Talk:Interstate 580 (Nevada)

message: In case your not sure I-580 does start from SR-431 and end at Exit 72, not from SR-667 to I-80.
I live here in Reno and the information on this page is incomplete and I'm trying to fix that.
I am sure on the termini for I-580.  Nevada DOT recognizes I-580 as currently existing from I-80 to SR-667/Neil Road (formerly Del Monte Ln) in Reno, a distance of 4.989.  This information is from the most recent version of NDOT's State Maintained Highways: Descriptions, Index and Maps published January 2006 and available here (on page 88 of this PDF document): <http://www.nevadadot.com/reports_pubs/state_maintained/pdf/sm_book.pdf>.  In my edit, I was attempting to provide information based on what is current and what has been verified to be occurring in the future.
I also live here in Reno...and I'm also a roadgeek and civil/transportation engineer.  Every single source I've come across indicates that the I-580 designation will not continue north of I-80.  This is consistent with the general notion that Interstate Spurs (which I-580 is) serve a general population center not located on the main Interstate route; there is no major population center that would be served by I-580 extending north four miles to Virginia Street.  If you can provide a source that says I-580 will/does go north of I-80, I'd be glad to see it.
By the way, Exit 70 on US 395 is for North McCarran Blvd, not East and West.  Ljthefro 07:13, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I-580 Termini

message: Signs used to say both "East Lake Blvd" and "Eastlake Blvd" for this exit.  After construction wrapped on phase 1 of the Carson City freeway, the exit number was changed and the signs that said "East Lake" were corrected to read "Eastlake".  The name also reads this way on several online maps.
Also, I removed the SR 429 reference from this part of the exit since Eastlake Blvd is not on SR 429.  To leave it in would be analogous to putting "(SR 430)" after Damonte Ranch Pkwy, South Meadows Pkwy and Neil Road, just because Virginia Street can be easily accessed from these interchanges.  As a compromise on the Eastlake exit, I put "To SR 429" in the notes column.
:OK - that makes sense. I changed it to read "FR WA45 to SR 429", since the part of Eastlake Boulevard under US 395, connecting to SR 429, is state maintained. (It would probably be SR 429 itself had SR 428 never existed.) --NE2 18:30, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: While technically correct, nobody would understand the "FR WA45" reference.  NDOT doesn't sign state-maintained frontage roads at all. The only possible way one could tell they were on an NDOT frontage road would be by the milepost, and even then NDOT doesn't post these consistently on the FR's.  How about we just put "To SR 429"?  BTW: Eastlake probably wouldn't have been SR 429, since SR 429  is old US 395 and Eastlake Blvd is not.  NDOT assigned the entire old highway to SR 429 in this area to keep it in the state system (primarily as a truck/camper detour during high winds).  Ljthefro (talk) 21:52, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, then Eastlake Boulevard (to SR 429) it is. I'm still not convinced that's necessary; NDOT seems to be overly strict about only allowing one alignment to have a certain number, since Eastlake west of US 395 is functionally SR 429 northbound. --NE2 23:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Eastlake Exit

message: Can someone put a list of construction updates (or update the "timeline" that is already there)?
I read that the construction has been delayed 6 months!  I think that needs to be mentioned somewhere.
Thank you in advance,
Allen (talk) 11:13, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction Updates 

message: But, apparently some people here do not want that to be public as every time I edit the page to state the facts, the updates are deleted.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.4.194 (talk) 02:54, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I see here, you were blanking the Route description section entirely. You're lucky you didn't get a block for this, as that is considered vandalism. --Rschen7754 02:58, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Although far from ready for GAC nomination, I've quickly moved the text around so the article is at least up to date (but needs sources). Any objections to removing the article protection? I think we don't have to worry about section blanking now. Dave (talk) 05:03, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have unprotected it without prejudice to reprotecting should the blanking return. --Rschen7754 06:21, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

text: To anybody else who wants to work on this until I get back to it, I just realized the route description I wrote is backwards (it should progress south to north). Curses. I'll fix it, but if in the interim anybody else works on this article, please keep that in mind. Dave (talk) 17:02, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

text: The mile or so between US-50 and Fairview drive is signed US-50/US-395, no I-580 shields. However, I'm not sure that's even worth mentioning. It's a temporary thing and this is not unusual for spur freeways to not be signed on their last mile or so before the dead end. Dave (talk) 15:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

text: PS Dough, I already promised to fix the route description and its not that much more effort to reverse route description as it is to find and tag the article. Was that really necessary? Dave (talk) 15:29, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The reason I bring it up is that while the current terminus is "temporary", NDOT seems to keep pushing back completion of the CC bypass...the temporary end could be semi-permanent for the next several years... -- LJ ↗ 08:33, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for fixing the exit list. I freely admit what I put up was hurried. I'm not sure I agree with stating US-50 is the southern terminus based on field signage, but I'm not objecting either. IMO, this is no different than other spur freeways, like Interstate 280 (California), Interstate 395 (Maryland) or even Interstate 19 where signage disappears the last few miles before the dead end of the freeway. I think it's just logical the DOT would not want signage to direct people to a freeway in a direction that only extends for 1 or 2 more exits. However, there were several other issues that I missed with the exit list, thanks for getting those.Dave (talk) 17:00, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I revised the list to go with the AASHTO/FHWA approval for field signage. If NDOT's next log update shows 580 as extending south of US 50, I might think about revising the article to reflect Fairview as the south end. -- LJ ↗ 09:05, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Freeway is open and signed from Reno to Carson City 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Interstate 580 (Nevada). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080527104511/http://www.freewayextension.com:80/ to http://www.freewayextension.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:25, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Checked.  LJ ↗ 18:12, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: With the scheduled opening of the freeway in August, this article will be out of date soon. I'm just listing stuff here that could be used to both get the article updated and improved once the dust settles. Feel free to add whatever else is found. Dave (talk) 15:47, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  August opening