Interstate 11 alignment, though Vegas and points north

[roadfro]

Also note that 95 was extended through Nevada at a time where much of the state highway network (particularly through central Nevada) had yet to be paved, so that routing of US 95 was the best improved alignment upon which the route could be routed (it was the only paved route north/south in that part of the state at the time). It wasn't really a matter of not wanting to spend money...the state was still completing its highway network (a task not substantially completed until the 1970s) and didn't really have the money to be spending on forging highways through mountains.

Is that also why US 93 goes through Caliente and Pioche instead of being routed on NV 318?

Yes, same situation. When US 93 was extended south through central Nevada via preexisting state routes, SR 38, the precursor to SR 318, was barely established as a dirt road. (Note today that it's SR 318 route and not US 93 that is part of the National Highway System.)

[kkt]

For I-11 to get into Carson City, Minden and Gardnerville from the South via the US-395 corridor pushing I-11 through the mountains on the West side of Walker Lake is the key. It can't happen otherwise. Bypasses of other towns along US-95 in order to further straighten the route would be additional make or break factors.

At this point it's not even clear where the powers that be want I-11 to go in the Northwestern US. I suppose a corridor up to Boise is a possibility, but as an Interstate getting to Boise from Vegas would work a whole lot better and faster via US-93 on the East side of Nevada rather than going West and doing hundreds upon hundreds of miles worth of NE bound back-tracking just to get to Boise.

IMHO, I-11 was envisioned as an alternate major NAFTA highway serving coastal states. It would bypass the traffic clusterf*** in California, serve the growing metro regions in Nevada and serve cities in Oregon and Washington state far bigger than Boise, Idaho. If the choice was up to me I'd have I-11 follow US-395 into Northern California and then follow one of a few possible routes at dove-tailing into the I-5 corridor.

As far as being a NAFTA corridor, I-11 could just go as far as Las Vegas and stop.  Traffic for Portland, Seattle, Hanford, Spokane, Bend, etc., could take I-15 to Salt Lake City and then I-84.  That would usually be an easier route than being dumped on I-5 through the Siskiyous and southern Oregon -- less direct, but much less traffic and less likely to get delayed by snow.

[sparker]

For I-11 to get into Carson City, Minden and Gardnerville from the South via the US-395 corridor pushing I-11 through the mountains on the West side of Walker Lake is the key. It can't happen otherwise. Bypasses of other towns along US-95 in order to further straighten the route would be additional make or break factors.

At this point it's not even clear where the powers that be want I-11 to go in the Northwestern US. I suppose a corridor up to Boise is a possibility, but as an Interstate getting to Boise from Vegas would work a whole lot better and faster via US-93 on the East side of Nevada rather than going West and doing hundreds upon hundreds of miles worth of NE bound back-tracking just to get to Boise.

IMHO, I-11 was envisioned as an alternate major NAFTA highway serving coastal states. It would bypass the traffic clusterf*** in California, serve the growing metro regions in Nevada and serve cities in Oregon and Washington state far bigger than Boise, Idaho. If the choice was up to me I'd have I-11 follow US-395 into Northern California and then follow one of a few possible routes at dove-tailing into the I-5 corridor.

I think this has been previously discussed, but my basic thought was to take I-11 up 395 to Alturas, then use CA 299 and CA 139/OR 39 to reach Klamath Falls.  From there, I'd just take it west along OR 140 to junction with I-5 north of Medford; in that way, lumber traffic from Roseburg down to the Rogue Valley could utilize I-11 to access the interior parts of the West down, of course, as far as Phoenix.  If a corridor would be planned for US 97, it could be designated as something else (I-7 comes to mind).  Also -- a Cascade crossing that far south would be less likely to cause shitfits at ODOT and friends, since it wouldn't come close to disturbing the Willamette Valley and the old-growth forests around its perimeter.  Bonus -- avoidance of Siskiyou Summit.  But for the time being getting it up to I-80 should be the initial concern;  defining a corridor that will satisfy -- or at least placate -- the various parties concerned will incite enough controversy in and of itself!   

[Sub-Urbanite]

As far as being a NAFTA corridor, I-11 could just go as far as Las Vegas and stop.  Traffic for Portland, Seattle, Hanford, Spokane, Bend, etc., could take I-15 to Salt Lake City and then I-84.  That would usually be an easier route than being dumped on I-5 through the Siskiyous and southern Oregon -- less direct, but much less traffic and less likely to get delayed by snow.

I disagree with this, for reasons that I've debated elsewhere but love to rehash:

• The 26/97 Oregon corridor is increasingly important, and ODOT at some point needs to look into twinning it from Sandy to Klamath Falls.
• Las Vegas to Portland is 1,184 miles via 15/84. Las Vegas to Seattle is 1,258 miles via 15/84/82/90.
• Las Vegas to Portland is 988 miles via Reno, Klamath Falls, Bend and Government Camp.
• Blue Box Pass on 26 is 4,024 feet and, aside from the Columbia River, is the lowest pass on the Western Cordillera between Snoqualmie and Tehachapi.
• When the Cascadia earthquake happens, Redmond is the established staging area for relief. That stuff needs good, new infrastructure to get there — and to get people out.

[nexus73]

As far as being a NAFTA corridor, I-11 could just go as far as Las Vegas and stop.  Traffic for Portland, Seattle, Hanford, Spokane, Bend, etc., could take I-15 to Salt Lake City and then I-84.  That would usually be an easier route than being dumped on I-5 through the Siskiyous and southern Oregon -- less direct, but much less traffic and less likely to get delayed by snow.

I disagree with this, for reasons that I've debated elsewhere but love to rehash:

• The 26/97 Oregon corridor is increasingly important, and ODOT at some point needs to look into twinning it from Sandy to Klamath Falls.
• Las Vegas to Portland is 1,184 miles via 15/84. Las Vegas to Seattle is 1,258 miles via 15/84/82/90.
• Las Vegas to Portland is 988 miles via Reno, Klamath Falls, Bend and Government Camp.
• Blue Box Pass on 26 is 4,024 feet and, aside from the Columbia River, is the lowest pass on the Western Cordillera between Snoqualmie and Tehachapi.
• When the Cascadia earthquake happens, Redmond is the established staging area for relief. That stuff needs good, new infrastructure to get there – and to get people out.

Read an ODOT message that came my way which indicated US 97 from Sunriver to Klamath Falls does not have enough passing lanes.  More will be added in a 4-lane fashion, with the idea being to link these sections together to form a 4-lane US 97 at some point in the future.  ODOT does not move fast so don't expect this to happen soon but I do expect the passing lanes to be built over the next several years.

Rick

[kkt]

I see the desire for a 4-way expressway along US 97 from Weed to Madras.  I don't think it warrants a freeway, however.  There are a lot of driveways and at-grade interchanges that would be very expensive to separate, and there's not the amount of traffic that would justify it.  Take those billions and add a third lane to I-5, which could use it.

There's nothing stopping automobile drivers or truckers from driving through northeastern California from Reno to Klamath Falls.  The roads are fine and uncrowded.  You don't have to have a freeway in order to drive.

[doorknob60]

I see the desire for a 4-way expressway along US 97 from Weed to Madras.  I don't think it warrants a freeway, however.  There are a lot of driveways and at-grade interchanges that would be very expensive to separate, and there's not the amount of traffic that would justify it.

I don't disagree, but I think US-97 justifies it more than US-95 through Nevada does.

[kkt]

I see the desire for a 4-way expressway along US 97 from Weed to Madras.  I don't think it warrants a freeway, however.  There are a lot of driveways and at-grade interchanges that would be very expensive to separate, and there's not the amount of traffic that would justify it.

I don't disagree, but I think US-97 justifies it more than US-95 through Nevada does.

I agree, although it's been a few years since I've driven along it.  But my inclination would be to end I-11 at Las Vegas rather than continue north.

[Bobby5280]

Las Vegas to Phoenix has to be the top priority for I-11 development. Other possible parts of the corridor should simply be identified and maybe some ROW bought and reserved for future use once an alignment was chosen.

I don't mind seeing I-11 simply end at I-80 if it ever gets built up that far. But if it had to terminate at another Interstate beyond I-80 I'd rather see it go over to I-5 in Oregon, but to Southern Oregon in the Medford area. Over 200,000 people live in the Medford-Grants Pass MSA. From there I-5 could be widened. I-11 could come near Klamath Falls, skirting the South side going over to Medford. US-97 is on a pretty narrow ROW North of Klamath Falls. It would be difficult enough just building that road 4-lane undivided.

Redding, CA is another possible option for a North terminus of I-11, partly since CA-44 is a freeway in Redding and on a freeway wide ROW East of Redding. Unfortunately the trip between Redding and Susanville pretty mountainous and not truck friendly. That would be a really expensive stretch of road to build.

[sparker]

Las Vegas to Phoenix has to be the top priority for I-11 development. Other possible parts of the corridor should simply be identified and maybe some ROW bought and reserved for future use once an alignment was chosen.

I don't mind seeing I-11 simply end at I-80 if it ever gets built up that far. But if it had to terminate at another Interstate beyond I-80 I'd rather see it go over to I-5 in Oregon, but to Southern Oregon in the Medford area. Over 200,000 people live in the Medford-Grants Pass MSA. From there I-5 could be widened. I-11 could come near Klamath Falls, skirting the South side going over to Medford. US-97 is on a pretty narrow ROW North of Klamath Falls. It would be difficult enough just building that road 4-lane undivided.

Redding, CA is another possible option for a North terminus of I-11, partly since CA-44 is a freeway in Redding and on a freeway wide ROW East of Redding. Unfortunately the trip between Redding and Susanville pretty mountainous and not truck friendly. That would be a really expensive stretch of road to build.

Since it was the first section out of the blocks, I don't think anyone would quibble with prioritizing Phoenix-Vegas; my guess is that there won't even be any studies on anything north of LV until at least Vegas-Kingman is completed as a full freeway and a Phoenix alignment has been selected.  But considering the NV corridor routing controversy in this thread alone, I'm certain interests in Gardnerville, Fallon, and other interim points will be pressing for the corridor to come their way, which will stretch out the decision process. 

Your original idea about taking I-11 to Medford certainly prompted my similar OR 140 alignment concept -- but even that involves some mountainous terrain, albeit along the most benign crossing south of US 26  And I've often driven US 97 along the east short of Klamath Lake and wondered just where they would even think of putting a freeway -- it would have to either take a broad arc around the lake area, or ODOT would have to carve a 4-lane K-railed alignment out of the existing route (and not disturb the joint UP/BNSF line next door).  If any sort of corridor improvements occur on 97 in these parts, it'll certainly be interesting to see how the project is tackled.

I don't see a Redding option as being particularly efficient; traffic heading north would still have to slog through Sacramento Canyon and over the Dunsmuir-Shasta grade.  Pretty much everyone here thought my original I-11 plan of a few months back following CA 44 & 89 to Shasta City wasn't terribly feasible or efficient; after reconsidering -- principally because of Siskiyou Summit and Anderson Grade -- I'd have to concur with this (hence the Klamath Falls-Medford option) -- and a Redding destination would utilize quite a bit of that original routing.  While the only really bad mountainous portion, where CA 44 surmounts the ridge east of Old Station/CA 89, would pose construction problems, the fact that much of the route east of there sits at  over 6000 ft. elevation and is prone to heavy snow drifts during the winter mitigates against an all-year freeway in that region.     

[doorknob60]

I think that if I-11 gets extended north of I-80 (I'm not saying it should, I'm just saying what I think would be best if it did hypothetically), the best option would be to follow US-395 N from Reno (if it's coming from Fernley, maybe a northern bypass of Reno would be a good fit), going through/near Susanville, roughly following CA-139 to Klamath Falls. From there, extend over US-97 to Madras, and US-26 to Portland. This provides better access to the growing Bend area, especially the crucial link to Portland, as well as a bypass of I-5 and the Siskiyou pass (while the US-97 corridor is higher, it is often drier, and US-26 is not bad for a cross-Cascades highway).

Other options would be to follow US-97 from Madras to Yakima (which would provide a long term bypass of the Portland/Salem area for people traveling between California and Seattle, though at about 40 miles longer that's a bit of a stretch), but US-26 gets a lot more traffic so I'd prefer that. Now, this is fictional territory at this point and I'm not saying any of this should happen any time remotely soon.

Extending to Boise doesn't make sense because it's 624 miles from Boise to Las Vegas via US-93/NV-318 through Twin Falls and Ely. Simply following the existing US-95 (and ID-55), it is 771 miles. Totally not worth it, especially since if you require a full freeway, I-84 to I-15 is 759 miles. Routing I-11 to Boise simply makes no sense (unless you're routing it along US-93, but nobody, including me, would suggest that; it's even lower traffic than US-95 and goes nowhere near Reno, which is the main goal of extending it to I-80).

[Bobby5280]

Since it was the first section out of the blocks, I don't think anyone would quibble with prioritizing Phoenix-Vegas; my guess is that there won't even be any studies on anything north of LV until at least Vegas-Kingman is completed as a full freeway and a Phoenix alignment has been selected.  But considering the NV corridor routing controversy in this thread alone, I'm certain interests in Gardnerville, Fallon, and other interim points will be pressing for the corridor to come their way, which will stretch out the decision process.

One thing on Nevada's side for I-11 is the state's population growth. Nevada led the entire in percentage gain of population between the 2000 and 2010 US census -well over 30%. Much of that growth has been in the Las Vegas region, but the Reno-Carson City metro is growing well too.

[sparker]

I think that if I-11 gets extended north of I-80 (I'm not saying it should, I'm just saying what I think would be best if it did hypothetically), the best option would be to follow US-395 N from Reno (if it's coming from Fernley, maybe a northern bypass of Reno would be a good fit), going through/near Susanville, roughly following CA-139 to Klamath Falls. From there, extend over US-97 to Madras, and US-26 to Portland. This provides better access to the growing Bend area, especially the crucial link to Portland, as well as a bypass of I-5 and the Siskiyou pass (while the US-97 corridor is higher, it is often drier, and US-26 is not bad for a cross-Cascades highway).

Other options would be to follow US-97 from Madras to Yakima (which would provide a long term bypass of the Portland/Salem area for people traveling between California and Seattle, though at about 40 miles longer that's a bit of a stretch), but US-26 gets a lot more traffic so I'd prefer that. Now, this is fictional territory at this point and I'm not saying any of this should happen any time remotely soon.

Extending to Boise doesn't make sense because it's 624 miles from Boise to Las Vegas via US-93/NV-318 through Twin Falls and Ely. Simply following the existing US-95 (and ID-55), it is 771 miles. Totally not worth it, especially since if you require a full freeway, I-84 to I-15 is 759 miles. Routing I-11 to Boise simply makes no sense (unless you're routing it along US-93, but nobody, including me, would suggest that; it's even lower traffic than US-95 and goes nowhere near Reno, which is the main goal of extending it to I-80).

If US 97 is going to get the Interstate treatment, it's likely that the southern end will be two-pronged -- one toward the "inland" (I-11) corridor, the other heading toward the populated areas of Northern California (i.e., straight down to I-5 at Weed).  Ideally, the concept of the 97/26 continuum to Portland is probably the most useful corridor concept for the region -- but it would garner tremendous political backlash from Portland interests, particularly PDX Metro, which really would rather not see any additional freeway corridors serving the area (hence my notion of taking I-11 straight across to Medford -- "out of sight, out of mind").  Just the though of seeing "Boring/Oregon City" on an Interstate corridor makes me very happy! -- but, hey, I've got to consider reality here -- Metro would likely stick the project in a semi-permanent holding pattern.

As far as Boise/Treasure Valley goes, any routing up 95 from I-80 is a separate consideration from the I-11 corridor -- unless one really likes a convoluted alignment!  That's one of the reasons I think Fernley is an obvious selection for I-11 to intersect I-80 from the south:  it's only 30 miles or so west to Reno, and east on I-80 puts one on the right track for a NE trajectory toward the Boise/T.V. area.  True, some truck traffic will come right up US 93 (and NV 318, for that matter!) -- but during winter months, a regularly plowed Interstate corridor might be useful.  Besides -- it expedites Boise-bound/originating traffic to and from NorCal points via I-80 as well.  Nevertheless, and deliberately ignoring the various politicos who have projected an "intermountain" corridor through every NV valley -- even the Burning Man site -- anything serving Boise or any Idaho point is something that needs to be judged on its own merits -- not as an integral part of the I-11 concept.   

[Bobby5280]

I just don't see an Interstate upgrade along US-26 going into Portland being feasible at all. There's too much development all over the US-26 corridor on the East side of Portland. US-26 twists and turns around the base of Mount Hood. Bypassing Portland to the South to connect into I-5 is one idea. But splitting off from East of Sandy what route do you take without still kicking a political hornet's nest?

If US-97 was to get the Interstate treatment through Klamath Falls, Bend and Redmond (which would not be easy or cheap at all) you might as well run the freeway along US-197 up to The Dalles. Routing it along US-97 up to Yakima, WA is another idea. But all that extra Interstate mileage would cost a fortune. And for how much benefit? It might be just as good to push I-11 into Medford.

As for pushing I-11 up US-95 to Boise, that's another thing I just don't see. Very little of US-95 between Winnemucca and the Boise area is just a dinky 2-lane route, and one that is extremely crooked at that. Jeez, the 100+ degree turn at Jordan Valley epitomizes the nature of that route. That's not the kind of thing fitting for an Interstate.

[sparker]

I just don't see an Interstate upgrade along US-26 going into Portland being feasible at all. There's too much development all over the US-26 corridor on the East side of Portland. US-26 twists and turns around the base of Mount Hood. Bypassing Portland to the South to connect into I-5 is one idea. But splitting off from East of Sandy what route do you take without still kicking a political hornet's nest?

If US-97 was to get the Interstate treatment through Klamath Falls, Bend and Redmond (which would not be easy or cheap at all) you might as well run the freeway along US-197 up to The Dalles. Routing it along US-97 up to Yakima, WA is another idea. But all that extra Interstate mileage would cost a fortune. And for how much benefit? It might be just as good to push I-11 into Medford.

As for pushing I-11 up US-95 to Boise, that's another thing I just don't see. Very little of US-95 between Winnemucca and the Boise area is just a dinky 2-lane route, and one that is extremely crooked at that. Jeez, the 100+ degree turn at Jordan Valley epitomizes the nature of that route. That's not the kind of thing fitting for an Interstate.

100 degrees?  That's nothing for the Northwest; I-5 does a 115-degree turn at Myrtle Creek, OR (marked for 45 mph both ways) -- and I-84, with its split carriageways, has several such (albeit single-direction) turns coming down out of the Blue Mountains toward Pendleton.  If there are calls from the Treasure Valley/Boise region for a southward Interstate -- and those calls persist for years on end -- and a way is found to subsidize the route through Oregon (which stands to benefit very little from such a corridor -- and virtually none NE of the OR 78 junction) -- then a Winnemucca-Treasure Valley Interstate is a possibiliby.  But, as the saying goes, all the ducks have to be lined up just right for that to happen!

[Henry]

The only available number for a Vegas-Boise corridor would be I-13, and NV wants no part of it, especially due to its bad luck connections.

Getting back to I-11, I guess swinging it to the west to reach Carson City could work, although I see more of an AR situation, where I-49 gets its own route east of Fort Smith instead of absorbing the southern half of I-540. Sure, it won't be an easy task (and then again, nothing is), but we'll see how things work out on that part, if and when they get to it.

[sparker]

The only available number for a Vegas-Boise corridor would be I-13, and NV wants no part of it, especially due to its bad luck connections.

Getting back to I-11, I guess swinging it to the west to reach Carson City could work, although I see more of an AR situation, where I-49 gets its own route east of Fort Smith instead of absorbing the southern half of I-540. Sure, it won't be an easy task (and then again, nothing is), but we'll see how things work out on that part, if and when they get to it.

If an I-13 started in Winnemucca, it shouldn't have any psychic effect on Vegas folks (out of sight, out of mind!).  Hey, if Dan Marino can have the career he did wearing that number, then maybe the "hex" isn't what it used to be! 

[theroadwayone]

The only available number for a Vegas-Boise corridor would be I-13, and NV wants no part of it, especially due to its bad luck connections.

Getting back to I-11, I guess swinging it to the west to reach Carson City could work, although I see more of an AR situation, where I-49 gets its own route east of Fort Smith instead of absorbing the southern half of I-540. Sure, it won't be an easy task (and then again, nothing is), but we'll see how things work out on that part, if and when they get to it.

If an I-13 started in Winnemucca, it shouldn't have any psychic effect on Vegas folks (out of sight, out of mind!).  Hey, if Dan Marino can have the career he did wearing that number, then maybe the "hex" isn't what it used to be!

I do have a feeling that if there was going to be an I-13, it's signs would quickly fall victim to theft. (But then again, there's US 13, which hasn't had any signs get stolen, as far as I'm aware. So that could help...)

[sparker]

The only available number for a Vegas-Boise corridor would be I-13, and NV wants no part of it, especially due to its bad luck connections.

Getting back to I-11, I guess swinging it to the west to reach Carson City could work, although I see more of an AR situation, where I-49 gets its own route east of Fort Smith instead of absorbing the southern half of I-540. Sure, it won't be an easy task (and then again, nothing is), but we'll see how things work out on that part, if and when they get to it.

If an I-13 started in Winnemucca, it shouldn't have any psychic effect on Vegas folks (out of sight, out of mind!).  Hey, if Dan Marino can have the career he did wearing that number, then maybe the "hex" isn't what it used to be!

I do have a feeling that if there was going to be an I-13, it's signs would quickly fall victim to theft. (But then again, there's US 13, which hasn't had any signs get stolen, as far as I'm aware. So that could help...)

CA 13, even within a dense urban area and partially signed over city streets, doesn't seem to have a particularly problematic theft issue.  But then the city involved is Berkeley -- and the citizens there may be less inclined to even want to possess a highway sign than a broad cross-section of folks.  But unlike the late and lamented CA 69, the US 95 alignment between Winnemucca and any corridor's likely Idaho terminus is relatively remote; miscreants would have to drive dozens if not hundreds of miles to snag one of the potential I-13 shields.  If deployed, there might be a trailblazer or two that occasionally goes missing near the more populated Treasure Valley end of the route -- but probably not out of line with normal thefts of any numbered route's shields save 69, 420, and the like with "giggle" factor!  But I-69 -- arguably one of the numbers with the greatest theft potential -- is being extended thousands of miles, and AFAIK, no DOT along the corridor has raised this concern -- at least to the level of public discussion.  Bottom line -- I don't see a particular problem with an I-13, particularly considering its likely rural/desert environment.

[doorknob60]

But unlike the late and lamented CA 69, the US 95 alignment between Winnemucca and any corridor's likely Idaho terminus is relatively remote; miscreants would have to drive dozens if not hundreds of miles to snag one of the potential I-13 shields.

I feel like this potential I-13 would have its likely terminus around Caldwell or Nampa, not exactly remote. The only other reasonable place would be around Payette which is more rural (but not remote), but that wouldn't make a lot of sense because it wouldn't directly serve Boise (only way it would make sense on that routing is if it continued on to Lewiston, etc). But I agree that theft shouldn't be much of a concern with I-13. Though, milepost 420 on US-95 in Idaho did have issues so who knows (but people care more about that number, I feel like a majority of people don't care about 13, except Vegas).

[sparker]

I'll try to make the following point without venturing too much into Fictional -- but it appears, according to another thread in this regional board, that while I-11 is now legally designated to head up (more or less) US 95 toward the Reno area, there's being some attention paid to the US 93 (and likely NV 318 as well, being the local NHS artery) corridor up the east side of the state (including one weird-ass interchange!).  Possibly roadfro or other NV-based posters might know if that attention extends beyond Vegas and environs -- i.e., is that corridor through Ely and Wells penciled in for capacity expansion?  Not that I'm trying to find a place to stick an I-13 -- but it seems that if a direct Vegas-Idaho corridor is sought, that might be an alternative to a I-11/I-80/US 95 convolution.   

[US 89]

I'll try to make the following point without venturing too much into Fictional -- but it appears, according to another thread in this regional board, that while I-11 is now legally designated to head up (more or less) US 95 toward the Reno area, there's being some attention paid to the US 93 (and likely NV 318 as well, being the local NHS artery) corridor up the east side of the state (including one weird-ass interchange!).  Possibly roadfro or other NV-based posters might know if that attention extends beyond Vegas and environs -- i.e., is that corridor through Ely and Wells penciled in for capacity expansion?  Not that I'm trying to find a place to stick an I-13 -- but it seems that if a direct Vegas-Idaho corridor is sought, that might be an alternative to a I-11/I-80/US 95 convolution.

Just throwing in my two cents: I feel like Vegas-Idaho traffic would rather take I-15 and/or I-84. US 93 goes through some pretty big service deserts, but at least I-15 passes through plenty of cities and towns. That said, if there was enough demand for an upgraded north-south highway in eastern Nevada, I would recommend moving US 93 onto NV 318.

[sparker]

I'll try to make the following point without venturing too much into Fictional -- but it appears, according to another thread in this regional board, that while I-11 is now legally designated to head up (more or less) US 95 toward the Reno area, there's being some attention paid to the US 93 (and likely NV 318 as well, being the local NHS artery) corridor up the east side of the state (including one weird-ass interchange!).  Possibly roadfro or other NV-based posters might know if that attention extends beyond Vegas and environs -- i.e., is that corridor through Ely and Wells penciled in for capacity expansion?  Not that I'm trying to find a place to stick an I-13 -- but it seems that if a direct Vegas-Idaho corridor is sought, that might be an alternative to a I-11/I-80/US 95 convolution.

Just throwing in my two cents: I feel like Vegas-Idaho traffic would rather take I-15 and/or I-84. US 93 goes through some pretty big service deserts, but at least I-15 passes through plenty of cities and towns. That said, if there was enough demand for an upgraded north-south highway in eastern Nevada, I would recommend moving US 93 onto NV 318.

I-15/84 is a bit out of the way -- and dealing with traffic from Spanish Fork to Ogden might present an additional issue to LV-Idaho traffic.  But the rub is how much traffic between those two points can be expected both now and in the foreseeable future.  If Idaho continues growing at its present pace -- and that growth extends up the Snake River Valley from Boise and environs -- then something like this corridor might be a consideration.  But the one thing that a Winnemucca-Nampa (or thereabouts) corridor provides that a US 93 alignment does not is access from Northern California as well as southern NV points.  No one, especially commercial drivers, would consider going east from the Bay Area or Sacramento all the way to Wells, turn north to Twin Falls, and backtrack on I-84 to Boise unless it was during a dead-of-winter storm and that was the only route plowed!  A US 93-based Interstate corridor would be useful for one thing -- expediting through traffic from Phoenix or Las Vegas directly to Idaho (unless you really, really wanted to visit Ely!).  And seeing how the Reno vicinity routing was selected for I-11 over alternatives that approximated the US 93 corridor -- to borrow a TV phrase, ''the tribe has spoken".  And somehow I don't think that once I-11 planning and construction commences north from LV, there will be much impetus to tackle a second N-S corridor on the heels of the Reno server.  If considered at all, it would be a long-range prospect at best. 

[roadfro]

I'll try to make the following point without venturing too much into Fictional -- but it appears, according to another thread in this regional board, that while I-11 is now legally designated to head up (more or less) US 95 toward the Reno area, there's being some attention paid to the US 93 (and likely NV 318 as well, being the local NHS artery) corridor up the east side of the state (including one weird-ass interchange!).  Possibly roadfro or other NV-based posters might know if that attention extends beyond Vegas and environs -- i.e., is that corridor through Ely and Wells penciled in for capacity expansion?  Not that I'm trying to find a place to stick an I-13 -- but it seems that if a direct Vegas-Idaho corridor is sought, that might be an alternative to a I-11/I-80/US 95 convolution.

The original I-11 feasibility study seemed to indicate that I-11 could go practically any direction northward from Vegas. There was a map image showing arrows extending northward along several corridors (US 93, US 95, plus a few others that likely made use of some existing state highways).

I seem to recall mention somewhere that while it is preferred I-11 head along US 95 corridor/Reno-ish vicinity, there was mention that the US 93 corridor should not be completely abandoned as a Vegas-Idaho corridor didn't seem without merit. This may have been more in the concept of using 93 as a freight train corridor than expanding roads to Interstate standards. (I can't quite recall where I saw this and can't locate at the moment.)

[kkt]

The original I-11 feasibility study seemed to indicate that I-11 could go practically any direction northward from Vegas. There was a map image showing arrows extending northward along several corridors (US 93, US 95, plus a few others that likely made use of some existing state highways).

I remember that map.  Its message to me was, "We have no idea where I-11 should go next.  Maybe if we show it going everywhere, the people who support all possible routes will support the project."