‘Who does this help?’ US-95 widening project draws ire from downtown residents

A multi-billion dollar plan by the Nevada Department of Transportation to widen and reconstruct US-95 in Downtown Las Vegas is meeting resistance from residents worried about the negative impact it will have on their property values and health.

The Downtown Access Project seeks to improve the stretch of Interstate 515 (US-95) between Rancho Drive and Mojave Road. The freeway hasn’t been widened since 1968 while the metropolitan area has grown 1,000%, say officials. The increased traffic volume associated with that population growth, combined with the natural aging of bridges and the closely spaced exits into downtown, are contributing to congestion and creating potentially dangerous driving conditions.

But at least three dozen downtown households are expected to be displaced as part of the project, which would take several years and billions of dollars to complete. Upwards of 350 households potentially could be displaced, depending on which design the agency decides to pursue.

Residents aired their concerns and grievances with NDOT’s Downtown Access Project last week during a public meeting at East Las Vegas Community Center.

Several speakers argued the widening of US-95 primarily benefits Nevadans who live in the outskirts of the valley and commute in — and that it does so at the expense of those living in the urban core.

Resident Paola Davila demanded to know how NDOT believes, as it states in project materials, that there will be “no adverse air quality impact” when it would dramatically increase the volume of vehicles on the roadways.

Southern Nevada is already out of compliance with federal air quality standards.

“Why are we not working on lowering it and actually meeting the standards?” she asked project representatives. “How are you going to come into our community and say this is what we’re spending our money on? We pay — our tax money — so that we get to start having breathing problems…”

A draft environmental impact statement is tentatively scheduled for release in May 2024.

The Downtown Access Project is currently in (and only funded for) phase 1, which includes the design process and environmental impact study.

Davila said NDOT has an obligation to make sure the freeway is safe but that billions of dollars would be better spent on other needs: “(I’d like) for this money to go actually toward our community.”

She added, “I want to walk. I want children to be able to walk safely. I want moms to walk to the parks safely with their strollers.”

To build or not to build

NDOT first unveiled three design plans last year and began soliciting feedback. 

The department says staff held 15 “kitchen-table style conversations” with nearly 150 residents and businesses whose properties would be impacted by the project. The feedback from those conversations resulted in the creation of five additional plans — known as Design Alternatives 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 — which the department is now presenting to the public and accepting feedback on.

Design Alternative 4 is known as the “no build” option and would leave the freeway as is.

Project manager Ryan Wheeler said the no build option triggers a different set of consequences, including the state having to spend millions to keep the freeway safe. He noted that NDOT recently spent $30 million on rehabbing some of the freeway’s bridges “to make them last a little bit longer.”

One woman said she has seen the impact of a fallen freeway, referencing a Bay Area freeway that collapsed during an earthquake: “When the Cypress Freeway failed, nobody was worried about who was going to pay for moving because they were trying to bury their people. Y’all need to fix that freeway. It’s worse if it falls.”

Design Alternatives 5 through 8 would all add two additional lanes in both directions and erect what’s known as collector-distributor (CD) roads for vehicles entering US-95 from I-15. The CD roads would run parallel with US-95, have their own downtown exits, and then fully merge with US-95 only after those existing chokepoints.

They all displace between 46 and 51 households, between two and 11 businesses, and six community facilities (including a municipal swimming pool and Dula Community Center). None of the plans include walking and bike trails adjacent to the freeway, which is something NDOT proposed in its original designs but axed after hearing concerns about such areas attracting homeless people.

The proposed plans differ on other design elements. Option 7 moves the US-95 northbound to I-15 northbound ramp, whereas the others do not. Option 8 is the costliest option by far and proposes making the downtown stretch of US-95 recessed, meaning it would be below ground level and not on an elevated dirt embankment as proposed in the other plans. Option 8 would also displace the most people — 372 households.

As part of its project mitigation plan, NDOT has proposed committing $20 million for “Complete Streets” projects, $15 million to replace on a 1-to-1 ratio any household units it razes as part of right-of-way acquisition, $10 million for “resources for the unhoused community,” and $10 million for an indoor recreation area to replace the existing ones it would tear down.

NDOT also says all of the owners of the properties downtown will be fairly compensated. But some residents expressed concern that people may not be able to find similarly priced replacement homes because average home prices have risen tremendously since they bought.

Joe Clark, who owns nine homes downtown, said he supports the no-build option and believes the City of Las Vegas puts off making much needed neighborhood improvements because it wants to “see what happens” with US-95.

“Property values have been suppressed in our neighborhood since I’ve lived there and improvements never done because of this freeway thing,” said Clark. “I have been through this freeway thing. I think this is the third time.”