Interstate 11

[Plutonic Panda]

I supplied a thread for National Water Policies in the Off-Topic Regional Board: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29861.0. I suggest the other posters utilize it (I don't understand why it hasn't been utilized), and leave this thread for comments on Interstate 11.

Maybe a moderator should move all the off topic posts to that thread. I can't rkeener if I started and to be frank if a tad tipsy so I don't want to go back and look but if I did my bad. I agree this is off topic t1 I-11

[sparker]

I supplied a thread for National Water Policies in the Off-Topic Regional Board: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29861.0. I suggest the other posters utilize it (I don't understand why it hasn't been utilized), and leave this thread for comments on Interstate 11.

Maybe a moderator should move all the off topic posts to that thread. I can't rkeener if I started and to be frank if a tad tipsy so I don't want to go back and look but if I did my bad. I agree this is off topic t1 I-11

If it's directly relevant to the progress of I-11 or to the environment where corridor routings, developmental schedules, and rationales are discussed, then there should be no problem mentioning water-related issues within that context.  However, this thread isn't the place for general water discussions (like the Chicagoland particulars); that needs to be parsed out into the dedicated thread.

[Plutonic Panda]

I supplied a thread for National Water Policies in the Off-Topic Regional Board: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29861.0. I suggest the other posters utilize it (I don't understand why it hasn't been utilized), and leave this thread for comments on Interstate 11.

Maybe a moderator should move all the off topic posts to that thread. I can't rkeener if I started and to be frank if a tad tipsy so I don't want to go back and look but if I did my bad. I agree this is off topic t1 I-11

If it's directly relevant to the progress of I-11 or to the environment where corridor routings, developmental schedules, and rationales are discussed, then there should be no problem mentioning water-related issues within that context.  However, this thread isn't the place for general water discussions (like the Chicagoland particulars); that needs to be parsed out into the dedicated thread.

I wonder if Arizona would go for a water pipeline or the like bundled with an I-11 project from Vegas to Phoenix.

[sparker]

I supplied a thread for National Water Policies in the Off-Topic Regional Board: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29861.0. I suggest the other posters utilize it (I don't understand why it hasn't been utilized), and leave this thread for comments on Interstate 11.

Maybe a moderator should move all the off topic posts to that thread. I can't rkeener if I started and to be frank if a tad tipsy so I don't want to go back and look but if I did my bad. I agree this is off topic t1 I-11

If it's directly relevant to the progress of I-11 or to the environment where corridor routings, developmental schedules, and rationales are discussed, then there should be no problem mentioning water-related issues within that context.  However, this thread isn't the place for general water discussions (like the Chicagoland particulars); that needs to be parsed out into the dedicated thread.

I wonder if Arizona would go for a water pipeline or the like bundled with an I-11 project from Vegas to Phoenix.

Seeing as how the Colorado River watershed is experiencing drought effects like most others in the region, that idea might, at least for the time being, be a non-starter.  Besides, the I-11 trajectory is hardly a flat profile; a southward water transfer would require multiple pumping stations.  If water from that river were to be drawn out for use in greater Phoenix, one of the downstream dams would likely provide a more efficient extraction point -- perhaps along the lower reaches of the Bill Williams River branch of Lake Havasu, which would necessitate about 100 miles less pipeline.  Nevertheless, no project of this type would even be considered in the present climate environment, much less one that would require a considerable amount of I-11 facility reconfiguration to accommodate a pipeline and its associated works.

[Occidental Tourist]

I supplied a thread for National Water Policies in the Off-Topic Regional Board: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29861.0. I suggest the other posters utilize it (I don't understand why it hasn't been utilized), and leave this thread for comments on Interstate 11.

Maybe a moderator should move all the off topic posts to that thread. I can't rkeener if I started and to be frank if a tad tipsy so I don't want to go back and look but if I did my bad. I agree this is off topic t1 I-11

If it's directly relevant to the progress of I-11 or to the environment where corridor routings, developmental schedules, and rationales are discussed, then there should be no problem mentioning water-related issues within that context.  However, this thread isn't the place for general water discussions (like the Chicagoland particulars); that needs to be parsed out into the dedicated thread.

I wonder if Arizona would go for a water pipeline or the like bundled with an I-11 project from Vegas to Phoenix.

Arizona seems to be getting its water needs met from the Colorado River by the Central Arizona Project.  Any further capacity via a second route would likely outstrip the state's entitlement to water from the river under the Colorado River Compact

[kdk]

There is no place to shoehorn an interstate-grade, freeway-to-freeway interchange in that small space where the 303/60 ramps are.  The current interchange is surrounded on three sides by residential areas, which would have to be condemned and destroyed.  Not gonna happen.

There is enough room to build a standard "Y" interchange with ramps on the NW and NE sides of the Loop 303/US-60 interchange. It doesn't have to be a 5 level directional stack.

Those lights are at 163rd Ave in Surprise, less than 1/2 mile from the 303, and at Center St. in Wittman.  I'm willing to bet that a 3rd light will be added at AZ 74 in Morristown in the not-too-distant future.

So 3 traffic signals instead of two. Not all that big a deal. I think it beats having to drive way out past Barry Goldwater peak before starting to cut back East toward the city.

I drive between Phoenix and Las Vegas and points north often, just did last week.

The US 60/Grand interchange has become an increasing bottleneck over the past few years.  It's gotten to the point that ADOT has added slow traffic signs and changed some lane striping on NB 303 as traffic exiting to US 60 has backed up quite a bit of a way onto NB 303, and it's worse every time.

I think as the corridor between the 303/60 interchange and Wickenburg continues to grow it will become less and less traveled if an alternative happens, I have already seen the speed limits get lowered over the past couple of years.  Combine that with still having to travel through most of actual Wickenburg at slow speeds and a full freeway even further west looks more attractive.

[andy3175]

I supplied a thread for National Water Policies in the Off-Topic Regional Board: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=29861.0. I suggest the other posters utilize it (I don't understand why it hasn't been utilized), and leave this thread for comments on Interstate 11.

Maybe a moderator should move all the off topic posts to that thread. I can't rkeener if I started and to be frank if a tad tipsy so I don't want to go back and look but if I did my bad. I agree this is off topic t1 I-11

If it's directly relevant to the progress of I-11 or to the environment where corridor routings, developmental schedules, and rationales are discussed, then there should be no problem mentioning water-related issues within that context.  However, this thread isn't the place for general water discussions (like the Chicagoland particulars); that needs to be parsed out into the dedicated thread.

I wonder if Arizona would go for a water pipeline or the like bundled with an I-11 project from Vegas to Phoenix.

Arizona seems to be getting its water needs met from the Colorado River by the Central Arizona Project.  Any further capacity via a second route would likely outstrip the state's entitlement to water from the river under the Colorado River Compact

Thanks all... please use the new link provided by Ghostbuster for any more water discussion. From here, we'll continue with Interstate 11.

SM-G975U

[mrsman]

There is no place to shoehorn an interstate-grade, freeway-to-freeway interchange in that small space where the 303/60 ramps are.  The current interchange is surrounded on three sides by residential areas, which would have to be condemned and destroyed.  Not gonna happen.

There is enough room to build a standard "Y" interchange with ramps on the NW and NE sides of the Loop 303/US-60 interchange. It doesn't have to be a 5 level directional stack.

Those lights are at 163rd Ave in Surprise, less than 1/2 mile from the 303, and at Center St. in Wittman.  I'm willing to bet that a 3rd light will be added at AZ 74 in Morristown in the not-too-distant future.

So 3 traffic signals instead of two. Not all that big a deal. I think it beats having to drive way out past Barry Goldwater peak before starting to cut back East toward the city.

I drive between Phoenix and Las Vegas and points north often, just did last week.

The US 60/Grand interchange has become an increasing bottleneck over the past few years.  It's gotten to the point that ADOT has added slow traffic signs and changed some lane striping on NB 303 as traffic exiting to US 60 has backed up quite a bit of a way onto NB 303, and it's worse every time.

I think as the corridor between the 303/60 interchange and Wickenburg continues to grow it will become less and less traveled if an alternative happens, I have already seen the speed limits get lowered over the past couple of years.  Combine that with still having to travel through most of actual Wickenburg at slow speeds and a full freeway even further west looks more attractive.

I believe that to be true.  A quick look at GSV shows practically all of the traffic on 303 in the right lane waiting to exit onto 60.  Incredible.  I think they need to widen the offramp to allow for two highway lanes to exit onto 60.

I wonder about the possibliity of upgrading Sun Valley Pkwy or extending Northern Pkwy as other ways of bettter connecting I-11 to Metro Phoenix.

[Sonic99]

Northern Parkway can't really go anywhere though unless they plow right through the White Tanks, which would never in a million years happen.

[sparker]

Northern Parkway can't really go anywhere though unless they plow right through the White Tanks, which would never in a million years happen.

The tribal governments would be apoplectic if that were to be seriously proposed.  At this time, given all the info provided in the last series of posts, the likely scenario for I-11 would be as follows:

1:  The Wickenburg bypass will be built first, with an initial connector over to US 60 near the AZ 74 junction.
2:  I-11 itself will be built south via the Hassayampa alignment to I-10; an interchange will be built there, a few miles west of the present AZ 85 junction.
3:  That configuration will sit there for several years or even past a decade.  The next step, funding willing, will be conditional:
4(a):  Phoenix in general continues its outsized growth pattern; the area including Maricopa down to Casa Grande increasingly becomes filled with housing and related facilities, making a Phoenix bypass a desired feature.  I-11 extends, per the most recent routing map, east on I-10 and south on AZ 85 before veering off SE to head through Maricopa and terminate at I-8 between Stanfield and Casa Grande, or --
4(b):  The growth shrinks substantially; the open tracts south of Phoenix remain largely vacant.  After much hemming and hawing, and soul-searching (if a DOT can have one!) over the course of a few years, it's decided to simply continue I-11 down AZ 85 to Gila Bend* and I-8 as a "virtual" Phoenix bypass and an Interstate connector Phoenix>San Diego. 

*Been looking at the flooding in that town the last day or so.  Never would have though it (but I also wouldn't have thought the Dixie fire would still be burning after a month -- it'll likely continue to do so until it runs out of fuel!)

[KeithE4Phx]

Northern Parkway can't really go anywhere though unless they plow right through the White Tanks, which would never in a million years happen.

The tribal governments would be apoplectic if that were to be seriously proposed. 

Not gonna happen.  I don't have any idea how it could even be possible.  A tunnel through South Mountain in Phoenix was proposed to extend 32nd St. years ago, and that never got past the proposal stage.  Not only did the Gila River tribal government protest, but with a couple dozen FM/TV towers sitting on top, there's no way it can be done.  Blasting could destroy the towers, even 1500 feet above ground level.

At this time, given all the info provided in the last series of posts, the likely scenario for I-11 would be as follows:

1:  The Wickenburg bypass will be built first, with an initial connector over to US 60 near the AZ 74 junction.
2:  I-11 itself will be built south via the Hassayampa alignment to I-10; an interchange will be built there, a few miles west of the present AZ 85 junction.
3:  That configuration will sit there for several years or even past a decade.  The next step, funding willing, will be conditional:
4(a):  Phoenix in general continues its outsized growth pattern; the area including Maricopa down to Casa Grande increasingly becomes filled with housing and related facilities, making a Phoenix bypass a desired feature.  I-11 extends, per the most recent routing map, east on I-10 and south on AZ 85 before veering off SE to head through Maricopa and terminate at I-8 between Stanfield and Casa Grande, or --
4(b):  The growth shrinks substantially; the open tracts south of Phoenix remain largely vacant.  After much hemming and hawing, and soul-searching (if a DOT can have one!) over the course of a few years, it's decided to simply continue I-11 down AZ 85 to Gila Bend* and I-8 as a "virtual" Phoenix bypass and an Interstate connector Phoenix>San Diego.

AFAIK, there is funding to upgrade the last two remaining 2-lane sections of US 93 north of Wickieup, including the I-40 ramps, but through/around Wickieup and (more importantly), the Joshua Forest Hwy section north of Wickenburg are not on anyone's radar.  Those have to be completed before any conversion to I-11 happens south of I-40.  The latter should be fast-tracked, and I have no idea why it isn't, given the number of wrecks there.

Beyond that, your proposals #1, 2, 3, and 4b are the more likely result.  I can't see I-11 ever being built south of I-8 because pathologically anti-freeway Pima County will never allow it.

[mrsman]

^^^^^^

4b is definitely the path of least resistance for further extensions of I-11.  To cement its role as both a Phoenix bypass and a San Diego- Phoenix connector, I-11 needs to have the following control cities signed:

SB towards I-10:  Phoenix

At the western I-10 interchange:

WB 10 Los Angeles
EB 10 SB 11 Phoenix
NB 11 Las Vegas

At the eastern I-10 interchange:

EB 10                Phoenix
EB 10 to SB 11  Gila Bend / Tucson
WB 10 to SB 11  Gila Bend / San Diego
WB 10 NB 11      Los Angeles / Las Vegas

At the I-8/I-11 interchange:

WB 8                San Diego
EB  8                Tucson
WB 8 to NB 11   Los Angeles / Las Vegas
EB 8 to NB 11    Phoenix / Las Vegas

At the I-8/I-10 interchange, the control city for I-8 is appropriately San Diego.  Supplemental signage should direct both Las Vegas and Los Angeles traffic to I-8 as part of the Phoenix bypass.

Under the 4b approach, I-11 can simply terminate at I-8.  No need to extend the designation any further than the Gila Bend area.

[sparker]

^^^^^^

4b is definitely the path of least resistance for further extensions of I-11.  To cement its role as both a Phoenix bypass and a San Diego- Phoenix connector, I-11 needs to have the following control cities signed:

SB towards I-10:  Phoenix

At the western I-10 interchange:

WB 10 Los Angeles
EB 10 SB 11 Phoenix
NB 11 Las Vegas

At the eastern I-10 interchange:

EB 10                Phoenix
EB 10 to SB 11  Gila Bend / Tucson
WB 10 to SB 11  Gila Bend / San Diego
WB 10 NB 11      Los Angeles / Las Vegas

At the I-8/I-11 interchange:

WB 8                San Diego
EB  8                Tucson
WB 8 to NB 11   Los Angeles / Las Vegas
EB 8 to NB 11    Phoenix / Las Vegas

At the I-8/I-10 interchange, the control city for I-8 is appropriately San Diego.  Supplemental signage should direct both Las Vegas and Los Angeles traffic to I-8 as part of the Phoenix bypass.

Under the 4b approach, I-11 can simply terminate at I-8.  No need to extend the designation any further than the Gila Bend area.

That signage plan really looks good.  Unless someone at AZDOT goes completely bonkers and plans an extension down AZ 85 to the border (given the Nogales extension, I wouldn't put it past anyone in that state), there's no rational reason for I-11 to continue past Gila Bend.  And, down the line, if new roads through the Maricopa area are required, they can be state highways, as per historic AZ preference anyway. 

[kernals12]

We need a National Water Network to move the H2O where it is needed. 

Rick

God no, we went through this in the 60s with NAWAPA. It was a dumb idea then and a dumber one now.

[Plutonic Panda]

We need a National Water Network to move the H2O where it is needed. 

Rick

God no, we went through this in the 60s with NAWAPA. It was a dumb idea then and a dumber one now.

There's a whole thread on this now with multiple mods telling people to lay off the subject and take the conversation to the appropriate thread.

[kdk]

There is no place to shoehorn an interstate-grade, freeway-to-freeway interchange in that small space where the 303/60 ramps are.  The current interchange is surrounded on three sides by residential areas, which would have to be condemned and destroyed.  Not gonna happen.

There is enough room to build a standard "Y" interchange with ramps on the NW and NE sides of the Loop 303/US-60 interchange. It doesn't have to be a 5 level directional stack.

Those lights are at 163rd Ave in Surprise, less than 1/2 mile from the 303, and at Center St. in Wittman.  I'm willing to bet that a 3rd light will be added at AZ 74 in Morristown in the not-too-distant future.

So 3 traffic signals instead of two. Not all that big a deal. I think it beats having to drive way out past Barry Goldwater peak before starting to cut back East toward the city.

I drive between Phoenix and Las Vegas and points north often, just did last week.

The US 60/Grand interchange has become an increasing bottleneck over the past few years.  It's gotten to the point that ADOT has added slow traffic signs and changed some lane striping on NB 303 as traffic exiting to US 60 has backed up quite a bit of a way onto NB 303, and it's worse every time.

I think as the corridor between the 303/60 interchange and Wickenburg continues to grow it will become less and less traveled if an alternative happens, I have already seen the speed limits get lowered over the past couple of years.  Combine that with still having to travel through most of actual Wickenburg at slow speeds and a full freeway even further west looks more attractive.

I believe that to be true.  A quick look at GSV shows practically all of the traffic on 303 in the right lane waiting to exit onto 60.  Incredible.  I think they need to widen the offramp to allow for two highway lanes to exit onto 60.

I wonder about the possibliity of upgrading Sun Valley Pkwy or extending Northern Pkwy as other ways of bettter connecting I-11 to Metro Phoenix.

I don't know if that would help enough.   There's already two left turn lanes, another lane would help but there's so much truck traffic and with a stoplight that the semis slow acceleration rates prevent a lot of traffic from getting through each green cycle.  It felt like recently they lengthened the amount of time the light is green from the exit ramp, but unless they figure out a free flowing ramp that doesn't have a stoplight this is going to get worse.  With the tracks adjacent to the 60 on the northeast side that's not an easy one to figure. 
It's like the Kingman 93/I-40 interchange, when you force interstate type traffic onto surface streets you can't easily build your way out of them.

Extending Sun Valley north would run it to about the 60/74 intersection and could help, but Sun Valley has a lot of new development along it now just north of I-10 in Buckeye and will end up eventually like a Bell Road with lots of stoplights and local traffic.

Probably the best plan was on the old Loop 404 plan.   There was a freeway that started at the 303/60 interchange and paralleled US 60 northwest then turned due west south of Morristown, eventually ending at I-11 (although on this plan the 11 corridor was also the Loop 404 at the time).  Not sure if the corridor is still feasible, but most of the land still seems open.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Shereth/PhoenixFreewayConcepts#mediaviewer/File:Phoenix_Metro_Area_Future_Freeway_System.svg

[Roadwarriors79]

FWIW I found this map of ADOT planned improvements to the US 93 corridor from Wickenburg to Kingman (updated Summer 2021):

https://azdot.gov/sites/default/files/media/2021/06/us-93-corridor-map-Update2.pdf

[kernals12]

There is no place to shoehorn an interstate-grade, freeway-to-freeway interchange in that small space where the 303/60 ramps are.  The current interchange is surrounded on three sides by residential areas, which would have to be condemned and destroyed.  Not gonna happen.

There is enough room to build a standard "Y" interchange with ramps on the NW and NE sides of the Loop 303/US-60 interchange. It doesn't have to be a 5 level directional stack.

Those lights are at 163rd Ave in Surprise, less than 1/2 mile from the 303, and at Center St. in Wittman.  I'm willing to bet that a 3rd light will be added at AZ 74 in Morristown in the not-too-distant future.

So 3 traffic signals instead of two. Not all that big a deal. I think it beats having to drive way out past Barry Goldwater peak before starting to cut back East toward the city.

I drive between Phoenix and Las Vegas and points north often, just did last week.

The US 60/Grand interchange has become an increasing bottleneck over the past few years.  It's gotten to the point that ADOT has added slow traffic signs and changed some lane striping on NB 303 as traffic exiting to US 60 has backed up quite a bit of a way onto NB 303, and it's worse every time.

I think as the corridor between the 303/60 interchange and Wickenburg continues to grow it will become less and less traveled if an alternative happens, I have already seen the speed limits get lowered over the past couple of years.  Combine that with still having to travel through most of actual Wickenburg at slow speeds and a full freeway even further west looks more attractive.

I believe that to be true.  A quick look at GSV shows practically all of the traffic on 303 in the right lane waiting to exit onto 60.  Incredible.  I think they need to widen the offramp to allow for two highway lanes to exit onto 60.

I wonder about the possibliity of upgrading Sun Valley Pkwy or extending Northern Pkwy as other ways of bettter connecting I-11 to Metro Phoenix.

I don't know if that would help enough.   There's already two left turn lanes, another lane would help but there's so much truck traffic and with a stoplight that the semis slow acceleration rates prevent a lot of traffic from getting through each green cycle.  It felt like recently they lengthened the amount of time the light is green from the exit ramp, but unless they figure out a free flowing ramp that doesn't have a stoplight this is going to get worse.  With the tracks adjacent to the 60 on the northeast side that's not an easy one to figure. 
It's like the Kingman 93/I-40 interchange, when you force interstate type traffic onto surface streets you can't easily build your way out of them.

Extending Sun Valley north would run it to about the 60/74 intersection and could help, but Sun Valley has a lot of new development along it now just north of I-10 in Buckeye and will end up eventually like a Bell Road with lots of stoplights and local traffic.

Probably the best plan was on the old Loop 404 plan.  There was a freeway that started at the 303/60 interchange and paralleled US 60 northwest then turned due west south of Morristown, eventually ending at I-11 (although on this plan the 11 corridor was also the Loop 404 at the time).  Not sure if the corridor is still feasible, but most of the land still seems open.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Shereth/PhoenixFreewayConcepts#mediaviewer/File:Phoenix_Metro_Area_Future_Freeway_System.svg

But think of all the sign thefts and jokes.

[GreenLanternCorps]

FWIW I found this map of ADOT planned improvements to the US 93 corridor from Wickenburg to Kingman (updated Summer 2021):

https://azdot.gov/sites/default/files/media/2021/06/us-93-corridor-map-Update2.pdf

Which begs the question, how much of US 93 and other parts of the I-11 corridor are up to Interstate standards?

[rower155]

Which begs the question, how much of US 93 and other parts of the I-11 corridor are up to Interstate standards?

The short answer is almost none of it.  Most, if not all, of US 93 does not have access control, which would need to be established for the whole corridor.

For a geometric perspective, the 4 lane sections were designed at 65mph or 70mph. The horizontal and vertical geometry, typical section and such, would be sufficient for an interstate freeway standard.

[Mark68]

^^^^ 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

I hope this gets done sooner rather than later. I just went through there a couple of weeks ago (went from Monument Valley to Vegas by way of the Grand Canyon) and that WB 40 offramp to NB 93 was backed up a good mile on I-40.

[KeithE4Phx]

Which begs the question, how much of US 93 and other parts of the I-11 corridor are up to Interstate standards?

The short answer is almost none of it.  Most, if not all, of US 93 does not have access control, which would need to be established for the whole corridor.

Full interchanges will be needed at AZ 71, 89, 97, and maybe a few county roads closer to I-40. 

The current US 93 segment that goes into Wickenburg and ends at US 60 will have to be accommodated as well.  I-11 will likely veer due south at that point, with the current road going southeast (it will eventually have to be renumbered as something other than US 93 if ADOT keeps control of it).  Where that point is (Vulture Mine Rd?  Right at AZ 89?) is yet to be determined.

The interchange at I-40 will have to be improved, and something will have to be done about Wickieup, since the highway goes straight through town.

Then, there are about 3 dozen ranch turnoffs along the route that will need to be accommodated.  Probably will have to remain at-grade since most of the property gates are only a few feet off the highway on either side.

[KeithE4Phx]

Probably the best plan was on the old Loop 404 plan.   There was a freeway that started at the 303/60 interchange and paralleled US 60 northwest then turned due west south of Morristown, eventually ending at I-11 (although on this plan the 11 corridor was also the Loop 404 at the time).  Not sure if the corridor is still feasible, but most of the land still seems open.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Shereth/PhoenixFreewayConcepts#mediaviewer/File:Phoenix_Metro_Area_Future_Freeway_System.svg

That is a very old map.  What was proposed as the Loop 404 and AZ 174 is now a possible route for I-11.  I believe the northern segment of the 404, from AZ 174 to 303, has been dropped.

AZ 801 is now AZ 30, and AZ 802 is now AZ 24.  I've never seen any real proposals for either AZ 274 or AZ 803.

The Pinal North-South Fwy (shown as AZ 88) has been approved, but on a slightly different route completely separate from AZ 87 south of Coolidge, and connecting to a bypass of Gold Canyon that would be a new segment of US 60. 

It would have been interesting to number that freeway as 88 (unlikely now, with the new routing).  I can't think of any numbered road in the country that is a freeway at one end and a dirt road at the other.

[Zonie]

Probably the best plan was on the old Loop 404 plan.   There was a freeway that started at the 303/60 interchange and paralleled US 60 northwest then turned due west south of Morristown, eventually ending at I-11 (although on this plan the 11 corridor was also the Loop 404 at the time).  Not sure if the corridor is still feasible, but most of the land still seems open.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Shereth/PhoenixFreewayConcepts#mediaviewer/File:Phoenix_Metro_Area_Future_Freeway_System.svg

That is a very old map.  What was proposed as the Loop 404 and AZ 174 is now a possible route for I-11.  I believe the northern segment of the 404, from AZ 174 to 303, has been dropped.

AZ 801 is now AZ 30, and AZ 802 is now AZ 24.  I've never seen any real proposals for either AZ 274 or AZ 803.

The Pinal North-South Fwy (shown as AZ 88) has been approved, but on a slightly different route completely separate from AZ 87 south of Coolidge, and connecting to a bypass of Gold Canyon that would be a new segment of US 60. 

It would have been interesting to number that freeway as 88 (unlikely now, with the new routing).  I can't think of any numbered road in the country that is a freeway at one end and a dirt road at the other.

The north end of I-229 used to be, but I believe it's now paved. 

[kernals12]

Record of Decision baby!

https://azdot.gov/adot-news/adot-and-fhwa-publish-interstate-11-record-decision

And with Arizona getting showered with billions in federal infrastructure funds, money should not be an issue.