Interstate 11

[Sub-Urbanite]

I wouldn't be so confident in the "Arizona will never run out of water" comment. You can't predict the future, and desalination is INSANELY expensive. That alone will cause major economic problems in the area if what you're saying happens.

To borrow from former Las Vegas water czar Pat Mulroy, there will always be water. It's just a question of how much people are willing to pay for it.

The same way we'll never run out of oil...it'll just become too expensive. But either way, the supply does effectively dry up. If water in Phoenix costs $20/gal (even for household taps), Phoenix will never run out of water, because there won't be anyone left in Phoenix that'll have the money to afford such ridiculous utility costs.

I just don't think they'll get there. Consider that Las Vegas' net usage of Colorado River water annually is a meager 270,000 acre feet. Another 50,000-or-so acre feet comes from groundwater. That's in a city roughly half the size of Phoenix.

Phoenix' annual water use is 2.3 million acre feet.

The difference? About 40% of the water consumed in Las Vegas is treated and sent back to the Colorado River. So, long before they got to desal, Phoenix could pipe its grey water to the Imperial Valley for irrigation and take Colorado River water into the CAP upstream from the Imperial Valley farmers.

There will always be enough water. It's a question of how much people are willing to pay for it.

[Bobby5280]

I don't know. Somebody is sucking Lake Mead dry, that much is certain. I visited the Hoover Dam and Lake Mead in April and was shocked to see how low the water has receded.

[Sub-Urbanite]

I don't know. Somebody is sucking Lake Mead dry, that much is certain. I visited the Hoover Dam and Lake Mead in April and was shocked to see how low the water has receded.

Since 1985, the Colorado has sent down about 13 million gallons of water from Glen Canyon Dam since 1985.

3.1 million of that goes to irrigate the Imperial Valley. 1.2 million goes to urban Southern California. Both are "senior" river users that get water no matter what. So when the Colorado only sent down 6 million acre feet in 2003... down went the reservoirs. And since the river has roughly 17 million acre feet in annual commitments — again, mostly agriculture — guess what happened to Lake Mead... 

[sparker]

I don't know. Somebody is sucking Lake Mead dry, that much is certain. I visited the Hoover Dam and Lake Mead in April and was shocked to see how low the water has receded.

Here in CA, the reservoirs are still being filled up by the late snow melt; that situation may well apply to Lake Mead as well, the level of which is dependent upon water coming from as far away as northwest Wyoming and the west slope of the Colorado Rockies -- as well as how much is being held back at Glen Canyon.  It's a matter of both supply and demand -- and this year, the rains in the West came a bit later than usual. 

[Sub-Urbanite]

I don't know. Somebody is sucking Lake Mead dry, that much is certain. I visited the Hoover Dam and Lake Mead in April and was shocked to see how low the water has receded.

Here in CA, the reservoirs are still being filled up by the late snow melt; that situation may well apply to Lake Mead as well, the level of which is dependent upon water coming from as far away as northwest Wyoming and the west slope of the Colorado Rockies -- as well as how much is being held back at Glen Canyon.  It's a matter of both supply and demand -- and this year, the rains in the West came a bit later than usual.

It doesn't matter for Lake Mead. The river would have to send down about 25 million acre feet — think "That time Glen Canyon Dam almost failed in 1983" level flows — for three years to get Mead to full. And that doesn't even get into filling Powell, which is probably a fourth year of that level of flow.

[US 89]

The thing about the Powell-Mead system is it’s based on the Colorado River Compact, which allocates water rights based on an average streamflow of 16.4 million acre-feet. Unfortunately, the early 1900s were a wetter than average period, and the actual average streamflow is somewhere closer to 13.5 million acre feet.

At any rate, the current low levels of those reservoirs are a multi-year issue. California’s reservoirs might all completely fill during a big winter, but Powell and Mead are huge. Even if a few big water years happen, Lake Powell would probably fill first. Glen Canyon is required to send 7.5 million acre-feet down to Lake Mead, and I’m not sure they would increase their output until Powell was nearly full.

[X99]

What's the latest progress on the Vegas-Kingman section of I-11?

[sparker]

What's the latest progress on the Vegas-Kingman section of I-11?

Bupkus so far.   Still waiting for ADOT to finalize a decision about a Kingman connection to I-40; so far the front-runner is a close-in western bypass of the Beale St. commercial zone, with a I-40 interchange about a mile or so west of the current 40/93/Beale interchange.  The only existing fully limited access portion of the corridor except for the approach to the Colorado River bridge is the interchange with AZ 68 a couple of miles NW of Kingman; that section was extended about 3/4 mile toward town when the state truck-inspection facility was built adjacent to the interchange a year or so ago.

[splashflash]

What's the latest progress on the Vegas-Kingman section of I-11?

Bupkus so far.   Still waiting for ADOT to finalize a decision about a Kingman connection to I-40; so far the front-runner is a close-in western bypass of the Beale St. commercial zone, with a I-40 interchange about a mile or so west of the current 40/93/Beale interchange.  The only existing fully limited access portion of the corridor except for the approach to the Colorado River bridge is the interchange with AZ 68 a couple of miles NW of Kingman; that section was extended about 3/4 mile toward town when the state truck-inspection facility was built adjacent to the interchange a year or so ago.

UPDATE

The study is scheduled for completion in early 2020. The findings of this study will be incorporated into the preferred alignment, and ADOT will advance the project into the final design phase.

ADOT held community open house meetings during the summer of 2019, and will conduct similar meetings to update the public on the study in early 2020. ADOT and FHWA will present the results of the study -, including the investigated alternatives and the recommended alternative, during a public hearing in spring/summer 2020.

Phase 1 of this project, which will create a new TI on westbound I-40 to northbound US 93 and southbound US 93 to eastbound I-40, is currently scheduled for construction in ADOT's 2024 fiscal year.

https://azdot.gov/planning/transportation-studies/interstate-40-us-93-system-traffic-interchange-study

[sparker]

What's the latest progress on the Vegas-Kingman section of I-11?

Bupkus so far.   Still waiting for ADOT to finalize a decision about a Kingman connection to I-40; so far the front-runner is a close-in western bypass of the Beale St. commercial zone, with a I-40 interchange about a mile or so west of the current 40/93/Beale interchange.  The only existing fully limited access portion of the corridor except for the approach to the Colorado River bridge is the interchange with AZ 68 a couple of miles NW of Kingman; that section was extended about 3/4 mile toward town when the state truck-inspection facility was built adjacent to the interchange a year or so ago.

UPDATE

The study is scheduled for completion in early 2020. The findings of this study will be incorporated into the preferred alignment, and ADOT will advance the project into the final design phase.

ADOT held community open house meetings during the summer of 2019, and will conduct similar meetings to update the public on the study in early 2020. ADOT and FHWA will present the results of the study -, including the investigated alternatives and the recommended alternative, during a public hearing in spring/summer 2020.

Phase 1 of this project, which will create a new TI on westbound I-40 to northbound US 93 and southbound US 93 to eastbound I-40, is currently scheduled for construction in ADOT's 2024 fiscal year.

https://azdot.gov/planning/transportation-studies/interstate-40-us-93-system-traffic-interchange-study

That's quite a bit sooner than a lot of us anticipated for this project; looks like the I-40-to-Vegas virtual "SIU" is well up ADOT's priority list.   Since most of the remainder will in all likelihood be an upgrade of the existing expressway, it'll be interesting to see the timeframe projected for the rest of that portion of US 93 -- and whether that'll be similar to that of the bypass itself. 

[sprjus4]

IMO, completion of an I-40 direct connector & Kingman Bypass is far greater of a priority than upgrading the rural expressway to Nevada.

[sparker]

IMO, completion of an I-40 direct connector & Kingman Bypass is far greater of a priority than upgrading the rural expressway to Nevada.

Actually, I agree -- the Kingman bypass should precede the rest of 93 up to the NV line in terms of scheduling; it's the most vital (and expensive) segment here -- get it done before inflation kicks the cost up too far.  But if a 5-year timeframe is applicable to the bypass, then it should be within 5 additional years until the more rural segment is well under way.  Given delays, EIS's, etc. -- I'd "guesstimate" that completion of Interstate-standard upgrades north of I-40 would occur about 2031 or 2032.   A snail's pace compared with the heydey of chargeable construction in the '60's and '70's -- but not terribly shabby by current standards. 

[splashflash]

IMO, completion of an I-40 direct connector & Kingman Bypass is far greater of a priority than upgrading the rural expressway to Nevada.

Actually, I agree -- the Kingman bypass should precede the rest of 93 up to the NV line in terms of scheduling; it's the most vital (and expensive) segment here -- get it done before inflation kicks the cost up too far.

It is interesting that the project is now described not as a full-directional interchange but as, "a new TI on westbound I-40 to northbound US 93 and southbound US 93 to eastbound I-40".  Perhaps this means reverting to Alignment D the interchange but with its design simplified, dropping the lesser used as southbound 93 to westbound I-40 and easttbound I-40 to northbound US 93 flows.  Perhaps the latter flows would continue using Beale, placating those fuel station owners' concerns about traffic and business losses.  The cost savings would be significant while essentially eliminating the more visually apparent portion of the project, objected to in open houses. http://www.epsgroupinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/west-kingman.gif

Kingman was able to secure $20 million from ADOT to build an interchange for airport access, east of where Alignment D would be.  "The project as a whole is budgeted at $46 million and some change,"  Foggin said. "The other $26 million, as Mr. Lenhart indicated, we are working with the private sector to do a public-private partnership where we come up with $13 million as a city and they will come up with $13 million."

http://www.mohavedailynews.com/news/kingman-sees-funding-for-interchange-as-boost-to-becoming-transport/article_0a5c9596-9bc3-11e9-9144-c77d72c66ceb.html   
https://www.construction.com/projects/i-40-kingman-crossing-traffic-interchange/

Perhaps completion of that interchange would dovetail with the commencement of the US 93 / I-40 interchange.

[armadillo speedbump]

Once the Kingman direct connects go in, I don't see an actual need (other than OCD) to upgrade Kingman to Nevada.  No stoplights or stop signs, not very many intersections, and maybe 2 or 3 where traffic volume at times might get anywhere close to justifying an overpass.  After the DC's, will any other upgrades save any actual trip time?

So many other places in AZ where road upgrades are needed.

[vdeane]

You won't get the interstate number if there are still at-grades, though.  Also, what's the speed limit through there?  Many states won't post the same limit on a road with at-grades as one that doesn't, even if the traffic volumes at those intersections are very low.

[US 89]

Also, what's the speed limit through there?

65 mph, which is Arizona's maximum for a rural divided highway. Rural freeways there can be posted up to 75.

[sprjus4]

I think it's less of not needed, and more of it's a low priority. It'd be nice to see a completed I-11 between I-40 and Las Vegas, but it's a low priority and will likely be done in many minor spot improvements gradually upgrading it.

[jakeroot]

65 mph, which is Arizona's maximum for a rural divided highway. Rural freeways there can be posted up to 75.

This is completely unrelated, but that link allowed me to view an example of a divided highway in Arizona (never seen one before). The second crossings (for left or straight movements) are protected by an additional stop sign. I didn't think this was a thing anywhere?

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^
Still think early 2030's for completion of I-11 north from Kingman to NV; it is an effective SIU -- and the main commercial trucking link from Vegas eastward (particularly in winter).  Once the Kingman bypass is in progress, ADOT will get a bit of pressure from multiple parties to wring out the remainder of the route, which will likely commence after the bypass is in service.   While PHX-area projects get more attention, I-11's backers won't let ADOT keep the corridor on the back burner indefinitely; the steady progress of 4-laning US 93 between Wickenburg and I-40 attests to that.  Kingman-Vegas would be an accomplishment that ADOT could trumpet as something of value (and once the bypass is completed, a relatively easy set of projects) -- although the remainder down to I-10 will likely be more of a slow slog likely not fully completed until mid-century. 

[X99]

65 mph, which is Arizona's maximum for a rural divided highway. Rural freeways there can be posted up to 75.

This is completely unrelated, but that link allowed me to view an example of a divided highway in Arizona (never seen one before). The second crossings (for left or straight movements) are protected by an additional stop sign. I didn't think this was a thing anywhere?

You should see Highway 1416 in Box Elder, South Dakota. They do this with at least two intersections out of the four along the divided portion.

[KeithE4Phx]

You won't get the interstate number if there are still at-grades, though.  Also, what's the speed limit through there?  Many states won't post the same limit on a road with at-grades as one that doesn't, even if the traffic volumes at those intersections are very low.

I-40 has at-grade ranch turnoffs in Texas and (IIRC) New Mexico.  There are over 30 ranch turnoffs on US 93 between Wickenburg and I-40, with no place to build ramps for them.  Exceptions will have to be made for I-11.

[ClassicHasClass]

65 mph, which is Arizona's maximum for a rural divided highway. Rural freeways there can be posted up to 75.

This is completely unrelated, but that link allowed me to view an example of a divided highway in Arizona (never seen one before). The second crossings (for left or straight movements) are protected by an additional stop sign. I didn't think this was a thing anywhere?

If I'm understanding you correctly, do you mean something like this? It's not unusual in California.

https://goo.gl/maps/7fUgV8FiMrNu7MQr7

[jakeroot]

65 mph, which is Arizona's maximum for a rural divided highway. Rural freeways there can be posted up to 75.

This is completely unrelated, but that link allowed me to view an example of a divided highway in Arizona (never seen one before). The second crossings (for left or straight movements) are protected by an additional stop sign. I didn't think this was a thing anywhere?

If I'm understanding you correctly, do you mean something like this? It's not unusual in California.

https://goo.gl/maps/7fUgV8FiMrNu7MQr7

Correct, yes. Those would have yield signs in WA.

You should see Highway 1416 in Box Elder, South Dakota. They do this with at least two intersections out of the four along the divided portion.

I would find this very annoying if I was trying to merge onto a highway.

[X99]

You should see Highway 1416 in Box Elder, South Dakota. They do this with at least two intersections out of the four along the divided portion.

I would find this very annoying if I was trying to merge onto a highway.

It is. The West Gate and Radar Hill intersections back up half a mile down 1416 during the evening rush hour. Luckily, my neighborhood is on Radar Hill, so I can get to most of Rapid City by heading straight south to SD 44. The problem changes from "long wait times at intersections" to "a road that wasn't built for the amount of traffic it now handles."

[sparker]

CA only does this with medians that are wide enough to accommodate a stopped vehicle.  In this particular picture, it's along the CA 58 expressway section between Boron and Mojave -- discussed at some length in the Kramer Junction Bypass thread in SW (the EB lanes [the far ones in the photo] are on the alignment of the original 2-lane facility).  For narrower medians Caltrans usually omits signage except for the initial stop sign adjacent to the first set of lanes (except for "ONE WAY" arrows and occasional "WRONG WAY" and/or "DO NOT ENTER" signs in the contraflow direction of the expressway).  Exact signage tends to vary by district; what's seen here is common with D6 -- similar signage is posted on CA 198 in the vicinity of the CA 65 & 245 junctions.

But I doubt this sort of intersection would be utilized with any portion of I-11 in AZ; at worst, ranch roads would be handled by slow-speed ramps or even RIRO's.