Interstate 11

[vdeane]

It makes the most sense to route I-11 along I-515 and US 95. Leave the 215 as is. If the eastern "lake mead" bypass is ever completed, tie the ends into the current ends of I-215, and complete the circle of that route.

I believe the proposals for the eastern bypass would have a tie-in near Boulder City rather than going through Henderson.

[sparker]

It makes the most sense to route I-11 along I-515 and US 95. Leave the 215 as is. If the eastern "lake mead" bypass is ever completed, tie the ends into the current ends of I-215, and complete the circle of that route.

I believe the proposals for the eastern bypass would have a tie-in near Boulder City rather than going through Henderson.

Despite the offset, I-215 could still remain a complete beltway, as with I-435 around metro KC, with a multiplex on I-29, and I-410 around San Antonio, partially mpx'd with I-35. 

[jakeroot]

Has Clark County always planned to give up control of the 215 to NDOT? Regardless of whether it becomes I-11 or I-215.

[US 89]

Has Clark County always planned to give up control of the 215 to NDOT? Regardless of whether it becomes I-11 or I-215.

I believe the plan is for NDOT and Clark County to do a big mileage swap in which the state takes the rest of 215 in exchange for a bunch of urban arterial state highway mileage.

[ztonyg]

Has Clark County always planned to give up control of the 215 to NDOT? Regardless of whether it becomes I-11 or I-215.

I believe the plan is for NDOT and Clark County to do a big mileage swap in which the state takes the rest of 215 in exchange for a bunch of urban arterial state highway mileage.

Doesn't Clark County maintain about 1/2 of the road currently signed as I-215 as well as all of CC 215? Couldn't they simply continue that arrangement.

[sparker]

Has Clark County always planned to give up control of the 215 to NDOT? Regardless of whether it becomes I-11 or I-215.

I believe the plan is for NDOT and Clark County to do a big mileage swap in which the state takes the rest of 215 in exchange for a bunch of urban arterial state highway mileage.

Doesn't Clark County maintain about 1/2 of the road currently signed as I-215 as well as all of CC 215? Couldn't they simply continue that arrangement.

It's doubtful that Clark County wants to retain the current arrangement once the full 3/4 loop has been completed; that arrangement was originally for fiscal reasons centered around initial fund identification and disbursement.  Besides, NDOT has the means and skill set to fully maintain the facility once it is brought out to a full freeway.  Regardless of designation, they're the ones who will own the facility once completed. 

[andy3175]

Hi everyone,

Further discussion of Interstate 11 in Nevada should continue in the Pacific Southwest thread located below. Thanks! 

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7881.0

[Kniwt]

Kicking this dormant thread because ADOT has released the EIS and preferred corridor for Nogales-Wickenburg.

The Wickenburg Sun reports:
https://wickenburgsun.com/news/37963/interstate-11-study-route-available-for-public-view/

The Arizona Department of Transportation's preferred alternative route of Interstate 11 ties in with U.S. 93 northwest of State Route 89 and crosses U.S. 60 west of Wickenburg.

It would include interchanges near U.S. 60, State Route 89 and State Route 71.

... In June of 2019, the task force recommended to council and council agreed that the preferred alternative is the alternative that connects at U.S. 60 at mile post 103.5 just east of Black Mountain and would connect near mile post 186 on U.S. 93, the mayor said.

"The Town supports pushing the roadway towards the west to avoid sound/sight concerns with our residents and surrounding community members,"  Pereira said. "Much work still needs to be done and the final location of the highway has not been set."

ADOT and the Federal Highway Administration shifted the connection with U.S. 93 one mile away from the homes in the Vista Royale neighborhood to reduce impacts to those residents while following natural terrain, and reducing impacts to floodplains, wildlife linkages, and Sonoran Desert tortoise habitat, according to the study.

ADOT release: https://azdot.gov/adot-news/interstate-11-final-tier-1-environmental-impact-statement-available-public-review

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^^^
2 things right off the bat:  (1) Looks like it'll still intersect I-10 west of Buckeye, but will multiplex east on that route to AZ 85, using the latter for several miles before striking out southeast toward Maricopa, as opposed to the completely new alignment shown previously.  And (2) it also appears that the southern developer-friendly extension is still in play (although I'm guessing in reality it'll never get farther south than Casa Grande).  Any option heading down US 60 directly toward Phoenix seems to be out the door, possibly because as with the rationale described for Wickenburg, AZDOT has no intention of placing this (or any) freeway anywhere near an existing housing area, thus putting the onus for any future noise complaints in the laps of developers who would place tracts next to the freeway corridor.  Given the massive amount of retirees arrayed along Grand Ave. (and as a group we old farts tend to lodge formal complaints more than other demographics), running a freeway through Surprise and/or the Sun City tracts may well have been a non-starter -- hence the Hassayampa alignment.  At least the EIS is a first step toward getting something started re I-11, although it may not align with what a lot of us thought optimal -- but again, aiming directly at Phoenix, even only as far as Loop 303, may not have been considered politically feasible. 

[vdeane]

Yikes.  If they want it to come out that far west, they should send it down AZ 85 and end it at I-8 near Gila Bend.  And even if they still persist in having it parallel to I-10, having it south of I-8 is still not necessary - and what's REALLY not necessary is sending it down I-19.  Why are they so desperate to get rid of I-19, anyways?  Are they hoping that this will be the chance to get rid of the km-based distance markers and exit numbers like they've been wanting to do for years?

[KeithE4Phx]

Yikes.  If they want it to come out that far west, they should send it down AZ 85 and end it at I-8 near Gila Bend.

Exactly.  There is zero need whatsoever for I-11 to continue south of I-8, regardless of whether the end point is at Gila Bend or Casa Grande.

But before they do anything else, they absolutely need to finish 4-laning US 93 between Wickenburg and I-40.  There are still 3 short segments (the I-40 ramps, one just north of Wickieup, and through or around Wickieup itself), plus one long segment (Joshua Forest Hwy) that are still two lanes.  These segments are becoming more deadly.  On July 10, that entire stretch of 93 was closed due to two fatal accidents, one just south of the I-40 ramps, and one just north of AZ 71.  Both accidents occurred on the two-lane segments.  The road was closed all day.

Fix 93 first, then upgrade to I-11.  Too bad ADOT has no plans as of now to do either.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^^ surely ADOT will upgrade the corridor between Phoenix and Vegas to interstate standards before they build I-11 south of I-8.

[sparker]

Yikes.  If they want it to come out that far west, they should send it down AZ 85 and end it at I-8 near Gila Bend.  And even if they still persist in having it parallel to I-10, having it south of I-8 is still not necessary - and what's REALLY not necessary is sending it down I-19.  Why are they so desperate to get rid of I-19, anyways?  Are they hoping that this will be the chance to get rid of the km-based distance markers and exit numbers like they've been wanting to do for years?

Whether the Buckeye-Casa Grande I-11 segment actually gets past the initial planning stage will, in all likelihood, depend upon two things:  first, whether the population influx into the area continues unabated, prompting new housing in areas such as Buckeye and Maricopa, and, second, whether regional traffic reaches a tipping point where such a segment would be viewed more as a south Phoenix bypass rather than just an I-11 extension.  If both those conditions are met, then the diagonal connector would be more likely to see actual development.  If not, then the suggestion to simply continue I-11 down AZ 85 to I-8 at Gila Bend would be the most probable outcome, if for no other reason that it is largely developed (partially utilizing the TX frontage-road-first methodology) as is, with a full interchange at I-10, with the sole new-terrain section being the connector to I-8.  And if the area's growth slows down, AZDOT will likely be looking at more cost-effective alternatives, with AZ 85 an obvious candidate.  And Phoenix would still have its bypass, albeit a bit longer and less direct. 

And I-19 will likely be safe for at least another 2 or 3 decades; by that time, the parallel corridor concept will have encountered fiscal reality and be discarded or at least severely truncated.

^^^^ surely ADOT will upgrade the corridor between Phoenix and Vegas to interstate standards before they build I-11 south of I-8.

One would surely hope it'll work out that way.  The original brief was to upgrade the non-Interstate portion of the Canamex (HPC #26) corridor from Phoenix to Vegas to Interstate standards and slap I-11 shields on the finished project.  The fact that the most difficult (and spectacular!) singular section, the Colorado River bridge, was finished the year before the corridor designation push was undoubtedly one of the catalysts for the full project.  South of Phoenix the brief was to use any available corridor-related funds to upgrade the present (I-19 and I-10) facilities -- but the concept was "hijacked" by in-state parties who wanted to use that segment for commercial and housing development purposes -- particularly in terms of providing a western loop around Tucson and its slow-growth program, giving the developers a venue at which to ply their trade.  Nevertheless, AZDOT keeps plugging away at US 93, filling in the 2-lane gaps as funds allow with Interstate-geometry divided expressway (minus, of course, grade separations planned for later phases), which will enhance the safety of the corridor while "prepping" it for eventual full upgrade.  That, and the longstanding expressway section north of Kingman are the "farthest along" sections of I-11, to be joined by the Kingman I-40 interchange in the next few years.  This approach seems eminently reasonable -- take care of the immediate safety needs of the corridor first and do the final upgrades later.  While the EIS for the southern segment is now in process, it'll still be quite a while before any dirt is turned for anything south of Wickenburg, so actual construction along the northern reaches, limited in scope as it is, is a welcome occurrence from any standpoint.

[KeithE4Phx]

^^^^ surely ADOT will upgrade the corridor between Phoenix and Vegas to interstate standards before they build I-11 south of I-8.

I believe they're going to work from north to south for the most part.  It looks like work on what will be the I-11/40 bypass ramps on the north side of Kingman is going to start soon (the linked article says 2023, but I've heard that it might start early next year).  That will eliminate the Beale Street bottleneck at I-40.  When I drove to Vegas a couple weeks ago, 93 southbound was backed up past AZ 68 due to an accident, and it took hours to reopen.  Fortunately, I was going north.

https://azdot.gov/projects/northwest-district-projects/us-93-i-40-west-kingman-traffic-interchange-project

[Plutonic Panda]

I saw that and isn't there a project to widen I-40 to eight lanes in Kingman?

[vdeane]

Yikes.  If they want it to come out that far west, they should send it down AZ 85 and end it at I-8 near Gila Bend.  And even if they still persist in having it parallel to I-10, having it south of I-8 is still not necessary - and what's REALLY not necessary is sending it down I-19.  Why are they so desperate to get rid of I-19, anyways?  Are they hoping that this will be the chance to get rid of the km-based distance markers and exit numbers like they've been wanting to do for years?

Whether the Buckeye-Casa Grande I-11 segment actually gets past the initial planning stage will, in all likelihood, depend upon two things:  first, whether the population influx into the area continues unabated, prompting new housing in areas such as Buckeye and Maricopa, and, second, whether regional traffic reaches a tipping point where such a segment would be viewed more as a south Phoenix bypass rather than just an I-11 extension.  If both those conditions are met, then the diagonal connector would be more likely to see actual development.  If not, then the suggestion to simply continue I-11 down AZ 85 to I-8 at Gila Bend would be the most probable outcome, if for no other reason that it is largely developed (partially utilizing the TX frontage-road-first methodology) as is, with a full interchange at I-10, with the sole new-terrain section being the connector to I-8.  And if the area's growth slows down, AZDOT will likely be looking at more cost-effective alternatives, with AZ 85 an obvious candidate.  And Phoenix would still have its bypass, albeit a bit longer and less direct. 

And I-19 will likely be safe for at least another 2 or 3 decades; by that time, the parallel corridor concept will have encountered fiscal reality and be discarded or at least severely truncated.

The Gila Bend routing would also be advantageous from the perspective of providing an all-interstate route between Phoenix and San Diego.  I suppose they could make a 3di of the remaining piece if they went with the diagonal route, though AZ has been 3di-phobic in the past.

[kkt]

I always thought the Gila Bend route made the most sense.  If Arizona wants a route primarily to facilitate real estate development outside Tucson's low-growth zone, that's up to them, but it doesn't need an Interstate shield.

[KeithE4Phx]

I always thought the Gila Bend route made the most sense.  If Arizona wants a route primarily to facilitate real estate development outside Tucson's low-growth zone, that's up to them, but it doesn't need an Interstate shield.

It does make the most sense.  Besides, Tucson and Pima County are so pathologically anti-freeway, that I think we'll see the Detroit Lions defeat the Cleveland Browns in the Super Bowl before they ever agree to this proposal.

[Bobby5280]

Any option heading down US 60 directly toward Phoenix seems to be out the door, possibly because as with the rationale described for Wickenburg, AZDOT has no intention of placing this (or any) freeway anywhere near an existing housing area, thus putting the onus for any future noise complaints in the laps of developers who would place tracts next to the freeway corridor.  Given the massive amount of retirees arrayed along Grand Ave. (and as a group we old farts tend to lodge formal complaints more than other demographics), running a freeway through Surprise and/or the Sun City tracts may well have been a non-starter -- hence the Hassayampa alignment.

The thing that generates noise is traffic. A busy 6-lane surface street with traffic signals can generate just as much noise as a super highway, and maybe even MORE noise in certain circumstances. Horns honk when a driver fails to notice a light turned green. Fender benders and serious accidents at intersections generate plenty of racket.

US-60 is pretty much a lost cause inside the 303 loop (going thru Surprise and Sun City). I think it would be ridiculous for AZDOT to not bring US-60 up to Interstate standards from the 303 loop going Northwest up to Wickenburg. The main purpose of building I-11 is a direct super highway link between Las Vegas and Phoenix. Not Vegas to freaking Gila Bend.

I think it's easy to guarantee if I-11 is built as proposed (in that Final Tier EIS preferred corridor alternative map) traffic counts will be a LOT different on I-11 North of Wickenburg versus South of Wickenburg. There will be far fewer vehicles on I-11 South of Wickenburg. Most will leave I-11 for US-60 because they're driving TO Phoenix. Not around it.

[triplemultiplex]

I-11 won't even be on the inset for Phoenix in the Rand Mac.  So much for connecting Phoenix and Vegas, as advertised.  Apparently it's a Las Vegas to Nogales interstate first and foremost.   

[sprjus4]

I think it's easy to guarantee if I-11 is built as proposed (in that Final Tier EIS preferred corridor alternative map) traffic counts will be a LOT different on I-11 North of Wickenburg versus South of Wickenburg. There will be far fewer vehicles on I-11 South of Wickenburg. Most will leave I-11 for US-60 because they're driving TO Phoenix. Not around it.

I would estimate most traffic would follow I-11 to I-10, then head east. It's less direct, but it'd be significantly faster than slogging up city streets.

Look at the US-95 freeway in Las Vegas. Is traffic following Business US-95 because it's more "direct"  despite being much slower?

[Sub-Urbanite]

I think it's easy to guarantee if I-11 is built as proposed (in that Final Tier EIS preferred corridor alternative map) traffic counts will be a LOT different on I-11 North of Wickenburg versus South of Wickenburg. There will be far fewer vehicles on I-11 South of Wickenburg. Most will leave I-11 for US-60 because they're driving TO Phoenix. Not around it.

I would estimate most traffic would follow I-11 to I-10, then head east. It's less direct, but it'd be significantly faster than slogging up city streets.

Look at the US-95 freeway in Las Vegas. Is traffic following Business US-95 because it's more "direct"  despite being much slower?

People will go how Waze tells them to go. I mean, there's a diminishing return situation from Wickenburg to Phoenix:

54 miles direct down Grand
61 miles via 60 / 101
66 miles via 60 / 303
67 miles via 60 / 74 / 17
80ish miles via the preferred alternative

So what's your tolerance for surface streets? Knowing how slow Grand is, I'd probably (if I wasn't looking at Waze) do the 60/303 option.

All that being said, it's also easy to imagine that your average speed going 54 miles down Grand is going to be close to 40 mph, but your average speed on I-11 to I-10 will be 75ish.

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^^^
The thing is -- while incorporated Phoenix itself is about 1.45M population, it's the whole metro area that is the traffic generator/destination.  In that respect, it's a smaller-scale L.A. -- inbound visitor traffic generally isn't heading downtown (OK, maybe to Staples Center for a game) but to the areas generally within a 55-60-mile radius (Disneyland, the beaches, yada yada).  Unless there is a push from urban quarters within Phoenix (if such exist and have any significant clout) to point I-11 at the city center, it'll probably go more or less where the EIS shows.  BTW, the last census showed Buckeye at a hair under 60K population by itself!  The whole area, for better or worse, is the poster child for suburban sprawl -- reflecting the pull that developers have with the various levels of governance at local and state levels (need more revenue?.....plant more houses).  Placing a freeway -- even one purported to be an interregional server like I-11 -- out at the present periphery of development is hardly a new and radical concept -- hell, this area's mirroring that at its other end with AZ 24!  Metro Phoenix is still in its "boomtown" phase -- and there's no apparent push to rein that in.  Of course, like any bubble, it will eventually burst -- but that bubble, in a similar fashion to SoCal, will leave behind residential areas that are at least a 90-minute commute from job centers; those areas won't be reverting to pure desert anytime soon. 

Another way of looking at it requires a bit of defocusing on the way the area has been laid out, facility-wise.  The arterial "spines" at the west/northwest end are Loops 101 & 303; US 60/Grand Ave. cuts across them, providing a place to put things.  Defocus a bit more, and one will see that the I-11 alignment and AZ 74 functionally make up another outside loop;  I wouldn't be one bit surprised to see the latter built out to the same standards as the existing loops as a way to dissipate/distribute traffic in that corner of the metro area -- and as the "other" way to get over to the east side without having to screw around with I-10, Loop 202, or the more urbanized portion of I-17.  East of Wickenburg it's easy to see AZ 74 replaced by "Loop 404"!  Metro PHX has developed a quasi-"grid" pattern; running a freeway down Grand Ave. doesn't fit that pattern, even outside Loop 303.  It doesn't matter whether or not we outside observes approve of that pattern; it's what they've elected to do.       

[ztonyg]

^^^^^^^^^^^
The thing is -- while incorporated Phoenix itself is about 1.45M population, it's the whole metro area that is the traffic generator/destination.  In that respect, it's a smaller-scale L.A. -- inbound visitor traffic generally isn't heading downtown (OK, maybe to Staples Center for a game) but to the areas generally within a 55-60-mile radius (Disneyland, the beaches, yada yada).  Unless there is a push from urban quarters within Phoenix (if such exist and have any significant clout) to point I-11 at the city center, it'll probably go more or less where the EIS shows.  BTW, the last census showed Buckeye at a hair under 60K population by itself!  The whole area, for better or worse, is the poster child for suburban sprawl -- reflecting the pull that developers have with the various levels of governance at local and state levels (need more revenue?.....plant more houses).  Placing a freeway -- even one purported to be an interregional server like I-11 -- out at the present periphery of development is hardly a new and radical concept -- hell, this area's mirroring that at its other end with AZ 24!  Metro Phoenix is still in its "boomtown" phase -- and there's no apparent push to rein that in.  Of course, like any bubble, it will eventually burst -- but that bubble, in a similar fashion to SoCal, will leave behind residential areas that are at least a 90-minute commute from job centers; those areas won't be reverting to pure desert anytime soon. 

However the "preferred" alternative has I-11 west of Wickenberg. So for most people the fastest route to Kingman / Las Vegas will still involve a trek on AZ 74 / US 60 to Wickenberg. Unless the AZ 74 / US 60 connection to I-11 is built to freeway standards I-11 really doesn't serve a lot of purpose to most Phoenix area travelers.

My preferred alternative would be to route I-11 east of Wickenberg and down US 60 to the Loop 303 corridor and then head south potentially turning east down the AZ 30 corridor and ending at the Durango curve.

Another way of looking at it requires a bit of defocusing on the way the area has been laid out, facility-wise.  The arterial "spines" at the west/northwest end are Loops 101 & 303; US 60/Grand Ave. cuts across them, providing a place to put things.  Defocus a bit more, and one will see that the I-11 alignment and AZ 74 functionally make up another outside loop;  I wouldn't be one bit surprised to see the latter built out to the same standards as the existing loops as a way to dissipate/distribute traffic in that corner of the metro area -- and as the "other" way to get over to the east side without having to screw around with I-10, Loop 202, or the more urbanized portion of I-17.  East of Wickenburg it's easy to see AZ 74 replaced by "Loop 404"!  Metro PHX has developed a quasi-"grid" pattern; running a freeway down Grand Ave. doesn't fit that pattern, even outside Loop 303.  It doesn't matter whether or not we outside observes approve of that pattern; it's what they've elected to do.       

Honestly what I don't like about the proposal above is that I-11 splits off the US 60 / US 93 route west of Wickenberg so it isn't really even a good conduit of Phoenix - Wickenberg traffic. The I-11 alignment from west of Wickenberg to I-10 seems like a waste. I do like the fact that the preferred alternative seems to utilize the AZ 85 corridor between I-10 and I-8. Honestly if Arizona was to ever get a 3di I-208 makes perfect sense for this corridor and a 4 - 6 lane freeway really is needed in this corridor.

I really think that US 93 / 60 east of Wickenberg to Loop 303 south is the best routing for I-11. If the AZ 85 corridor is upgraded to a freeway there really isn't much value for I-11 south of I-8.

[sparker]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What I was trying to get at earlier is that the I-11 concept has been interpreted, both by AZDOT and the Feds, as connecting metro Phoenix with Vegas -- and metro Phoenix sprawls in all directions.  If the EIS is accepted, then that's pretty much the end of any possibility that the I-11 trunk will simply follow US 60 SE toward central Phoenix.  At this point downtown/central Phoenix just isn't the project focus -- likely the opposite.  The use of eminent domain within an incorporated city has always been problematic; since the city of Surprise has pretty much annexed everything along US 60 between AZ 74 and Sun City, including any junction point with Loop 303, they would have to accede to any taking of property within the city as well as street closures.  Something tells me AZDOT would rather not have to deal with the ramifications of suburban freeway alignments, so they're choosing to simply avoid it by planning a route where there is currently little in the way of improvement -- property acquisition will cost less, and the noses tweaked in the process will be minimized.  DOT's in general are "adversity-adverse"; they'd rather endure criticism than litigation.  If development hadn't extended along US 60, and the city of Surprise was simply a few small tracts, AZDOT would have likely marched I-11 straight down to and along Loop 303; any extension south toward Maricopa would have just been an extension of that loop.  But as it happened, that wasn't the case -- and the Hassayampa valley was selected as the most reasonable alternative; now that the corridor is intended to utilize more in the way of existing routes in the Buckeye area, it indicates that AZDOT at least recognizes some semblance of fiscal reality. 

A separate I-11 corridor south of I-8 is simply gratuitous; just another place to put more housing.  But then, expecting different behavior from developers is an exercise in futility; if they can't get what they want through the front door, they simply carve out plans for a new back door!