Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[ztonyg]

How has the Broadway Curve project managed to avoid the controversy that other massive widening projects (I-45 in Houston, I-5 in Portland, 710/605 in Los Angeles etc.) have attracted recently?

We're used to that section of I-10 being a massive bottleneck.  Anything will be an improvement, despite an even worse bottleneck for a couple of years.

That hot mess was one reason I moved from Ahwatukee to Mesa in 2014. 

ADOT should really do a better job of trying to redistribute traffic that doesn't need to go through that bottleneck onto other highways. I see a lot of through truck and other vehicle traffic staying on I-10 through this area when it really should be redistributed onto the Loop 202 South Mountain Freeway. I know ADOT hates 3dis but the Loop 202 South Mountain really should be an I-x10 with a S/B and E/B control city of Tucson and a N/B and W/B control city of Los Angeles.

Also the Broadway curve can be avoided with the Loop 101 / Loop 202 combination yet, again, with a lack of control cities and a lot of signage (other than a few VMSs) most drivers just take US 60 to I-10.

Along with the AZ 30 project ADOT needs to fix the distribution of traffic around downtown. It seems the main through movements through the "Mini-stack" are from I-10 E/B to Loop 202 E/B, Loop 202 W/B to I-10 W/B, I-10 W/B to AZ 51 N/B, and AZ 51 S/B to I-10 E/B. Yet the movement with the most lanes is the 90 degree turn through this intersection (which I guess makes sense to keep it the I-10 mainline). If the I-10 mainline is relocated to I-17 and AZ 30 it solves this problem while converting the "Mini-stack" to a conventional stack.

[rower155]

How has the Broadway Curve project managed to avoid the controversy that other massive widening projects (I-45 in Houston, I-5 in Portland, 710/605 in Los Angeles etc.) have attracted recently?

Fair question. Projects like I-45 and I-710 are orders of magnitude larger than Broadway Curve for starters and have proposed impacts to residents and neighborhoods. Regardless of any documented benefits, it is rare these days for those types of projects to get built without some controversy, which can be understandable.

Broadway curve is mostly within the existing right-of-way with no residential impacts. Primarily there was some sliver property acquisition from businesses west of US60, who are typically accepting of selling off a sliver of land in exchange for improved freeway access.

There's also a number of pedestrian/cycling improvements along the corridor with the Broadway curve project that will benefit some of the neighborhoods.  Long story short, there's not much in this project that would cause the controversy that many other projects face. If anything, the weekend closures to build it may be the most annoying thing, but at least that is only temporary.

[rower155]

How has the Broadway Curve project managed to avoid the controversy that other massive widening projects (I-45 in Houston, I-5 in Portland, 710/605 in Los Angeles etc.) have attracted recently?

Fair question. Projects like I-45 and I-710 are orders of magnitude larger than Broadway Curve for starters and have proposed impacts to residents and neighborhoods. Regardless of any documented benefits, it is rare these days for those types of projects to get built without some controversy, which can be understandable.

Broadway curve is mostly within the existing right-of-way with no residential impacts. Primarily there was some sliver property acquisition from businesses west of US60, who are typically accepting of selling off a sliver of land in exchange for improved freeway access.

There's also a number of pedestrian/cycling improvements along the corridor with the Broadway curve project that will benefit some of the neighborhoods.  Long story short, there's not much in this project that would cause the controversy that many other projects face. If anything, the weekend closures to build it may be the most annoying thing, but at least that is only temporary.

[kernals12]

How has the Broadway Curve project managed to avoid the controversy that other massive widening projects (I-45 in Houston, I-5 in Portland, 710/605 in Los Angeles etc.) have attracted recently?

Fair question. Projects like I-45 and I-710 are orders of magnitude larger than Broadway Curve for starters and have proposed impacts to residents and neighborhoods. Regardless of any documented benefits, it is rare these days for those types of projects to get built without some controversy, which can be understandable.

Broadway curve is mostly within the existing right-of-way with no residential impacts. Primarily there was some sliver property acquisition from businesses west of US60, who are typically accepting of selling off a sliver of land in exchange for improved freeway access.

There's also a number of pedestrian/cycling improvements along the corridor with the Broadway curve project that will benefit some of the neighborhoods.  Long story short, there's not much in this project that would cause the controversy that many other projects face. If anything, the weekend closures to build it may be the most annoying thing, but at least that is only temporary.

The fact that they're adding 6 lanes over 11 miles for just $663 million is incredible. That's only $10 million per lane mile.

[Pink Jazz]

How has the Broadway Curve project managed to avoid the controversy that other massive widening projects (I-45 in Houston, I-5 in Portland, 710/605 in Los Angeles etc.) have attracted recently?

We're used to that section of I-10 being a massive bottleneck.  Anything will be an improvement, despite an even worse bottleneck for a couple of years.

That hot mess was one reason I moved from Ahwatukee to Mesa in 2014. 

ADOT should really do a better job of trying to redistribute traffic that doesn't need to go through that bottleneck onto other highways. I see a lot of through truck and other vehicle traffic staying on I-10 through this area when it really should be redistributed onto the Loop 202 South Mountain Freeway. I know ADOT hates 3dis but the Loop 202 South Mountain really should be an I-x10 with a S/B and E/B control city of Tucson and a N/B and W/B control city of Los Angeles.

Also the Broadway curve can be avoided with the Loop 101 / Loop 202 combination yet, again, with a lack of control cities and a lot of signage (other than a few VMSs) most drivers just take US 60 to I-10.

Along with the AZ 30 project ADOT needs to fix the distribution of traffic around downtown. It seems the main through movements through the "Mini-stack" are from I-10 E/B to Loop 202 E/B, Loop 202 W/B to I-10 W/B, I-10 W/B to AZ 51 N/B, and AZ 51 S/B to I-10 E/B. Yet the movement with the most lanes is the 90 degree turn through this intersection (which I guess makes sense to keep it the I-10 mainline). If the I-10 mainline is relocated to I-17 and AZ 30 it solves this problem while converting the "Mini-stack" to a conventional stack.

I always thought Loop 101 should be I-410, Loop 202 should be I-610, Loop 303 should be I-217 when completed, SR 51 should be I-510, and SR 143 should be I-110.  I-210 would likely be reserved for any potential future freeway conversion of SR 210 in Tucson. SR 24 would be I-710, and SR 30 would be I-810.

[KeithE4Phx]

I always thought Loop 101 should be I-410, Loop 202 should be I-610, Loop 303 should be I-217 when completed, SR 51 should be I-510, and SR 143 should be I-110.  I-210 would likely be reserved for any potential future freeway conversion of SR 210 in Tucson. SR 24 would be I-710, and SR 30 would be I-810.

The segment of I-10 that runs between what is now the I-17 and Buckeye Rd. was called I-410 at one point in the 1960s, and I-510 at another.  I-710 was proposed for Tucson but was never built.  Since then, ADOT has made it clear that there will be no 3DIs in Arizona, period.  I don't see them changing their minds anytime soon, if ever.

[Max Rockatansky]

I always thought Loop 101 should be I-410, Loop 202 should be I-610, Loop 303 should be I-217 when completed, SR 51 should be I-510, and SR 143 should be I-110.  I-210 would likely be reserved for any potential future freeway conversion of SR 210 in Tucson. SR 24 would be I-710, and SR 30 would be I-810.

The segment of I-10 that runs between what is now the I-17 and Buckeye Rd. was called I-410 at one point in the 1960s, and I-510 at another.  I-710 was proposed for Tucson but was never built.  Since then, ADOT has made it clear that there will be no 3DIs in Arizona, period.  I don't see them changing their minds anytime soon, if ever.

The Loop Freeways largely prove the notion of having an urban glut of 3D Interstates is dubious at best.  They are just as good as any 3D Interstate and make a lot more sense navigationally than what they traditionally bring to the table.

[ztonyg]

I always thought Loop 101 should be I-410, Loop 202 should be I-610, Loop 303 should be I-217 when completed, SR 51 should be I-510, and SR 143 should be I-110.  I-210 would likely be reserved for any potential future freeway conversion of SR 210 in Tucson. SR 24 would be I-710, and SR 30 would be I-810.

The segment of I-10 that runs between what is now the I-17 and Buckeye Rd. was called I-410 at one point in the 1960s, and I-510 at another.  I-710 was proposed for Tucson but was never built.  Since then, ADOT has made it clear that there will be no 3DIs in Arizona, period.  I don't see them changing their minds anytime soon, if ever.

The Loop Freeways largely prove the notion of having an urban glut of 3D Interstates is dubious at best.  They are just as good as any 3D Interstate and make a lot more sense navigationally than what they traditionally bring to the table.

That being said, would it kill ADOT to list control cities? Especially on the South Mountain Freeway which serves as a nice bypass of downtown Phoenix for traffic continuing past it's junctions with I-10 but isn't signed as such.

[sparker]

I always thought Loop 101 should be I-410, Loop 202 should be I-610, Loop 303 should be I-217 when completed, SR 51 should be I-510, and SR 143 should be I-110.  I-210 would likely be reserved for any potential future freeway conversion of SR 210 in Tucson. SR 24 would be I-710, and SR 30 would be I-810.

The segment of I-10 that runs between what is now the I-17 and Buckeye Rd. was called I-410 at one point in the 1960s, and I-510 at another.  I-710 was proposed for Tucson but was never built.  Since then, ADOT has made it clear that there will be no 3DIs in Arizona, period.  I don't see them changing their minds anytime soon, if ever.

The Loop Freeways largely prove the notion of having an urban glut of 3D Interstates is dubious at best.  They are just as good as any 3D Interstate and make a lot more sense navigationally than what they traditionally bring to the table.

That being said, would it kill ADOT to list control cities? Especially on the South Mountain Freeway which serves as a nice bypass of downtown Phoenix for traffic continuing past it's junctions with I-10 but isn't signed as such.

Considering the controversies the South Mountain section of Loop 202 had to endure en route to its actual construction, it's not entirely surprising that ADOT has declined to identify it in the field as an effective central Phoenix bypass -- doing so might be construed by still-confrontational parties as insult added to injury by inviting additional traffic to use it as such. 

[Kniwt]

I-15 at Virgin River Bridge #1 (between exits 8 and 9) will be reduced to one lane in each direction with a 45mph speed limit until at least spring 2023 as rehab work begins on the main bridge surface, and wide loads will again be prohibited.

https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2021/09/03/mgk-long-term-lane-closures-announced-for-1-15-south-of-gorge-adot-launches-new-app-with-traffic-updates/

Long-term single-lane travel will be returning to a segment of the Arizona stretch of Interstate 15 following Labor Day weekend as bridge work is scheduled to resume. To try to make the construction easier for travelers to navigate, the Arizona Department of Transportation has rolled out a smart phone app designed to share traffic information and project updates.

... In addition to single-lane travel through the construction zone, vehicles wider than 10 feet and carrying more than 129,000 pounds will have to take a 224-mile detour. Signs, as well as the new smart phone app, will direct oversize vehicles to route of US 93, Nevada state Route 319 and Utah state Route 56 between Las Vegas and Cedar City.

... Work on the bridge is anticipated to run $56 million and involves replacing the abutment foundations, piers and the bridge deck of Bridge No. 1. New pavement, pavement markings, guardrail and signage are also included in the project.

[Rover_0]

I-15 at Virgin River Bridge #1 (between exits 8 and 9) will be reduced to one lane in each direction with a 45mph speed limit until at least spring 2023 as rehab work begins on the main bridge surface, and wide loads will again be prohibited.

https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2021/09/03/mgk-long-term-lane-closures-announced-for-1-15-south-of-gorge-adot-launches-new-app-with-traffic-updates/

Long-term single-lane travel will be returning to a segment of the Arizona stretch of Interstate 15 following Labor Day weekend as bridge work is scheduled to resume. To try to make the construction easier for travelers to navigate, the Arizona Department of Transportation has rolled out a smart phone app designed to share traffic information and project updates.

... In addition to single-lane travel through the construction zone, vehicles wider than 10 feet and carrying more than 129,000 pounds will have to take a 224-mile detour. Signs, as well as the new smart phone app, will direct oversize vehicles to route of US 93, Nevada state Route 319 and Utah state Route 56 between Las Vegas and Cedar City.

... Work on the bridge is anticipated to run $56 million and involves replacing the abutment foundations, piers and the bridge deck of Bridge No. 1. New pavement, pavement markings, guardrail and signage are also included in the project.

It’s been long past time for ADOT and UDOT to make Old US-91 state-maintained again, so we don’t have this 224-mile detour.

[Kniwt]

It’s been long past time for ADOT and UDOT to make Old US-91 state-maintained again, so we don’t have this 224-mile detour.

Alas, Old 91 heading into Ivins, Santa Clara, and St. George can't safely accommodate a large number of interstate oversize vehicles. And that doesn't even count the backups that ensue when climbing up from Littlefield during closures in the Gorge. Also, the part north of the summit is a signed county bicycle route without significant shoulders.

It would take a lot of work to upgrade Old 91, although some smaller projects are in the works between Santa Clara and Shivwits tribal land.

The giant detour, while long, has the advantage of not passing through any cities of significant size (there's Caliente NV, though) and, IIRC, has zero traffic signals until the outskirts of Cedar City.

[Max Rockatansky]

It’s been long past time for ADOT and UDOT to make Old US-91 state-maintained again, so we don’t have this 224-mile detour.

Alas, Old 91 heading into Ivins, Santa Clara, and St. George can't safely accommodate a large number of interstate oversize vehicles. And that doesn't even count the backups that ensue when climbing up from Littlefield during closures in the Gorge. Also, the part north of the summit is a signed county bicycle route without significant shoulders.

It would take a lot of work to upgrade Old 91, although some smaller projects are in the works between Santa Clara and Shivwits tribal land.

The giant detour, while long, has the advantage of not passing through any cities of significant size (there's Caliente NV, though) and, IIRC, has zero traffic signals until the outskirts of Cedar City.

I believe some of the older bridges near Shivwits couldn’t even accommodate the weight of a modern fully loaded semi.  South of Shivwits isn’t too bad getting over the Beaver Dam Mountains but that would probably even need to be widened for trucks.

[KeithE4Phx]

I always thought Loop 101 should be I-410, Loop 202 should be I-610, Loop 303 should be I-217 when completed, SR 51 should be I-510, and SR 143 should be I-110.  I-210 would likely be reserved for any potential future freeway conversion of SR 210 in Tucson. SR 24 would be I-710, and SR 30 would be I-810.

The segment of I-10 that runs between what is now the I-17 and Buckeye Rd. was called I-410 at one point in the 1960s, and I-510 at another.  I-710 was proposed for Tucson but was never built.  Since then, ADOT has made it clear that there will be no 3DIs in Arizona, period.  I don't see them changing their minds anytime soon, if ever.

The Loop Freeways largely prove the notion of having an urban glut of 3D Interstates is dubious at best.  They are just as good as any 3D Interstate and make a lot more sense navigationally than what they traditionally bring to the table.

That being said, would it kill ADOT to list control cities? Especially on the South Mountain Freeway which serves as a nice bypass of downtown Phoenix for traffic continuing past it's junctions with I-10 but isn't signed as such.

The South Mountain Freeway never leaves the city of Phoenix, other than maybe a few county islands here and there.  There are no other "control cities" to show.

[kernals12]

Can anyone explain why the road connecting I-17 to Sedona is 2 lanes wide?

The traffic I experienced there this morning was absolutely awful.

Meanwhile Cottonwood gets a 4 lane divided highway connecting it to Sedona.

[Max Rockatansky]

Can anyone explain why the road connecting I-17 to Sedona is 2 lanes wide?

The traffic I experienced there this morning was absolutely awful.

Meanwhile Cottonwood gets a 4 lane divided highway connecting it to Sedona.

Because the City of Sedona and Oak Creek wanted AZ 179 reconfigured to be multi-use and pedestrian friendly.  Much of AZ 179 was one four lanes and had traffic lights.  If you’re in a hurry AZ 89A and AZ 260 is the way better way back to I-17.  Cornville Road is an okay alternative between AZ 89A and I-17.  It’s worth noting that AZ 89A was until recently a US Route. 

Also, just a piece of advice on Sedona.  If you try to talk “car centric” anything with the locals it will get a largely negative response.  There are a lot of outdoor types up in Sedona and they tend not to be receptive towards outsiders and ideas that don’t fit the views of the community.  Hell, they even got McDonald’s to do a teal arch given it was a city ordinance to use it in the color scheme.

Edit: turns Arizonaroads.com has a photo of the old AZ 179/AZ 89A junction before the current roundabouts were built.

https://www.arizonaroads.com/arizona/az179.html

[kernals12]

Can anyone explain why the road connecting I-17 to Sedona is 2 lanes wide?

The traffic I experienced there this morning was absolutely awful.

Meanwhile Cottonwood gets a 4 lane divided highway connecting it to Sedona.

Because the City of Sedona and Oak Creek wanted AZ 179 reconfigured to be multi-use and pedestrian friendly.  Much of AZ 179 was one four lanes and had traffic lights.  If you’re in a hurry AZ 89A and AZ 260 is the way better way back to I-17.  Cornville Road is an okay alternative between AZ 89A and I-17.  It’s worth noting that AZ 89A was until recently a US Route. 

Also, just a piece of advice on Sedona.  If you try to talk “car centric” anything with the locals it will get a largely negative response.  There are a lot of outdoor types up in Sedona and they tend not to be receptive towards outsiders and ideas that don’t fit the views of the community.  Hell, they even got McDonald’s to do a teal arch given it was a city ordinance to use it in the color scheme.

I saw that, it was pretty cool.

As for the rest of your argument, surveys show pretty decent support for major road improvements.

[Max Rockatansky]

Can anyone explain why the road connecting I-17 to Sedona is 2 lanes wide?

The traffic I experienced there this morning was absolutely awful.

Meanwhile Cottonwood gets a 4 lane divided highway connecting it to Sedona.

Because the City of Sedona and Oak Creek wanted AZ 179 reconfigured to be multi-use and pedestrian friendly.  Much of AZ 179 was one four lanes and had traffic lights.  If you’re in a hurry AZ 89A and AZ 260 is the way better way back to I-17.  Cornville Road is an okay alternative between AZ 89A and I-17.  It’s worth noting that AZ 89A was until recently a US Route. 

Also, just a piece of advice on Sedona.  If you try to talk “car centric” anything with the locals it will get a largely negative response.  There are a lot of outdoor types up in Sedona and they tend not to be receptive towards outsiders and ideas that don’t fit the views of the community.  Hell, they even got McDonald’s to do a teal arch given it was a city ordinance to use it in the color scheme.

I saw that, it was pretty cool.

As for the rest of your argument, surveys show pretty decent support for major road improvements.

That’s the thing, the locals wanted AZ 179 put on a road diet and configured the way it presently is.  I had an office in the City of Sedona when AZ 179 was being reconfigured to how it is now.  The pre-existing configuration of AZ 179 wasn’t fun either but it also didn’t take forever to get out of town on the weekdays like it does now.  I can’t fathom the community would tolerate the prospects of endangering that multi-use trail that runs alongside AZ 179.  Converting the highway back to a more conventional configuration or giving it lane expansions would be an unprecedented communal change of heart. 

[kernals12]

Phoenix's freeway system did not disappoint during my trip. That being said, I wish they could plant some cacti along the roads, the gravel just didn't look very good, and neutered the effect of artfully designed bridges and retaining walls. Also, I think an extension of 303 East is necessary to serve Carefree, Cave Creek, and Northern Scottsdale, our resort was over 10 miles from the nearest on-ramp and while that's only mildly annoying now, as growth continues, it could lead to massive congestion on surface streets in the future.

[ztonyg]

Phoenix's freeway system did not disappoint during my trip. That being said, I wish they could plant some cacti along the roads, the gravel just didn't look very good, and neutered the effect of artfully designed bridges and retaining walls. Also, I think an extension of 303 East is necessary to serve Carefree, Cave Creek, and Northern Scottsdale, our resort was over 10 miles from the nearest on-ramp and while that's only mildly annoying now, as growth continues, it could lead to massive congestion on surface streets in the future.

I don't think there are any plans for an extension of the 303 east. Eventually there will be a "parkway" that will connect Sonoran Desert Drive (the road at the end of the 303) to Black Mountain Blvd (the road at the end of SR 51) but that is the only plan I've heard so far.

[74/171FAN]

U.S. 60 Bridge At Pinto Creek Opens To Traffic

The new bridge is slightly north of the old bridge.

[Kniwt]

The Arizona Daily Star in Tucson has published several photos taken in 1954 along AZ 84A, the precursor to I-10.
https://tucson.com/news/local/photos-tucson-controlled-access-highway-in-1954/collection_cdb4a2bc-6d0b-5961-8435-e66d6f779d17.html

[Lukeisroads]

Any update on the kingman beale/us93 project

[Sonic99]

Any update on the kingman beale/us93 project

Last I saw, it's planned for 2023 or so.

[Plutonic Panda]

Saw the tax to help fund Pinal County road projects was shot down by the courts. Will this affect the large planned freeway expansions here?

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/arizona/articles/2022-03-08/arizona-court-says-pinal-county-transportation-tax-invalid