Interstate 11

[english si]

IIRC, 999 works in the US as an emergency number, like how 911 and 112 (international/european number) work in the UK. Not the one they want you to use, but we better redirect them anyway.

[vdeane]

How hard would it be to mandate that landlines use the same calling interface as cell phones?  Landlines auto-dial once they see a complete number, making some codes unusable, but cell phones don't, so anything from 000 to 999 would work as an area code.  On the plus side, there would be no need to dial 1 before an area code any more.

[agentsteel53]

IIRC, 999 works in the US as an emergency number, like how 911 and 112 (international/european number) work in the UK. Not the one they want you to use, but we better redirect them anyway.

I had no idea this was the case.  very interesting, and indeed a good thing to redirect.

that said, does that validate my guess from earlier?

[Compulov]

As an exercise, try to figure out why no area codes have the second digit "9". 

This one I knew off the top of my head... I was a bit of a phone geek before I became a road geek. The second digit 9 is being reserved for expanding the NANP with more digits (say 11 or 12 digit dialing instead of 10). Wikipedia has an article about it.
Between living in an overlay area for several years and using my cell phone exclusively thereafter, I was really confused when I got my office phone and it *doesn't* support 10 digit dialing. Not sure why it isn't at least permissive everywhere.

As for the topic at hand. I'm just glad they finally got the bridge over the colorado built and the bypass in place. The last time I went from Phoenix to Vegas, I had to cross over the Hoover Dam and the traffic was awful. Really, the rest of the trip isn't bad. US-93 is actually a pretty good road, even without a limited access alignment.

[mgk920]

As an exercise, try to figure out why no area codes have the second digit "9". 

This one I knew off the top of my head... I was a bit of a phone geek before I became a road geek. The second digit 9 is being reserved for expanding the NANP with more digits (say 11 or 12 digit dialing instead of 10). Wikipedia has an article about it.
Between living in an overlay area for several years and using my cell phone exclusively thereafter, I was really confused when I got my office phone and it *doesn't* support 10 digit dialing. Not sure why it isn't at least permissive everywhere.

As for the topic at hand. I'm just glad they finally got the bridge over the colorado built and the bypass in place. The last time I went from Phoenix to Vegas, I had to cross over the Hoover Dam and the traffic was awful. Really, the rest of the trip isn't bad. US-93 is actually a pretty good road, even without a limited access alignment.

To expand on that, not having a '9' as the second digit of an area code in North America (more accurately 'World Zone 1') allows for a permissive dialing period for such a numbering pool expansion - existing area code (called the 'Numbering Plan Area' or 'NPA' code within the telecom industry) numbers would be expanded to four digits with '9' being the second digit.  For example, the '213' area code in downtown Los Angeles would become '2913', keeping the system from getting confused during the transition.  My own home '920' would become '9920', and so forth.

Also, in response to english si, '999' does not work as an emergency call number in North America - '999' is used as a local number prefix (the second group of digits in a North American phone number - xxx-XXX-xxxx) in many World Zone 1 area codes.  For example, in my home '920' area code here in Wisconsin, '920-999-xxxx' is an active local number block - local landlines in Saint Cloud, WI (just northeast of Fond du Lac, WI) use it and if you are in or close to that town, a call can be made to those numbers by just dialing the last seven digits of the phone number ('999-xxxx').

Only '911' works for emergency access here.

Mike

[agentsteel53]

As for the topic at hand. I'm just glad they finally got the bridge over the colorado built and the bypass in place. The last time I went from Phoenix to Vegas, I had to cross over the Hoover Dam and the traffic was awful. Really, the rest of the trip isn't bad. US-93 is actually a pretty good road, even without a limited access alignment.

not only that, but the bypass isn't nearly as "kill a Mexican for the Homeland!" as the old road was. 

[Grzrd]

It looks like the House and the Senate may pass a transportation reauthorization bill tonight. From looking at the current text of the bill (page 23/599 of the pdf), it appears that "I-11" will have a Congressionally mandated route designation:

(2) ROUTE DESIGNATION.–Section 1105(e)(5)(C)(i) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 109 Stat. 598) is amended by adding at the end the following: "˜"˜The routes referred to subparagraphs (A)(iii) and(B)(i) of subsection (c)(26) are designated as Interstate Route I-11.''.

I assume this provision will survive if the bill is passed.

EDIT

The FHWA website has the description of the corridor:

26. The CANAMEX Corridor ... as follows:
A.In the State of Arizona, the CANAMEX Corridor shall generally follow-- ...
iii.United States Route 93 in the vicinity of Phoenix to the Nevada Border.
B.In the State of Nevada, the CANAMEX Corridor shall follow-
i.United States Route 93 from the Arizona Border to Las Vegas

[kurumi]

As an exercise, try to figure out why no area codes have the second digit "9".

okay, google was no help.  I'll bite.

my only guess is that having middle digit "9" would cause more people to accidentally dial "999", which is an emergency number in some places that use the North American area code system (Jamaica?)

It's bad enough already, calling from the office:

Call your colleague in Philly: 9-1-215-...

Fatfinger the "2": 9-1-1-["Hello, what is your emergency?"]

[agentsteel53]

wouldn't you need to do "9-911"?  or does 911 bypass the "dial 9 for an outside line" in a corporate phone network?

[Compulov]

wouldn't you need to do "9-911"?  or does 911 bypass the "dial 9 for an outside line" in a corporate phone network?

In my experience, PBXs tend to bypass the 9 requirement for 911. Where I work, though, 911 routes to campus public safety rather than the local PSAP. I think I'd rather call it from my cell phone in an emergency and get the state police, frankly.

[Compulov]

It looks like the House and the Senate may pass a transportation reauthorization bill tonight. From looking at the current text of the bill (page 23/599 of the pdf), it appears that "I-11" will have a Congressionally mandated route designation:

(2) ROUTE DESIGNATION.–Section 1105(e)(5)(C)(i) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 109 Stat. 598) is amended by adding at the end the following: "˜"˜The routes referred to subparagraphs (A)(iii) and(B)(i) of subsection (c)(26) are designated as Interstate Route I-11.''.

Will this actually *fund* the upgrade to Interstate standards, or does that just sort of put it higher on the list for funding?

[Grzrd]

Will this actually *fund* the upgrade to Interstate standards, or does that just sort of put it higher on the list for funding?

I believe that, in this part of the bill, Arizona and Nevada joined the Texas effort to have I-69 signage on interstate-grade sections of the I-69 Corridor that are currently not connected to the current interstate system (primarily along the Mexican border for Texas).  As I read the language of the bill, I think all of I-69, not just Texas I-69, and I-11 will be able to have signed segments that are not connected to the current interstate system as long as they plan to have a connection within 25 years:

(1) IN GENERAL.–Section 1105(e)(5)(A) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2031;109 Stat. 597; 115 Stat. 872) is amended–
(A) in the first sentence, by striking "˜"˜and in subsections(c)(18) and (c)(20)'' and inserting "˜"˜, in subsections (c)(18) and (c)(20), and in subparagraphs (A)(iii) and (B) of subsection(c)(26)''; and
(B) in the second sentence, by striking "˜"˜that the segment'' and all that follows through the period and inserting "˜"˜that the segment meets the Interstate System design standards approved by the Secretary under section 109(b) of title 23, United States Code, and is planned to connect to an existing Interstate System segment by the date that is 25 years after the date of enactment of the MAP—21.''.

Above said, I would not be surprised if Harry Reid inserted an I-11 funding provision elsewhere in the bill (I have not read all 599 pages of the pdf  )

I think this provision would also give Mississippi and Tennessee the green light to immediately sign both current interstate-grade sections of I-269 and other sections of I-269 as they are opened to traffic. The Monticello Bypass in Arkansas could probably be signed as I-69 as sections are opened since it is planned to be connected to I-530 within the next 25 years.

It seems like Arkansas and Louisiana would have wanted their sections of I-49 to be included in this provision (it would have been a nice option to have).

[Rover_0]

^^

If that's the case, I wonder what portions of US-93 would be labled as I-11. I also wonder if this could affect anything on I-515 as well.

[Compulov]

If that's the case, I wonder what portions of US-93 would be labled as I-11. I also wonder if this could affect anything on I-515 as well.

I wonder if they'll sign the whole thing as Future I-11 until they at least upgrade the section through Boulder City to a full freeway up to the existing freeway on both sides of the bridge. Then at least they'd have a continuous section from I-515 (or maybe all the way up to I-215?) into Arizona. Then it'd be up to AZ to upgrade sections and sign them as they were able to fund them.

It might be overkill, but I wonder if perhaps I-515 should be designated I-11 all the way to I-15. Seems a bit odd to have the end of a mainline Interstate be a child route. Not to mention I think it's confusing to change the designation of a through-route at a seemingly arbitrary point -- of course there's plenty of that in the Interstate system as it is.
I think the best route, at least for the short-mid term would to designate I-11 between I-15 and I-40... connecting two major Interstates certainly gives I-11 the credentials to be numbered with a mainline designation.

[Alps]

wouldn't you need to do "9-911"?  or does 911 bypass the "dial 9 for an outside line" in a corporate phone network?

Both work equally, by law, at least around here. Oh, and, fuck yes, I-11.

[vdeane]

Why didn't they allow any of the other interstates under construction (I-86, I-73/I-74, I-99, etc.) to use the same power?  It would really speed things along here in NY.  Actually, we'd be able to sign most of I-86 if we had greater leeway in the endpoints of 2dis.

[Zonie]

Article in the AZ Republic about future I-11, including a reference it may be toll.

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2012/06/28/20120628phoenix-vegas-freeway-bill-advances.html

[CentralCAroadgeek]

After reading that article, I'm rather surprised that I-11 would be routed to Casa Grande south of I-10. Though why wouldn't they just end it at I-8?

I would be looking forward to the construction of this highway. For sure, it would be done in my lifetime.

[swbrotha100]

It would be nice if this sped up the southern part of US 93 to a least a 4-lane divided highway.

[AZDude]

I wonder how US 93 will be upgraded through Kingman.  That will be interesting to see.

[mapman1071]

I wonder how US 93 will be upgraded through Kingman.  That will be interesting to see.

ADOT is looking to place a interchange for I-11 W of the Beale Street Interchange.

[mapman1071]

If that's the case, I wonder what portions of US-93 would be labled as I-11. I also wonder if this could affect anything on I-515 as well.

I wonder if they'll sign the whole thing as Future I-11 until they at least upgrade the section through Boulder City to a full freeway up to the existing freeway on both sides of the bridge. Then at least they'd have a continuous section from I-515 (or maybe all the way up to I-215?) into Arizona. Then it'd be up to AZ to upgrade sections and sign them as they were able to fund them.

It might be overkill, but I wonder if perhaps I-515 should be designated I-11 all the way to I-15. Seems a bit odd to have the end of a mainline Interstate be a child route. Not to mention I think it's confusing to change the designation of a through-route at a seemingly arbitrary point -- of course there's plenty of that in the Interstate system as it is.
I think the best route, at least for the short-mid term would to designate I-11 between I-15 and I-40... connecting two major Interstates certainly gives I-11 the credentials to be numbered with a mainline designation.

I - 515 will be replaced with I - 11

[Interstate Trav]

If that's the case, I wonder what portions of US-93 would be labled as I-11. I also wonder if this could affect anything on I-515 as well.

I wonder if they'll sign the whole thing as Future I-11 until they at least upgrade the section through Boulder City to a full freeway up to the existing freeway on both sides of the bridge. Then at least they'd have a continuous section from I-515 (or maybe all the way up to I-215?) into Arizona. Then it'd be up to AZ to upgrade sections and sign them as they were able to fund them.

It might be overkill, but I wonder if perhaps I-515 should be designated I-11 all the way to I-15. Seems a bit odd to have the end of a mainline Interstate be a child route. Not to mention I think it's confusing to change the designation of a through-route at a seemingly arbitrary point -- of course there's plenty of that in the Interstate system as it is.
I think the best route, at least for the short-mid term would to designate I-11 between I-15 and I-40... connecting two major Interstates certainly gives I-11 the credentials to be numbered with a mainline designation.

I agree with renumbering I-515 as I-11 since I-11 is going to be there anyways if this gets built, and since I-515 is cosigned it's entire run.  To me it always just added confusion to the route.  The only thing I wonder is if the exit numbers would stay the same to reflect US 95 or change for I-11 to the HooverDam?  Since I-11 would be the main Interstate it should take over, but then you have all the exits south of I-15 being renumbered, and they change pretty largely at I-15 since, then US 95 takes over.

But would it be better to have exit numbers based on US 95 or I-11 through Las Vegas?

Also Sign the I-515 as I-11 then past that have it signed at Future I-11.

[roadfro]

I agree with renumbering I-515 as I-11 since I-11 is going to be there anyways if this gets built, and since I-515 is cosigned it's entire run.  To me it always just added confusion to the route.  The only thing I wonder is if the exit numbers would stay the same to reflect US 95 or change for I-11 to the HooverDam?  Since I-11 would be the main Interstate it should take over, but then you have all the exits south of I-15 being renumbered, and they change pretty largely at I-15 since, then US 95 takes over.

But would it be better to have exit numbers based on US 95 or I-11 through Las Vegas?

Also Sign the I-515 as I-11 then past that have it signed at Future I-11.

Right now, the exit numbering on I-515/US 93/US 95 follows mileposts for US 95. The reason for this is that US 95 is the through route (as I-515 ends at I-15 and US 93 switches freeways to follow I-15), so it made sense to keep the exit numbers with US 95 for continuity. Also, historically, as the 515/93/95 freeway was built, new mileposts used US 95 (to tie into the freeway segments of US 95 west of I-15, which came first) while the old route (now SR 582) continued to use US 93 mileposts.

If I-11 actually does move forward closer to actual reality, NDOT would renumber I-515 as I-11. I would guess that they would continue to use US 95 exit numbering due to the continuity issue, avoiding having an approximate gap of 40 in the numbering in the middle of Vegas. However, if the long term idea of extending I-11 north along US 95 through Nevada towards Canada gained any traction into reality, then renumbering all exits to follow I-11 would make much more sense.

NDOT probably isn't apt to sign "Future I-11" at all. They didn't post "future" shields for I-515, leaving it unposted until the freeway was constructed to its current limit around 1994. NDOT hasn't posted any "future I-580" shields either, despite the fact that they refer to I-580 quite frequently in press releases and project documentation.

[kkt]

I'm not too happy about Congress mandating interstate route numbers or deciding which specific routes should get funding.  Congress should lay out overall criteria for funding and let the agencies administer them.  That's their job.

Phoenix to Las Vegas is only 285 miles and only connects two major cities.  I don't think it's long enough or important enough to use a primary interstate number.  I'd make the whole stretch I-515 (if it's worth making it an interstate route at all).

Making it I-11 would be out of the grid.  And why is there no appropriate number within the grid available?  Because too many short routes of only regional importance have been allowed to take up primary interstate numbers.