Why isn't I-215 signed to Tropicana Avenue?

[Max Rockatansky]

I started working on a blog for our page on the Las Vegas Beltway today.  When I was looking up the AASHTO/FHWA approvals in 1993 for I-215 I noticed they actually approved the designation west of I-15 to Tropicana Avenue (then NV 593).  Aside from the segment of the Las Vegas Beltway between I-15 and Tropicana Avenue being maintained by Clark County (Clark County Route 215) is there a particular reason this segment isn't signed as I-215?  The current FHWA mileage log only has I-215 extending from I-11 in Henderson west to I-15.  I'm not aware of any rules by AASHTO or the FHWA which specifically bar non-state DOTs from maintaining US Route or Interstate segments.

[Scott5114]

A couple of possible reasons:

- There's perpetual confusion over who to contact for what in Las Vegas, because the city limits here are weird and so much of what looks like it should be in some city's limits isn't. These days you report everything on an app for Clark County and the backend silently routes the request to the proper agency, but before that it was probably a lot easier to tell people "Interstate shield goes to NDOT and pentagon goes to the county". (It should be noted that the county actually built a good chunk of what is now I-215 and later transferred it to NDOT, so they probably had some experience dealing with that confusion during that era.)
- Trop is an awkward place for the designation to change over. There is not really anything there that would seem like a logical reason for the shield shape to change. At least I-15 is a major interchange so there's that.

I think 1993 was about when the development of the Summerlin area was in full swing so that might explain why they jumped the gun on extending the Interstate designation that far. Perhaps the idea was for it to be a spur to Summerlin for a while instead of a full loop around North Las Vegas, and then when the full loop idea got traction they went with the signage scheme they have now.

[pderocco]

The stretch in question wasn't completed as a freeway until 2006. Maybe by then, no one really cared any more about the Interstate designation, because it was ancient history.

[Max Rockatansky]

The stretch in question wasn't completed as a freeway until 2006. Maybe by then, no one really cared any more about the Interstate designation, because it was ancient history.

Thing is the original projection for the corridor had it being complete between Henderson and Tropicana by 2005.  That estimate was actually pretty close to accurate. 

[roadfro]

With the way the beltway construction was first envisioned, the county originally planned to build the actual freeway in multiple phases from I-15 westward all the way around. They later decided to do the fast track plan putting in the frontage road system first from Decatur westward (which more quickly facilitated changing regional traffic patterns), then going back to build the mainline when funding allowed. Obviously, they couldn't sign frontage roads with an interstate shield, and NDOT had no hand in building this part...

Also, note that NDOT's MO has typically been not to sign interstate designations until they are completed to a 'logical' endpoint... which would typically be another numbered state-maintained highway or the final planned terminus of the freeway (particularly in the case of spurs).

Tropicana Ave has never been designated SR 593 or state-maintained west of Rainbow Blvd (SR 595). So, from the NDOT MO perspective, the first logical endpoint for the western I-215 designation would have been Charleston Blvd (SR 159). That does make the AASHTO request establishing 215 up to Tropicana somewhat peculiar. I haven't come across anything that explains why NDOT chose that for the western endpoint (but I also haven't done any extensive research on this).

Going the other direction, NDOT originally maintained just the first ≈2 miles of I-215 adjacent to I-15 and the final ≈2 miles adjacent to I-515, at least according to the NDOT State Maintained Highways books (the changeover of maintenance of the middle segment only happened fairly recently). So there is nothing prohibiting County-maintained beltway sections from posting the I-shield because we had a ≈25+ year precedent a few miles away. 

[kphoger]

Obviously, they couldn't sign frontage roads with an interstate shield

They should have consulted with TxDOT. 

[Max Rockatansky]

With the way the beltway construction was first envisioned, the county originally planned to build the actual freeway in multiple phases from I-15 westward all the way around. They later decided to do the fast track plan putting in the frontage road system first from Decatur westward (which more quickly facilitated changing regional traffic patterns), then going back to build the mainline when funding allowed. Obviously, they couldn't sign frontage roads with an interstate shield, and NDOT had no hand in building this part...

Also, note that NDOT's MO has typically been not to sign interstate designations until they are completed to a 'logical' endpoint... which would typically be another numbered state-maintained highway or the final planned terminus of the freeway (particularly in the case of spurs).

Tropicana Ave has never been designated SR 593 or state-maintained west of Rainbow Blvd (SR 595). So, from the NDOT MO perspective, the first logical endpoint for the western I-215 designation would have been Charleston Blvd (SR 159). That does make the AASHTO request establishing 215 up to Tropicana somewhat peculiar. I haven't come across anything that explains why NDOT chose that for the western endpoint (but I also haven't done any extensive research on this).

Going the other direction, NDOT originally maintained just the first ≈2 miles of I-215 adjacent to I-15 and the final ≈2 miles adjacent to I-515, at least according to the NDOT State Maintained Highways books (the changeover of maintenance of the middle segment only happened fairly recently). So there is nothing prohibiting County-maintained beltway sections from posting the I-shield because we had a ≈25+ year precedent a few miles away.

Part of the issue I'm having is finding the early timeline for the western and northern parts of the beltway.  The only reason I know much of anything with the southern segment is because the AASHTO request makes specific references to timeline milestones.  Summerlin Parkway amusingly had more documentation out there than the beltway. 

[roadfro]

Part of the issue I'm having is finding the early timeline for the western and northern parts of the beltway.  The only reason I know much of anything with the southern segment is because the AASHTO request makes specific references to timeline milestones.  Summerlin Parkway amusingly had more documentation out there than the beltway. 

I'll try to see what I have in my roadgeek files here in the next few days. I saved some newsletters Clark County Public Works used to put out in the late 1990's/early 2000's that might have some useful info.

[pderocco]

It's kind of fun to peruse the beltway in Google Earth historic imagery. Before 2003 there are some missing parts, but for quite a spell you can see long stretches that were undivided, and were eventually torn up when the freeway was built on a slightly different alignment.