I've been wanting to do this for quite some time but didn't have the photo stock to illustrate it until recently:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-history-of-us-route-system-in-las.html?m=1
Los Angeles is clearly a legacy control city for Interstate 15, which follows in part the former route of the Los Angeles-Salt Lake City road.
The name "Las Vegas" translated from Spanish into English means "Fertile Plains."
Actually, it translates to "The Meadows".
I guess they'd never seen a real meadow in Nevada.
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 03, 2024, 09:50:40 AM
I've been wanting to do this for quite some time but didn't have the photo stock to illustrate it until recently:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-history-of-us-route-system-in-las.html?m=1
Really interesting. I note that you devoted a lot of time to describing the evolution of I-515 but not much on the evolution of I-215 in Las Vegas.
Quote from: DenverBrian on February 17, 2024, 10:41:57 PM
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on February 03, 2024, 09:50:40 AM
I've been wanting to do this for quite some time but didn't have the photo stock to illustrate it until recently:
https://www.gribblenation.org/2024/02/the-history-of-us-route-system-in-las.html?m=1
Really interesting. I note that you devoted a lot of time to describing the evolution of I-515 but not much on the evolution of I-215 in Las Vegas.
Yes, essentially due to the fact that I-215 has never carried a US Route designation. I'll probably get to I-215 as its own thing eventually.
Quote from: pderocco on February 17, 2024, 10:34:42 PM
I guess they'd never seen a real meadow in Nevada.
There was an actual meadow where downtown Las Vegas is now because of a natural spring. It was a natural oasis on the Mormon Trail that predated US-91. After people started living here and using the water, the spring dried up and so no more meadows.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 18, 2024, 01:23:56 AM
Quote from: pderocco on February 17, 2024, 10:34:42 PM
I guess they'd never seen a real meadow in Nevada.
There was an actual meadow where downtown Las Vegas is now because of a natural spring. It was a natural oasis on the Mormon Trail that predated US-91. After people started living here and using the water, the spring dried up and so no more meadows.
Mormon Trail ended in SLC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Trail
Thought it was the Honeymoon Trail, but alas, no.
https://wchsutah.org/roads/honeymoon-trail.php
Wonder what the old route was called back then...
I would love to see Historic US 91 signs erected along Las Vegas Blvd. in the Las Vegas area. Unless former US 91 wasn't that important of a route through the Las Vegas area. I doubt there would be any need to acknowledge former US 466, since it was co-designated with US 91 and US 93 and 95 throughout its journey through the Las Vegas area.
Interesting you mention US 466 in that context. I tend to be of the opinion that said highway gets the shaft in terms of historic importance. 466 was the first designated US Route over Hoover Dam whereas US 93 was added later. Amusingly even during the heyday of the highway there was a drive to replace it with US 66A.
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2024, 08:00:18 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 18, 2024, 01:23:56 AM
Quote from: pderocco on February 17, 2024, 10:34:42 PM
I guess they'd never seen a real meadow in Nevada.
There was an actual meadow where downtown Las Vegas is now because of a natural spring. It was a natural oasis on the Mormon Trail that predated US-91. After people started living here and using the water, the spring dried up and so no more meadows.
Mormon Trail ended in SLC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Trail
Thought it was the Honeymoon Trail, but alas, no.
https://wchsutah.org/roads/honeymoon-trail.php
Wonder what the old route was called back then...
Bluh. Mormon Road (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Road).
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 18, 2024, 04:04:07 PM
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2024, 08:00:18 AM
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 18, 2024, 01:23:56 AM
Quote from: pderocco on February 17, 2024, 10:34:42 PM
I guess they'd never seen a real meadow in Nevada.
There was an actual meadow where downtown Las Vegas is now because of a natural spring. It was a natural oasis on the Mormon Trail that predated US-91. After people started living here and using the water, the spring dried up and so no more meadows.
Mormon Trail ended in SLC:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Trail
Thought it was the Honeymoon Trail, but alas, no.
https://wchsutah.org/roads/honeymoon-trail.php
Wonder what the old route was called back then...
Bluh. Mormon Road (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_Road).
Go figure. The West is nothing if not blandly named.
Quote from: Rothman on February 18, 2024, 10:52:53 PM
Go figure. The West is nothing if not blandly named.
Dare you to say that to Flamingo Jones (https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1142639,-115.2250076,3a,15y,287.6h,109.56t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sX8qutAKF_lpcbjNqywzRKA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu).
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 18, 2024, 11:48:21 AM
I would love to see Historic US 91 signs erected along Las Vegas Blvd. in the Las Vegas area. Unless former US 91 wasn't that important of a route through the Las Vegas area. I doubt there would be any need to acknowledge former US 466, since it was co-designated with US 91 and US 93 and 95 throughout its journey through the Las Vegas area.
I would think that in the pre-Interstate era, US-91 would have been more important than US-93, given that US-93 didn't go to any major cities in either direction (although it was used to get to Phoenix, obviously), while US-91 was used to get to Los Angeles and Salt Lake City. US-91 is a nothingburger now, simply because practically all of it got buried under I-15, while US-93 still exists as a discrete road almost in its entirety.
This is similar to US-40, US-60, US-70, and US-80 in California, all of which went from a major California city to a major city in an adjacent state, while US-50 didn't. So we still have US-50, but the others got replaced by Interstates.
I would think that Las Vegas Blvd. through the "strip" is the one section of roadway that does NOT need historic US 91 signs. For one, Las Vegas Blvd. is the most famous or one of the most famous sections of street or roadway in the US, if not the entire world, all by itself. It does not need historic route signs to attract more business or traffic.
The other reason is that Las Vegas Blvd. is so wide throughout that area (4 thru lanes in each direction plus intersections with double or even triple left-turn lanes, that the street is so wide, you can hardly read signs in any case.
Quote from: pderocco on February 20, 2024, 03:46:33 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 18, 2024, 11:48:21 AM
I would love to see Historic US 91 signs erected along Las Vegas Blvd. in the Las Vegas area. Unless former US 91 wasn't that important of a route through the Las Vegas area. I doubt there would be any need to acknowledge former US 466, since it was co-designated with US 91 and US 93 and 95 throughout its journey through the Las Vegas area.
I would think that in the pre-Interstate era, US-91 would have been more important than US-93, given that US-93 didn't go to any major cities in either direction (although it was used to get to Phoenix, obviously), while US-91 was used to get to Los Angeles and Salt Lake City. US-91 is a nothingburger now, simply because practically all of it got buried under I-15, while US-93 still exists as a discrete road almost in its entirety.
This is similar to US-40, US-60, US-70, and US-80 in California, all of which went from a major California city to a major city in an adjacent state, while US-50 didn't. So we still have US-50, but the others got replaced by Interstates.
US 50 was truncated to its current terminus as I-580 stole part of it and part of I-5 took over some. So not entirely true for that route.
US 50 is a weird case given it has been truncated back roughly to where it originally ended. Interestingly US 50 wasn't even going to make it California in the original concepts of the US Route System but rather end at US 40 in Fernley, Nevada. I still can't find a solid explanation for why this was the case given the Lake Tahoe State Highway was far more traveled at the time than Donner Pass. Donner Pass was just becoming modern by 1926 and the Dog Valley Grade was bypassed months before US 40 came into existence.
Regarding US 91 on Las Vegas Boulevard, it isn't totally forgotten by the general populace. The Route 91 Harvest even had a US Route shield in the event logo. Shame it came to be far more well known due to a mass shooting:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Route_91_Harvest
If Historic US 91 signs are unnecessary, perhaps Las Vegas Boulevard could have been numbered NV 91 instead of NV 604. After all, the NV 91 designation has been available since the pre-existing NV 91 was renumbered to NV 844 in 1976.
Outside of the strip I would imagine that Historic US 91 shields would garner more interest. They probably would be pretty welcome in downtown Las Vegas, south of the metro area and maybe even the bulk of what is still maintained as NV 604. Valley of Fire State Park actually maintains the original Arrowhead Trail as a hiking trail. So there is precedent in the area for marking historic highways.
Quote from: RoadWarrior56 on February 20, 2024, 06:23:28 AM
I would think that Las Vegas Blvd. through the "strip" is the one section of roadway that does NOT need historic US 91 signs. For one, Las Vegas Blvd. is the most famous or one of the most famous sections of street or roadway in the US, if not the entire world, all by itself. It does not need historic route signs to attract more business or traffic.
The other reason is that Las Vegas Blvd. is so wide throughout that area (4 thru lanes in each direction plus intersections with double or even triple left-turn lanes, that the street is so wide, you can hardly read signs in any case.
The purpose wouldn't be to attract business or traffic to Las Vegas Blvd., it would be to inform tourists that are already there of its history.
Nobody is trying to attract traffic to the streets in downtown Chicago with Historic US 66 signs.
I personally think it's a fine idea and I might reach out to Clark County with it once things settle down here. There has been increased interest as of late in Las Vegas history, especially the Rat Pack era that this would fall under.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on February 20, 2024, 01:44:25 PM
If Historic US 91 signs are unnecessary, perhaps Las Vegas Boulevard could have been numbered NV 91 instead of NV 604. After all, the NV 91 designation has been available since the pre-existing NV 91 was renumbered to NV 844 in 1976.
The Nevada numbering system doesn't work like that. 591 is free now, though, and it's a valid Clark County number (was formerly on Spring Mountain Road).
It would be neat to see some US 93 and US 95 historic shields on the Fremont Street Experience. Throw in a couple plaques and that would hit a lot of the historic interest marks of the same era Scott is speaking of.
Great article. There is also some opportunity to put more historic US 95 signage along the Boulder Strip, which doesn't get as much love as the Las Vegas Strip and could use a little more history. There is a replica "Welcome to Las Vegas" sign in the middle of that highway as well.
Boulder Highway has the problem of near-universally being considered the shit part of Vegas, so you'd probably have to do some work into cleaning it up a little bit before that'd be viable.
Quote from: fungus on February 22, 2024, 02:46:19 AM
There is also some opportunity to put more historic US 95 signage along the Boulder Strip, which doesn't get as much love as the Las Vegas Strip and could use a little more history. There is a replica "Welcome to Las Vegas" sign in the middle of that highway as well.
If they did that, they might as well add "Historic US 93" at the same time. But either seems unlikely, since US 93 & 95 still exist in the area.
What is interesting to me is that Boulder Highway never got a business route designation for either highway. Given that Rancho Drive has carried a BUS US 95 designation for a long time now (even though it's only signed from the freeways and not on the street itself) and that Business US Route designations have been recently sought in Boulder City and Carson City, Boulder Highway not having one seems to be a bit of an outlier.
Quote from: Scott5114 on February 22, 2024, 07:45:37 PM
Boulder Highway has the problem of near-universally being considered the shit part of Vegas, so you'd probably have to do some work into cleaning it up a little bit before that'd be viable.
Well, there is the "Reimagine Boulder Highway" (https://www.rtcsnv.com/boulderhighway/) concept that is somewhat in the works by RTC. I think City of Henderson is really trying to move forward with one or two of their segments.
I think they should leave Boulder Highway as a six-lane boulevard. Narrowing it to four lanes would likely increase congestion, especially if they were to add a light-rail line to the median. I'd be okay with a bus lane being added as long as it utilizes the existing curb lane.
I think you could narrow the lanes and do the low speed frontage road concept for the right lane. I haven't driven down Boulder Highway in years, but it sure looks like much of it has the original 1960's era configuration of the dirt median, like Las Vegas Boulevard used to have.
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.1540434,-115.1109558,3a,75y,323.09h,77.95t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sk-84W_-zbDwp739zvKENPQ!2e0!5s20211201T000000!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu