News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

Interstate 11 alignment, though Vegas and points north

Started by swbrotha100, October 16, 2012, 09:51:18 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

hobsini2

I knew it. I'm surrounded by assholes. Keep firing, assholes! - Dark Helmet (Spaceballs)


kkt

Quote from: hobsini2 on June 15, 2024, 03:18:47 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 15, 2024, 01:28:36 AM
Quote from: hobsini2 on June 14, 2024, 07:38:18 PMGoldfield NV (WEST of town)

Goldfield has a town now? When'd that start?
Looks like a sizeable pain in the ass to not build a bypass around.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Goldfield,+NV+89013/@37.7108198,-117.2478966,15z/data=!4m6!3m5!1s0x80beb451d0bb660f:0xf02c9ea8aa5aa0a0!8m2!3d37.7084481!4d-117.2357131!16zL20vMDF5X2Ix?entry=ttu

Looks like a spot that was made to have a U.S. route through it where you slow down for a few blocks and maybe get a nice cold lemonade at the diner.


SSR_317

If they went to all this trouble to detail I-11 all the way to Mercury, why the heck didn't they just take it another 8 miles to the terminus of SR 160, which runs south from there to Pahrump? I know the 4-lane divided US 95 ends just west of the Mercury interchange, but still, SR 160 seems to be a more logical end point for this section of the future Interstate than the isolated Mercury.

cl94

Quote from: SSR_317 on June 15, 2024, 05:56:17 PMIf they went to all this trouble to detail I-11 all the way to Mercury, why the heck didn't they just take it another 8 miles to the terminus of SR 160, which runs south from there to Pahrump? I know the 4-lane divided US 95 ends just west of the Mercury interchange, but still, SR 160 seems to be a more logical end point for this section of the future Interstate than the isolated Mercury.

Because traffic counts drop pretty dramatically at Indian Springs and you start running into ROW issues past Mercury. A conversion south of Mercury can be done in place with minimal additional ROW. There's also a canyon between Mercury and SR 160 that may require blasting to be made wide enough for a 4-lane freeway with full shoulders.

As I have said before, NDOT is doing enough to show politicians that they're working on the conversion and little more. The minute you get past Mercury, the work and money required grow exponentially due to the need for additional ROW and environmental studies. And those environmental studies will be contested given the presence of several endangered/ endemic species along US 95.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

PColumbus73

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 15, 2024, 02:14:31 PM
Quote from: TheStranger on June 15, 2024, 01:51:01 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 15, 2024, 12:55:49 AMIt'd absolutely hilarious how so many are getting worked up here about building a road in a road discussion forum.

Not everyone in this forum is gung ho about road construction for various reasons (people who are against the impacts of eminent domain/relocation, some mass transit advocates, etc.).   

Others just think that this project might not be as important as others they are more interested in or want to see more funding for.  But that's also the reality of having 50 states with competing interests and different approaches to their highway networks too.

I bring up California's situations a lot on this forum not because I fully like or dislike everything out here, but more to be realistic about what can and can't happen in this current age.  Nevada is different (look at how they already planned for things going north of Summerlin and thereabouts), but planning is always going to be different from whether lines on a map have the funding to turn into real routes.

The only reason I'm against I-11 north of Las Vegas is because it isn't needed nor will ever be. The idea is FritzOwlian at best.

A lot of people would do themselves a favor to dig into the three main proposals to drag I-70 across Nevada during the 1960s qnd early 1970s.  All of those had that the same "build it and they will come" mindset that has taken over all talk/scoping on I-11.

Also, why do some of the posters on this forum seem to think all of us want nothing but freeways and Interstates?  We are literally talking about a part of Nevada that rivals much Alaska for low population density.

Speaking of Alaska, I think we should run I-11 along the Dalton Hwy to the Arctic Circle. The Arctic Ocean is the only ocean in the country not served by an interstate and would be infinitely safer to be stuck in a blizzard in [/joke]

vdeane

Quote from: cl94 on June 15, 2024, 07:30:08 PM
Quote from: SSR_317 on June 15, 2024, 05:56:17 PMIf they went to all this trouble to detail I-11 all the way to Mercury, why the heck didn't they just take it another 8 miles to the terminus of SR 160, which runs south from there to Pahrump? I know the 4-lane divided US 95 ends just west of the Mercury interchange, but still, SR 160 seems to be a more logical end point for this section of the future Interstate than the isolated Mercury.

Because traffic counts drop pretty dramatically at Indian Springs and you start running into ROW issues past Mercury. A conversion south of Mercury can be done in place with minimal additional ROW. There's also a canyon between Mercury and SR 160 that may require blasting to be made wide enough for a 4-lane freeway with full shoulders.

As I have said before, NDOT is doing enough to show politicians that they're working on the conversion and little more. The minute you get past Mercury, the work and money required grow exponentially due to the need for additional ROW and environmental studies. And those environmental studies will be contested given the presence of several endangered/ endemic species along US 95.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Not to mention that there's plenty of precedence for interstates ending at military bases.  In fact, I really don't see much need for I-11 to go past Mercury at all.  Just don't then sign anything near I-80 and then create a semi-permanent gap, so IMO, if anything gets built on that end, it should have a separate number unless the middle part (which really isn't necessary) gets finished.  Maybe north of Mercury could get the CR 215 treatment.

Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 15, 2024, 08:04:40 PMSpeaking of Alaska, I think we should run I-11 along the Dalton Hwy to the Arctic Circle. The Arctic Ocean is the only ocean in the country not served by an interstate and would be infinitely safer to be stuck in a blizzard in [/joke]
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12994.msg314359#msg314359
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

US 395

Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 14, 2024, 01:54:51 PM
Quote from: US 395 on June 14, 2024, 01:51:30 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 14, 2024, 01:31:07 PM
Quote from: US 395 on June 14, 2024, 01:27:55 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on June 14, 2024, 09:37:24 AMThe current routing OR 39 and US 97 take more or less functions as a bypass of the original alignment through downtown.  The amount of traffic doesn't really justify doing much to either.  OR 39 towards CA 139 is boasted as the preferred route to Reno from the area.

OR 39/CA 139 is the way to go. It's the road I go on between Susanville and Klamath Falls whenever I go to Salem from Reno.

Yes, and it is a total cake walk at that.  Freight tends to cut over to US 395 via CA 299 near Canby.  OR 39/CA 139 were more or less improved around the same time to permit a handy cutoff route for all traffic.

https://www.gribblenation.org/2021/09/oregon-route-39-and-california-state.html?m=1

I remember around three years ago there was some improvements being done on 139 by Adin and I believe by Eagle Lake. The one thing that definitely needs improvement is the cell service.

That used to be a major problem on US 95 for a long time between Las Vegas and Fallon.  Since about 2016 it hasn't been too bad in most of those valleys.
Yeah, I remember that. I also have Verizon so it wasn't as bad as someone with AT&T or T-Mobile at the time. When there was no LTE, 3G CDMA would take over and kept the service going somewhat.

US 395

Quote from: cl94 on June 14, 2024, 08:03:58 PMHonestly, if anywhere on the Vegas-Oregon corridor needs to be 4-laned, it's US 395 between Hallelujah Junction and Susanville. I'm not saying it's needed, but it has higher traffic counts than any of the 2-lane segments in Nevada by a decent margin and is more important in terms of need for redundancy given that it's an alternate for I-80 during winter.

(personal opinion emphasized)
I agree. As part of my job, I would go out and deliver to the Sierra Army Depot in Herlong. It's a pretty busy stretch of rural highway. There are passing lanes but having it be entirely four lanes definitely would be an improvement.

US 395

Quote from: vdeane on June 15, 2024, 10:06:18 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 15, 2024, 07:30:08 PM
Quote from: SSR_317 on June 15, 2024, 05:56:17 PMIf they went to all this trouble to detail I-11 all the way to Mercury, why the heck didn't they just take it another 8 miles to the terminus of SR 160, which runs south from there to Pahrump? I know the 4-lane divided US 95 ends just west of the Mercury interchange, but still, SR 160 seems to be a more logical end point for this section of the future Interstate than the isolated Mercury.

Because traffic counts drop pretty dramatically at Indian Springs and you start running into ROW issues past Mercury. A conversion south of Mercury can be done in place with minimal additional ROW. There's also a canyon between Mercury and SR 160 that may require blasting to be made wide enough for a 4-lane freeway with full shoulders.

As I have said before, NDOT is doing enough to show politicians that they're working on the conversion and little more. The minute you get past Mercury, the work and money required grow exponentially due to the need for additional ROW and environmental studies. And those environmental studies will be contested given the presence of several endangered/ endemic species along US 95.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Not to mention that there's plenty of precedence for interstates ending at military bases.  In fact, I really don't see much need for I-11 to go past Mercury at all.  Just don't then sign anything near I-80 and then create a semi-permanent gap, so IMO, if anything gets built on that end, it should have a separate number unless the middle part (which really isn't necessary) gets finished.  Maybe north of Mercury could get the CR 215 treatment.

Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 15, 2024, 08:04:40 PMSpeaking of Alaska, I think we should run I-11 along the Dalton Hwy to the Arctic Circle. The Arctic Ocean is the only ocean in the country not served by an interstate and would be infinitely safer to be stuck in a blizzard in [/joke]
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12994.msg314359#msg314359

Personally, I don't see the point in I-11 existing at all. It's not the end of the world if Vegas and Phoenix don't have a direct Interstate connection. US 93 being four laned would be more than enough.
I'm also the person that thinks I-15 is pointless beyond the 84 merge towards Portland and Boise so what would I know? Lol.

Max Rockatansky

US 93 used to be super hectic south of Boulder City before it began to be expanded.  Quaint that I remember it being an almost completely two lane highway to Wickenburg.  It was famous at the time for head on collisions. 

cl94

Yeah, the head-ons are what 395 north of Reno and 93 north of Ely are famous for. Both of those have the dangerous combination of high truck traffic and lots of timid drivers afraid to pass, so passing often involves blowing past several vehicles at once.

Quote from: US 395 on June 15, 2024, 10:14:03 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 14, 2024, 08:03:58 PMHonestly, if anywhere on the Vegas-Oregon corridor needs to be 4-laned, it's US 395 between Hallelujah Junction and Susanville. I'm not saying it's needed, but it has higher traffic counts than any of the 2-lane segments in Nevada by a decent margin and is more important in terms of need for redundancy given that it's an alternate for I-80 during winter.

(personal opinion emphasized)
I agree. As part of my job, I would go out and deliver to the Sierra Army Depot in Herlong. It's a pretty busy stretch of rural highway. There are passing lanes but having it be entirely four lanes definitely would be an improvement.

I think this stretch, and maybe some parts of 95, would be great opportunities for a Euro-style 2+1 road. Alternating passing lane, Jersey barrier or guiderail separating directions so you can only cross the centerline at intersections. Relatively inexpensive to construct and it would greatly increase safety.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

Plutonic Panda

#1161
I will say one thing, This is also responding directly to a couple posters that I respect greatly, I am very happy they are not in charge. Because I think there are several highways out on the west that you could say don't deserve to be full interstate quality and that a four-lane at grade Road would suffice. One such obvious road is I-70 in Utah. I am very happy I can travel that road at 80 miles an hour and not have to go through at grade intersections. I think you could say the same thing about some segments of I-10 in western Texas.

Scott5114

uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

cl94

Problem is that much of Goldfield is a historic district, which effectively stops any major changes, such as knocking down some of what remains for a freeway.
Please note: All posts represent my personal opinions and do not represent those of my employer or any of its partner agencies.

Travel Mapping (updated weekly)

silverback1065

I-11 makes sense from 80 in Reno to 10 in Phoenix. no need for it elsewhere.

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: silverback1065 on June 16, 2024, 07:36:02 AMI-11 makes sense from 80 in Reno to 10 in Phoenix. no need for it elsewhere.
I agree, but I'm also not a huge fan of how it ties way the hell out east of Reno and way the hell out west of Phoenix. Whatever the case, If these DOTs Are dead set on these alignments, They need to find a way to build high-speed expressways to connect to any extension to these respective cities.

silverback1065

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2024, 07:45:25 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 16, 2024, 07:36:02 AMI-11 makes sense from 80 in Reno to 10 in Phoenix. no need for it elsewhere.
I agree, but I'm also not a huge fan of how it ties way the hell out east of Reno and way the hell out west of Phoenix. Whatever the case, If these DOTs Are dead set on these alignments, They need to find a way to build high-speed expressways to connect to any extension to these respective cities.

Have any links on this? I assumed 11 would just run into 580 in Carson City and 17 in Phoenix via an upgraded US 60.

Scott5114

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2024, 07:45:25 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 16, 2024, 07:36:02 AMI-11 makes sense from 80 in Reno to 10 in Phoenix. no need for it elsewhere.
I agree, but I'm also not a huge fan of how it ties way the hell out east of Reno and way the hell out west of Phoenix. Whatever the case, If these DOTs Are dead set on these alignments, They need to find a way to build high-speed expressways to connect to any extension to these respective cities.

Reviewing the topography of the area is instructive:


Given the layout of the mountain ranges in the area, I don't really see any way that you could connect the US-95 and I-580/US-395 corridors without either backtracking, or things getting very expensive very quickly.

Connecting to I-80 in Fernley is fine with me.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 16, 2024, 08:00:01 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2024, 07:45:25 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 16, 2024, 07:36:02 AMI-11 makes sense from 80 in Reno to 10 in Phoenix. no need for it elsewhere.
I agree, but I'm also not a huge fan of how it ties way the hell out east of Reno and way the hell out west of Phoenix. Whatever the case, If these DOTs Are dead set on these alignments, They need to find a way to build high-speed expressways to connect to any extension to these respective cities.

Reviewing the topography of the area is instructive:


Given the layout of the mountain ranges in the area, I don't really see any way that you could connect the US-95 and I-580/US-395 corridors without either backtracking, or things getting very expensive very quickly.

Connecting to I-80 in Fernley is fine with me.
I'm aware of the topography. But do it right or don't do it at all. That's my philosophy. If they want to throw it away the hell east on I-80 then fuck it I could care less about it.

I think the only thing that it would really have going for it to get extended any further northwest would be if that big lithium mine comes to fruition. I'm not sure how many new cars and trucks that would put on the road though.

Or who knows maybe that Oregon, Idaho, Northern California succession thing Will happen and that new area will want their own high-speed road. I sure wouldn't count on Federal dollars is helping out with it though lol

Plutonic Panda

#1169
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 16, 2024, 07:47:20 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2024, 07:45:25 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 16, 2024, 07:36:02 AMI-11 makes sense from 80 in Reno to 10 in Phoenix. no need for it elsewhere.
I agree, but I'm also not a huge fan of how it ties way the hell out east of Reno and way the hell out west of Phoenix. Whatever the case, If these DOTs Are dead set on these alignments, They need to find a way to build high-speed expressways to connect to any extension to these respective cities.

Have any links on this? I assumed 11 would just run into 580 in Carson City and 17 in Phoenix via an upgraded US 60.
Here's the one for Nevada: https://www.dot.nv.gov/projects-programs/programs-studies/future-i-11-alternatives-analysis-las-vegas-valley-to-i-80

I'm 99% certain the purple alignment tie in to I-580 in Carson City has been eliminated, officially.

But never say never. I doubt this is the last study before this gets built if it ever does. I wouldn't be surprised if this gets shelved for another decade or two and then they do a new study.https://www.nevadadot.com/Home/ShowImage?id=5767&t=636639631055800000

Plutonic Panda

In Arizona and the same thing with Nevada it's not letting me post pictures directly here, but it starts on slide 19: http://i11study.com/Arizona/PDF/I-11_ASR_December-2017.pdf

Scott5114

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2024, 08:18:12 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on June 16, 2024, 08:00:01 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2024, 07:45:25 AM
Quote from: silverback1065 on June 16, 2024, 07:36:02 AMI-11 makes sense from 80 in Reno to 10 in Phoenix. no need for it elsewhere.
I agree, but I'm also not a huge fan of how it ties way the hell out east of Reno and way the hell out west of Phoenix. Whatever the case, If these DOTs Are dead set on these alignments, They need to find a way to build high-speed expressways to connect to any extension to these respective cities.

Reviewing the topography of the area is instructive:


Given the layout of the mountain ranges in the area, I don't really see any way that you could connect the US-95 and I-580/US-395 corridors without either backtracking, or things getting very expensive very quickly.

Connecting to I-80 in Fernley is fine with me.
I'm aware of the topography. But do it right or don't do it at all. That's my philosophy. If they want to throw it away the hell east on I-80 then fuck it I could care less about it.

Ending it in Fernley (or Clark) is doing it right—that's the route that exists now.

A tunnel to Carson would be neat, but unless Sens. Cortez-Masto and Rosen can compel Mayor Pete to slap down the big bucks for it, there's really no way it's going to happen.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

vdeane

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 16, 2024, 08:18:12 AMI'm aware of the topography. But do it right or don't do it at all. That's my philosophy. If they want to throw it away the hell east on I-80 then fuck it I could care less about it.

I think the only thing that it would really have going for it to get extended any further northwest would be if that big lithium mine comes to fruition. I'm not sure how many new cars and trucks that would put on the road though.

Or who knows maybe that Oregon, Idaho, Northern California succession thing Will happen and that new area will want their own high-speed road. I sure wouldn't count on Federal dollars is helping out with it though lol
How is going through Carson doing it right?  The topography says it all.  Las Vegas is east enough of Reno that you need to go east-west between the two somewhere.  Terrain dictates that somewhere is I-80 unless you're going to spend a lot more.  By the time you get to the north side of Walker Lake, I-80 and the southern end of I-580 are about the same mileage as each other, but the latter is much more expensive.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Max Rockatansky

It really isn't much a jog from Fernley to Reno.  Fernley lines up better with US 95 heading north to the ION Highway anyways.

kkt

Quote from: vdeane on June 15, 2024, 10:06:18 PM
Quote from: cl94 on June 15, 2024, 07:30:08 PM
Quote from: SSR_317 on June 15, 2024, 05:56:17 PMIf they went to all this trouble to detail I-11 all the way to Mercury, why the heck didn't they just take it another 8 miles to the terminus of SR 160, which runs south from there to Pahrump? I know the 4-lane divided US 95 ends just west of the Mercury interchange, but still, SR 160 seems to be a more logical end point for this section of the future Interstate than the isolated Mercury.

Because traffic counts drop pretty dramatically at Indian Springs and you start running into ROW issues past Mercury. A conversion south of Mercury can be done in place with minimal additional ROW. There's also a canyon between Mercury and SR 160 that may require blasting to be made wide enough for a 4-lane freeway with full shoulders.

As I have said before, NDOT is doing enough to show politicians that they're working on the conversion and little more. The minute you get past Mercury, the work and money required grow exponentially due to the need for additional ROW and environmental studies. And those environmental studies will be contested given the presence of several endangered/ endemic species along US 95.

(personal opinion emphasized)
Not to mention that there's plenty of precedence for interstates ending at military bases.  In fact, I really don't see much need for I-11 to go past Mercury at all.  Just don't then sign anything near I-80 and then create a semi-permanent gap, so IMO, if anything gets built on that end, it should have a separate number unless the middle part (which really isn't necessary) gets finished.  Maybe north of Mercury could get the CR 215 treatment.

Quote from: PColumbus73 on June 15, 2024, 08:04:40 PMSpeaking of Alaska, I think we should run I-11 along the Dalton Hwy to the Arctic Circle. The Arctic Ocean is the only ocean in the country not served by an interstate and would be infinitely safer to be stuck in a blizzard in [/joke]
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=12994.msg314359#msg314359

Okay, but I-11W should be I-211, and I-11E should be I-11.

;)



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.