Talk:Interstate 11

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject U.S. Roads (Rated Future-class, Mid-importance)
U.S. Roads WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the U.S. Roads WikiProject, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to state highways and other major roads in the United States. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 Future  This article has been rated as Future-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
This article has been identified as having the following issues:
USRD MTF no.svg
This article needs a map. Please work with the maps task force to create and add a map to this article.
USRD KML no.svg
This article needs a KML file. Please work with the maps task force to create and add a file for this article.
WikiProject Arizona (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arizona, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Arizona on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Nevada (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon Interstate 11 is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the U.S. state of Nevada. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.


This entire article is dubious at best. There is no empirical, independant sourced information that supports the claims of this article, as opposed to the articles on other proposed interstates. I am very close to bringing this up as an AfD for that very reason. --Mhking 16:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

what about other preposed corridors[edit]

interstate 11 would be beter to be routed from Yuma ,arizona to las vegas,nevade and run parrall to US 95 becasue odd number routes usally run north and south routes. the corridor from wickenburg ,arizona to las vegas along US 93 would be better routed with a preposed intertate 12 becasue thats more of a east to west kind of route and interstate 12 would be a even number . so i cant see why this articale is only looking at one of the preposed corridors (talk) 00:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, Interstate 12 already exists in Louisiana, so I doubt that another I-12 would be put into the Nevada/Arizona area.
I hope my fellow roadgeeks will help back me on this.
Allen (talk) 01:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, Interstate highways can run for hundreds of miles, then stop, then continue again a thousand miles later. This is the case of I-84, which starts at Portland, OR, runs E. to Salt Lake City, where it (apparently) ends. Actually, I-84 begins again at Scranton, PA, then runs through New York state. I always thought I-84 ended at SLC until I talked to a guy from the east coast, who was just as surprised that there was an I-84 in the west. Also, (if anyone cares,) I edited the distance from Hoover Dam to Kingman. The article said the distance is 17 miles, when in fact it is 71. Someone may have transposed the numbers. FooeyDooey837 (talk) 06:30, 17 March 2012 (UTC)FooeyDooey837


I removed the categories "Interstate highways in Arizona" and "Interstate highways in Nevada" from the article. Inclusion within such categories implies that the I-11 exists currently, which it does not. --LJ (talk) 00:14, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Original Research?[edit]

The only source actually mentioning "Interstate 11" is this one. Everything else IMO is pure speculation.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Master son (talkcontribs)

Even then the article is speculation. IMO the only discussion is should this be deleted on the grounds of hoax, or original research.Dave (talk) 07:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Well, there's this one, even if they get their sources from the Las Vegas Sun as well. ----DanTD (talk) 12:45, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
I'll note that the Southern Nevada RTC (encompassing Clark County, NV) wrote a resolution supporting this proposed Interstate corridor which specifically mentioned "Interstate 11". I can't find it right now, but will link it when I find it. --LJ (talk) 21:19, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, the AFD went nowhere; however, this is still an issue. I see two options: merge this article with US 93 or rename this article to something else and strip out all references to the I-11 designation. The latter approach was taken with Interstate 92, a designation that was tossed around by the media and project backers for a "Rooftop Highway" through New York and New England. – TMF 08:44, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

At a minimum the article needs to be renamed. The people who propose the name I-11 have no authority to assign interstate designations. If this road is even built (which itself is not certain), it could just as easily be numbered I-7,9,11,13,21,23,315,715,915,110,310,510,710,910,117,317,517,717,917 or even as an extension of I-19 (which is actually the most logical choice) and still reasonably follow the Interstate numbering pattern. In any case, until the interstate designation is approved, the factual content of this article (the 40% of it left after removing the speculation) will be entirely redundant to the U.S. Route 93 family of articles. Apparently we didn't make this case at AfD, but this article has serious issues regardless.Dave (talk) 23:48, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

Renumbering existing I-17 from I-10 (downtown Phoenix) to Flagstaff as I-19, as well as double designation of the stretch from Tucson to Phoenix as I-10/I-19 is the most logical solution. The I-17 moniker would then be free to use on the Phoenix - Las Vegas Interstate grade corridor (US 93). Confusion? Yes, but the most sensible solution without creating non conforming route numbers, as seen in Pennsylvania with Bud Shusters' Appalachian Thruway. (US 220 / I-99) (----) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:35, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

I'll note that there's talk in Nevada of supporting a wider-reaching Interstate 11. This would incorporate the existing Phoenix-to-Vegas segment along US 93 all the way to the Mexican border, and extend the proposed designation up along US 95 all the way to the Canadian border. If the interstate were so routed, the I-11 numbering would be much less egregious, as the majority of the highway would be west of I-15 and align to the original grid. -- LJ  21:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Removed incorrect info[edit]

I've removed the following paragraph:

News accounts indicate that the Congressional designation include an Interstate 11 segment between Buckeye and Casa Grande. The Arizona Department of Transportation does not have such a freeway on its master plans [1].

There is a freeway in the Arizona Department of Transportation's master plans in the Buckeye-Casa Grande segment: the Hassayampa Freeway. The article currently mentions only the portion of the Hassayampa that was covered by the I-10 Hassayampa Valley Study (see Figure 7.1 in [2]). In the I-8/I-10 Hidden Valley Framework Study, the freeway is planned to continue south of the Estrella Mountains, gradually turning into a east-west direction to connect with I-10 in Casa Grande (see page 3 in [3]). Both of these studies were part of the bqAZ Statewide Framework (see Figure 2 in [4]), which is the basis of the state's 2010–20135 Long-Range Transportation Plan ([5]). Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 11:13, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Page Renaming - Bad Number[edit]

No way this freeway will be called Interstate 11 since it's planned course will be EAST of Interstate 15, so the number has to be BIGGER than 15, and 11 is smaller. Most likely this freeway will be designated as Interstate 16, since the new freeway will be east of I-15 and still west of I-17 in Arizona. I believe that we should rename this article to Interstate 16. Giggett (talk) 18:31, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I-16 already exists in Georgia, so I don't know how that could work. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 22:29, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
That's weird, Georgia should not have such a low number so far east. I guess there can be exceptions on the numbering system. In that case, I-11 seems likely. Giggett (talk) 23:44, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
I know that I answered your query, but you can get even better answers if you ask the U.S. Roads WikiProject. The editors there have much more experience with the U.S. Roads topics than I do. I can try to help, but they are better. Also, consider joining the Project. Allen (Morriswa) (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Interstate 11 was the number promoted by advocates for the designating the interstate corridor. This number was mentioned in recent federal highway authorization, which somewhat locks in the number. I-11 is not so egregious as other numbering violations in the grid (notable others being I-99 and I-238). I-16 is not a numbering violation as it fits in the even-numbered east-west grid between I-10 & I-20. -- LJ  02:47, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

Future Interstate Corridor[edit]

Now that the I-11 signs are up, should we upload a picture of the sign and put it into the article just like you guys did in Interstate 69#History and on Interstate 99#Future? I got some good pictures of the sign that I found on Google Giggett (talk) 20:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

The only signs that are up, from what I can tell, are "Future I-11 Corridor" signs in Arizona...which is not enough to say that I-11 is currently signed. Any pictures of the sign found on Google would need the appropriate license in order for us to use them here (ideally uploaded to Commons). -- LJ  03:22, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

Exact alignment of route[edit]

The article currently says that I-11 will use I-515/US 95 to travel through the Las Vegas Valley. This is incorrect, as the route of I-11 in Nevada has not been decided beyond the end of the Boulder City Bypass project. There are currently three routing alternatives under study by the I-11 team for the route going through/around Las Vegas (with the I-515/US 95 route being one of those options). Similarly, I don't think the exact route has been determined on the Phoenix end either. -- LJ  02:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Well looking at this image, it's pretty clear that I-11 will use I-515 into Las Vegas, especially since I-515 is the only freeway from the Boulder Dam Bypass that goes into the Vegas metro area. Giggett (talk) 16:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
You've linked to an image created by a Arizona newspaper for illustrative purposes. The I-11 study website would be more reliable. The exact alignment is not yet finalized as they are still in the feasibility study stage. -- LJ  04:06, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
The evaluation study (start on page 80) shows that I-515 is only one of the alternatives being considered for the Las Vegas metro area, and that the exact alignment will be determined in future studies. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 02:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)