daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old February 27th, 2014, 02:20 AM   #9461
Airman Kris™
Infrastructure Geek
 
Airman Kris™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Memphis ~ Southwest Florida
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 129

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredcalif View Post
It is time for Las VEgas and Phoenix to be connected by a nice Freeway.
this are the 2 largest cities not connected by interstate system.

it is still a long way before this happen. maybe by 2020 or 2025

we really need more investment in this country, no wonder we are falling fast on the rankings when it comes to infrastructure.
With the restricted wilderness areas southeast of Vegas, there is no way to get that direct route between LV and Phoenix
__________________
American

Last edited by Airman Kris™; February 27th, 2014 at 02:27 AM.
Airman Kris™ no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old February 27th, 2014, 02:43 AM   #9462
Kanadzie
Registered User
 
Kanadzie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,373
Likes (Received): 746

But it isn't a lot of space... I mean, surely could just build a second carriageway on hwy 93 and a couple overpasses...
Kanadzie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2014, 02:58 AM   #9463
Professor L Gee
Fan of skylines, highways
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Newport News, VA (hometown); Raleigh, NC (current)
Posts: 257
Likes (Received): 21

According to Google Maps, 93 is already a divided expressway from Las Vegas to Kingman.

From Kingman to Metro Phoenix it's undivided... but there's also almost literally nothing there.
__________________
Linguist by trade, roadfan since childhood

US Top 50 Cities inhabited, visited, or passed through:
1 - New York
5 - Philadelphia
12 - Jacksonville
14 - Columbus
17 - Charlotte
21 - Washington
23 - Detroit
25 - Nashville

30 - Baltimore
31 - Milwaukee
38 - Atlanta
41 - Raleigh
42 - Miami
43 - Virginia Beach
36 to go...


Airman Kris™ liked this post
Professor L Gee no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2014, 05:06 AM   #9464
Airman Kris™
Infrastructure Geek
 
Airman Kris™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Memphis ~ Southwest Florida
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 129

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kanadzie View Post
But it isn't a lot of space... I mean, surely could just build a second carriageway on hwy 93 and a couple overpasses...
It is indeed divided; But it has relatively low traffic and for the government to "promote" it to a national interstate highway would face uproar for environmental reasons. Secondly, there is nil in that area, population wise, for emergencies such as wrecks, so it would take rescue crews too much time to respond to emergencies. That in turn would cost money to construct multiple rest areas, emergency phone post,etc.

Your best bet would be to construct the interstate starting from PHX-Bullhead City-Boulder City. From there have it connect with the 515. I would say stretch it to the 15 but we all know the added headache it would add to that mess. Imagine the traffic from LAX and Pheonix coming from that one stretch of the 15?
__________________
American
Airman Kris™ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2014, 07:36 AM   #9465
Natomasken
Registered User
 
Natomasken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: La Center, Washington
Posts: 140
Likes (Received): 40

I drove 93 from Las Vegas to Phoenix last year and I'd say over half of the section between I-40 and Phoenix has already been upgraded to 4-lane divided (but not freeway). Outside of Phoenix, I'd agree that 4-lane divided is perfectly adequate along this route, as there are no towns to speak of north of Wickenburg.

There is an organization that's promoting upgrading this route to Interstate 11:

www.interstate11.org

This would be part of the proposed Canamex Corridor, stretching from Edmonton, AB to Mexico City. Within the US, the I-11 segment is the only section that's not already part of the Interstate system. It uses I-15 from Las Vegas to Canada, and I-10 and I-19 from Phoenix to Mexico.

www.canamex.org

Just as an aside, it drives me crazy that the route is designated US 93 all the way to Wickenburg, but then picks up the US 60 designation from there to Phoenix. US 60 west of Phoenix has been an irrelevant route since I-10 was built, not significant enough to justify a US route designation. IMO, it should be dropped and the current 60 route between central Phoenix and Wickenburg ought to be redesignated as an extension of US 93 for continuity, as this important route deserves a single route number.
Natomasken no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2014, 04:54 PM   #9466
ttownfeen
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: William T. Sherman's stomping grounds
Posts: 454
Likes (Received): 17

Not every major highway needs to be an interstate. If Arizona wants a high-speed vehicular route between PHX and LAS, they can upgrade it to freeway standard themselves.
ttownfeen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2014, 08:34 PM   #9467
Penn's Woods
Deadpan Snarker
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 6,241
Likes (Received): 779

Well, Las Vegas and Phoenix are much larger cities than, say, Fort Smith and Texarkana. And much larger than they were when the Interstate network was being planned.

But how about an Interstate from Las Vegas southeast to I-40 - call it I-42, say - so the "normal" route from Las Vegas to Phoenix would become 42, 40, 17. Would that make sense?
__________________
I didn't vote for him....

DRIVEN IN BEEN IN:
AL CA CT DE DC FL GA ID IL IN KY ME MD MA MI MN MO MT NH NJ NY NC ND OH OR PA RI SC SD TN UT VT VA WA WV WI WY ---
AB BC MB NB NS ON PE QC SK ---
A B CH D F GB I L NL
Penn's Woods no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2014, 09:07 PM   #9468
diablo234
Oh No He Didn't
 
diablo234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,297

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penn's Woods View Post
Well, Las Vegas and Phoenix are much larger cities than, say, Fort Smith and Texarkana. And much larger than they were when the Interstate network was being planned.

But how about an Interstate from Las Vegas southeast to I-40 - call it I-42, say - so the "normal" route from Las Vegas to Phoenix would become 42, 40, 17. Would that make sense?
The stretch between Fort Smith and Texarkana is supposed to be part of a larger highway connecting New Orleans to Kansas City so you can't really compare the two just on that merit.
diablo234 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 27th, 2014, 09:25 PM   #9469
Penn's Woods
Deadpan Snarker
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 6,241
Likes (Received): 779

Well, the last example that some on this thread thought was a bit much was I-14, but I couldn't remember where that goes, or will go.... (Killeen to, to, um, some place else) So I used that arguably bad example instead. But, okay, I think a Las Vegas-to-Phoenix corridor, or at least the portion north of I-40, is at least as reasonable a place for an Interstate as that Killeen-to-wherever corridor. Or Interstate 2.
__________________
I didn't vote for him....

DRIVEN IN BEEN IN:
AL CA CT DE DC FL GA ID IL IN KY ME MD MA MI MN MO MT NH NJ NY NC ND OH OR PA RI SC SD TN UT VT VA WA WV WI WY ---
AB BC MB NB NS ON PE QC SK ---
A B CH D F GB I L NL
Penn's Woods no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 12:30 AM   #9470
Natomasken
Registered User
 
Natomasken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: La Center, Washington
Posts: 140
Likes (Received): 40

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penn's Woods View Post
But how about an Interstate from Las Vegas southeast to I-40 - call it I-42, say - so the "normal" route from Las Vegas to Phoenix would become 42, 40, 17. Would that make sense?
I wouldn't think so. The US 93/US 60 route is much shorter, per Google maps, 294 miles vs. 398 via I-40/I-17. Although over 100 miles longer, the driving time is only about an hour longer, due to higher average speeds on the interstates. But if 93 were upgraded to interstate standards, the time difference would increase. The section of the route along US 60/Grand Ave. through the western Phoenix suburbs can be very slow (you're better off taking AZ-101 south to I-10).
Natomasken no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 04:41 PM   #9471
rantanamo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Dallas, Texas
Posts: 3,507
Likes (Received): 353

93 is where it is because of the mountain ranges. If a SE route directly to Phoenix were built it would be a huge undertaking and engineering feat. 93 being updated would probably be the best bet cost-wise
rantanamo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 05:01 PM   #9472
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,572
Likes (Received): 19366

The population of the United States has doubled since the original Interstate Highway plans were made in the mid-1950s. It's rather notable that no significant revision of the plan has been made. Most later Interstate projects were state-pushed projects, instead of a national reassessment of the Interstate Highway system.

I can think of a few corridors that would make sense as a federal funded Interstate Highway in the character of the original 1956 plan, for example;

* Phoenix - Las Vegas
* Houston - Austin
* Bakersfield - Sacramento (CA-99)
* New Orleans - Kansas City
* Meridian - Columbus - Macon
* Dallas - Tulsa - Kansas City
* San Diego - Phoenix (I-8/10 connector)
* Raleigh - Norfolk
* Norfolk - Philadelphia
* Charlotte - Wilmington
* Houston - Brownsville
* Chicago - Kansas City
* Indianapolis - Grand Rapids

Most of these places are located in the south and southwest, where a large proportion of growth took place since 1960.
__________________

my clinched highways / travel mapping • highway photography @ Flickr and Youtube

Airman Kris™ liked this post
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 05:06 PM   #9473
Penn's Woods
Deadpan Snarker
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 6,241
Likes (Received): 779

I don't agree with all of those (for what it's worth), but not a bad plan.
__________________
I didn't vote for him....

DRIVEN IN BEEN IN:
AL CA CT DE DC FL GA ID IL IN KY ME MD MA MI MN MO MT NH NJ NY NC ND OH OR PA RI SC SD TN UT VT VA WA WV WI WY ---
AB BC MB NB NS ON PE QC SK ---
A B CH D F GB I L NL
Penn's Woods no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 06:26 PM   #9474
Natomasken
Registered User
 
Natomasken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: La Center, Washington
Posts: 140
Likes (Received): 40

I would add to Chris' list conversion of CA-58 between I-5 and Barstow to an extension of I-40. This route carries a lot of traffic between the SF Bay Area/Northern California and Las Vegas, and provides a useful bypass of Los Angeles congestion for those going between Arizona/points east and Northern California/points north. Some of the route has been upgraded to interstate standards already (between Barstow and Mojave), some is substandard freeway (around Tehachapi), but much remains 2-lane. To make the LA bypass complete, I'd like to see either US 395 between I-15 and CA-58 (I-40) or CA-138 between CA-14 and I-15 upgraded to freeway standard as well.
Natomasken no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 06:49 PM   #9475
Airman Kris™
Infrastructure Geek
 
Airman Kris™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Memphis ~ Southwest Florida
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 129

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
The population of the United States has doubled since the original Interstate Highway plans were made in the mid-1950s. It's rather notable that no significant revision of the plan has been made. Most later Interstate projects were state-pushed projects, instead of a national reassessment of the Interstate Highway system.

I can think of a few corridors that would make sense as a federal funded Interstate Highway in the character of the original 1956 plan, for example;

* Phoenix - Las Vegas
* Houston - Austin
* Bakersfield - Sacramento (CA-99)
* New Orleans - Kansas City
* Meridian - Columbus - Macon
* Dallas - Tulsa - Kansas City
* San Diego - Phoenix (I-8/10 connector)
* Raleigh - Norfolk
* Norfolk - Philadelphia
* Charlotte - Wilmington
* Houston - Brownsville
* Chicago - Kansas City
* Indianapolis - Grand Rapids

Most of these places are located in the south and southwest, where a large proportion of growth took place since 1960.

Will like to add to that and to one of your suggested routes:
* Hattiesburg - Meridian - Columbus - Macon

Then aswell... * Canton - Pittsburgh

All of yours are great ideas Chris!
__________________
American
Airman Kris™ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 06:58 PM   #9476
Penn's Woods
Deadpan Snarker
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 6,241
Likes (Received): 779

As far as the Mississippi-to-Macon corridor is concerned: 20/59 already runs basically east-west west of Tuscaloosa; 85 runs east-west for a bit east of Montgomery... I think something forking off of 85 where it starts to turn north then going over to Columbus would suffice. If you're trying to get from Jackson to Montgomery, you can use 20 to 459 to 65.

I don't see why Canton to Pittsburgh needs to be an Interstate, or why we need interstates from Kansas City to both Joplin (or wherever 49 crosses 44) and Tulsa.
__________________
I didn't vote for him....

DRIVEN IN BEEN IN:
AL CA CT DE DC FL GA ID IL IN KY ME MD MA MI MN MO MT NH NJ NY NC ND OH OR PA RI SC SD TN UT VT VA WA WV WI WY ---
AB BC MB NB NS ON PE QC SK ---
A B CH D F GB I L NL
Penn's Woods no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 08:15 PM   #9477
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,572
Likes (Received): 19366

The Dallas/Tulsa - Kansas City issue is interesting. Originally, there was only the Kansas Turnpike which runs west and then southwest to Wichita before turning south, which is quite a detour compared to the US 169 to Tulsa.

Later, I-35 was constructed as a free alternate route to the Kansas Turnpike between Emporia and Kansas City. I always found this a bit weird considering it is not much shorter and the only new town to be served was Ottawa.

Over the years, five routes were developed into partial freeways south(west) of Kansas City, the Kansas Turnpike, I-35, US 169, US 69 and US 71. US 71 eventually gained prominence and was rebuilt into a freeway. On the other side of the state line, US 69 was partially turned into a freeway. Parts of US 169 (the most direct route from Kansas City to Tulsa) have also been turned into a freeway, but large sections are still non-freeway.

I think it would've made more sense to turn US 169 into an Interstate than I-35 east of Emporia. Nowadays Tulsa is quite a large urban area (1 million).
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 28th, 2014, 08:40 PM   #9478
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,543

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisZwolle View Post
* Phoenix - Las Vegas
* Houston - Austin
* Bakersfield - Sacramento (CA-99)
* New Orleans - Kansas City
* Meridian - Columbus - Macon
* Dallas - Tulsa - Kansas City
* San Diego - Phoenix (I-8/10 connector)
* Raleigh - Norfolk
* Norfolk - Philadelphia
* Charlotte - Wilmington
* Houston - Brownsville
* Chicago - Kansas City
* Indianapolis - Grand Rapids
On a map, with subsequent proposals with light gray lines.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 1st, 2014, 06:00 AM   #9479
Airman Kris™
Infrastructure Geek
 
Airman Kris™'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Memphis ~ Southwest Florida
Posts: 190
Likes (Received): 129

Quote:
Originally Posted by Penn's Woods View Post
As far as the Mississippi-to-Macon corridor is concerned: 20/59 already runs basically east-west west of Tuscaloosa; 85 runs east-west for a bit east of Montgomery... I think something forking off of 85 where it starts to turn north then going over to Columbus would suffice. If you're trying to get from Jackson to Montgomery, you can use 20 to 459 to 65.

I don't see why Canton to Pittsburgh needs to be an Interstate, or why we need interstates from Kansas City to both Joplin (or wherever 49 crosses 44) and Tulsa.
That would suffice I suppose, traffic is not heavy enough to bother at the moment in many of those areas now that I think about it.

As for the Canton to Pitt, I-77 goes from Cleveland-Akron-Canton with all the suburbs between making a huge macro-metropolitan area. Having the Canton to Pitt route would connect all these metros together. Seems reasonable to me. Have 77 make that southeast turn and there you go. Let's not forget the booming shale-drilling industry in that area right now; Its forcing towns such as Carrollton,Ohio to have to deal with twice as long commutes and double the traffic. Expect that corridor to soar in growth in the next 10 years.
__________________
American
Airman Kris™ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 1st, 2014, 09:49 PM   #9480
Penn's Woods
Deadpan Snarker
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 6,241
Likes (Received): 779

There are already two Interstate corridors (80-then-76 from Cleveland, just-plain-76 from Akron) connecting the Cleveland/Akron/Canton area to Pittsburgh, so you're really talking about another one just for Canton/Pittsburgh traffic. Upgrading US 30 ought to be enough.
__________________
I didn't vote for him....

DRIVEN IN BEEN IN:
AL CA CT DE DC FL GA ID IL IN KY ME MD MA MI MN MO MT NH NJ NY NC ND OH OR PA RI SC SD TN UT VT VA WA WV WI WY ---
AB BC MB NB NS ON PE QC SK ---
A B CH D F GB I L NL
Penn's Woods no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
america, california, highway, highways, interstate, los angeles, united states, urban

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:49 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium