Interstate 11

[kkt]

Traffic heading for Phoenix could still take US 60 into town, or jog over to I-17 if their destination was closer to the north end.  And there's nothing stopping Arizona from eliminating cross-traffic along US 60 if they want to.  I just don't see it as a problem for the interstate system to solve.  Building I-11 south to I-8 should divert traffic from going through Phoenix, thus making I-10 and US 60 flow a bit better.  And allowing through traffic to bypass congested city centers is appropriate for the interstate system to address.

[sparker]

Traffic heading for Phoenix could still take US 60 into town, or jog over to I-17 if their destination was closer to the north end.  And there's nothing stopping Arizona from eliminating cross-traffic along US 60 if they want to.  I just don't see it as a problem for the interstate system to solve.  Building I-11 south to I-8 should divert traffic from going through Phoenix, thus making I-10 and US 60 flow a bit better.  And allowing through traffic to bypass congested city centers is appropriate for the interstate system to address.

And that would be the main saving grace of a Hassayampa I-11 alignment -- if combined with an upgraded AZ 85 south to I-8 -- that it be able to do "double duty" as not only a bypass for what is now merely potential I-11 traffic but also an Interstate-grade/signed southern bypass of greater Phoenix for I-10 (the Loop 202 extension now under construction remains too close to the city center to function as an effective bypass; it'll probably function like CA 210 did when fully opened out to Redlands in 2007: congested within the first month of use).

As much as Loop 303 is intuitively an ideal way to get I-11 to serve central Phoenix more directly, it still doesn't solve the regional need to get through traffic away from the city core.  Even the proposed parallel I-10 southern relief route, AZ 30, will feed into the 202 loop, adding to that route's likely problems -- and 303 is eventually scheduled to terminate at and feed into that corridor.  AZ 85's already there; it's partially constructed, with the only obstacle left to overcome the final alignment just north of an I-8 junction.  Not utilizing it as a multi-purpose relief route seems at best silly and at worst wasteful!   

[vdeane]

AZ 303 is exurbs, not "city core".  AZ 85 is "middle of nowhere".  And isn't the whole point of I-11 to connect Phoenix and Vegas?  Without connecting to Phoenix, I-11 has no reason to exist.  None.  And using AZ 85 as a bypass of Phoenix for I-10 traffic is still way out of the way.

[compdude787]

Regardless of where I-11 ends up being routed, there should be an effort to upgrade the US 60 corridor to a freeway northwest of Loop 303 up to Wickenburg to connect to I-11. I'd be in favor of this.

[The Ghostbuster]

How much traffic uses US 60 between Wickenburg and Phoenix? And since a railroad line parallels US 60 all the way into downtown Phoenix, how much of a factor would it be in a potential US 60 freeway conversion?

[Bobby5280]

The railroad makes all the difference in the world between US-60 being able to be upgraded into a freeway or not. The railroad would have to be removed to create enough room for a freeway. Still, even if the railroad was removed a freeway upgrade would still be a very tight squeeze at several spots in Glendale. About all that can be done with US-60 inside the 303 loop is building bridges and partial interchanges at busy intersections.

[kkt]

That's an in-service railroad!  Why would anyone want to remove it?  Freight railroads are a lot more important to the economy than upgrading an expressway.

Roads take tighter turns and steeper grades than railroads.  If the route is necessary, a bypass road could be built outside the urbanized area a lot more easily than a railroad.

[sparker]

AZ 303 is exurbs, not "city core".  AZ 85 is "middle of nowhere".  And isn't the whole point of I-11 to connect Phoenix and Vegas?  Without connecting to Phoenix, I-11 has no reason to exist.  None.  And using AZ 85 as a bypass of Phoenix for I-10 traffic is still way out of the way.

How much traffic uses US 60 between Wickenburg and Phoenix? And since a railroad line parallels US 60 all the way into downtown Phoenix, how much of a factor would it be in a potential US 60 freeway conversion?

That's an in-service railroad!  Why would anyone want to remove it?  Freight railroads are a lot more important to the economy than upgrading an expressway.

Roads take tighter turns and steeper grades than railroads.  If the route is necessary, a bypass road could be built outside the urbanized area a lot more easily than a railroad.

I've used the AZ 85/I-8 combination to bypass Phoenix traffic several times; although somewhat longer in terms of pure mileage than the I-10 (relative) "straight shot", it does save time if one is attempting to traverse Phoenix during commute hours (something only recommended for a devout masochist); as a "economy" bypass -- saving overall money on AZ 85 upgrades rather than deploying a new-terrain I-11 from Buckeye to Casa Grande -- it'll work, particularly if $$ outlay becomes an issue (as it invariably does!).  The south of I-10 I-11 alignment as locally planned does make for a close-to-optimal I-10 bypass -- but hardly one that is likely to be fully developed in the next 20-30 years unless the "infill" growth south of Phoenix outstrips current projections; the AZ 85 routing, while certainly not the optimal bypass path, has a much greater chance of showing up in a near-term budget!

As far as taking some sort of freeway down US 60 -- it's not likely anything could be built efficiently southeast of 303 -- and actually laying an Interstate-grade facility atop the current route is probably not going to happen either; a parallel new facility would have to be developed.  Besides the proximity of the rail line (BNSF's sole line into Phoenix), there's just too much in the way of development inside the 303 loop -- and if an alignment in that direction were to be developed, the ROW preservation for such need to be done sooner than later, considering the pace at which housing is being deployed along or near this corridor.  But the plans for anything south and/or east of Wickenburg seem to be part of a juggling act, with the Hassayampa corridor being the only one seeming to warrant official consideration at this time.  If an alignment anywhere near US 60 is to be considered, the local/state planning entities need to get their shit together and actually present a viable alternative to what's out there now! 

[Bobby5280]

As it stands, the state and local governments have to start acting as soon as possible on acquiring and preserving ROW along US-60 from Wickenburg to at least the 303 loop. Upgrading US-60 into I-11 along that stretch is still very do-able. But that could easily change if developers plop big new residential and commercial developments right up to the edge of the existing Phoenix-Wickenburg highway.

[dfwmapper]

AZ 303 is exurbs, not "city core".  AZ 85 is "middle of nowhere".  And isn't the whole point of I-11 to connect Phoenix and Vegas?  Without connecting to Phoenix, I-11 has no reason to exist.  None.  And using AZ 85 as a bypass of Phoenix for I-10 traffic is still way out of the way.

L-303 is rapidly transitioning from exurbs to suburbs. Exurbs are moving out to the west side of the White Tanks, where I-11 could potentially run. I-11 connecting south to I-10 at/near AZ 85 (and maybe a freeway spur either over US 60 to L-303 or over AZ 74 to I-17) is certainly a reasonable path. Using I-8 and AZ 85 as a bypass of Phoenix is under 9 miles longer than I-10, and is probably the best route any time between 6a and 7p. A better connection to I-8 should cut a mile or two off of that as well.

[US 89]

Maybe I-11 could still be routed down AZ 85 to I-8, and a new 3di (I-311?) could run down the US 60 corridor as far SE as it is feasible.

[sparker]

Maybe I-11 could still be routed down AZ 85 to I-8, and a new 3di (I-311?) could run down the US 60 corridor as far SE as it is feasible.

At the risk of edging into Fictional, something a bit east of US 60 may be the ticket for a even-first-digit x11 to get over to I-17 by using the northeast end of Loop 303 to do so, even if the Hassayampa corridor is used for the main trunk.  Or, if I-11 itself ends up following (more or less) US 60 down to 303, the eastern part of 303 could be given a similar designation (despite AZDOT's track record re avoiding 3di's). 

[Bickendan]

But do metro areas really have to be contiguous with county boundaries?  I would not consider Alexandria Bay to be part of the Watertown metro area, yet both are in Jefferson County.  The Rochester metro area includes parts of Livingston, Ontario, and Wayne Counties, but not all of them.

According to the US Census, they do. I agree that counties might not be the best way to define metro areas, but that's how it works.

For Census Bureau purposes metro areas do have to be contained with one county; but MPO's can and do encompass multi-county jurisdictions, depending upon how they were chartered.  Portland metro (often referred to as PDX after the main airport ID) in Oregon is one of these, with their jurisdiction being all of Multnomah County and substantial parts of Washington and Clackamas counties -- and, IIRC, some populated slivers of Yamhill and Mount Hood counties as well.  So what is and what isn't a specific metro area is dependent upon the criteria of the agency making the distinction.   

There's no Mt Hood County, and the Portland metro has nothing to do with Hood River County. An argument could be made for Scappoose and St Helens in Columbia County, but that's only because the Portland address grid extends out to the eastern fringe of Rainier along US 30.

[Sub-Urbanite]

Metro's jurisdiction barely extends east of Gresham and Troutdale, and excludes most of the satellite cities around Portland (Forest Grove being the notable exception). (Source: map)

The Census-defined metropolitan area includes Clackamas, Columbia, Multnomah, Washington, and Yamhill Counties in Oregon, and Clark and Skamania Counties in Washington.

But do metro areas really have to be contiguous with county boundaries?  I would not consider Alexandria Bay to be part of the Watertown metro area, yet both are in Jefferson County.  The Rochester metro area includes parts of Livingston, Ontario, and Wayne Counties, but not all of them.

According to the US Census, they do. I agree that counties might not be the best way to define metro areas, but that's how it works.

For Census Bureau purposes metro areas do have to be contained with one county; but MPO's can and do encompass multi-county jurisdictions, depending upon how they were chartered.  Portland metro (often referred to as PDX after the main airport ID) in Oregon is one of these, with their jurisdiction being all of Multnomah County and substantial parts of Washington and Clackamas counties -- and, IIRC, some populated slivers of Yamhill and Mount Hood counties as well.  So what is and what isn't a specific metro area is dependent upon the criteria of the agency making the distinction.   

[sparker]

There's no Mt Hood County, and the Portland metro has nothing to do with Hood River County. An argument could be made for Scappoose and St Helens in Columbia County, but that's only because the Portland address grid extends out to the eastern fringe of Rainier along US 30.

I meant Hood River county (misstatement -- sorry!); for some reason, I recall seeing a map at PDX metro when I was up there in the '90's that included the northern portion of the Hood River valley within metro limits (in retrospect, that indication may have been speculative or for ancillary purposes -- possibly an indication of a separate district).  Back during that era (20+ years ago) there was talk at Metro about trying to include the Multnomah Falls park/recreational area within Metro as an additional bulwark against development along I-84 -- or the periodic requests by UP to double-track their line through the Columbia Gorge (the most recent of which was shot down in flames just this month!).  If that had materialized, it's likely that measures to extend jurisdiction to the Hood River area immediately to the east would have followed in short order.   

[foolsgold]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/news-columns/road-warrior/2-mile-stretch-of-southbound-i-11-to-open-by-the-end-of-july/

"Opening up the small, southbound segment marks a big step toward completing the first leg of an international trade route that is expected to eventually ease cross-border trade from the Mexico border to Canada by running through Arizona, Nevada and Idaho."


This article makes it sound as if it's been decided that I-11 will eventually reach as far north as Idaho.  I wasn't aware that was the case.

[The Ghostbuster]

I think it is a pipe dream to say Interstate 11 will go to Idaho. Realistically, I see future Interstate 11 going no further north than Interstate 80 in Nevada (if it even makes it that far).

[sparker]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/news-columns/road-warrior/2-mile-stretch-of-southbound-i-11-to-open-by-the-end-of-july/

"Opening up the small, southbound segment marks a big step toward completing the first leg of an international trade route that is expected to eventually ease cross-border trade from the Mexico border to Canada by running through Arizona, Nevada and Idaho."


This article makes it sound as if it's been decided that I-11 will eventually reach as far north as Idaho.  I wasn't aware that was the case.

I think it is a pipe dream to say Interstate 11 will go to Idaho. Realistically, I see future Interstate 11 going no further north than Interstate 80 in Nevada (if it even makes it that far).

If the Treasure Valley/Boise area keeps expanding at anything close to its present rate, upgrading US 95 (and likely the southern reaches of ID 55) might be given serious consideration to provide enhanced access from California and other Southwest points.  Whether that would imply a I-11 extension would be something TBD; but I wouldn't expect any activity regarding this to occur for at least another decade; it'll likely take that long for purpose-driven political activity to "gel" from simple local interest.  Curiously, the only portion of US 95 north of Las Vegas that isn't included in the high-priority corridor compendium is the stretch from Winnemucca to the OR/ID state line (although it is a NHS route, of course).  If rumblings do occur, expect the "first strike" to be a dedicated HPC, possibly with accompanying Interstate designation; that seems to have become the default method for such activity.   

[ARMOURERERIC]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/news-columns/road-warrior/2-mile-stretch-of-southbound-i-11-to-open-by-the-end-of-july/

"Opening up the small, southbound segment marks a big step toward completing the first leg of an international trade route that is expected to eventually ease cross-border trade from the Mexico border to Canada by running through Arizona, Nevada and Idaho."


This article makes it sound as if it's been decided that I-11 will eventually reach as far north as Idaho.  I wasn't aware that was the case.

I think it is a pipe dream to say Interstate 11 will go to Idaho. Realistically, I see future Interstate 11 going no further north than Interstate 80 in Nevada (if it even makes it that far).

If the Treasure Valley/Boise area keeps expanding at anything close to its present rate, upgrading US 95 (and likely the southern reaches of ID 55) might be given serious consideration to provide enhanced access from California and other Southwest points.  Whether that would imply a I-11 extension would be something TBD; but I wouldn't expect any activity regarding this to occur for at least another decade; it'll likely take that long for purpose-driven political activity to "gel" from simple local interest.  Curiously, the only portion of US 95 north of Las Vegas that isn't included in the high-priority corridor compendium is the stretch from Winnemucca to the OR/ID state line (although it is a NHS route, of course).  If rumblings do occur, expect the "first strike" to be a dedicated HPC, possibly with accompanying Interstate designation; that seems to have become the default method for such activity.   

2 years ago when I was considering a move to Emmett ID, the county master plan update had 2 freeways on it.

[sparker]

2 years ago when I was considering a move to Emmett ID, the county master plan update had 2 freeways on it.

AFAIK, the sole freeway project active at this time within that region is the ID 16 connector from I-84 to Eagle, prompted by the outsized growth of that particular community. 

[Sub-Urbanite]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/news-columns/road-warrior/2-mile-stretch-of-southbound-i-11-to-open-by-the-end-of-july/

"Opening up the small, southbound segment marks a big step toward completing the first leg of an international trade route that is expected to eventually ease cross-border trade from the Mexico border to Canada by running through Arizona, Nevada and Idaho."


This article makes it sound as if it's been decided that I-11 will eventually reach as far north as Idaho.  I wasn't aware that was the case.

I think it is a pipe dream to say Interstate 11 will go to Idaho. Realistically, I see future Interstate 11 going no further north than Interstate 80 in Nevada (if it even makes it that far).

If the Treasure Valley/Boise area keeps expanding at anything close to its present rate, upgrading US 95 (and likely the southern reaches of ID 55) might be given serious consideration to provide enhanced access from California and other Southwest points.  Whether that would imply a I-11 extension would be something TBD; but I wouldn't expect any activity regarding this to occur for at least another decade; it'll likely take that long for purpose-driven political activity to "gel" from simple local interest.  Curiously, the only portion of US 95 north of Las Vegas that isn't included in the high-priority corridor compendium is the stretch from Winnemucca to the OR/ID state line (although it is a NHS route, of course).  If rumblings do occur, expect the "first strike" to be a dedicated HPC, possibly with accompanying Interstate designation; that seems to have become the default method for such activity.

Just to be abundantly clear — there is exactly a 0% chance that Oregon invests in duplexing US 95, which carried 58 cars an hour in 2015. At this point, Oregon can't even afford to upgrade heavily used, in-state two laners like US 97.

Any I-11 extension to Idaho, however far off, will either have to use a new alignment that bypasses Oregon, or involve Nevada and Idaho paying Oregon to do the work.

All that being said, I maintain that the most practical routing for I-11 is across northeastern California to Klamath Falls, then up US 97 to Madras, then over the Cascades along 26 to Sandy and the Portland area.

[nexus73]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/news-columns/road-warrior/2-mile-stretch-of-southbound-i-11-to-open-by-the-end-of-july/

"Opening up the small, southbound segment marks a big step toward completing the first leg of an international trade route that is expected to eventually ease cross-border trade from the Mexico border to Canada by running through Arizona, Nevada and Idaho."


This article makes it sound as if it's been decided that I-11 will eventually reach as far north as Idaho.  I wasn't aware that was the case.

I think it is a pipe dream to say Interstate 11 will go to Idaho. Realistically, I see future Interstate 11 going no further north than Interstate 80 in Nevada (if it even makes it that far).

If the Treasure Valley/Boise area keeps expanding at anything close to its present rate, upgrading US 95 (and likely the southern reaches of ID 55) might be given serious consideration to provide enhanced access from California and other Southwest points.  Whether that would imply a I-11 extension would be something TBD; but I wouldn't expect any activity regarding this to occur for at least another decade; it'll likely take that long for purpose-driven political activity to "gel" from simple local interest.  Curiously, the only portion of US 95 north of Las Vegas that isn't included in the high-priority corridor compendium is the stretch from Winnemucca to the OR/ID state line (although it is a NHS route, of course).  If rumblings do occur, expect the "first strike" to be a dedicated HPC, possibly with accompanying Interstate designation; that seems to have become the default method for such activity.

Just to be abundantly clear – there is exactly a 0% chance that Oregon invests in duplexing US 95, which carried 58 cars an hour in 2015. At this point, Oregon can't even afford to upgrade heavily used, in-state two laners like US 97.

Any I-11 extension to Idaho, however far off, will either have to use a new alignment that bypasses Oregon, or involve Nevada and Idaho paying Oregon to do the work.

All that being said, I maintain that the most practical routing for I-11 is across northeastern California to Klamath Falls, then up US 97 to Madras, then over the Cascades along 26 to Sandy and the Portland area.

Then we can set a record for the longest spur as I-111 is built to connect a deserted corner of Oregon to Boise to north Idaho and from there we'll end it at the Canadian border.  ADT's should get up to an average of one vehicle per minute...LOL!

Rick

[sparker]

https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/news-columns/road-warrior/2-mile-stretch-of-southbound-i-11-to-open-by-the-end-of-july/

"Opening up the small, southbound segment marks a big step toward completing the first leg of an international trade route that is expected to eventually ease cross-border trade from the Mexico border to Canada by running through Arizona, Nevada and Idaho."


This article makes it sound as if it's been decided that I-11 will eventually reach as far north as Idaho.  I wasn't aware that was the case.

I think it is a pipe dream to say Interstate 11 will go to Idaho. Realistically, I see future Interstate 11 going no further north than Interstate 80 in Nevada (if it even makes it that far).

If the Treasure Valley/Boise area keeps expanding at anything close to its present rate, upgrading US 95 (and likely the southern reaches of ID 55) might be given serious consideration to provide enhanced access from California and other Southwest points.  Whether that would imply a I-11 extension would be something TBD; but I wouldn't expect any activity regarding this to occur for at least another decade; it'll likely take that long for purpose-driven political activity to "gel" from simple local interest.  Curiously, the only portion of US 95 north of Las Vegas that isn't included in the high-priority corridor compendium is the stretch from Winnemucca to the OR/ID state line (although it is a NHS route, of course).  If rumblings do occur, expect the "first strike" to be a dedicated HPC, possibly with accompanying Interstate designation; that seems to have become the default method for such activity.

Just to be abundantly clear — there is exactly a 0% chance that Oregon invests in duplexing US 95, which carried 58 cars an hour in 2015. At this point, Oregon can't even afford to upgrade heavily used, in-state two laners like US 97.

Any I-11 extension to Idaho, however far off, will either have to use a new alignment that bypasses Oregon, or involve Nevada and Idaho paying Oregon to do the work.

All that being said, I maintain that the most practical routing for I-11 is across northeastern California to Klamath Falls, then up US 97 to Madras, then over the Cascades along 26 to Sandy and the Portland area.

I'm in general agreement as to Oregon financially contributing to anything along US 95 -- seeing as much of that route, viewed as a through facility from Winnemucca to Marsing, has little or no benefit to the state; the present routing is simply topographic happenstance.  That being said, ODOT and their handlers might be, with a few "goodies" thrown in to sweeten the pot, convinced to kick in a few bucks for the portion from the Nevada line to OR 78 -- the only segment that has the potential to provide even a modicum of benefit to the state.  NE of there, it'll have to be a project with virtually all the funding coming from either the feds or from within Idaho, which stands to reap the rewards, be they as they will, of a Winnemucca-Boise (general vicinity) corridor.  These are arrangements that will need to be hashed out if & when such a corridor is in the early planning stages.

As far as I-11 extending from I-80 (likely Reno area) to Klamath Falls and beyond, again, I'm in agreement that the ideal routing takes it directly into the Portland area (let's get that wonderful/infamous "Boring Oregon City" sign on an Interstate so it can provide yuks to a wider audience!).  Having lived & done grad school up there (albeit a quarter-century ago), I worry that attitudes within the greater state planning circles would make such a routing riddled with controversy -- if not actually DOA! -- which is one of the reasons I suggested taking I-11 west to I-5 near Medford -- lower cost, and definitely nowhere near PDX Metro; with a reasonable level of support from the Rogue River Valley, such a route might fall within the realm of feasibility.  I've outlined this concept previously; don't see any reason to reiterate it in nauseating detail once again (just look through the previous replies, plus any of the other I-11 threads in other regional coverage).  Bottom line -- if I-11 can be kept away from greater Portland (actually, Eugene would likely complain as well if it landed there via OR 58) there's less of a chance that the folks up there who regularly engage in such things would piss & moan to the point that any project of this type would be jeopardized.

[GreenLanternCorps]

With Nevada making significant progress on future Interstate 11, how much of the freeway on the Arizona side of the bridge is built to interstate standards?

How much could be signed as I-11?

[roadfro]

With Nevada making significant progress on future Interstate 11, how much of the freeway on the Arizona side of the bridge is built to interstate standards?

How much could be signed as I-11?

From my understanding of present conditions, nothing really beyond the Arizona portion of the Hoover Dam bypass project could be signed as I-11, save for the presumed overlap with I-40.

Arizona has been working on widening portions of US 93 for a while, but this has been to divided highway status and not full freeway/Interstate standards–that effort began well before the notion of I-11 was conceived.

Nevada, on the other hand, has considerably less mileage along the I-11 corridor to link Vegas and Phoenix. The only real length of Interstate construction Nevada needed for I-11 to reach the Las Vegas valley after I-11 was made official was the Hoover Dam Byapss (under construction if not complete at that time) and the Boulder City Bypass project. The Boulder City Bypass was also conceived about a decade before I-11 was ever a thing–if I recall correctly, the project cleared the final environmental reviews and was well into initial design a couple years before I-11 was signed into law–so it ended up as the first new construction under I-11.