News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Interstate 11

Started by Interstate Trav, April 28, 2011, 12:58:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

SSR_317

Quote from: AZDude on May 22, 2018, 01:43:20 PM
According to the ADOT website, construction on extending the US 93 divided highway segment from mile 161 to 166 is expected to begin in 2025.

https://www.azdot.gov/projects/northwest-district-projects/us-93-corridor-projects/map
That's the "Big Jim Wash" segment, if I recall correctly. Will connect to the existing 4-lane "Santa Maria River" section at the north end.

I also show that the US 93 segment known as "The Gap" (formerly known as "Vista Royale") between reference post (RP) 190.5 & 193.5 is presently in design this year & scheduled for construction in 2020. That section is just south of where I-11 is tentatively planned to break away from the existing US 93 alignment (around RP 190 or so) and bypass Wickenburg to the west. Sure hope that when it's finally built, the Wickenburg Bypass will have a spur south of town (I-711, perhaps?) over to US 60/Grand Ave, possibly connecting at SR 74. Otherwise, I-11 will most likely be totally useless for people/commercial interests in the northern portions of the Valley until it joins US 93 northbound at the point mentioned above (north of Wickenburg).


sparker

Quote from: SSR_317 on May 22, 2018, 02:57:58 PM
Quote from: AZDude on May 22, 2018, 01:43:20 PM
According to the ADOT website, construction on extending the US 93 divided highway segment from mile 161 to 166 is expected to begin in 2025.

https://www.azdot.gov/projects/northwest-district-projects/us-93-corridor-projects/map
That's the "Big Jim Wash" segment, if I recall correctly. Will connect to the existing 4-lane "Santa Maria River" section at the north end.

I also show that the US 93 segment known as "The Gap" (formerly known as "Vista Royale") between reference post (RP) 190.5 & 193.5 is presently in design this year & scheduled for construction in 2020. That section is just south of where I-11 is tentatively planned to break away from the existing US 93 alignment (around RP 190 or so) and bypass Wickenburg to the west. Sure hope that when it's finally built, the Wickenburg Bypass will have a spur south of town (I-711, perhaps?) over to US 60/Grand Ave, possibly connecting at SR 74. Otherwise, I-11 will most likely be totally useless for people/commercial interests in the northern portions of the Valley until it joins US 93 northbound at the point mentioned above (north of Wickenburg).

Given AZDOT's longstanding allergy to 3di's, it's likely that any spur extending east from the I-11 alignment (once finalized!?) will simply be signed as US 60 or even AZ 74 (depending upon whether US 60 is itself rerouted over part of the Wickenburg bypass or maintains its present in-town routing).

But I'll acknowledge that an I-711 would be an appropriate location for a cluster of convenience stores!  :-P

kkt

Quote from: sparker on May 22, 2018, 03:53:38 PM
Quote from: SSR_317 on May 22, 2018, 02:57:58 PM
Quote from: AZDude on May 22, 2018, 01:43:20 PM
According to the ADOT website, construction on extending the US 93 divided highway segment from mile 161 to 166 is expected to begin in 2025.

https://www.azdot.gov/projects/northwest-district-projects/us-93-corridor-projects/map
That's the "Big Jim Wash" segment, if I recall correctly. Will connect to the existing 4-lane "Santa Maria River" section at the north end.

I also show that the US 93 segment known as "The Gap" (formerly known as "Vista Royale") between reference post (RP) 190.5 & 193.5 is presently in design this year & scheduled for construction in 2020. That section is just south of where I-11 is tentatively planned to break away from the existing US 93 alignment (around RP 190 or so) and bypass Wickenburg to the west. Sure hope that when it's finally built, the Wickenburg Bypass will have a spur south of town (I-711, perhaps?) over to US 60/Grand Ave, possibly connecting at SR 74. Otherwise, I-11 will most likely be totally useless for people/commercial interests in the northern portions of the Valley until it joins US 93 northbound at the point mentioned above (north of Wickenburg).

Given AZDOT's longstanding allergy to 3di's, it's likely that any spur extending east from the I-11 alignment (once finalized!?) will simply be signed as US 60 or even AZ 74 (depending upon whether US 60 is itself rerouted over part of the Wickenburg bypass or maintains its present in-town routing).

But I'll acknowledge that an I-711 would be an appropriate location for a cluster of convenience stores!  :-P

Not to mention craps players!

Bobby5280

I think the grandiose I-11 plans they have for the Phoenix and Tuscon metros, with a parallel Interstate route clear down to Nogales no less, are a giant pipe dream. I'm skeptical the Loop 404 will ever take hold, and if it does it may consist of just a modest 2-lane standard access highway. I think the best shot I-11 has at linking into Phoenix within the foreseeable future is just getting I-11 to Loop 303 via US-60/US-93 and then multiplexing I-11 along Loop 303 down to I-10. And that's it. I think all the other extra plans, especially anything involving Tucson or routes clear down to the Mexico border are desperately wishful thinking.

Arizona may have enough water to handle more residents. But water is not the worst problem. Money is it. The cost of living, the cost of raising a family (rather than just going it alone) is getting flat out ridiculous and into mathematically unsustainable territory. Yet these planners are acting like the current economy and growth trends can stay on the same track, uninterrupted, for decades into the future. All I can do is laugh at that. Just this past week news headlines mentioned the US has hit a new low in fertility rate for the 2nd year in a row. If this turns into a long term trend there will be considerably fewer working age taxpayers and home buyers in the 20-30 year time frames in which these planners are currently, blissfully dreaming.

Decades ahead urban areas will keep adding population, but that growth will be all at the expense of smaller cities, towns and rural areas. Many of those towns will be less able to fund infrastructure, police & fire departments and other services we take for granted. Inflation and aging residents will see to that. Even more and more older people will be forced closer to cities for access to health care.

In the long run I think an Interstate 11 directly linking Las Vegas and Phoenix will become a reality. There's no reason for it not to happen. As of the latest census estimates the Phoenix MSA has 4.7 million people. And the Las Vegas MSA is 2.2 million. The distance between the two metros is roughly 270 miles. So it's at least justifiable to upgrade the US-93 and US-60 corridors to Interstate quality.

As for the stuff to the South, I think that's overkill. It might be worth it to upgrade AZ-85 to Interstate quality between Gila Bend and Buckeye (I-8 to I-10). Expansions of Loop 202 and Loop 303 in Phoenix are worthwhile. Tucson needs some additional freeway work. However working I-11 into all of that is just nuts, especially stretching it all the way down to the border. Texas is growing like crazy in some parts, adding residents at a much faster clip than Arizona, yet there are no concrete plans to build new Interstate corridors where the most growth is taking place. In Texas it all seems to be about various I-69 routes while areas along the I-35 corridor are bursting at the seams.

silverback1065

Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 23, 2018, 01:11:18 AM
I think the grandiose I-11 plans they have for the Phoenix and Tuscon metros, with a parallel Interstate route clear down to Nogales no less, are a giant pipe dream. I'm skeptical the Loop 404 will ever take hold, and if it does it may consist of just a modest 2-lane standard access highway. I think the best shot I-11 has at linking into Phoenix within the foreseeable future is just getting I-11 to Loop 303 via US-60/US-93 and then multiplexing I-11 along Loop 303 down to I-10. And that's it. I think all the other extra plans, especially anything involving Tucson or routes clear down to the Mexico border are desperately wishful thinking.

Arizona may have enough water to handle more residents. But water is not the worst problem. Money is it. The cost of living, the cost of raising a family (rather than just going it alone) is getting flat out ridiculous and into mathematically unsustainable territory. Yet these planners are acting like the current economy and growth trends can stay on the same track, uninterrupted, for decades into the future. All I can do is laugh at that. Just this past week news headlines mentioned the US has hit a new low in fertility rate for the 2nd year in a row. If this turns into a long term trend there will be considerably fewer working age taxpayers and home buyers in the 20-30 year time frames in which these planners are currently, blissfully dreaming.

Decades ahead urban areas will keep adding population, but that growth will be all at the expense of smaller cities, towns and rural areas. Many of those towns will be less able to fund infrastructure, police & fire departments and other services we take for granted. Inflation and aging residents will see to that. Even more and more older people will be forced closer to cities for access to health care.

In the long run I think an Interstate 11 directly linking Las Vegas and Phoenix will become a reality. There's no reason for it not to happen. As of the latest census estimates the Phoenix MSA has 4.7 million people. And the Las Vegas MSA is 2.2 million. The distance between the two metros is roughly 270 miles. So it's at least justifiable to upgrade the US-93 and US-60 corridors to Interstate quality.

As for the stuff to the South, I think that's overkill. It might be worth it to upgrade AZ-85 to Interstate quality between Gila Bend and Buckeye (I-8 to I-10). Expansions of Loop 202 and Loop 303 in Phoenix are worthwhile. Tucson needs some additional freeway work. However working I-11 into all of that is just nuts, especially stretching it all the way down to the border. Texas is growing like crazy in some parts, adding residents at a much faster clip than Arizona, yet there are no concrete plans to build new Interstate corridors where the most growth is taking place. In Texas it all seems to be about various I-69 routes while areas along the I-35 corridor are bursting at the seams.

texas is too busy adding more letter suffixes to 69

sparker

Like I iterated before, it's likely that I-11 will eventually extend as a southwest loop around Phoenix because (a) local developers want an artery in areas where they're planning to build (for better or worse) and they have the state legislature, and through them AZDOT, more or less under their thumb as far as funding and support are concerned; and (b) the loop circumvents the Gila reservation, providing an alternate through-traffic artery and thus ameliorating (if not solving) the issues regarding expanding I-10 through their territory.  Southward beyond that is simply a pipedream, cobbled together by wishful thinking regarding a Tucson bypass (which will probably never happen) and projections of vastly increased commerce to and from Nogales (even though the over-the-border maquiledora manufacturing strategy has been largely supplanted by even more inexpensive Asian manufacturing).  Anything south of the I-8/10 junction likely won't happen in at least the next 30-35 years.   

howlincoyote2k1

After reading this thread again, I thought I'd add some more input.

Interstate 11 south of the Valley is absolutely unnecessary. If you want to make this a trade corridor, why not improve existing I-10 and I-19? Sure, I get that there's still the issue of I-10 on the GRIC where it can't be widened, but finding a way to come to some kind of agreement with the GRIC to expand that road is a far better solution than building a whole new freeway that isn't needed. Another idea: why not four-lane AZ 86 and 85 between Tucson and Gila Bend?

Using Interstate 11 as part of a bypass of Phoenix on I-10 would be helpful, but again, there's better ways to accomplish that without using the Interstate. Really all that needs to be done is an improvement of the intersection with I-8 and remove the stoplight at MC85 (and replace it with a diamond interchange), and functionally it works almost just as well as an Interstate. You could even improve Aguila/Vulture Mine Road as an SR 85 extension; it's already a paved road that seems to be in pretty good condition and I don't imagine much would need to be done to bring it to state highway standards.

The main purpose of Interstate 11 is to connect the cities of Las Vegas, Nevada and Phoenix, Arizona. Routing I-11 to meet I-10 in Buckeye or Tonopah only partially accomplishes this and adds miles to the trip that do not need to be added. The freeway needs to be routed down US 60 to meet L303 on the edge of Surprise (which, oddly enough, is still a good 20 miles from the "city core" and literally on the far fringe of current development), and down to I-10 using the current L303. Maybe to avoid the railroad, build the freeway parallel to US60 about a mile to the northeast? I get that it would be redundant, but with the railroad in the way, it might be the best option.

As far as north of Las Vegas goes....I guess sending it to Reno might make sense, but north of that I'm not sure.

sparker

Quote from: howlincoyote2k1 on July 05, 2018, 12:53:13 PM
After reading this thread again, I thought I'd add some more input.

Interstate 11 south of the Valley is absolutely unnecessary. If you want to make this a trade corridor, why not improve existing I-10 and I-19? Sure, I get that there's still the issue of I-10 on the GRIC where it can't be widened, but finding a way to come to some kind of agreement with the GRIC to expand that road is a far better solution than building a whole new freeway that isn't needed. Another idea: why not four-lane AZ 86 and 85 between Tucson and Gila Bend?

Using Interstate 11 as part of a bypass of Phoenix on I-10 would be helpful, but again, there's better ways to accomplish that without using the Interstate. Really all that needs to be done is an improvement of the intersection with I-8 and remove the stoplight at MC85 (and replace it with a diamond interchange), and functionally it works almost just as well as an Interstate. You could even improve Aguila/Vulture Mine Road as an SR 85 extension; it's already a paved road that seems to be in pretty good condition and I don't imagine much would need to be done to bring it to state highway standards.

The main purpose of Interstate 11 is to connect the cities of Las Vegas, Nevada and Phoenix, Arizona. Routing I-11 to meet I-10 in Buckeye or Tonopah only partially accomplishes this and adds miles to the trip that do not need to be added. The freeway needs to be routed down US 60 to meet L303 on the edge of Surprise (which, oddly enough, is still a good 20 miles from the "city core" and literally on the far fringe of current development), and down to I-10 using the current L303. Maybe to avoid the railroad, build the freeway parallel to US60 about a mile to the northeast? I get that it would be redundant, but with the railroad in the way, it might be the best option.

As far as north of Las Vegas goes....I guess sending it to Reno might make sense, but north of that I'm not sure.

Pretty much agreed on all counts, particularly the concept of actually serving the more populated areas of greater PHX via a route that utilizes the N-S section of Loop 303 rather than a "side-trip" over to Hassayampa and Buckeye.  In a more perfect world, I-11 would terminate at I-10 -- period.  But in the developmental world of that neck of the woods, the motto seems to be "expand or die" -- and expansion into previously untapped territory has been the hallmark of the region for as long as I can remember.  If the Hassayampa alignment is retained, the best and most efficient way to extend it further south is simply to multiplex it east over I-10 to AZ 85 and then upgrade that route (which is specifically designed for such) down to Gila Bend and I-8.  The only reason to shunt it over to Maricopa is, as previously iterated, to provide an artery for developers to use on the territory south and west of the Gila reservation.  But it's likely that the only thing that would prompt either a Loop 303 or AZ 85 reroute of I-11 would be a significant slowdown of developmental activity in the area, itself prompted by less and less folks moving in.  As long as commercial/real estate activity in the area is geared toward the "churning" of housing, including establishing large tracts in outlying areas that have historically been relatively quick sales -- the regional "model" will persist, along with plans to deploy highway facilities to serve it.  If the "gravy train" of inbound residents slows down, more measured and reasonable plans -- utilizing existing facilities where possible -- might take hold; if not, then expect to see the same speculative planning that has gone on for the past several decades.  I hate to sound overly cynical -- but while there's that "gravy train" flowing, planners -- in & out of the public sector -- will simply continue to ride it! 

And as far as extending I-11 past I-80/Reno -- that will all depend upon if & when a particular state or region wants the extension more -- be it Oregon, the Boise area, etc.  It's likely NV will merely go along with plans fomented elsewhere.  But no one should hold their breath -- except for the Boise/Treasure Valley area reached via US 95, huge population growth in the Northwest isn't something that's anticipated or planned for.  I think the results of the 2020 census will have a lot to do with where I-11 goes; if that part of Idaho exceeds 1M then, there may be a push for increased connectivity, particularly to the southwest.  Even with other "boom towns" in the NW (I'm thinking Bend, OR and environs), it's unlikely that any region not already well established will exceed 200-250K -- pretty marginal for service by a new long-distance Interstate corridor.  If and when I-11 is actually constructed north of Vegas, it's northern terminus -- unless something like that mentioned above intervenes -- will be somewhere along I-80 (my money's on something within 10 miles of Fernley). 

DJStephens

#908
As for the stuff to the South, I think that's overkill. It might be worth it to upgrade AZ-85 to Interstate quality between Gila Bend and Buckeye (I-8 to I-10). Expansions of Loop 202 and Loop 303 in Phoenix are worthwhile. Tucson needs some additional freeway work. However working I-11 into all of that is just nuts, especially stretching it all the way down to the border. Texas is growing like crazy in some parts, adding residents at a much faster clip than Arizona, yet there are no concrete plans to build new Interstate corridors where the most growth is taking place. In Texas it all seems to be about various I-69 routes while areas along the I-35 corridor are bursting at the seams.
[/quote]

"Tucson needs some additional work"   Yes, amen to that.  It actually needs a lot.  There was a median crossover on I-10 on the east side yesterday, between exits 270 and 273.   The EB two lanes were closed down.  All rush hour and through freight were pushed onto east side arterials that simply are terrible.   Such as "hourglass" sections of surface road that morph from six lanes into the original two lane cross section.   Valencia, Houghton, etc.   And massive amounts of tractor trailers and rush hour traffic were pushed onto these.  No frontages on I-10 there, no way to get around.   An interesting question for ADOT might be:  Why no barrier, from at least between the Sonoita Highway, and the Wilmot exit?    Speeds are too high, and should be lowered to 65 mph west of Exit 281 into town from the east.   Massive guardrail damage in evident in a short section of I-10 WB between 279 and 275 exits.  No seeming desire to repair or even warn with advance signage.  Any liability there?  Would assume that they (ADOT), and transportation agencies in general,  have immunity from liability in such crossover incidents, and guardrail damage incidents such as these.   

sparker

Quote from: DJStephens on July 07, 2018, 11:29:06 AM
"Tucson needs some additional work"   Yes, amen to that.  It actually needs a lot.  There was a median crossover on I-10 on the east side yesterday, between exits 270 and 273.   The EB two lanes were closed down.  All rush hour and through freight were pushed onto east side arterials that simply are terrible.   Such as "hourglass" sections of surface road that morph from six lanes into the original two lane cross section.   Valencia, Houghton, etc.   And massive amounts of tractor trailers and rush hour traffic were pushed onto these.  No frontages on I-10 there, no way to get around.   An interesting question for ADOT might be:  Why no barrier, from at least between the Sonoita Highway, and the Wilmot exit?    Speeds are too high, and should be lowered to 65 mph west of Exit 281 into town from the east.   Massive guardrail damage in evident in a short section of I-10 WB between 279 and 275 exits.  No seeming desire to repair or even warn with advance signage.  Any liability there?  Would assume that they (ADOT), and transportation agencies in general,  have immunity from liability in such crossover incidents, and guardrail damage incidents such as these.   

Simply put, there's no push from Tucson or area interests to place additional Interstate-grade facilities in the region.  The odds of I-11 ever extending south past Casa Grande are slim & none -- the rationales for such just don't hold up.  Northwest of there are the previously mentioned developmental pressures to build up pretty much all buildable areas that aren't within the Gila reservation; any extension of I-11 south of I-10 is functionally the "main street" of such ambitions.  Beyond Casa Grande, that particular interest wanes with simple distance and diminishing lack of influence.  Besides, there may be federal pushback on any additional service routes to the Mexican border -- the Border Patrol/ICE may just bitch like hell about the possibility of having to expend manpower and their facility budget on any new high-capacity roads serving border crossings. 

DJStephens

   There does need to be a complete rebuild of Interstate 10, east of downtown Tucson, just as there has been to the west of downtown Tucson.  However, there is a lot more traffic heading west, towards Phoenix, so the upgrades west of downtown do make sense. 
   All of the interchanges east of the early nineties six lane project just east of I-19, are original, mid to late sixties.  The only things that have been changed, are the overlay of the original concrete pavement (which was still visible in mid nineties) and the changeover to the Clearview signage on original overhead gantries.    Several "merge or die" interchanges exist - the wB on ramp at the Kino Parkway / Ajo way interchange, and the EB half cloverleaf at the Palo Verde interchange.  And one original bridge (steel girder, concrete round piers and pier cap) at Alvernon Way appears to have been replaced.  With a box beam design, with allowance for widening into the median, for a six lane cross section, which is not being utilized.   
   The Wilmot and Craycroft bridge redeckings have not added a future lane to the inside, nor do there seem to be even bearing seat provisions for such on the backwalls which appear to not be part of the bridge reconstructions.  Redecking original two lane cross sections only.   

sparker

Posters based closer to Tucson may be able to either confirm or debunk this statement, but the last several times I used I-10 east of Tucson it seemed that once past Vail the facility seemed to deteriorate the closer to Benson one got!  The RR overpasses seemed to be the worst of the lot -- narrow lanes and what seemed to be very old structure.  Compounding the problem was the constant truck traffic; a number of commercial drivers seemed to know just where the dips, ruts, and potholes were and were constantly changing lanes ostensibly to avoid these.  IMO, AZDOT needs to get out there, assess the situation, and get remedial contracts let sooner than later.  It has been nearly a decade since I've been on I-10 out that way; if the condition has markedly improved, it certainly would be good news!     

J N Winkler

Quote from: sparker on July 15, 2018, 02:33:26 AMPosters based closer to Tucson may be able to either confirm or debunk this statement, but the last several times I used I-10 east of Tucson it seemed that once past Vail the facility seemed to deteriorate the closer to Benson one got!  The RR overpasses seemed to be the worst of the lot -- narrow lanes and what seemed to be very old structure.

The one that sticks out in my mind as the worst by far--Marsh Station, just east of Tucson--has been reconstructed out of existence in the last five years.  I believe the railroad line through the area was relocated.  Previously the speed limit dropped to 65 as the I-10 roadbed narrowed to pass underneath the railroad (complete with interrupted shoulders and a center median barrier with green headlight screen); now geometry is easy and the speed limit stays 75.

Truck traffic is still heavy and blowing dust is much more of a problem now than it has been in the past, largely because of one plot of land near San Simon which is being seriously mismanaged by an absentee owner based in Atlanta.  There are new flashing signs for low visibility and there is also an extended zone around the San Simon POE where lane changing is prohibited (double white stripe).
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

DJStephens

    The reason it seems old - is the fact that the EB side is the pre-existing two lane Benson Highway.   When the 10 facility was funded and built in the area (MP 282 - 290, roughly '69 - '70) it placed a new carriageway for the WB lanes, with a varying median.  Between it, and the older Benson highway, which became the EB side lanes.  The older two lane (EB) was not re-built, with greater cuts and fills.   Guess it could be called "virginia twinning" by some on this site. 
   The worst section, the original marsh station road exit (289) was moved a mile and a half to the E, to become exit 291, and the railroad was straightened by placing it entirely to the north.   The steel plate girder RR overpass was removed, and new twin bridges were built for 10 over the Cienega Creek, which is an oasis for plants and birds in the desert.   The agency did provide for a future third lane in each direction, oddly way out in the desert, while they aren't now, in the east side of tucson on wilmot and craycroft. 
   The other RR set of bridges still exists, which is a pair of bridges over the former RR mainline just W of exit 292.  This former RR mainline is now used as a spur for storage.  This is just W of the Empirita road exit (292), which is another old ranch access exit. 
   The varying width wide median is very good, and eliminates glare, and allows use of high beams late at night without affecting oncoming traffic.   A major arroyo (wash) crossing, Davidson Canyon, has had it's pair of bridges either completely repaired, or replaced.  But no provision for a third lane, on either of them.    And they are further west, closer to Tucson. 
   Don't believe that three laning is warranted, east of the Sonoita highway, exit 281.   Aside from truck climbing lanes in the Benson area.  But complete reconstruction should be done, from there, all the way to the western edge of the early nineties six lane project near milepost 262.   The roller coaster EB section, in the ranch land is kind of neat, and should be left alone for the time being.   

sparker

I do know that UPRR recently revised their trackage between Vail & Benson.  The original configuration, which wound around the I-10 lanes like braiding, was a result of the line originally being two separate but parallel railroads -- the original Southern Pacific, which essentially follows I-10 (and old AZ 86 before that) via Willcox, and the El Paso & Southwestern, which veered south at Benson, paralleling old US 80 (now AZ 80) via Douglas en route to El Paso, mostly hugging the Mexican border (but an SP subsidiary after 1924).  Those tracks were abandoned as a through line in the early '80's after the Staggers Act made such abandonment an easier process; SP upgraded the Willcox line to handle the additional traffic.  But because of the gradients, the twin RR lines from Vail to Benson were retained until recently, when the line was straightened out to better accommodate exceptionally long container trains (slow going with those on the old "braided" alignment).  However, from the above accounts, the old track that variously ducked under & over I-10 still remains but is now a storage loop, which would account for the original US 80 bridges remaining.  Another thing I recall from various trips on that stretch is that the approaches to those bridges had settled; leaving a substantial "bump" in the roadway at each end of the bridge structure.  Correcting/upgrading those substandard features would likely have to be a joint project of AZDOT and UPRR; whether the latter actually needs that old trackage or is simply utilizing it for convenience will probably be discussed -- elimination of that track would go a long way to simplifying a long-overdue realignment of I-10 itself.

The Ghostbuster

Personally I'd have Interstate 11's southern terminus be at Interstate 10. Is there really a need for it to go any further south?

howlincoyote2k1

#916
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 16, 2018, 03:46:44 PM
Personally I'd have Interstate 11's southern terminus be at Interstate 10. Is there really a need for it to go any further south?

Not really. Unless you want to run it diagonally through Maricopa to Casa Grande (which could be useful, but a bit overkill), but I'm having trouble finding a reasonable route to do so while avoiding populated areas and the GRIC.

Edit: I just looked again. You also have the Estrella Mountains and Sonoran Desert NM in the way too. You'd have to swing west and south of Maricopa to connect the freeway, and there's a lot of agricultural/rural communities out that way. Folks living way out in the boonies. The mileage savings over Interstate 8 and AZ 85 to bypass Phoenix would be limited, and the costs wouldn't be worth. So, to answer your question...no, there really is no need for it to go further south.

However, I will say that the Maricopa/Casa Grande highway ought to be a four-lane 65 MPH extension of AZ 238. Two cities like this approaching 50K in population need more than a two-lane county road as its direct connector. Heck, at this point you could renumber the whole road as AZ 284 or 687 or something.

sparker

Quote from: howlincoyote2k1 on July 16, 2018, 05:21:23 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on July 16, 2018, 03:46:44 PM
Personally I'd have Interstate 11's southern terminus be at Interstate 10. Is there really a need for it to go any further south?

Not really. Unless you want to run it diagonally through Maricopa to Casa Grande (which could be useful, but a bit overkill), but I'm having trouble finding a reasonable route to do so while avoiding populated areas and the GRIC.

Edit: I just looked again. You also have the Estrella Mountains and Sonoran Desert NM in the way too. You'd have to swing west and south of Maricopa to connect the freeway, and there's a lot of agricultural/rural communities out that way. Folks living way out in the boonies. The mileage savings over Interstate 8 and AZ 85 to bypass Phoenix would be limited, and the costs wouldn't be worth. So, to answer your question...no, there really is no need for it to go further south.

However, I will say that the Maricopa/Casa Grande highway ought to be a four-lane 65 MPH extension of AZ 238. Two cities like this approaching 50K in population need more than a two-lane county road as its direct connector. Heck, at this point you could renumber the whole road as AZ 284 or 687 or something.

The interregional aspect of I-11 ends at its first intersection with I-10 after coming south from Wickenburg -- wherever that ends up.  Any extension south or southeast beyond that (unless simply replacing AZ 85 south to Gila Bend) is a connector within the greater PHX urban area and intended to serve as a location along which to site development (housing and the associated commercial activities).  The practical limitations of such an extension are at either I-8 or I-10 in the Casa Grande area; any extension south of there parallel to I-10 and I-19 is simply a gratuitous reading of the I-11 authorizing language, likely fomented by frustrated Tucson-area developers looking for an additional corridor to "sprawl" upon.   It certainly wouldn't be justified by the volume of commercial traffic crossing the Nogales border. 

If the Buckeye-Casa Grande extension of I-11 is cancelled or remains unfunded, then it's more than likely that an arterial or expressway following the UP tracks from the Estrellas southeast to Casa Grande would in time be constructed ; whether it would retain the AZ 238 designation of the current conventional facility or renumbered as a "child" of one of the nearby trunks (84, 87) remains to be seen.   While not having the cachet of a full-fledged Interstate, such a corridor may well prove about as useful when it comes to nearby housing expansion -- and would certainly cost less!  Face it -- if someone's looking for entry-level housing prices and such are offered in outlying areas, whether the closest road is an Interstate or state-designated expressway will only marginally matter -- the price will be the deciding factor (up here in the Bay Area we have a front row seat regarding that phenomenon!).     

kkt

I'd go for I-11 using AZ 85 to the Gila Bend vicinity.  Yes, the mileage savings compared to going through Phoenix would be small to none, but Phoenix traffic is congested.  It would be a win both for people bypassing Phoenix not to have to go through it, and for the people who must drive Phoenix freeways to have the through traffic bypass the city.


sparker

Quote from: kkt on July 16, 2018, 07:00:10 PM
I'd go for I-11 using AZ 85 to the Gila Bend vicinity.  Yes, the mileage savings compared to going through Phoenix would be small to none, but Phoenix traffic is congested.  It would be a win both for people bypassing Phoenix not to have to go through it, and for the people who must drive Phoenix freeways to have the through traffic bypass the city.



Agree 110%!!!!  However.....the developers who historically have driven the growth in greater PDX still hold sway, and they still want their "main street" down which to place housing, WalMarts, Costcos, Safeways.......you get the drift!  Hopefully by the time I-11 actually creeps into the area, the local housing market will have subsided to the point where massive new development just isn't all that profitable -- and reason just might slink back into the picture.  Hell, AZ 85 is deliberately upgradeable (most likely as the enhancement of its current role as a PHX-San Diego artery); the I-11 planners would be fools not to take a look at it as a viable alternative. 

DJStephens

Makes more sense to keep it on Grand Avenue.  To Loop 101 most likely.  To go any farther into Phoenix would take decades, although it would be a long term worthy goal.   

Bobby5280

They might be able to accomplish it bit by bit via zoning and minimum property setbacks. Existing property would be grandfathered. But many commercial properties have relatively short life spans and as they're replaced over the decades more room would open up for road expansion.

sparker

I'd be tickled pink to see I-11 extended parallel to US 60 just to Loop 303 (101 might be a "berm too far", so to speak).  But as time goes by and infill along the Grand corridor happens, the Hassayampa option seems more likely.  Farther south than I-10, although still a inked-in line on the map, is anyone's guess at this point as to whether it'll ever occur. 

vdeane

I'd love to see I-11 go to AZ 303 and take it to either I-10 or I-17, with the remainder becoming I-211; with what Arizona is planning now, would anyone really take I-10 to I-11 instead of US 60?  My guess is no.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

KeithE4Phx

Quote from: vdeane on July 29, 2018, 05:21:39 PM
I'd love to see I-11 go to AZ 303 and take it to either I-10 or I-17, with the remainder becoming I-211; with what Arizona is planning now, would anyone really take I-10 to I-11 instead of US 60?  My guess is no.

Other than for continuity, there is no reason whatsoever for Grand Ave. southeast of the 303 to be numbered as anything.  The current route from the 303 to Wickenburg could be an extension of US 93. The section of US 60 west of Wickenburg could be an extension of AZ 74, which was its original number, BTW.  There'd be a 10-mile multiplex between Morristown and Wickenburg.  Or, the whole thing could be renumbered as AZ 60.  They could do that today.  Once I-11 is built, and if it's along Grand Ave., then US 93 would be decommissioned statewide, including this stretch.

And no, the northern section of what is now the 303 (Grand to I-17) will not be numbered I-211 if the southern section does become I-11.  ADOT doesn't use 3DIs, and haven't done so, either actually signed (I-510, the I-10 to Buckeye Rd. section of the current AZ 51) or planned (I-710 in Tucson) for close to 50 years.  They'll probably leave it as 303.
"Oh, so you hate your job? Well, why didn't you say so? There's a support group for that. It's called "EVERYBODY!" They meet at the bar." -- Drew Carey



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.