meeting photo

Here’s What We Heard:

  • Solve the traffic problems.
  • Don’t harm the environment.
  • Consider other alternatives.
  • Do something fast.
These are just some of the themes that surfaced as a result of our talking with you.
tabWe have received many comments on the three alternative crossings being considered and the no-build alternative. Mostly, we heard support for the project in the form of one alternative or another. Additional alternatives suggested were alignments further to the south of the dam and an alternative that would use the U.S. 95 corridor instead of the U.S. 93. A number of comments at all three meetings emphasized the need to minimize environmental impact to wildlife habitat like the Peregrine falcon, the mountain lion and the bighorn sheep.
tabWe heard from frustrated Boulder City Residents that this project does nothing to reduce the traffic congestion and noise in Boulder City. We also heard from you that the traffic problems on the Hoover Dam are unacceptable. Here are some direct comments from you:

“Why will it take so long to build the Hoover Dam Bypass when the construction of the dam only took 5 years?” – Kingman Meeting attendee

“Accelerate funding effort by going to beneficiaries (casinos, users, etc.) to get funds for design and construction.” – Kingman Meeting attendee

“The Goldstrike or Sugarloaf Alignments are preferred due to visibility reasons.”
– Las Vegas Meeting attendee.

“I suggest choosing an alternative that is safest and has the least environmental impact.”
– Las Vegas Meeting attendee

“Drop all 3 alternatives and build the project further downstream.”
– Boulder City Meeting attendee

“Present crossing and approaches are a nightmare for cars when traffic is at capacity with trucks.”
– Boulder City Meeting attendee

“The federal government is planning to build the Hoover Dam Bypass with Boulder City having no guarantee of a suitable Boulder City Bypass simultaneous with the Hoover Dam Bypass.”
– Boulder City Meeting attendee


The Project Management Team (PMT) for the Hoover Dam Bypass Project thanks all of you who attended the informal public meetings October 27-29, 1997 and provided comments on the project. We enjoyed meeting you and hearing from you about the need for the project and ways to solve the traffic congestion at Hoover Dam. The meetings were held in Boulder City and Las Vegas, Nevada, and Kingman, Arizona, with approximately 250 people in attendance.

The PMT Talks to Local, State and Federal Agencies A multi-agency workshop was hosted by the Project Management Team on October 29, 1997. The purpose of the meeting was to:

  1. Inform local, state and federal agencies about the Team’s direction to complete the environmental process.
  2. Discuss individual agency issues and concerns about the project.
  3. Develop a partnership and promote communications among the agencies.
The session resulted in a Team Charter signed by all participants acknowledging a willingness to work together to achieve the best possible project.

meeting photo

Here’s What’s Next…

The comments received at the three public meetings and the multi-agency workshop will be considered as the work on the draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) resumes this winter. You will receive the next newsletter prior to the completion of the DEIS and the public hearings, which are scheduled for the summer of 1998.

For More Information
Call our project voice-mail at 702/369-6904 extension 234. Or contact :
tabJames D. Roller (HFL-16)
tab Project Manager
tab Federal Highway Administration
tab 555 Zang Street, Room 259
tab Lakewood, CO 80228.
tab Telephone number: 303/716-2009
tab FAX number: 303/969-5900

Special Acknowledgment

Congratulations to Mr. Barron Lauderbaugh from the Nevada Department of Transportation for creating the winning logo for the Hoover Dam Bypass Project. The logo was selected from over 25 entries from employees of the PMT member agencies.

Page last updated Monday, November 8, 1999