Interstate 15 north of Barstow to the State Line

[roadfro]

'Widen the I-15': Las Vegas mayor makes familiar request to California, Las Vegas Review-Journal, 12/27/2023

Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman carried out her New Year's Eve week tradition of calling on California officials to widen Interstate 15 south of the Nevada state line.

Following busy holiday weekends in Las Vegas, such as New Year's Eve, I-15 southbound routinely backs up for miles. Goodman has made the call for widening several times over the years, usually around holiday weekends.

New Year's Eve weekend in Las Vegas is expected to draw around 356,000 visitors.

"Welcome to all those coming to Las Vegas to celebrate and ring in 2024," Goodman said in a post on social media platform X. "We are excited that traveling between Southern California and Las Vegas may someday include the option of high speed rail, but in the meantime California needs to widen the I-15 from Barstow to Stateline."

Goodman told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that President Joe Biden's recent visit to Las Vegas to award Brightline West a $3 billion grant for their planned high-speed rail project spurred her most recent post.

"It's exciting and the focus is on Southwest infrastructure needs, but the key is that's years out to accomplish and we need relief now," Goodman said in a text message to the Review-Journal.

Despite Goodman's repeated calls for expanding the highway, Caltrans has stated multiple times that they have no plans to widen I-15 between Southern Nevada and Southern California. Caltrans didn't immediately respond Wednesday to an inquiry by the Review-Journal on if any discussions had recently been had regarding I-15 widening.

Caltrans and the Nevada Department of Transportation worked together on a $5.1 million project to bring a part-time lane to I-15, which runs for about five miles from the Nevada-California border to the agricultural checkpoint. The lane, which runs on the shoulder of the interstate, is only open to traffic between 10 a.m. and 8 p.m. Sundays and Mondays.

On Labor Day around noon, traffic began to back up near Primm, which was an approximate 12-mile improvement compared to past years when backups started around Jean, according to Caltrans.

NDOT Director Tracy Larkin Thomason said in September that the part-time lane moved where the bottleneck begins, but it didn't end the traffic issue.

"It basically seems that the bottleneck has moved from Nevada to Mountain Pass, California," Thomason said.

[Scott5114]

It's exciting and the focus is on Southwest infrastructure needs, but the key is that's years out to accomplish and we need relief now.

It's so nice, that unlike rail construction, a freeway widening can be completed instantly with no need for any planning, design, or environmental review. /s

[Max Rockatansky]

I really don't understand the resistance on the California end.  I would've assumed that the interest in widening I-15 to facilitate commerce would be enough.  Seems the state just wants to wash their hands of helping out Nevada and do whatever they can to not acknowledge that the corridor needs expansion.  How any perspective widening of I-15 would hinder a private high speed rail venture eludes me.  All of this just strikes me as being a bad neighbor (which unfortunately California has a reputation of being).

[pderocco]

It seems obvious that the widening needs to go completely over Mountain Pass, because the slopes by themselves are enough to cause slowdowns and backups.

[Plutonic Panda]

It's exciting and the focus is on Southwest infrastructure needs, but the key is that's years out to accomplish and we need relief now.

It's so nice, that unlike rail construction, a freeway widening can be completed instantly with no need for any planning, design, or environmental review. /s

She didn't word that right. But I think Caltrans could complete a freeway widening much faster than an HSR line. For whatever reason this country just doesn't seem to know how to build real HSR.

[ran4sh]

Some pro-transit people seem to want to actually get rid of the environmental review, when building transit/rail/etc

[mgk920]

I really don't understand the resistance on the California end.  I would've assumed that the interest in widening I-15 to facilitate commerce would be enough.  Seems the state just wants to wash their hands of helping out Nevada and do whatever they can to not acknowledge that the corridor needs expansion.  How any perspective widening of I-15 would hinder a private high speed rail venture eludes me.  All of this just strikes me as being a bad neighbor (which unfortunately California has a reputation of being).

The traffic demand on I-15 in the desert is not being driven by anything that is located  in California.

Mike

[ran4sh]

I really don't understand the resistance on the California end.  I would've assumed that the interest in widening I-15 to facilitate commerce would be enough.  Seems the state just wants to wash their hands of helping out Nevada and do whatever they can to not acknowledge that the corridor needs expansion.  How any perspective widening of I-15 would hinder a private high speed rail venture eludes me.  All of this just strikes me as being a bad neighbor (which unfortunately California has a reputation of being).

The traffic demand on I-15 in the desert is not being driven by anything that is located  in California.

Mike

Huh? What's the Interstate route from Denver or any point east, to Los Angeles? Is I-15 not part of the route used by that traffic?

[Max Rockatansky]

I really don't understand the resistance on the California end.  I would've assumed that the interest in widening I-15 to facilitate commerce would be enough.  Seems the state just wants to wash their hands of helping out Nevada and do whatever they can to not acknowledge that the corridor needs expansion.  How any perspective widening of I-15 would hinder a private high speed rail venture eludes me.  All of this just strikes me as being a bad neighbor (which unfortunately California has a reputation of being).

The traffic demand on I-15 in the desert is not being driven by anything that is located  in California.

Mike

Still massively involves commerce coming and going to/from California.  It has been bad for decades and only became worse when the Ag Station was relocated from Yermo to the bottom of a grade near Primm.  The freeway largely is the same as it was completed in 1965.  Close to six decades of ignoring a growing problem isn't correct.  It isn't as though other facilities further in the state don't get widened when needed.

[Scott5114]

I really don't understand the resistance on the California end.  I would've assumed that the interest in widening I-15 to facilitate commerce would be enough.  Seems the state just wants to wash their hands of helping out Nevada and do whatever they can to not acknowledge that the corridor needs expansion.  How any perspective widening of I-15 would hinder a private high speed rail venture eludes me.  All of this just strikes me as being a bad neighbor (which unfortunately California has a reputation of being).

The traffic demand on I-15 in the desert is not being driven by anything that is located  in California.

Mike

Gee, it's a good thing it's not part of a highway system designed to run between states or anything, then.

[roadfro]

I really don't understand the resistance on the California end.  I would've assumed that the interest in widening I-15 to facilitate commerce would be enough.  Seems the state just wants to wash their hands of helping out Nevada and do whatever they can to not acknowledge that the corridor needs expansion.  How any perspective widening of I-15 would hinder a private high speed rail venture eludes me.  All of this just strikes me as being a bad neighbor (which unfortunately California has a reputation of being).

The traffic demand on I-15 in the desert is not being driven by anything that is located  in California.

Mike

Still massively involves commerce coming and going to/from California.  It has been bad for decades and only became worse when the Ag Station was relocated from Yermo to the bottom of a grade near Primm.  The freeway largely is the same as it was completed in 1965.  Close to six decades of ignoring a growing problem isn't correct.  It isn't as though other facilities further in the state don't get widened when needed.

The whole issue stems from a bunch of Californians traveling out of state on long/holiday weekends to spend disposable income recreating elsewhere and then experiencing traffic nightmares on the way back home. That doesn't really help California's bottom line any. It's also a phenomenon that happens on the few occasional long weekends during the year, and outside of that the freeway (presumably) is perfectly capable of handing typical daily traffic loads. So why would California/Caltrans spend the tax dollars to widen a bunch of rural I-15 for a situation that happens maybe 10-20 days a year, when that money might be better spent elsewhere...? And if there's a not-to-distant mass transit project coming in the same corridor (actually in the median of this freeway, which is what's planned for the most part) that could potentially relieve the need for a freeway widening, is it wise for Caltrans to spend the money now?

Just playing devil's advocate a bit. I don't necessarily fully agree with that logic, but definitely can understand where the reluctance is coming from.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'd be more agreeable to understanding if the issue was new as opposed to several decades old.  Now it has progressed to a mainstream political controversy.  One which California has been painted in a mostly negative light about.  Passing the buck completely to a private high speed rail doesn't help the perception that California is a bad neighbor and can't do their infrastructure correctly anymore (worth noting, I don't think this is true). 

That isn't to say the rail line is a bad idea, on paper it sounds promising.  But that line is never going to be more than a partial niche solution to the larger problem.

[cahwyguy]

The whole issue stems from a bunch of Californians traveling out of state on long/holiday weekends to spend disposable income recreating elsewhere and then experiencing traffic nightmares on the way back home. That doesn't really help California's bottom line any. It's also a phenomenon that happens on the few occasional long weekends during the year, and outside of that the freeway (presumably) is perfectly capable of handing typical daily traffic loads. So why would California/Caltrans spend the tax dollars to widen a bunch of rural I-15 for a situation that happens maybe 10-20 days a year, when that money might be better spent elsewhere...? And if there's a not-to-distant mass transit project coming in the same corridor (actually in the median of this freeway, which is what's planned for the most part) that could potentially relieve the need for a freeway widening, is it wise for Caltrans to spend the money now?

Just playing devil's advocate a bit. I don't necessarily fully agree with that logic, but definitely can understand where the reluctance is coming from.

This makes a good point that many forget (especially PP over on the Headlines discussion). Highways are designed for the average daily traffic, mmm plus a little bit more. They aren't designed to make the worst traffic days tolerable, especially if those days are confined to a few specific weekends. I-15 is a great example of this (and their solution: opening the shoulder when necessary is a reasonable response).

But the cost and expense of a long widening just for a few weekends is not worth it. Better to provide alternatives (Brightline), encourage people to travel at off-peak hours, or even encourage alternate routes (US 95 down to I-40). We should all be able to deal with a bit of inconvenience now and then.

[mgk920]

Wasn't the original I-15 built using the '95/05' funding split well before that out-of-state traffic generator was even a dream (or nightmare)?

Mike

[Max Rockatansky]

Yes, it was a chargeable corridor.

[cl94]

And that is the key here. Unless the feds or Nevada are going to foot the bill, there is no incentive for California to widen. The congestion is people leaving California to spend money in other states. It might be CA residents, sure, but they're not spending money in the state. Why would the state want to encourage money to go elsewhere?

[Max Rockatansky]

I should clarify/expound my misgiving.  What makes this way more irksome for me is the placement of the new Ag Station.  It is literally placed in the worst possible spot to cause southbound traffic being located at the bottom of an a large incline.  California is willing to spend money on stuff like that even though it is the last remaining state to regularly hassle passenger traffic (commercial I'm not questioning) with Ag inspection stations.  That Ag Station could have been placed near Yermo where it originally was or even near Baker and it wouldn't cause nearly as many headaches.

Who even commutes out to the vicinity of Primm to work at that Ag station anyways?  I've always been curious about that.  When the Ag station was in Yermo that was at least near a decent size population.

I like to think that I'm a reasonable person about expansion.  In another thread we have pie in the sky stuff like people advocating for PCH to be expanded despite the window/need for that long being long closed.  Stuff like that is yeah, way out of touch with modern realities and intrastate problem.  Saying f*** you to a neighboring state that has made upgrades on their end to an Interstate corridor where the traffic counts often merit expansions seems like the wrong way to do things.

[RZF]

I would venture to say that every Sunday/Monday, regardless of whether it's a long weekend or a normal weekend, has its slow choke points coming back into Barstow. This is not to mention the slow crawls on a Sunday or Monday through Victorville/Hesperia and the Cajon Pass. Those are equally as bad. And unless you live in the western part of the greater LA area, where you can take CA 18/138 into Palmdale and cross the San Gabriels there, you have to stay on I-15 to get into the Southland. So, I would argue that we're not talking about 10-20 days per year, but, rather, 50-60 days.

[Max Rockatansky]

For me the best way to avoid the Orange County 500 is to just head west (advantage of living in Fresno) through Death Valley and cut over towards Ridgecrest.  The weather last year made that routing difficult to accomplish due to washouts. 

[cahwyguy]

I would venture to say that every Sunday/Monday, regardless of whether it's a long weekend or a normal weekend, has its slow choke points coming back into Barstow. This is not to mention the slow crawls on a Sunday or Monday through Victorville/Hesperia and the Cajon Pass. Those are equally as bad. And unless you live in the western part of the greater LA area, where you can take CA 18/138 into Palmdale and cross the San Gabriels there, you have to stay on I-15 to get into the Southland. So, I would argue that we're not talking about 10-20 days per year, but, rather, 50-60 days.

Although often, when I've driven it, the problem has not been "too many cars, not enough concrete", but rather "too many idiots" or issues related to bad weather (wind, washouts, etc). Often, the people who speed and weave in and out cause more congestion. You combine that with the extra truck traffic that is also trying to make time by passing other trucks (instead of staying in the truck lanes) and you have problems.

Folks tend to think of the desert land as free to build upon ... and perhaps, in terms of sheer right of way, it is. But it does have extra environmental mitigation costs these day, and there is increased concern about culverts and washouts, so the construction cost is much greater than when the route was first built.

Building the Brightline service will get some percentage of cars off the road, which will help. Finding increntives to move the truck traffic to rail (which parallels I-15 to Vegas), such that it is cheaper to do local trucking to hubs, rail between hubs with containers, and then local trucking from hubs, will also help. From the government point of view, both those are preferred, because (a) it transfers the cost to a private enterprise, and (b) it transfers the environmental risk to a private enterprise. As you have state budgets that are increasingly hampered by reduced gas tax income, that seems an attractive alternative.

[cl94]

Who even commutes out to the vicinity of Primm to work at that Ag station anyways?  I've always been curious about that.  When the Ag station was in Yermo that was at least near a decent size population.

I'm convinced that some of these ag station employees live in neighboring states. The cars in the employee lot at a few of the ones near me always have Nevada plates. Topaz and Hallelujah Junction stick out there, being close to large population centers in Nevada but far from people in CA.

[Max Rockatansky]

Who even commutes out to the vicinity of Primm to work at that Ag station anyways?  I've always been curious about that.  When the Ag station was in Yermo that was at least near a decent size population.

I'm convinced that some of these ag station employees live in neighboring states. The cars in the employee lot at a few of the ones near me always have Nevada plates. Topaz and Hallelujah Junction stick out there, being close to large population centers in Nevada but far from people in CA.

I'd assume most of the workers to the Primm Ag Station live in and around Las Vegas?  Not exactly a quick commute but it is on the far end of what I might find as reasonable.  Exit 27 gets you to the outskirts of the Las Vegas Metro Area. 

[Plutonic Panda]

What on earth would motivate somebody to get a job like that when they can easily find a job in Vegas? I mean I understand super commuters in the bay area and southern California. But I've always wondered about these gas stations in far-flung areas.

[Scott5114]

And that is the key here. Unless the feds or Nevada are going to foot the bill, there is no incentive for California to widen. The congestion is people leaving California to spend money in other states. It might be CA residents, sure, but they're not spending money in the state. Why would the state want to encourage money to go elsewhere?

The people using I-15 to visit Las Vegas on the weekend are the state of California.

[jdbx]

And that is the key here. Unless the feds or Nevada are going to foot the bill, there is no incentive for California to widen. The congestion is people leaving California to spend money in other states. It might be CA residents, sure, but they're not spending money in the state. Why would the state want to encourage money to go elsewhere?

There lies the rub. If this is a big issue for Las Vegas, perhaps they could implement a hotel tax or add a surcharge to parking fees to help fund the improvements. The parking fee probably makes the most sense in that it won't penalize people who didn't drive, although the revenue required might make the cost of parking pretty steep, which could have course encourage people to fly or (one day) take the train instead or driving, which would also help to reduce congestion on I-15.