe of MN 77. Instead, all the commercial development centered around County 42 and Cedar Avenue, the busiest non-freeways in the city. It is a pain in the ass; both are major commuting roads.

[roadman65]

In Plant City, FL the development follows FL 39 to the south of the city.  I-4 runs across the north side of the city and nothing than a few chain restaurants at one interchange, a typical interstate traveler motel at another, and a car dealer at the third interchange.  All the main businesses for the city to survive seem to head away from the interstate.

[TEG24601]

I would have to say that the development in and around Lafayette, IN are along the State Roads and US Highways, with very little development along I-65 through the city, and the county as well.

[roadman65]

I like how Delaware has kept a leash on development near the newest freeway by limiting the amount of interchanges through Kent County.

I believe that is what Kokomo, IN is trying to do with zoning issues around the new US 31 freeway as to keep development away from the new road and have it sprawl along the existing US 31.  They actually learned it the hard way when they first bypassed Kokomo as the current US 31 is the epicenter of that areas boom!

[TheStranger]

In Sacramento, suburban areas which revolted against planned freeways (Citrus Heights, Orangevale, Carmichael) all seemed to have been developed by the late 1970s.  Sunrise Mall in particular, in Citrus Heights, is nowhere near a freeway, though it would have been near the unbuilt Route 102/Route 65 junction.

[ET21]

Fort Collins, CO - The city sprawled southward, with relatively little development occurring near I-25 to the east of the city. Exit 269 (CO 14) supported a typical assortment of highway-oriented motels and restaurants. Exit 267 (Prospect) has no development until Timberline Rd, two miles west. Exit 265 (Harmony) had a single gas station and a park-n-ride until a few years ago, when a Walmart was built, though long range plans exist for a large regional center southwest of the interchange.

My thoughts exactly when I was there last week. There is hardly any development east of I-25 from 470 through Fort Collins. I think Loveland and Greely were the only exceptions

[cpzilliacus]

I'm sure there are other cities with this type of atypical development, not counting of course cities that either do not have freeway systems or are not connected to the Interstate system, or for that matter cities that have grown so fast that they rapidly outgrew the rudimentary freeway systems provided them when they were much smaller (Las Vegas, Austin, Colorado Springs come to mind).

Montgomery County, Maryland encouraged a lot of development along (already congested) U.S. 29 along its eastern border.

U.S. 29 is a combination of expressway and mostly divided arterial highway, with plenty of failing intersections during peak  commute periods.

[Alps]

New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.

[cpzilliacus]

New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.

And not so far from I-287, I have always found the lack of freeway-oriented development along I-87 between the N.Y. 17 interchange at Suffern/Sloatsburg/Ramapo (Exit 15A) and N.Y. 17 at Harriman/Woodbury (Exit 16) to be a source of amusement - and something to be pointed out to the "freeways cause sprawl" crowd.

[pianocello]

In Michigan City, IN, there is very little development along I-94. From what I can tell, most of the hotels, restaurants, and stores are either downtown (outlet mall and casino), or near the intersection of US-20 and US-421.

[Brandon]

In Michigan City, IN, there is very little development along I-94. From what I can tell, most of the hotels, restaurants, and stores are either downtown (outlet mall and casino), or near the intersection of US-20 and US-421.

Part of that is because Michigan City has two bypasses.  The first is US-20/IN-212.  The second is I-94.  Add that to the fact that US-20 was the established bypass until the early 1970s when InDOT finally got off their asses and finished I-94 between the state line and Burns Harbor.  Plus, Michigan City isn't exactly a development hot spot, and hasn't been since the 1960s.  It's not much of a surprise that the development stayed closer to the city than I-94.

Chesterton at I-94 (Exit 26, IN-49) is likewise away from the freeway.

[ET21]

In Michigan City, IN, there is very little development along I-94. From what I can tell, most of the hotels, restaurants, and stores are either downtown (outlet mall and casino), or near the intersection of US-20 and US-421.

Part of that is because Michigan City has two bypasses.  The first is US-20/IN-212.  The second is I-94.  Add that to the fact that US-20 was the established bypass until the early 1970s when InDOT finally got off their asses and finished I-94 between the state line and Burns Harbor.  Plus, Michigan City isn't exactly a development hot spot, and hasn't been since the 1960s.  It's not much of a surprise that the development stayed closer to the city than I-94.

Chesterton at I-94 (Exit 26, IN-49) is likewise away from the freeway.

If they do get a development boom at some point, I have a feeling they'll probably extend towards I-94 but won't go past that. Set it as their east and southeast border to a degree

[roadman65]

New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.

And not so far from I-287, I have always found the lack of freeway-oriented development along I-87 between the N.Y. 17 interchange at Suffern/Sloatsburg/Ramapo (Exit 15A) and N.Y. 17 at Harriman/Woodbury (Exit 16) to be a source of amusement - and something to be pointed out to the "freeways cause sprawl" crowd.

That has a lot to do with the fact that the Thruway is on the edge of Harriman State Park.  Furthermore, them not adding another interchange in between is a help in that matter.  The Old NY 210, I am surprised that they have not interchanged it especially with Greenwood Lake and the Sherwood Forest attraction.  Hope they never do either, leave it as is.  Too much sprawl and most of it encourages overcrowding of existing roadways plus environmental pollution and the shifting of classes as farther development from city centers leads to other issues as well.

[Alps]

New York, where the freeways were just stuck in long after development occurred. You don't see freeway-related development until you get out to I-287 in NJ.

And not so far from I-287, I have always found the lack of freeway-oriented development along I-87 between the N.Y. 17 interchange at Suffern/Sloatsburg/Ramapo (Exit 15A) and N.Y. 17 at Harriman/Woodbury (Exit 16) to be a source of amusement - and something to be pointed out to the "freeways cause sprawl" crowd.

That has a lot to do with the fact that the Thruway is on the edge of Harriman State Park.  Furthermore, them not adding another interchange in between is a help in that matter.  The Old NY 210, I am surprised that they have not interchanged it especially with Greenwood Lake and the Sherwood Forest attraction.  Hope they never do either, leave it as is.  Too much sprawl and most of it encourages overcrowding of existing roadways plus environmental pollution and the shifting of classes as farther development from city centers leads to other issues as well.

Absolutely correct. "OMG all this sprawl and no one lives in t3h Meadowlands."