News:

why is this up in the corner now

Main Menu

Interstate 11 alignment, though Vegas and points north

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

Previous topic - Next topic

DenverBrian

Quote from: vdeane on June 13, 2024, 08:51:58 PMI also wonder why the four-lane highway is fine near the homes (which are only about 100-150' away from the 500' threshold mentioned), but it would suddenly be a problem if it were grade separated.  It's not like it would divide anything.  Traffic already moves at free-flow.  It's basically the status quo but safer.  They could even put in a sound wall if the residents want it.

Quote from: DenverBrian on June 13, 2024, 08:16:28 PMSince when did Interstates become some kind of sacred object?
Since the beginning of the hobby?
What hobby? The hobby of posting on a forum?

I do agree, Interstates should be built to a higher standard than US routes. But that "standard" has already been broken so many times, it's laughable. A "standard" of allowing an interstate to reduce to an arterial road through an existing city simply creates a set of Breezewoods on the way to Reno. There's definitely precedent. And in this day and age of high costs, it might mean the difference between I-11 getting past Mercury or forever ending there.


TheStranger

Quote from: DenverBrian on June 14, 2024, 02:20:52 PM
Quote from: vdeane on June 13, 2024, 08:51:58 PMI also wonder why the four-lane highway is fine near the homes (which are only about 100-150' away from the 500' threshold mentioned), but it would suddenly be a problem if it were grade separated.  It's not like it would divide anything.  Traffic already moves at free-flow.  It's basically the status quo but safer.  They could even put in a sound wall if the residents want it.

Quote from: DenverBrian on June 13, 2024, 08:16:28 PMSince when did Interstates become some kind of sacred object?
Since the beginning of the hobby?
What hobby? The hobby of posting on a forum?

I do agree, Interstates should be built to a higher standard than US routes. But that "standard" has already been broken so many times, it's laughable.

Other than I-180 in Wyoming, I-78 east of NJ 139 in Jersey City, and Breezewood, are there any other examples of a non-freeway Interstate out of the many thousands of miles in the system?


Quote from: DenverBrian on June 14, 2024, 02:20:52 PMA "standard" of allowing an interstate to reduce to an arterial road through an existing city simply creates a set of Breezewoods on the way to Reno. There's definitely precedent. And in this day and age of high costs, it might mean the difference between I-11 getting past Mercury or forever ending there.


If I-11 doesn't get past Mercury and ends in the Las Vegas area permanently, it's not the end of the world, especially for a road that is already sparsely used from there to Tonopah to begin with.
Chris Sampang

Bobby5280

Quote from: Max RockatanskyI'm confused why you seem to think that freight vehicles don't US 395 and US 95 already for that purpose?

The existing 2-lane routes in Oregon, Northern California and Northern Nevada aren't great for long-haul trucking at all.

Quote from: Max RockatanskyI've never encountered soul crushing traffic on either highway.

When I mentioned "soul crushing traffic" I meant the traffic on highways in Middle and Southern California.

People driving commercial vehicles and personal vehicles still tend to stick to the Interstates anyway. Long distance is arguably easier on Interstates due to the more consistent travel speeds. 2-lane roads are more littered with speed traps and stops. Interstates offer a perception of better levels of safety; there is far less chance of getting in a head-on collision when driving on a divided Interstate versus a not-divided 2-lane road. Interstates tend to have far greater amounts of services along the exits.

Rothman

Quote from: Bobby5280 on June 14, 2024, 05:07:47 PM
Quote from: Max RockatanskyI'm confused why you seem to think that freight vehicles don't US 395 and US 95 already for that purpose?

The existing 2-lane routes in Oregon, Northern California and Northern Nevada aren't great for long-haul trucking at all.

Quote from: Max RockatanskyI've never encountered soul crushing traffic on either highway.

When I mentioned "soul crushing traffic" I meant the traffic on highways in Middle and Southern California.

People driving commercial vehicles and personal vehicles still tend to stick to the Interstates anyway. Long distance is arguably easier on Interstates due to the more consistent travel speeds. 2-lane roads are more littered with speed traps and stops. Interstates offer a perception of better levels of safety; there is far less chance of getting in a head-on collision when driving on a divided Interstate versus a not-divided 2-lane road. Interstates tend to have far greater amounts of services along the exits.

I find more speed traps along Interstates and four-lane "expressways" rather than two-laners.

If the two-laners were flooded with freight traffic, they'd be expanded.  But they're not because the existing routes are fine.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: Bobby5280 on June 14, 2024, 05:07:47 PM
Quote from: Max RockatanskyI'm confused why you seem to think that freight vehicles don't US 395 and US 95 already for that purpose?

The existing 2-lane routes in Oregon, Northern California and Northern Nevada aren't great for long-haul trucking at all.

Quote from: Max RockatanskyI've never encountered soul crushing traffic on either highway.

When I mentioned "soul crushing traffic" I meant the traffic on highways in Middle and Southern California.

People driving commercial vehicles and personal vehicles still tend to stick to the Interstates anyway. Long distance is arguably easier on Interstates due to the more consistent travel speeds. 2-lane roads are more littered with speed traps and stops. Interstates offer a perception of better levels of safety; there is far less chance of getting in a head-on collision when driving on a divided Interstate versus a not-divided 2-lane road. Interstates tend to have far greater amounts of services along the exits.

A lot of those two lane roads you don't like are built to high standards.  A significant percentage of CA 139 and northern US 395 in California is classified as two lane expressway.  We've already talked about the ease of passing people on US 95 between Fallon and Las Vegas. 

All this goes back to maybe you try the roads you are talking about first before formulating opinions on them.  You keep saying the same things to a bunch of people who actually have driven these corridors on a regular basis.  You're arguments definitely aren't helped by the fact that you are talking about highways passing through the likes of places like Modoc County.

And what is exactly "soul crushing" in the middle of the state?  I-5 in the Central is annoyingly bland, but not exactly full of soul crushing traffic.  99 between Sacramento and Wheeler Ridge rarely ever has significant slow down.  Even CA 58 east of Bakersfield is no big deal now that Kramer Junction has been bypassed.

hobsini2

#1130
So the current recommended by Google route from Las Vegas to Portland is US 93 to Twin Falls and then I-84 West at 1,049 mi and 15:47.
The next recommended route is US 95 via Battle Mountain and Winnemucca to OR 78. OR 78 to Burns. US 20 to George Millican Rd east of Bend. GM Rd north to OR 126. OR 126 to US 26. US 26 to Powell Valley Rd & Burnside Rd. Then local streets in Portland to I-84 and I-84 to I-5. That one is 968 mi and 15:51.

The way via Alt US 95, NV 439, I-80, US 395, CA 36, CA 139, OR 39, US 97, OR 58, I-5 at Eugene is 971 mi, but 16:40.

So let's say that you "Super 2" limited access bypasses of:
Beatty NV (EAST of town)
Goldfield NV (WEST of town)
Tonapah NV (4 lanes, SOUTHWEST of town, WEST of Siebert Mountain)
Hawthorne NV (which has Bypass 95 already NORTHEAST of Bus District)
Yerington NV (NORTHEAST of town)
Silver Springs NV (WEST of town, with interchange at US 50)
Susanville CA (4 lanes, EAST of town along Skyline Rd East)
Merrill OR (NORTH of town)
Klamath Falls (4 lanes, SOUTH & WEST of town via OR 140 and US 97, 7 interchanges at OR 39, Homemade Rd, Washburn Way (existing), OR 66/OR 140 WEST/US 97 SOUTH, Bus US 97 Main St/Klamath Ave (existing), Oregon Ave/Lakeshore Dr (existing),  and Bus US 97/OR 39 Crater Lake Pkwy (existing))

Add in "Super 2" rural interchanges at:
NV 160 Pahrump
Silverpeak Rd
US 6 WEST Bishop
US 95 NORTH Schurz, Fallon
NV 339 TO NV 208 Yerington, Mason
Red Rock Rd Reno
Standish - Buntingtonville Rd
US 395 NORTH Johnsonville, Alturas
CA 299 WEST Bieber, Redding
CA 299 EAST Canby, Alturas
OR 62 Crater Lake Hwy Crater Lake National Park
OR 138 Roseburg
US 97 NORTH Bend
OR 222 Parkway Rd

That's all I would do at this point for the corridor north of Las Vegas. By doing this, you may cut off about 30-45 minutes to make it a reasonable route compared to the other 2 ways listed above.
I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)

Max Rockatansky

Just having a true modern cutoff for US 395 to bypass Susanville would be super helpful.  County Route A3 does that for passenger traffic, not so much freight.

cl94

Honestly, if anywhere on the Vegas-Oregon corridor needs to be 4-laned, it's US 395 between Hallelujah Junction and Susanville. I'm not saying it's needed, but it has higher traffic counts than any of the 2-lane segments in Nevada by a decent margin and is more important in terms of need for redundancy given that it's an alternate for I-80 during winter.

(personal opinion emphasized)
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-10 in West Texas has at-grade intersections, as others have noted. I-93 in New Hampshire is only one lane in each direction through Franconia Notch. There are numerous examples where median width is not at "standard." So what's so wrong with allowing a new Interstate to merge down to regular road through a town and then back up outside the city limits? Other than it violates some pedantry protocol here on this forum LOL.

vdeane

Quote from: DenverBrian on June 14, 2024, 10:29:11 PMI-10 in West Texas has at-grade intersections, as others have noted. I-93 in New Hampshire is only one lane in each direction through Franconia Notch. There are numerous examples where median width is not at "standard." So what's so wrong with allowing a new Interstate to merge down to regular road through a town and then back up outside the city limits? Other than it violates some pedantry protocol here on this forum LOL.
Honestly, your concept sounds like the most annoying thing ever to drive.  I'm also sure that the towns, while initially relishing all the thru traffic that would be forced to go by their businesses, would quickly tire of high volumes of traffic trying to race their way through town and making it difficult to walk around.  It could also easily become congested (probably not on I-11, but elsewhere; US 15 and PA 147 essentially do this around Shamokin Dam, and it's wall to wall cars in stop and go conditions on major travel days).
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 14, 2024, 10:40:41 PM
Quote from: DenverBrian on June 14, 2024, 10:29:11 PMI-10 in West Texas has at-grade intersections, as others have noted. I-93 in New Hampshire is only one lane in each direction through Franconia Notch. There are numerous examples where median width is not at "standard." So what's so wrong with allowing a new Interstate to merge down to regular road through a town and then back up outside the city limits? Other than it violates some pedantry protocol here on this forum LOL.
Honestly, your concept sounds like the most annoying thing ever to drive.  I'm also sure that the towns, while initially relishing all the thru traffic that would be forced to go by their businesses, would quickly tire of high volumes of traffic trying to race their way through town and making it difficult to walk around.  It could also easily become congested (probably not on I-11, but elsewhere; US 15 and PA 147 essentially do this around Shamokin Dam, and it's wall to wall cars in stop and go conditions on major travel days).
But that's the entire point. This stretch of road is in rural Nevada. There. is. no. high. volume.

Sapphuby

The situations with other interstates not following standards is that the terrain/surroundings were an issue (I-78, I-93, I-75, I-70/76, etc, or that the cost was too high proportional to what they could've done, such as with the cattle ranch entrances on 10, 20, and 40. It likely would've been and still is too much to build an exit every 5 or so miles for one person to use it a day, including service roads, which is mainly* why those highways don't conform to full limited-access standards. I-180 WY doesn't count because it shouldn't even exist at all.

PColumbus73

Why not have the Reno-Pacific NW and Las Vegas-Phoenix segments as separate highways? Meaning that they both get built with the understanding that traffic volumes might not warrant the effort to connect them for several decades, if ever.

Remoteness and geography aside, I think the military installations around Hawthorne would be difficult to built and interstate through. It looks like it would have to be built on top of US 95 / US 95 Bypass around town, involving a sharp 90 degree bend east, and avoiding the airstrip on the northwest side.

Bobby5280

Quote from: vdeaneHonestly, your concept sounds like the most annoying thing ever to drive.  I'm also sure that the towns, while initially relishing all the thru traffic that would be forced to go by their businesses, would quickly tire of high volumes of traffic trying to race their way through town and making it difficult to walk around.

Here is another ingredient to add to that situation. The non-Interstate zones leading into and out of the town would be obvious speed traps. Oklahoma has a lot of those "speed zones" on standard 2-lane and 4-lane highways. The same goes for Texas. When I drive from here to Colorado I can't really "relax" and set the cruise control to a flat speed for a long time until I'm on I-25.

Max Rockatansky

Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 15, 2024, 12:08:01 AMRemoteness and geography aside, I think the military installations around Hawthorne would be difficult to built and interstate through. It looks like it would have to be built on top of US 95 / US 95 Bypass around town, involving a sharp 90 degree bend east, and avoiding the airstrip on the northwest side.


Traditionally military bases have been a source of driving freeway development and general road upgrades.  The reason US 95 extends as far north of Las Vegas as an expressway is to service a base. 

cl94

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 15, 2024, 12:25:39 AM
Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 15, 2024, 12:08:01 AMRemoteness and geography aside, I think the military installations around Hawthorne would be difficult to built and interstate through. It looks like it would have to be built on top of US 95 / US 95 Bypass around town, involving a sharp 90 degree bend east, and avoiding the airstrip on the northwest side.


Traditionally military bases have been a source of driving freeway development and general road upgrades.  The reason US 95 extends as far north of Las Vegas as an expressway is to service a base. 

That. NNSS and Creech AFB are the only reasons why 95 is 4+ lanes through all of Clark County. Accordingly, their existence alone is enough justification for I-upgrades, even if the at-grades along that stretch of 95 weren't among the most dangerous intersections in the state. Similarly, a lot of the work Caltrans has done along US 395 (both south and north of Reno) has gotten funds because it serves multiple military installations.

Building around Hawthorne Army Depot is doable, but Hawthorne and Mineral County won't love the way to do it (build NE of the depot and up the east side of Walker Lake). Last I saw, that was the corridor in mind. Similar to Tonopah, I could see the bypass here getting a ton of opposition for being too far from town.

(personal opinion emphasized)
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)

Bobby5280

The 4-lane portion of US-95 going Northwest out of Las Vegas services the main entrances into Creech AFB and Mercury. Then it drops to 2-lane configuration after that, long before reaching Hawthorne.

US-95 going through the town of Hawthorne and the Hawthorne Army Ammunition Plant wasn't built in an upgrade-friendly manner. The dogleg turns going around the East and North sides of Hawthorne are rated at 35mph. An Interstate going through there would need much broader curves, which would require ROW the Army might not be willing to give up. There is a cemetery on the North side of Hawthorne, right by the existing highway. Good luck squeezing a new freeway through that. The zone going out of the NW side of Hawthorne into Babbitt could fit a freeway and frontage roads if a couple or so buildings and a few parking lots get removed.

Another option is bypassing the whole Walker Lake area and sending I-11 up Pole Line Road just outside Tonopah. That would cut 20 miles of distance off the route to Schurz.

Plutonic Panda

It'd absolutely hilarious how so many are getting worked up here about building a road in a road discussion forum.

Scott5114

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 14, 2024, 07:38:18 PMGoldfield NV (WEST of town)

Goldfield has a town now? When'd that start?
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

pderocco

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 15, 2024, 01:28:36 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 14, 2024, 07:38:18 PMGoldfield NV (WEST of town)

Goldfield has a town now? When'd that start?
Well, they did just find a bunch more gold there.

splashflash

Quote from: cl94 on June 14, 2024, 08:03:58 PMHonestly, if anywhere on the Vegas-Oregon corridor needs to be 4-laned, it's US 395 between Hallelujah Junction and Susanville. I'm not saying it's needed, but it has higher traffic counts than any of the 2-lane segments in Nevada by a decent margin and is more important in terms of need for redundancy given that it's an alternate for I-80 during winter.

(personal opinion emphasized)

There was a Caltrans study, but I cannot find it, of the US 395 segment being recommended to be widened from SR 36 to Hallelujah Junction.  A local news story shows some of the efforts to widen the stretch: https://www.lassennews.com/commission-investigates-highway-395-improvements

TheStranger

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2024, 12:55:49 AMIt'd absolutely hilarious how so many are getting worked up here about building a road in a road discussion forum.

Not everyone in this forum is gung ho about road construction for various reasons (people who are against the impacts of eminent domain/relocation, some mass transit advocates, etc.).   

Others just think that this project might not be as important as others they are more interested in or want to see more funding for.  But that's also the reality of having 50 states with competing interests and different approaches to their highway networks too.

I bring up California's situations a lot on this forum not because I fully like or dislike everything out here, but more to be realistic about what can and can't happen in this current age.  Nevada is different (look at how they already planned for things going north of Summerlin and thereabouts), but planning is always going to be different from whether lines on a map have the funding to turn into real routes.
Chris Sampang

Plutonic Panda

^^^^ understood. I just think it's interesting how much effort some people put in the post responding to those that suggest to build I-11 from Las Vegas to Reno let alone connect with I-5 and their opposition to something that wont happen for a very long time if ever. I wanna see I-11 built from Las Vegas to Reno, I've lost almost all my interest in it given the fact that it won't connect into I-580 into Carson City. Etc. etc.

Max Rockatansky

#1148
Quote from: TheStranger on June 15, 2024, 01:51:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2024, 12:55:49 AMIt'd absolutely hilarious how so many are getting worked up here about building a road in a road discussion forum.

Not everyone in this forum is gung ho about road construction for various reasons (people who are against the impacts of eminent domain/relocation, some mass transit advocates, etc.).   

Others just think that this project might not be as important as others they are more interested in or want to see more funding for.  But that's also the reality of having 50 states with competing interests and different approaches to their highway networks too.

I bring up California's situations a lot on this forum not because I fully like or dislike everything out here, but more to be realistic about what can and can't happen in this current age.  Nevada is different (look at how they already planned for things going north of Summerlin and thereabouts), but planning is always going to be different from whether lines on a map have the funding to turn into real routes.

The only reason I'm against I-11 north of Las Vegas is because it isn't needed nor will ever be. The idea is FritzOwlian at best.

A lot of people would do themselves a favor to dig into the three main proposals to drag I-70 across Nevada during the 1960s qnd early 1970s.  All of those had that the same "build it and they will come" mindset that has taken over all talk/scoping on I-11.

Also, why do some of the posters on this forum seem to think all of us want nothing but freeways and Interstates?  We are literally talking about a part of Nevada that rivals much Alaska for low population density.

brad2971

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 15, 2024, 02:14:31 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on June 15, 2024, 01:51:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2024, 12:55:49 AMIt'd absolutely hilarious how so many are getting worked up here about building a road in a road discussion forum.

Not everyone in this forum is gung ho about road construction for various reasons (people who are against the impacts of eminent domain/relocation, some mass transit advocates, etc.).   

Others just think that this project might not be as important as others they are more interested in or want to see more funding for.  But that's also the reality of having 50 states with competing interests and different approaches to their highway networks too.

I bring up California's situations a lot on this forum not because I fully like or dislike everything out here, but more to be realistic about what can and can't happen in this current age.  Nevada is different (look at how they already planned for things going north of Summerlin and thereabouts), but planning is always going to be different from whether lines on a map have the funding to turn into real routes.

The only reason I'm against I-11 north of Las Vegas is because it isn't needed nor will ever be. The idea is FritzOwlian at best.

A lot of people would do themselves a favor to dig into the three main proposals to drag I-70 across Nevada during the 1960s qnd early 1970s.  All of those had that the same "build it and they will come" mindset that has taken over all talk/scoping on I-11.

Also, why do some of the posters on this forum seem to think all of us want nothing but freeways and Interstates?  We are literally talking about a part of Nevada that rivals much Alaska for low population density.

Forget about the rest of Nevada for a minute, and just look at Indian Springs (in Clark County!). Due to presence of both Creech AFB and the mountains close by to the south, Indian Springs has hard-and-fast development limits. It's quite doubtful they can ever justify two exits. However, NDOT can design an exit to the immediate east of town that can serve both the town and Creech AFB while providing the Air Force a more standardized base entrance than what it has right now. And all this can be done within current US 95 right-of-way.

A bypass of Indian Springs is, frankly, lunacy.



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.