Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: pc@ctt.ctt.bellcore.com
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Why Were Area Codes Scattered Around in Assignment?
Message-ID: <11704@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 4 Sep 90 17:01:00 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Bellcore - Wierd Ideas Factory
Lines: 23
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 619, Message 9 of 10


Patrick Humphrey wrote:

> the only kind available.  The reasoning was that the areas with large
> numbers of calls should get the NPA numbers that could be dialed the
> quickest -- hence New York City got 212, Los Angeles 213, Chicago 312,

That's what I always heard.  yet, Pittsburgh (population of the metro
area about one million?) has 412, and Phily (population of the metro
area about five million?) has 215, which is surely anomalous under the
above rule.

Similarly, why Austin (512) and Cleveland (216)?  Were there other
technical considerations at the time?  (Apart from physical proximity
of adjacent numbers, such as 212 not being near 213 and 312 etc)

pc


[Moderator's Note: 412 and 215 are about the same length: seven pulls
versus eight. 512 and 216 are close: eight pulls versus nine. It is
not like Nevada or North Carolina (19 pulls) or southern Indiana's 812
area (11 pulls).   PAT]