News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Interstate 11 alignment, though Vegas and points north

Started by swbrotha100, October 16, 2012, 09:51:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Max Rockatansky

If this was something akin to a "chargeable" corridor north of Vegas where the Feds are paying for it that changes the narrative substantially.  Trouble is that isn't what is happening.


hobsini2

Quote from: mgk920 on June 20, 2024, 01:05:16 PMAs I have said upthread, best is probably a 'no intersection turns' surface route between the end of I-580 in Carson City and US 95/Clark County 215/I-11 in LAS, with any further upgrades happening as traffic warrants and funding allows.

Mike
As much as I would like to see that, it is difficult on the Carson City end for that to happen because of Mt Siegel and Lyon Peak unless Sunrise Pass was utilized for such a highway.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

gonealookin

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 21, 2024, 02:23:55 PMIf this was something akin to a "chargeable" corridor north of Vegas where the Feds are paying for it that changes the narrative substantially.  Trouble is that isn't what is happening.

I think DenverBrian makes a valid point.  The constituency that benefits most from a new Interstate across the Nevada desert is the long-distance trucking industry.  Cost-benefit ratio would be really lousy for the citizens of Nevada, and that's made clear by the AADT on various sections of US 95.

So, here's the solution:  The trucking industry can self-assess and build a 400-mile Interstate-standard freeway as a private road.  Upon completion the new highway could be turned over to the State of Nevada for maintenance.  We have precedent for this:  the northern segment of USA Parkway was built as a dead-end private road by the developers of the industrial center out there.  When it was determined that a through highway south to US 50 was needed, the State paid for that part of it (by raiding money from some other projects), the developers turned over their private road to the State, and the whole thing became NDOT-maintained SR 439.

Take that 6-mile private road, expand the concept to a 400-mile freeway, have the trucking industry pay for it and Voila!  Everyone is happy, especially roadgeeks.  Maybe not truckers, because at that point they are broke.

I don't mind building I-11 from Vegas up to Reno, but there's just no reason for the State of Nevada to participate financially if almost all of the benefit accrues to out-of-state interests.

splashflash

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 21, 2024, 02:23:55 PMIf this was something akin to a "chargeable" corridor north of Vegas where the Feds are paying for it that changes the narrative substantially.  Trouble is that isn't what is happening.
[/quo
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 21, 2024, 02:23:55 PMIf this was something akin to a "chargeable" corridor north of Vegas where the Feds are paying for it that changes the narrative substantially.  Trouble is that isn't what is happening.
I recall the original studies for I-11 north of Vegas were to get set up to receive federal infrastructure funds because Yucca Mountain was being bandied about to receive nuclear waste from other states.  With the administration change this was dropped, https://www.nevadaappeal.com/news/2022/jan/05/yucca-mountain-remains-debate-over-nuclear-waste-s/.

The updating of the design to interstate standards of the section of highway closest to Vegas makes sense as there are higher traffic counts.  If Yucca Mountain were to receive nuclear waste for storage, elimination of all at grade intersections and bypasses of towns would certainly make US 95 safer and a little more palatable.  The upgrades would albeit likely need to north of Mercury and affected towns should rightfully expect compensation or economic benefits of some sort.

kkt

Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 01:38:12 PMAgain, some posters are missing the point of I-11. It's not on politicians' minds because it can somehow connect Reno and Las Vegas with an interstate. It's on their minds because they want trucks to be connected Mexico to Canada.

I-11 is on politician's minds as a freeway to new suburbs of Tucson that the real estate developer doesn't have to pay for.


DenverBrian

Quote from: JayhawkCO on June 21, 2024, 01:41:25 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 01:38:12 PMAgain, some posters are missing the point of I-11. It's not on politicians' minds because it can somehow connect Reno and Las Vegas with an interstate. It's on their minds because they want trucks to be connected Mexico to Canada.

Where, in your opinion, should I-11 connect to Canada? (I'm assuming even if they never build I-11 south of I-10, you'd consider I-19->I-10->I-11 as connected to Mexico.)
I'm just making the observation that, in 2024, new interstates are built with the thinking of trucks in mind far more than the thinking of cars in mind. I sincerely doubt that I-11 will ever extend Mexico to Canada; but I'm of the opinion that additional miles of interstate are built in today's world with truck traffic in mind first.

JayhawkCO

Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 04:56:56 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on June 21, 2024, 01:41:25 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 01:38:12 PMAgain, some posters are missing the point of I-11. It's not on politicians' minds because it can somehow connect Reno and Las Vegas with an interstate. It's on their minds because they want trucks to be connected Mexico to Canada.

Where, in your opinion, should I-11 connect to Canada? (I'm assuming even if they never build I-11 south of I-10, you'd consider I-19->I-10->I-11 as connected to Mexico.)
I'm just making the observation that, in 2024, new interstates are built with the thinking of trucks in mind far more than the thinking of cars in mind. I sincerely doubt that I-11 will ever extend Mexico to Canada; but I'm of the opinion that additional miles of interstate are built in today's world with truck traffic in mind first.

Completely understood, and I agree with that. But if most new interstates are built to connect to our neighbors to the north and south respectively, I just have no idea why I-11 would have those same goals. There aren't any population centers north of Reno in the U.S other than maybe Spokane or Boise, and certainly nothing in Canada. I don't see how anyone could justify extending I-11 to Reno because "it's on the way" to Canada when there's nothing in Canada to connect it to.

cl94

Nah, the reason provided by Nevada politicians is to bring money to rural Nevada. That's it. The old "build it and they will come", which does not work with rural expressway/freeway facilities. Building a new freeway in the state means lots of jobs. It's not serving state interests apart from jobs.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

PColumbus73

Quote from: gonealookin on June 21, 2024, 02:57:54 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 21, 2024, 02:23:55 PMIf this was something akin to a "chargeable" corridor north of Vegas where the Feds are paying for it that changes the narrative substantially.  Trouble is that isn't what is happening.

I think DenverBrian makes a valid point.  The constituency that benefits most from a new Interstate across the Nevada desert is the long-distance trucking industry.  Cost-benefit ratio would be really lousy for the citizens of Nevada, and that's made clear by the AADT on various sections of US 95.

So, here's the solution:  The trucking industry can self-assess and build a 400-mile Interstate-standard freeway as a private road.  Upon completion the new highway could be turned over to the State of Nevada for maintenance.  We have precedent for this:  the northern segment of USA Parkway was built as a dead-end private road by the developers of the industrial center out there.  When it was determined that a through highway south to US 50 was needed, the State paid for that part of it (by raiding money from some other projects), the developers turned over their private road to the State, and the whole thing became NDOT-maintained SR 439.

Take that 6-mile private road, expand the concept to a 400-mile freeway, have the trucking industry pay for it and Voila!  Everyone is happy, especially roadgeeks.  Maybe not truckers, because at that point they are broke.

I don't mind building I-11 from Vegas up to Reno, but there's just no reason for the State of Nevada to participate financially if almost all of the benefit accrues to out-of-state interests.

Assuming I were making decisions in Nevada, I think it would be difficult for me to justify building what would be a very lightly traveled Interstate for the benefit of outside interests. Especially if Nevada is not getting any money to build a highway that would predominantly benefit interests outside the state.

Sure, on the national level, I-11 might be beneficial to the rest of the Interstate system, but at the state level, they would be spending a lot of money in a very sparsely populated area. Even if I-11 were built, the path it would take is not one that would be favorable to rapid development outside Reno or Las Vegas. I don't imagine Tonopah would have the resources (and water access) to support it growing much more than it currently is.

cl94

Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 21, 2024, 05:59:34 PMSure, on the national level, I-11 might be beneficial to the rest of the Interstate system, but at the state level, they would be spending a lot of money in a very sparsely populated area. Even if I-11 were built, the path it would take is not one that would be favorable to rapid development outside Reno or Las Vegas. I don't imagine Tonopah would have the resources (and water access) to support it growing much more than it currently is.

There is a reason why, prior to Lake Mead becoming a thing, most of Nevada's sizeable permanent settlements were along the Humboldt River or one of the rivers flowing from eastern side of the Sierra. That reason is water. You need a substantial and continuous water source to build thriving permanent settlements and agricultural communities. Lake Mead made Southern Nevada viable as more than a railroad siding. Get away from the major rivers and springs (all heavily regulated, by the way) and year-round water supply ranges from sparse to barely existent. Of the communities along the planned route of I-11, maybe Fallon could grow, but many of those water rights are being bought up by the feds for wetland restoration.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

DenverBrian

I would guess that if you WERE to develop the I-11 corridor so that it attracted trucks, then it might also attract the Loves/Pilots/Flying Js of the world to add truck stops at various points; this then creates jobs along the corridor. Again, all of it supporting truck traffic, with auto traffic being BTW/incidental.

Of course, what we really need is a better truck superhighway east-west - I've long thought an extended I-66 across the country, built as at least 3x3 or perhaps 2-2x2-2, would be a boon to cross country trucking, with the BTW benefit of cross country automobile driving. But that's all I'll say on that, as SOMEONE needs to stay on topic LOL.

pderocco

I never noticed this before, but the Mercury Hwy interchange looks like it got modified at one point to allow for eventual conversion to a trumpet interchange. However, Google Earth shows that that happened before their earliest imagery from 1995.

vdeane

Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 01:38:12 PMAgain, some posters are missing the point of I-11. It's not on politicians' minds because it can somehow connect Reno and Las Vegas with an interstate. It's on their minds because they want trucks to be connected Mexico to Canada.
As I mentioned earlier (before it got buried behind an argument about flights), the Mexico-Canada corridor only follows I-11 south of Las Vegas; north of there, it follows I-15.  Unless there's been a change, I-11 between Reno and Las Vegas has nothing to do with that.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

DenverBrian

Quote from: vdeane on June 21, 2024, 11:18:29 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 01:38:12 PMAgain, some posters are missing the point of I-11. It's not on politicians' minds because it can somehow connect Reno and Las Vegas with an interstate. It's on their minds because they want trucks to be connected Mexico to Canada.
As I mentioned earlier (before it got buried behind an argument about flights), the Mexico-Canada corridor only follows I-11 south of Las Vegas; north of there, it follows I-15.  Unless there's been a change, I-11 between Reno and Las Vegas has nothing to do with that.
If you're referring to official CANAMEX, you're right. If you're a politician, I doubt you even know what CANAMEX is.

mgk920

Quote from: gonealookin on June 21, 2024, 01:53:15 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 01:38:12 PMAgain, some posters are missing the point of I-11. It's not on politicians' minds because it can somehow connect Reno and Las Vegas with an interstate. It's on their minds because they want trucks to be connected Mexico to Canada.

And as a Nevada taxpayer I really don't give a hoot about trucks going Mexico-Canada.  If that's the rationale for building this thing then somebody else gotta pay for it.

And such a road already passes through LAS, it is called 'I-15'.

Mike

Scott5114

Quote from: mgk920 on June 22, 2024, 11:01:31 AMAnd such a road already passes through LAS, it is called 'I-15'.

The only road that passes through LAS is NV 171.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: mgk920 on June 22, 2024, 11:01:31 AM
Quote from: gonealookin on June 21, 2024, 01:53:15 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on June 21, 2024, 01:38:12 PMAgain, some posters are missing the point of I-11. It's not on politicians' minds because it can somehow connect Reno and Las Vegas with an interstate. It's on their minds because they want trucks to be connected Mexico to Canada.

And as a Nevada taxpayer I really don't give a hoot about trucks going Mexico-Canada.  If that's the rationale for building this thing then somebody else gotta pay for it.

And such a road already passes through LAS, it is called 'I-15'.

Mike
How in the world does I-15 bypass Las Vegas lol? Las Vegas traffic sure flows better for the most part but there are massive housing developments planned and who knows how much longer Vegas traffic will flow at effective LOS levels. Maybe Scott can shed some light since he lives there. I just visit and maybe I get lucky but the only segments of freeway I ever experience "real" big city traffic on is I-15 and I-11(formally I-515) near DTLV. Las Vegas is certainly a big city IMO. Not LA or NYC big but bigger than a lot of cities. I-15 goes straight through. Less than half a mile from it's core. I consider it's core downtown even if the strip is busier.

Given trends of decentralization of cities I still think of their downtowns as the main part of economic activity and vibrancy.

JayhawkCO

Assuming you're responding to Scott, I think he's making a joke that NV171 passes through LAS, the airport.

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: JayhawkCO on June 22, 2024, 05:17:41 PMAssuming you're responding to Scott, I think he's making a joke that NV171 passes through LAS, the airport.
Ah sarcasm and the internet

roadfro

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 22, 2024, 12:03:27 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on June 22, 2024, 11:01:31 AMAnd such a road already passes through LAS, it is called 'I-15'.

The only road that passes through LAS is NV 171.
I appreciate the joke!

Although, it's technically inaccurate. SR 171 only exists between I-215 and the south portals of the airport tunnels. The remainder of the airport connector (the actual tunnels under the runways and the one way roads serving the terminals up to Tropicana to the north) are county/airport facilities.
Roadfro - AARoads Pacific Southwest moderator since 2010, Nevada roadgeek since 1983.

US 395

Quote from: gonealookin on June 21, 2024, 01:28:52 PM
Quote from: US 395 on June 21, 2024, 02:14:29 AMReno is a 30 minute drive to Tahoe. Sacramento is about an hour and a half.

Not if you add the time on the side of the highway receiving your speeding citation.

Actual distance and driving times from my house (close enough to the Stateline casinos to be a long walk) to RNO and SMF, with SMF being on the other side of the city:

RNO:  55 miles, 1 hour (no real variables in the time; in heavy snow I've done it in about 1:20)

SMF:  117 miles, 2 hours 15 minutes (variables:  traffic through Sacramento, winter conditions over the Sierra, sometimes heavy traffic on US 50 e.g. westbound on Sunday afternoon)

I like Sacramento's nonstops to Hawaii, which Reno has never had, and have used SMF quite a bit.  It does often require spending the previous night at a Sacramento hotel.  I much prefer flying out of Reno.  And in winter, the chance of a weather-related missed connection is much less in Las Vegas than it is in the Bay Area (westbound) or Denver (eastbound).  So that might help explain why RNO-LAS is my preferred first leg of a longer trip if Southwest has a schedule that makes sense, and all those daily RNO-LAS flights improve the opportunities for connections that make sense.

I go up Mount Rose Highway (NV 431 for the out of staters). So for me, it's not 55 minutes.

US 395

Quote from: cl94 on June 21, 2024, 08:38:40 PM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 21, 2024, 05:59:34 PMSure, on the national level, I-11 might be beneficial to the rest of the Interstate system, but at the state level, they would be spending a lot of money in a very sparsely populated area. Even if I-11 were built, the path it would take is not one that would be favorable to rapid development outside Reno or Las Vegas. I don't imagine Tonopah would have the resources (and water access) to support it growing much more than it currently is.

There is a reason why, prior to Lake Mead becoming a thing, most of Nevada's sizeable permanent settlements were along the Humboldt River or one of the rivers flowing from eastern side of the Sierra. That reason is water. You need a substantial and continuous water source to build thriving permanent settlements and agricultural communities. Lake Mead made Southern Nevada viable as more than a railroad siding. Get away from the major rivers and springs (all heavily regulated, by the way) and year-round water supply ranges from sparse to barely existent. Of the communities along the planned route of I-11, maybe Fallon could grow, but many of those water rights are being bought up by the feds for wetland restoration.

Well, if Lake Mead (and the river) dries up, Vegas will go back to being a railroad siding...

mgk920

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 22, 2024, 06:57:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on June 22, 2024, 05:17:41 PMAssuming you're responding to Scott, I think he's making a joke that NV171 passes through LAS, the airport.
Ah sarcasm and the internet

For an example of 'identity', 'MKE' was originally the identifier for the Milwaukee, WI airport (and later on their downtown Amtrak station).  Now it also generically means the city and metro area in general, so much so that the National League Milwaukee Brewers will often use 'MKE' as a part the design of their home uniforms.  You see this in other metros as well (ie, Atlanta, GA, 'ATL').

Mike

JayhawkCO

Quote from: mgk920 on June 24, 2024, 10:47:19 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 22, 2024, 06:57:59 PM
Quote from: JayhawkCO on June 22, 2024, 05:17:41 PMAssuming you're responding to Scott, I think he's making a joke that NV171 passes through LAS, the airport.
Ah sarcasm and the internet

For an example of 'identity', 'MKE' was originally the identifier for the Milwaukee, WI airport (and later on their downtown Amtrak station).  Now it also generically means the city and metro area in general, so much so that the National League Milwaukee Brewers will often use 'MKE' as a part the design of their home uniforms.  You see this in other metros as well (ie, Atlanta, GA, 'ATL').

Mike

As a regular poster on FlyerTalk, there's often discussion about utilizing airport codes when referring to a city vs. an airport. Obviously, on that site, airport codes are much more widely known, so they're pretty common knowledge. Outside of aviation nerds, I would argue that there are very few cities that are referred to by their airport codes.

Bobby5280

#1299
Quote from: JayhawkCOBut if most new interstates are built to connect to our neighbors to the north and south respectively, I just have no idea why I-11 would have those same goals. There aren't any population centers north of Reno in the U.S other than maybe Spokane or Boise, and certainly nothing in Canada.

That's looking in the wrong direction. If the I-11 route is directed from Reno to Klamath Falls and over to the Medford-Ashland area it taps into I-5. Portland, Seattle-Tacoma and Vancouver BC are all very big, major destinations. That's how I-11 can be turned into a "CANAMEX" route.

I don't think I-11 needs to be extended down to Tucson or Nogales to gain that function either. It would be enough for I-11 to just reach the Phoenix area. I-19 has more than enough room in its existing ROW to be doubled in capacity. People in Tucson just have to get over themselves and allow some new loop freeways to get built.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.