Keystone Avenue reopens after Reno crash downs power lines

Reno police arrested the driver on suspicion of driving under the influence. No injuries were reported. Those are important limits on the account: the collision damaged roadside infrastructure and blocked a roadway, but the available reporting identifies no injured person, and the arrest is not a finding of guilt.⁠2

According to Reno Police Department information reported by KRXI and KRNV, a silver Toyota sedan struck multiple poles at approximately 12:36 a.m. It was a single-vehicle crash. Police said the driver remained at the scene and was subsequently arrested; the circumstances that sent the car into the poles remain under investigation.⁠1⁠2

The collision brought down several power lines. Officers investigated while crews worked to clear them from the roadway, and Keystone was closed between the two cross streets during that work. The latest full reports from both stations confirm that traffic can use the stretch again. Neither gives an exact reopening time.⁠1⁠2

For drivers, the useful change is straightforward: the crash-related closure has ended. Earlier reporting that described Keystone as closed has been superseded by the reopening account. That is a change in the road’s status, not a disagreement over whether the collision or the closure happened.⁠1⁠2

The timing also needs separating. The approximately 12:36 a.m. time belongs to the crash on Wednesday, November 4—not to the reopening, and not to a second crash overnight into Thursday. The reports describe one collision, followed by an investigation, clearance work and the eventual return of traffic.⁠2

A dated Spot On Nevada entry linking to KRNV shows that the suspected-DUI arrest had been publicly reported by 02:21 UTC on November 5. That timestamp establishes when the information was in circulation, not when officers made the arrest. It also does not establish the moment police first released the information.⁠3

That distinction keeps the chronology honest without pretending the public account is more precise than it is. The crash time is reported; the exact arrest and reopening times are not. Without a reopening time, there is no sound basis for calculating how many hours the road was closed.⁠1⁠2⁠3

Clearing a road and completing repairs to electrical infrastructure are different milestones. The reports establish that crews removed the downed-line obstruction sufficiently for traffic to resume. They do not establish that every damaged pole has been permanently repaired or that all work associated with the collision is finished.⁠1⁠2

There is also no verified customer-outage total or utility-restoration timetable in the available account. Downed lines alone do not tell readers how many homes or businesses, if any, lost service. The reopening should therefore not be read as either a declaration that electrical service was fully restored or evidence that a service interruption continues.⁠1⁠2

The police question is separate again. DUI suspicion is the basis given for the driver’s arrest, while investigators continue to examine the circumstances leading to the collision. The available account does not settle that inquiry. It would overstate the evidence to turn the reported suspicion into a final explanation of how the crash occurred.⁠2

The next meaningful developments would be a police finding about the collision or a utility statement clarifying repairs and any service effects. For now, the confirmed outcome is narrower but useful: no injuries were reported, the fallen lines no longer block this stretch of Keystone, and the investigation remains open.⁠1⁠2