Interstate 11 alignment, though Vegas and points north

[Terry Shea]

Putting it out there that I think it's kind of silly to scope I-11 beyond the Nevada Test Site.  We are talking about 2,000-3,000 AADT north of there on US 95.  If you're willing to pass a truck on occasion the corridor as presently configured is adequate.

Mmhmm. Unless you have a freeway fetish, it's pointless. Traffic already moves at freeway speeds along that stretch of 95. It won't cut travel times by enough to induce demand between Vegas and Reno away from airlines. That's still gonna be a 7+ hour drive with virtually nothing along the way apart from a few small towns that basically survive on the little through traffic that exists. NDOT has zero interest and, speaking as a Nevada resident, I don't want them wasting my money on a freeway that will get no use.

It is highly unlikely that this corridor will ever get enough traffic to warrant a freeway, let alone 4 lanes. There is nothing for over 300 miles and, more importantly, not enough water to support future growth. If you want to convert something in the western Great Basin to a freeway, US 395 is a little more reasonable.

As we've probably discussed upthread, there are two main reasons to upgrade US95 from Vegas to I-80:

• To improve safety, because there's a fatal crash on this stretch of road about once every 8 weeks.
• To improve freight connectivity, both as a California bypass for freight moving from I-10 and I-40 to/from the Pacific Northwest, and for Nevada's economy discretely.

I don't think anyone's saying it's time to dump $5 billion into "overnight interstate" on US 95, but following the Arizona model from US 93 — twinning it in segments, building interchanges at the key intersections, finding funding as available for the major bypasses, that's the way to get it done and save lives. (Plus, because of the sparse nature of the western Nevada desert, you're probably looking at what, 20? exits between Mercury and Fallon? Maybe 25?)

And let's be honest - if the Eisenhower largesse were raining down on America today (ahh, the days of the 91% income tax brackets...) and we were building an Interstate System from scratch, this would be on the map.

Nobody paid those 91% brackets.  There were many, many more available deductions back in those old days.

That may be, but even the poorest people paid a 20% rate on the first dollars they earned, and it was even worse during the FDR and Truman days during and shortly after WW II.
https://taxfoundation.org/historical-income-tax-rates-brackets/

[Rothman]

Putting it out there that I think it's kind of silly to scope I-11 beyond the Nevada Test Site.  We are talking about 2,000-3,000 AADT north of there on US 95.  If you're willing to pass a truck on occasion the corridor as presently configured is adequate.

Mmhmm. Unless you have a freeway fetish, it's pointless. Traffic already moves at freeway speeds along that stretch of 95. It won't cut travel times by enough to induce demand between Vegas and Reno away from airlines. That's still gonna be a 7+ hour drive with virtually nothing along the way apart from a few small towns that basically survive on the little through traffic that exists. NDOT has zero interest and, speaking as a Nevada resident, I don't want them wasting my money on a freeway that will get no use.

It is highly unlikely that this corridor will ever get enough traffic to warrant a freeway, let alone 4 lanes. There is nothing for over 300 miles and, more importantly, not enough water to support future growth. If you want to convert something in the western Great Basin to a freeway, US 395 is a little more reasonable.

As we've probably discussed upthread, there are two main reasons to upgrade US95 from Vegas to I-80:

• To improve safety, because there's a fatal crash on this stretch of road about once every 8 weeks.
• To improve freight connectivity, both as a California bypass for freight moving from I-10 and I-40 to/from the Pacific Northwest, and for Nevada's economy discretely.

I don't think anyone's saying it's time to dump $5 billion into "overnight interstate" on US 95, but following the Arizona model from US 93 — twinning it in segments, building interchanges at the key intersections, finding funding as available for the major bypasses, that's the way to get it done and save lives. (Plus, because of the sparse nature of the western Nevada desert, you're probably looking at what, 20? exits between Mercury and Fallon? Maybe 25?)

And let's be honest - if the Eisenhower largesse were raining down on America today (ahh, the days of the 91% income tax brackets...) and we were building an Interstate System from scratch, this would be on the map.

Nobody paid those 91% brackets.  There were many, many more available deductions back in those old days.

That may be, but even the poorest people paid a 20% rate on the first dollars they earned, and it was even worse during the FDR and Truman days during and shortly after WW II.
https://taxfoundation.org/historical-income-tax-rates-brackets/

Those are just brackets.  Again, there were many, many more available deductions back then.

Hope you're using software or some help with your own taxes to lessen your own liability.

[skluth]

I've gone through some of the public comments and there is a ton of concern from towns along 95 about a freeway potentially killing downtown businesses. Given experiences elsewhere, these are probably more founded than the claim a freeway will bring economic development, especially given how far many of these towns are from the rest of civilization. It doesn't appear that they have done a full cost-benefit analysis yet. They have done a decent environmental analysis and the results of that aren't pretty, especially north of Tonopah.

One has to be kind of pragmatic about this.

Beatty, Tonopah and Hawthorne are spaced well enough that they're going to be fine as service centers.

Beatty has national park gateway access so it has a secondary economic support.

Tonopah has lithium mining and government so it has a secondary economic support.

Hawthorne has the ammo depot and has a secondary economic support.

The other whistle-stops — Goldfield, Mina, Luning, Lathrop Wells — there's not a lot of hope there as it is.

I think it's more likely US 95 will be slowly upgraded to four lanes between towns with the highway, posted as I-11, and remain going through the towns as US 95 for some time. This is how I-40 replaced US 66 west of Oklahoma City (like Winslow was when the Eagles song was written). Bypasses will be built as needed. It wouldn't surprise me if the highway was mostly four lanes from Las Vegas to Fallon with a few I-11 bypasses (maybe Hawthorne, Tonopah, Beatty) in 2050 but still contained a few gaps.

[Bobby5280]

From the perspective of safety, I would just hope NDOT can twin as much of US-95 as they can (or at least add more passing lane zones). Head-on collisions are far less likely with a divided highway. Oklahoma has a decent number of rural 4-lane divided highways that weren't divided due to high AADT counts. They were divided to cut down on the grisly fatal collisions.

I really don't like driving on 2-lane roads for long distances. Even though NM DOT did a crappy job with it; I was really happy once US-64/87 thru NE New Mexico was turned into a 4-lane divided highway. It really really sucked as a 2-lane road. It was hard as hell to pass slow drivers safely because the rolling terrain often blocked the view of on-coming traffic. During the daytime you could get stuck behind some RV or "grandma" driving a tank-sized sedan 20mph under the speed limit. There would be a "train" of cars backed up behind the slow-poke.

Passing on 2-lane US-95 in rural Nevada might be a little easier since the terrain appears more flat and the road appears to run more straight. RVs and other slow-pokes are still a factor at creating traffic back-ups.

Fatalities from highway crashes are on the rise. More people appear to be driving while impared by alcohol or drugs. Obviously drowsy drivers are a hazard late at night, but some people even fall asleep behind the wheel during the day. Sometimes it's not a good idea to wake up too early to embark on a long road trip. Then there's the ever-present syndrome of distracted drivers. They're texting or doing other things that can cause them to veer into the opposing lane.

Safety improvements on US-95 can happen as part of an eventual I-11 upgrade or just done on their own (such as adding passing lanes). If I-11 is built from Vegas to the Reno area and takes multiple decades to complete I wouldn't be surprised if the route ultimately built bypasses towns like Beatty and Tonopah in favor of a more direct route.

[Kniwt]

Between Hawthorne and Tonopah, my experience has been that, given the chance, traffic on US 95 really flies. Everyone is in such a hurry -- especially if they get trapped behind a slowpoke for a few miles -- that I've regularly seen (and [redacted]) speeds well over 90mph on the two-lane road. It's a miracle there aren't more fatalities out there.

Even with a low AADT, the importance of the road, and its continuing use by long-haul truckers, would seem to make a very strong case for twinning outside the "towns." (And then that cop in Goldfield can really clean up in that crazy 25mph zone.)

[Max Rockatansky]

Between Hawthorne and Tonopah, my experience has been that, given the chance, traffic on US 95 really flies. Everyone is in such a hurry -- especially if they get trapped behind a slowpoke for a few miles -- that I've regularly seen (and [redacted]) speeds well over 90mph on the two-lane road. It's a miracle there aren't more fatalities out there.

Even with a low AADT, the importance of the road, and its continuing use by long-haul truckers, would seem to make a very strong case for twinning outside the "towns." (And then that cop in Goldfield can really clean up in that crazy 25mph zone.)

Esmeralda County loves to set Goldfield up as a speed trap.  The speed through town could easily handle 45 MPH and kept artificially low.

[kdk]

Goldfield is down from a peak population of somewhere between 10,000-15,000, effectively it is a ghost town already.  The only reason Goldfield has any relevance at all is due to it still being the Esmeralda County seat.  Tonopah, Hawthorne and Beatty are the only locales on US 95 between Vegas-Fallon with an actual active pulse.  Mina, Luning and Coaldale are all similarly corpse-like as Goldfield.

Goldfield is going to at least have a gas station/truck stop finally, for the time in decades there will be a place to buy gas there.  It's been planned for years but construction is finally moving pretty far along and looks like it should be open by the spring.  it's on the south end of town.  NVDOT will have to update the "next gas 100 miles" signs between Beatty and Tonopah.  not that I expect this to turn around Goldfield, but it's something.  Amazes me that this will only be the second gas station in the entire Esmaralda County (the other is in the Fish Lake Valley area).

[Max Rockatansky]

Goldfield is down from a peak population of somewhere between 10,000-15,000, effectively it is a ghost town already.  The only reason Goldfield has any relevance at all is due to it still being the Esmeralda County seat.  Tonopah, Hawthorne and Beatty are the only locales on US 95 between Vegas-Fallon with an actual active pulse.  Mina, Luning and Coaldale are all similarly corpse-like as Goldfield.

Goldfield is going to at least have a gas station/truck stop finally, for the time in decades there will be a place to buy gas there.  It's been planned for years but construction is finally moving pretty far along and looks like it should be open by the spring.  it's on the south end of town.  NVDOT will have to update the "next gas 100 miles" signs between Beatty and Tonopah.  not that I expect this to turn around Goldfield, but it's something.  Amazes me that this will only be the second gas station in the entire Esmaralda County (the other is in the Fish Lake Valley area).

That is quite something isn't it?  I always wondered how people in Goldfield managed their lives around having to go all the way to Tonopah for basic services like gasoline.  Will this station also by chance include EV chargers?  That would be quite amusing to see the corpse of Goldfield dragged into the the 21st Century by way of one service station.

[kdk]

Goldfield is down from a peak population of somewhere between 10,000-15,000, effectively it is a ghost town already.  The only reason Goldfield has any relevance at all is due to it still being the Esmeralda County seat.  Tonopah, Hawthorne and Beatty are the only locales on US 95 between Vegas-Fallon with an actual active pulse.  Mina, Luning and Coaldale are all similarly corpse-like as Goldfield.

Goldfield is going to at least have a gas station/truck stop finally, for the time in decades there will be a place to buy gas there.  It's been planned for years but construction is finally moving pretty far along and looks like it should be open by the spring.  it's on the south end of town.  NVDOT will have to update the "next gas 100 miles" signs between Beatty and Tonopah.  not that I expect this to turn around Goldfield, but it's something.  Amazes me that this will only be the second gas station in the entire Esmaralda County (the other is in the Fish Lake Valley area).

That is quite something isn't it?  I always wondered how people in Goldfield managed their lives around having to go all the way to Tonopah for basic services like gasoline.  Will this station also by chance include EV chargers?  That would be quite amusing to see the corpse of Goldfield dragged into the the 21st Century by way of one service station.

There's a FB page active on it with some info.  https://www.facebook.com/people/Goldfield-TRUCK-STOP/100063733170922/  Last update was in August on the page but I drove by it in late October and it was much further along since.  Amazes me in that until this opens you cannot really buy anything in Goldfield as of today other than a meal at the one restaurant in town, or the random antique shops etc which never seem open when I'm through there.

[civilengineeringnerd]

It just seems a little odd that a state's two largest metro areas aren't connected by Interstate, let alone one single route designation.

Besides, if we can get the freeway built, maybe we can get the country's first 90 MPH speed limit

heh, i'd totally drive that route just for the idea i could always go 5 miles over and never get caught, doing 95 mph on a freeway, even if it isn't interstate, would be so much fun!

[civilengineeringnerd]

while ive read up to page 11 on this subject, assuming that there still hasn't been a decision, there really should be 2 freeways.
1. I-580 extended down to las vegas or mercury (or just a realignment of US-95 or a realignment plus extension of US-95 Alt northwest with US-95 or US-95A business added to tonopah and other areas that would be bypassed as a freeway, even if its a simple super-2 alignment through the mountains into US-395)
2. I-11 up to just past elko, up to boise ID.

this solves 2 problems and serves both sides of the state better overall.
1. the political pressure to get a proper connection to reno and vegas without going through any major points of political obstacles
2. having I-11 parallel to the eastern part and connect with elko or to the west of elko with I-80, then to the north and northeast to boise would at least have the interstate connect the western side closest to salt lake and provide a route from boise to phoenix.

the super 2 (2 laned freeway) along the western side of the state would better serve as a proper bypass around LA metro, considering it would be very expensive to cross the mountain ranges a proper super 2 would be sufficient till the traffic demands require a extra tunnel and a widening to a proper freeway. on top of it, the super 2 alignment could be better served with passing lanes in certain high traffic areas or in areas where slow ass grandmas and slow RVs are a thing and you could have the 90 mph speed limit throughout most of the super 2 if need be. hell add some extra wide curves so people could just drift around the bends and you'd be golden.

[sprjus4]

It just seems a little odd that a state's two largest metro areas aren't connected by Interstate, let alone one single route designation.

Besides, if we can get the freeway built, maybe we can get the country's first 90 MPH speed limit

heh, i'd totally drive that route just for the idea i could always go 5 miles over and never get caught, doing 95 mph on a freeway, even if it isn't interstate, would be so much fun!

Not 90 mph, but SH-130 in Texas has a 40 mile segment posted at 85 mph.

I'm fairly certain there's at least one country with a 90 mph freeway speed limit (not counting Germany).

[kphoger]

heh, i'd totally drive that route just for the idea i could always go 5 miles over and never get caught, doing 95 mph on a freeway, even if it isn't interstate, would be so much fun!

Not 90 mph, but SH-130 in Texas has a 40 mile segment posted at 85 mph.

Yep, I've driven the whole stretch, both directions.  We were heavy-laden, though, so I didn't drive faster than 85—87 mph.

I'm fairly certain there's at least one country with a 90 mph freeway speed limit (not counting Germany).

One highway in the UAE has a speed limit of 99 mph.

[Bobby5280]

Even if there was a 90mph speed limit in a remote area I certainly wouldn't drive that fast. Others can do so if they like. The fuel economy in my pickup truck really starts going to hell above 75mph. I get the best mileage in the 60-65mph range (as much as 33mpg).

while ive read up to page 11 on this subject, assuming that there still hasn't been a decision, there really should be 2 freeways.
1. I-580 extended down to las vegas or mercury (or just a realignment of US-95 or a realignment plus extension of US-95 Alt northwest with US-95 or US-95A business added to tonopah and other areas that would be bypassed as a freeway, even if its a simple super-2 alignment through the mountains into US-395)
2. I-11 up to just past elko, up to boise ID.

I've been looking at the Las Vegas to Reno freeway riddle for quite some time. The more and more I look at the situation the more I believe a version of I-11 using up I-580 is a non-starter -at least until the United States stops sucking at tunnel building.

Overlapping I-580 would require going down almost to Topaz Lake and the CA border to get around the South side of the Mt Siegel range. Then the highway would have to take an abrupt turn East toward Walker Lake. The highway would have to punch through another mountain range to reach Walker Lake and the US-95 corridor. That would probably involve having to build at least one or more tunnel locations. And that's the easiest route possibility. The diagonal Southwestern NV border straddles lots and lots of mountains.

Out of a standpoint of security, I would probably rather I-11 just completely bypass Walker Lake to the East so it avoids the Hawthorne Army Ammunition Depot. That depot is mainly serviced by rail anyway.

If I-11 was routed through Goldfield and Tonopah a more direct I-11 route could be developed by following along CR-89. That would have I-11 continuing to go Northwest out of Tonopah. The Interstate would have a somewhat unobstructed path to Schurz. But it would involve going through the Walker River Reservation. However that area is so freaking desolate that it's possible tribal leaders might welcome what an Interstate could do to boost economic development out there. From Schurz I-11 should parallel the railroad corridor up to Alt US-95. From there it's a straight shot from Silver Springs up to Clark and I-80. There's a bunch of logistical centers there, along with a Tesla factory. NV-439 is already four lane divided and wouldn't be difficult to upgrade to Interstate standards.

As for an Interstate from Elko to Boise: there is too much desolate mountain and canyon country between both locations. The US-95 corridor from Winnemucca up to the Boise metro would have the best chance at any upgrades. Even that route is not very direct, due to dodging around a complex of deep canyons in the SE corner of Oregon. I think it would be worth it for some portions of that US-95 segment to be upgraded to four lane divided highway and have more passing lanes built along other 2-lane segments. IMHO, a full blown Interstate would be overkill at least for now. The Boise region is growing. The metro has 800,000 and is forecast to reach 1.3 million by 2060. IMHO, if any movers and shakers in the Boise region want an Interstate highway going South to I-80 as a sort of California gateway they need to solve highway problems in the immediate Boise area first. Right now there are no good upgrade-able highway outlets going South out of Boise, Nampa or Caldwell. It's just a lot of square street grids getting covered up in commercial and residential development. As populous as the Boise area is the only secondary Interstate or freeway in the area is the little I-184 stub going into downtown Boise.

[kkt]

I-11 north of Las Vegas would be a highly questionable extension of an already questionable interstate.  North of LV doesn't need two freeways, it doesn't even need one.

The best route from LV to Reno doesn't go through Carson City.  I'm not sure there's much LV-Reno traffic, but if there is it would be US 95 to Fallon and then west.

Tunnels are expensive everywhere, and tunneling for Nevada low-use roads would just be silly.

Nevada should be saving its money for a third lane each way on I-80, or I-15, or something else they're more likely to need.

[Bobby5280]

I-11 north of Las Vegas would be a highly questionable extension of an already questionable interstate.

There is no questioning the merits of linking the Las Vegas metro and Phoenix metro directly with an Interstate highway. OTOH some of the proposed I-11 routing choices going well around the Phoenix metro are indeed highly questionable.

The merits of extending I-11 Northwest of Las Vegas up to the Reno area really depend on the link to Phoenix being built. In the near term I see no problem at all for I-11 to be extended up to Indian Springs, Creech AFB and the exit for Mercury.

As for a choice to simply have I-11 overlap US-95 all the way to Fallon and then go to Fernley: that sucks. There's no mileage savings and no time savings. And it would have I-11 meet I-80 roughly 30 miles East of Reno. I think NV-439 and Clark is a much better choice for an I-11 junction with I-80. My suggestion of bypassing Walker Lake to the East would cut a lot of mileage off the route and make I-11 much more of a straight shot. No tunnels required either. The towns of Mena and Luning wouldn't that route choice. But those towns are drying up anyway. Hawthorne mainly exists because of the Army depot there. It might not be so easy sending a new Interstate thru that mostly military territory.

[skluth]

Running I-11 up the east side of Walker Lake (and north of the army base) might be easier than keeping it close to US 95 near Hawthorne. The Army would probably prefer that the main highway not run between all those reinforced munitions bunkers currently on both sides of US 95. There is still the issue of the route through the Paiute Walker River Reservation but I think Nevada can come to an agreement with the Walker River Band.

My own preference is to run I-11 to Fallon but it's probably better to run it to Silver Springs if the final plan is to run I-11 NW of Reno to I-5 or just end it at I-80. I realize some don't feel the traffic merits it, but traffic didn't merit building I-70 between Salina and Green River UT either. It will far more important as a truck corridor between Mexico and the Pac NW than for cars which is why I'm fine with I-11 going to Buckeye instead of Phoenix. (It would be better going to Phoenix but I can't see a freeway along the US 60 corridor going east of AZ 303. A freeway won't even be able to get that far if Arizona doesn't do something quick to preserve the corridor.) I can even see it taking over AZ 85 between Buckeye and I-8 but don't see any point in running it further south. In any case construction of I-11 north of Vegas can be done incrementally and more northerly preferred freight routes should become more clear once US 95 is made four lanes up to Beatty regardless of freeway status.

[Bobby5280]

IMHO, I don't see much benefit of running a possible I-11 route on the East side of Walker Lake versus the West side where US-95 currently runs. It looks like there would be little if any mileage savings. Motorists would probably benefit more from having I-11 skirt the edge of Hawthorne and go thru Babbitt so they have access to the roadside services there. An I-11 path around the East side of Walker Lake could run just outside the East boundaries of the Hawthorne Army Depot.

If I-11 were to just avoid the town of Hawthorne why even have I-11 run next to Walker Lake at all? That crooked 40 mile jog to the West that US-95 takes West out of Tonopah could be avoided along with the crooked path US-95 takes from the Western US-6 junction up North to Walker Lake. Currently US-95 from Tonopah to Schurz is roughly 135 miles. The path I'm describing would be about 110 miles.

Add that detour going NW out of Tonopah to additional mileage savings gained by avoiding the Fallon and Fernley nonsense. Having I-11 follow the rail corridor NW out of Schurz would cut even more mileage off the route. I-11 could follow about 20 miles of Alt US-95 South of Silver Springs and tie directly into NV-439 and reach I-80 in Clark.

The other problem with the Fallon-Fernley concept is there are no easy/clear spaces where to build I-11. Fallon would require a Southern bypass well outside the town (locals there wouldn't like too much). A junction with I-80 in Fernley would probably have to be built well East of town.

Hawthorne's future is another wrinkle.

The US Army's Joint Munitions Command has 18 different installations around the nation. The ammunition depot in Hawthorne is the largest in terms of land area. The one in McAlester, OK has the greatest munitions capacity. I don't know how secure the Hawthorne installation's future is from possible BRAC meetings. The Army likes moving its missions from one post to another due to various factors (including cost of living). Anyway, if the Army decided to close the Hawthorne facility and move its missions elsewhere the towns along that segment of US-95 would dissolve almost immediately.

If I-11 was ever built between the Reno and Las Vegas regions it would take decades to complete (unless the feds suddenly found Jesus with Interstate highways again). I think the best near term strategy is establishing the I-80 outlet for I-11 going South. I think Clark and NV-439 is the best option. They could build out I-11 down to Schurz and just leave that stub there for the time being. From Vegas: do the easy extensions up to the Mercury exit. After that it's just a piece meal process to meet somewhere in the middle.

[kdk]

IMHO, I don't see much benefit of running a possible I-11 route on the East side of Walker Lake versus the West side where US-95 currently runs. It looks like there would be little if any mileage savings. Motorists would probably benefit more from having I-11 skirt the edge of Hawthorne and go thru Babbitt so they have access to the roadside services there. An I-11 path around the East side of Walker Lake could run just outside the East boundaries of the Hawthorne Army Depot.

If I-11 were to just avoid the town of Hawthorne why even have I-11 run next to Walker Lake at all? That crooked 40 mile jog to the West that US-95 takes West out of Tonopah could be avoided along with the crooked path US-95 takes from the Western US-6 junction up North to Walker Lake. Currently US-95 from Tonopah to Schurz is roughly 135 miles. The path I'm describing would be about 110 miles.

Add that detour going NW out of Tonopah to additional mileage savings gained by avoiding the Fallon and Fernley nonsense. Having I-11 follow the rail corridor NW out of Schurz would cut even more mileage off the route. I-11 could follow about 20 miles of Alt US-95 South of Silver Springs and tie directly into NV-439 and reach I-80 in Clark.

The other problem with the Fallon-Fernley concept is there are no easy/clear spaces where to build I-11. Fallon would require a Southern bypass well outside the town (locals there wouldn't like too much). A junction with I-80 in Fernley would probably have to be built well East of town.

Hawthorne's future is another wrinkle.

The US Army's Joint Munitions Command has 18 different installations around the nation. The ammunition depot in Hawthorne is the largest in terms of land area. The one in McAlester, OK has the greatest munitions capacity. I don't know how secure the Hawthorne installation's future is from possible BRAC meetings. The Army likes moving its missions from one post to another due to various factors (including cost of living). Anyway, if the Army decided to close the Hawthorne facility and move its missions elsewhere the towns along that segment of US-95 would dissolve almost immediately.

If I-11 was ever built between the Reno and Las Vegas regions it would take decades to complete (unless the feds suddenly found Jesus with Interstate highways again). I think the best near term strategy is establishing the I-80 outlet for I-11 going South. I think Clark and NV-439 is the best option. They could build out I-11 down to Schurz and just leave that stub there for the time being. From Vegas: do the easy extensions up to the Mercury exit. After that it's just a piece meal process to meet somewhere in the middle.

I think the reasoning for building on the east side of the lake is that north of Hawthorne US 95 is built on a cliff for a fairly long stretch.  You couldn't even widen the road to four lanes without blasting into the mountain or having to move the road off the cliff to build bridges in portions.  The east side of the lake has been discussed just being that it would be much cheaper and easier to build a new road there.

I still think the option (someone brought up a while back) of the Gabbs Pole Line Road alignment makes the most sense overall. 
Following 95 up to Tonopah which seems to be the agreed upon route for the south half works fine.  From just a few miles northwest of Tonopah it would head northwest along Gabbs Pole Line Road to the current NV 361 alignment NW to US 50 at Middlegate.  Upgrade US 50, but would need to bypass through the farmland south of Fallon, then back along US 50 to Fernley, would probably need to bypass through the flat land south of Fernley to connect to I-80.   
Very little ROW needs to be acquired, mainly some of the farmland south of Fallon and even a portion of that is currently County Routes 117 and 118.  It would cut through the town of Gabbs but there's maybe 180 people left living there now anyway.

A couple years ago on a drive from Reno to Las Vegas I checked traffic on my phone and it actually suggested I take this route.  It showed it would be 50 minutes shorter than the usual route along I80, NV 439, ALT 95, US 95 that I normally take.  I thought it seemed too good to be true but tried it anyway.  It was initially fine, much less two lane road driving, and east of Fernley US 50 and NV 361 there was very little traffic and didn't need to pass any slow vehicles.
However, just south of Gabbs I saw Gabbs Pole Line Road, and almost missed it.  it's just a dirt road in that area.  I didn't know how long it's a dirt road or the conditions, so didn't trust taking it and even if I did I'm not sure it would save me 50 minutes.  I know it's paved near Tonopah so not sure how long that lasts.  Ended up just taking NV 361 down to US 95 at Luning.  I probably didn't save any time or miles doing that, but certainly if Gabbs Pole Line was paved it would cut miles off.

Also this alignment would not only shorten the drive between Las Vegas and Reno but also be attractive for Las Vegas to Boise.  Boise traffic would head north in Fallon on US 95 to I-80 the north, but being I-11 wouldn't veer as far west it would be a more direct route than taking 93 through eastern Nevada on a mostly 2 lane route.

[Henry]

Also this alignment would not only shorten the drive between Las Vegas and Reno but also be attractive for Las Vegas to Boise.  Boise traffic would head north in Fallon on US 95 to I-18 the north, but being I-11 wouldn't veer as far west it would be a more direct route than taking 93 through eastern Nevada on a mostly 2 lane route.

I think you mean I-80.

[brad2971]

IMHO, I don't see much benefit of running a possible I-11 route on the East side of Walker Lake versus the West side where US-95 currently runs. It looks like there would be little if any mileage savings. Motorists would probably benefit more from having I-11 skirt the edge of Hawthorne and go thru Babbitt so they have access to the roadside services there. An I-11 path around the East side of Walker Lake could run just outside the East boundaries of the Hawthorne Army Depot.

If I-11 were to just avoid the town of Hawthorne why even have I-11 run next to Walker Lake at all? That crooked 40 mile jog to the West that US-95 takes West out of Tonopah could be avoided along with the crooked path US-95 takes from the Western US-6 junction up North to Walker Lake. Currently US-95 from Tonopah to Schurz is roughly 135 miles. The path I'm describing would be about 110 miles.

Add that detour going NW out of Tonopah to additional mileage savings gained by avoiding the Fallon and Fernley nonsense. Having I-11 follow the rail corridor NW out of Schurz would cut even more mileage off the route. I-11 could follow about 20 miles of Alt US-95 South of Silver Springs and tie directly into NV-439 and reach I-80 in Clark.

The other problem with the Fallon-Fernley concept is there are no easy/clear spaces where to build I-11. Fallon would require a Southern bypass well outside the town (locals there wouldn't like too much). A junction with I-80 in Fernley would probably have to be built well East of town.

Hawthorne's future is another wrinkle.

The US Army's Joint Munitions Command has 18 different installations around the nation. The ammunition depot in Hawthorne is the largest in terms of land area. The one in McAlester, OK has the greatest munitions capacity. I don't know how secure the Hawthorne installation's future is from possible BRAC meetings. The Army likes moving its missions from one post to another due to various factors (including cost of living). Anyway, if the Army decided to close the Hawthorne facility and move its missions elsewhere the towns along that segment of US-95 would dissolve almost immediately.

If I-11 was ever built between the Reno and Las Vegas regions it would take decades to complete (unless the feds suddenly found Jesus with Interstate highways again). I think the best near term strategy is establishing the I-80 outlet for I-11 going South. I think Clark and NV-439 is the best option. They could build out I-11 down to Schurz and just leave that stub there for the time being. From Vegas: do the easy extensions up to the Mercury exit. After that it's just a piece meal process to meet somewhere in the middle.

There has to be something approaching a current logistical reason for I-11 to be built from Reno-Las Vegas. A cursory look at this application from NDOT:

https://ndot.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=278339b4605e4dda8da9bddd2fd9f1e9

shows some...very interesting traffic patterns. For example, other than driving through towns like Hawthorne, Fallon, and Tonopah, the most heavily trafficked stretch of US 95 is between the south end of US 95A and the north end of SR 360. The sign right south of that SR 360 intersection says it is 269 miles to Las Vegas. Based on that, how can NDOT justify that I-11 plan beyond even scoping and planning stages?

And as for Hawthorne Army Depot: The post was originally on the 2005 BRAC list. (You can thank NV's congressional delegation for getting it off that list). Considering that all the munitions work related to Iraq and Afghanistan was handled by places at least as far east as McAlester Army Ammunition Plat, the place has likely seen a diminishing work load since that BRAC list.

[Bobby5280]

I think the reasoning for building on the east side of the lake is that north of Hawthorne US 95 is built on a cliff for a fairly long stretch.  You couldn't even widen the road to four lanes without blasting into the mountain or having to move the road off the cliff to build bridges in portions.

The fairly long stretch you speak of is a 1.7 mile segment of US-95 just South of Sportsmans Beach. The segment is short enough that a couple options are available for adding a second set of lanes on the lake side of the existing US-95 lanes. Land could be built up or they could even build a short bridge.

My own opinion is they should just bypass Walker Lake completely and build a direct route from Tonopah to Schurz (or rather a junction with US-95 to the North of Schurz). Then it would follow alongside the existing rail path to Alt US-95, then follow Alt US-95 up to near Silver Springs where it would aim at the junction with NV-439 and US-50.

I still think the option (someone brought up a while back) of the Gabbs Pole Line Road alignment makes the most sense overall.

If Gabbs Pole Line Road and CR-89 are the same thing then it would be I who made the suggestion earlier. But rather than hang right on NV-361 to go thru Gabbs and up to Middlegate I would rather this I-11 concept cut across a bunch of empty land between the CR-89/NV-361 junction and Schurz.

The only problem with this direct Tonopah-Schurz idea is the route would cut thru the Walker River Reservation. There's no telling how receptive or not tribe leaders would be to this idea. An Interstate could dramatically boost economic activity on otherwise desolate land that probably isn't attracting any visitors or new business. But some tribes don't mind letting prime real estate just sit empty. For example there is a good bit of "trust land" here in Lawton that falls into that category.

There has to be something approaching a current logistical reason for I-11 to be built from Reno-Las Vegas.

IMHO, the only way an I-11 route going NW of Las Vegas makes any sense is if I-11 was intended to be built as a much larger corridor. Vegas to Reno alone wouldn't cut it. If I-11 went farther North to connect with I-5 somewhere in Oregon the corridor could have a far more valuable purpose. It would serve as a relief valve for I-5, allowing traffic from the Pacific Northwest to head toward the Mexico border without having to deal with going thru the busy/expensive parts of California.

[Max Rockatansky]

So basically the leading argument for I-11 north of Las Vegas is:

"I think it is needed."

[Bobby5280]

Um, not really.

A mere Vegas to Reno Interstate would be a waste of money. Under the current plans the only thing that makes sense is Vegas to Phoenix.

A larger corridor that connected bigger population centers (Vancouver, Seattle & Portland on one end then Vegas and Phoenix on the other end) might be more worthwhile. The route would attract a lot more commerce. But the US government rarely ever thinks in big picture terms. I-69 is technically a big picture project. But we're over 20 years into that effort and only a small amount of that route has been built.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm amused at how you fail to see the parallels with this "build it and they will come mindset"  and some of the more choice items seen on the fictional board.  It's one thing to be aspirational, quite another to ignore every single person trying to given you actual data about the US 95 corridor north of Las Vegas.  But then again so much about I-11 as actually presently presented has let's say "questionable assumptions"  about where it should be and who will use it.