News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

TX: Ports to Plains corridor study

Started by MaxConcrete, May 12, 2020, 09:16:08 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Rothman

The IIJA relaxed the 10-year rule.  Just was in a meeting the other day where the implications of the IIJA were still being meted out (e.g., projects that broke the rule before the IIJA but FHWA hadn't made a final determination on waivers or repayments).  It's fun when laws change and regulatory agencies have to sift through hundreds of pages of legalese to stay out of trouble.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.


DNAguy

Has there been anyone who has overlayed the maps of the proposed I14 WITH the I27 extension as well?

There's some overlap there, isn't there?

My grand idea here would be the following:

Brady to Midland would become I-18. Then, in Midland I-327 connects to I-27 / US-87 in Lamessa.

I-14 takes its southern route and eventually terminates into I10.

The San Angelo to Sterling City along current US87 will be duplexed as I-27 and I-18.

This way, there's no I27W and I27E.

There are other ways to number this too.... If you didn't want to use I18.

I guess you could make a I-X14 spur between Brady and San Angelo.

Then you'd likely make the western loop from Lamessa to Sterling city I-627... but my guess is they'll likely make that the dreaded E / W of I27.


Bobby5280

#202
The only overlap between the proposed I-14 route and a possible South extension of I-27 is the segment between Midland and San Angelo.

I think chances are between extremely slim and absolutely none that a Southern leg of I-14 would ever be built to I-10. If it was built it would most likely result in I-14N and I-14S routes, regardless if anyone likes suffixed routes or not. By the way, if any highway corridor out in West Texas was worthy of an Eastward Interstate branch off I-10 it would be US-290 going to Austin. Not friggin' Brady or Killeen.

If I-14 was ever built out as far West as Midland it would help eliminate the need of a I-27W/I-27E split, assuming the Ports to Plains Corridor was upgraded to Interstate standards. I-14 would consume the I-27W route from Sterling City to Midland. TX-349 from Lamesa down to Midland could be given a 3-digit I-x27 designation or just remain named as TX-349.

bwana39

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 31, 2023, 02:06:35 PM
The only overlap between the proposed I-14 route and a possible South extension of I-27 is the segment between Midland and San Angelo.

I think chances are between extremely slim and absolutely none that a Southern leg of I-14 would ever be built to I-10. If it was built it would most likely result in I-14N and I-14S routes, regardless if anyone likes suffixed routes or not. By the way, if any highway corridor out in West Texas was worthy of an Eastward Interstate branch off I-10 it would be US-290 going to Austin. Not friggin' Brady or Killeen.

If I-14 was ever built out as far West as Midland it would help eliminate the need of a I-27W/I-27E split, assuming the Ports to Plains Corridor was upgraded to Interstate standards. I-14 would consume the I-27W route from Sterling City to Midland. TX-349 from Lamesa down to Midland could be given a 3-digit I-x27 designation or just remain named as TX-349.

Yeah but... Fort Hood trumps Austin any day.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

DJStephens

#204
Quote from: bwana39 on January 19, 2023, 02:57:25 PM
It is the Ports to Plains Corridor Study

Not the Ports to Plains Interstate Highway Study

While there is a significant number who will suggest that this is the ONLY alternative, there are several things that might happen.
1. Interstate or interstate equivalent all the way from IH-70 to Laredo (or even Interstate 2) including splits going Through Midland, Odessa, or Abilene or maybe all three.
2. A straight shot Interstate or Interstate equivalent mostly following US-87 through Big Spring again all the way from I-70 to Mexico.
3. Nothing, the route remains basically as it is with repairs and minor upgrades as population and traffic changes.  Simply the " NO BUILD" option.
I believe the study will show that it needs to mostly be four laned. It needs some loops and bypasses to get around particularly the smaller towns. 
This is a study to see what is needed. Not a study to rubber stamp a NGO agency's desire to increase the value of scrubby land into commercial property.

Believe #3, (Nothing) has already occurred.   In the fairly distant past.  Money designated for Interstate upgrades to US 84 SE of Lubbock to I-20 (Sweetwater) was shifted elsewhere.   US 84 would be the easiest to upgrade, as it's all four lane divided.   While would personally prefer a Midland / Odessa target for the 27 mainline, can understand the Big Spring / San Angelo routing as well.  Two fairly large population centers, not quite as big as O - M, preexisting four lane limited access incorporation, and providing San Angelo with I connection, where there is none now.   

splashflash

https://www.chron.com/business/article/senate-passes-act-create-i-27-west-midland-18270534.php

Looks like they steered away from the 3DIs, in what is becoming a very Texan numbering scheme.

BUSINESS
Senate passes act to create I-27 West through Midland

SB 992 designates the route numbers for the future interstate highway through Texas and into New Mexico as Laredo to Sterling City as I-27, the connection from Sterling City through Midland to Lamesa as I-27W, the corridor between Sterling City and Lamesa as I-27E, Lamesa northbound through Lubbock to Amarillo passing through Dumas to Raton, New Mexico, as I-27 and the corridor north of Dumas as I-27N.

The Ghostbuster

More Interstate suffixes in Texas? As if 69W/69C/69E were bad enough. I would prefer the Interstate 227 designation for 27W, like the first picture shows. Also, what do you all think about an Interstate 327 spur north of Dumas?

Bobby5280

I don't know. I don't mind the I-27W and I-27E concept as much as vanity designations such as I-99 in Pennsylvania. But the style definitely takes us back to the 1960's and 1970's when suffixed Interstates were more common. I wonder if anyone will try bringing back the odd looking vertical Interstate shields, such as the ones used on I-15E way back then.

Really, I don't care how they number the routes just as long as they start building some key segments of it soon.

Last Saturday I drove back home from Colorado and drove over the Raton-Amarillo segment of the P2P corridor. Um, holy shit, Dumas needs a damned freeway bypass badly! I topped off my fuel tank at the Walmart location on the South side of town. It was around 5:30pm. I had a hell of a time trying to make an at-grade left turn out of that parking lot onto SB US-287. There were so many damned semi trucks along with a lot of other vehicles, some of whom were turning into Walmart in front of me. I finally had to gun-it to get the hell out of there.

I could see building a 3-digit I-x27 route North of Dumas up to Stratford (where the 4-lane US-287 highway reverts to 2-lanes). I don't think it's appropriate calling the spur "I-27N" at all. That would create a conflict with the NB and SB cardinal directions listed on signage. It would either have to be "I-27E" or another 2-digit designation, such as "I-31." But that would only be worth doing if the Interstate was built up thru Boise City into Colorado and up to the junction with I-70 in Limon. If the spur stops at Stratford or the OK border it should just be called something like "I-127."

Judging by how New Mexico has "maintained" the US-64/87 four lane road in the NE corner of the state, I figure it's going to be a cold day in hell before the NM state government devotes any of its tax dollars to building an Interstate quality upgrade of that route. And I could imagine business owners in towns like Clayton possibly raising hell over any proposed freeway bypasses. Still, it doesn't look like anyone is moving to that part of NM at all. So, who knows? Maybe some people there might see a new Interstate as a way to get them on the map and save their towns.

triplemultiplex

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 09, 2023, 12:15:51 AM
I topped off my fuel tank at the Walmart location on the South side of town. It was around 5:30pm. I had a hell of a time trying to make an at-grade left turn out of that parking lot onto SB US-287. There were so many damned semi trucks along with a lot of other vehicles, some of whom were turning into Walmart in front of me. I finally had to gun-it to get the hell out of there.

Should've used the ol' "Michigan left" in that situation.  ;)
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

bwana39

#209
Quote from: splashflash on August 08, 2023, 10:30:36 PM
https://www.chron.com/business/article/senate-passes-act-create-i-27-west-midland-18270534.php

Looks like they steered away from the 3DIs, in what is becoming a very Texan numbering scheme.

BUSINESS
Senate passes act to create I-27 West through Midland

SB 992 designates the route numbers for the future interstate highway through Texas and into New Mexico as Laredo to Sterling City as I-27, the connection from Sterling City through Midland to Lamesa as I-27W, the corridor between Sterling City and Lamesa as I-27E, Lamesa northbound through Lubbock to Amarillo passing through Dumas to Raton, New Mexico, as I-27 and the corridor north of Dumas as I-27N.

They can pass all the enabling legislation they want. If they don't put money with it it means nothing. As long as the highway money comes in user defined grants, the user (TXDOT) will define where it is used. The Texas legislature could mandate it, but I don't see this one mandated by the Legislature.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

DJStephens

#210
Quote from: bwana39 on August 10, 2023, 10:18:09 AM
Quote from: splashflash on August 08, 2023, 10:30:36 PM
https://www.chron.com/business/article/senate-passes-act-create-i-27-west-midland-18270534.php

Looks like they steered away from the 3DIs, in what is becoming a very Texan numbering scheme.

BUSINESS
Senate passes act to create I-27 West through Midland

SB 992 designates the route numbers for the future interstate highway through Texas and into New Mexico as Laredo to Sterling City as I-27, the connection from Sterling City through Midland to Lamesa as I-27W, the corridor between Sterling City and Lamesa as I-27E, Lamesa northbound through Lubbock to Amarillo passing through Dumas to Raton, New Mexico, as I-27 and the corridor north of Dumas as I-27N.
They can pass all the enabling legislation they want. If they don't put money with it it means nothing. As long as the highway money comes in user defined grants, the user (TXDOT) will define where it is used. The Texas legislature might mandate it,but I don't see this one mandated by the Legislature.
Will never happen.  The NM section, at least.  With current mentalities regarding surface infrastructure in Santa Fe, that have existed since Anthony Anaya, no upgrades to US 64 - 87 in terms of I grade improvements will take place.   They "could have" done it right, back in the early 00's, instead of when they did a cheapie Pete Rahn inspired four lane.  Meaning they could have designed a stepping stone type of approach, where several steps would have been taken, towards a full limited access condition.  1. Buy ROW, including corridors for bypasses.  2. Partial build out perhaps a super two on one side of ROW, or an Indiana/Ohio style divided expressway that could be limited accessed later.  But that was not done.  The definition of what was done then, is "throwaway improvement".   Personally, don't think "funneling" additional Class A trucking to Raton Pass, is a good idea, so I don't support any I designation for US 64 - 87 W of Dumas.  Some four laning of remaining two lane sections, fine.  As long as they have an adequate median and aren't regressively designed.   But put the 27 mainline on US 287, with some straightening and more directness to Limon, CO.   

abqtraveler

Quote from: DJStephens on August 11, 2023, 12:34:40 PM
Quote from: bwana39 on August 10, 2023, 10:18:09 AM
Quote from: splashflash on August 08, 2023, 10:30:36 PM
https://www.chron.com/business/article/senate-passes-act-create-i-27-west-midland-18270534.php

Looks like they steered away from the 3DIs, in what is becoming a very Texan numbering scheme.

BUSINESS
Senate passes act to create I-27 West through Midland

SB 992 designates the route numbers for the future interstate highway through Texas and into New Mexico as Laredo to Sterling City as I-27, the connection from Sterling City through Midland to Lamesa as I-27W, the corridor between Sterling City and Lamesa as I-27E, Lamesa northbound through Lubbock to Amarillo passing through Dumas to Raton, New Mexico, as I-27 and the corridor north of Dumas as I-27N.
They can pass all the enabling legislation they want. If they don't put money with it it means nothing. As long as the highway money comes in user defined grants, the user (TXDOT) will define where it is used. The Texas legislature might mandate it,but I don't see this one mandated by the Legislature.
Will never happen.  The NM section, at least.  With current mentalities regarding surface infrastructure in Santa Fe, that have existed since Anthony Anaya, no upgrades to US 64 - 87 in terms of I grade improvements will take place.   They "could have" done it right, back in the early 00's, instead of when they did a cheapie Pete Rahn inspired four lane.  Meaning they could have designed a stepping stone type of approach, where several steps would have been taken, towards a full limited access condition.  1. Buy ROW, including corridors for bypasses.  2. Partial build out perhaps a super two on one side of ROW, or an Indiana/Ohio style divided expressway that could be limited accessed later.  But that was not done.  The definition of what was done then, is "throwaway improvement".   Personally, don't think "funneling" additional Class A trucking to Raton Pass, is a good idea, so I don't support any I designation for US 64 - 87 W of Dumas.  Some four laning of remaining two lane sections, fine.  As long as they have an adequate median and aren't regressively designed.   But put the 27 mainline on US 287, with some straightening and more directness to Limon, CO.
As I have said before, routing I-27 to Raton makes no sense, as it would create a huge bottleneck of traffic going over Raton Pass into Colorado. As it is right now, I-25 going over Raton Pass is narrow, steep, and winding with a 55 mph speed limit for obvious reasons. NMDOT has performed a number of construction projects on its side of Raton Pass in recent years to improve the interchange at the top of the pass and add climbing lanes in certain places, but even with those improvements, the current route would not be able to handle the additional traffic load coming from Amarillo and points south/east should I-27 ever be completed. IMHO, I-27 should be routed north from Amarillo along US-287 and US-385 to I-70 around Limon, Colorado.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Bobby5280

Aside from the bottleneck at Raton Pass, the US-287 corridor really needs to be 4-lane divided with a median or concrete barrier as it crosses the caprock at the OK/CO border. The existing 2 lane road is dangerous. A while back one of my girlfriend's friends was killed in a head-on collison on that stretch of highway.

TXtoNJ

Route it through Boise City as an OTA project, and ensure that Oklahoma derives some benefit from it. I'm sure most trucks would rather pay $30 in tolls rather than risk Raton Pass, especially in the winter time.

Bobby5280

US-287 covers only about 41 miles on its current alignment. I don't think that's really enough to justify building a turnpike. And if a turnpike was built I think, legally, it would have to be built on a new terrain alignment so the original "free" US-287 route could be available as an alternative. Every existing turnpike in Oklahoma can be "shun-piked" to some degree. If US-287 was upgraded to an Interstate class facility on much of its current alignment no "free" alternative road would be needed.

I do think either OTA or ODOT needs to look at building a limited access route Northwest out of the OKC metro up to Woodward. The OTA's long term planning maps have shown such proposals in the past. A new turnpike could directly bridge the odd dog-leg gap between Okarche and Watonga. Really I think the general OK-3 corridor needs to be improved from the NW corner of the state down to the SE corner. If I-27 was extended North along the US-287 corridor up to Limon and I-70 that would cover an incremental segment of a possible OKC-Denver diagonal Interstate corridor. Kit Carson, CO to Fort Supply, OK would be the gap to fill with a diagonal route to cut through the N-S-E-W grid highway layout.

TXtoNJ

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 13, 2023, 06:47:21 PM
US-287 covers only about 41 miles on its current alignment. I don't think that's really enough to justify building a turnpike. And if a turnpike was built I think, legally, it would have to be built on a new terrain alignment so the original "free" US-287 route could be available as an alternative. Every existing turnpike in Oklahoma can be "shun-piked" to some degree. If US-287 was upgraded to an Interstate class facility on much of its current alignment no "free" alternative road would be needed.

I do think either OTA or ODOT needs to look at building a limited access route Northwest out of the OKC metro up to Woodward. The OTA's long term planning maps have shown such proposals in the past. A new turnpike could directly bridge the odd dog-leg gap between Okarche and Watonga. Really I think the general OK-3 corridor needs to be improved from the NW corner of the state down to the SE corner. If I-27 was extended North along the US-287 corridor up to Limon and I-70 that would cover an incremental segment of a possible OKC-Denver diagonal Interstate corridor. Kit Carson, CO to Fort Supply, OK would be the gap to fill with a diagonal route to cut through the N-S-E-W grid highway layout.

There's literally no reason for Oklahoma to build this route if tolls can't be extracted. The long-distance trucks aren't going to be stopping much in Boise City, even if there's a Love's there.

It's 40 miles to almost exclusively serve out-of-state traffic. There will never be the political will within ODOT to spend the ~$250-400 million on this route when that money could go to OKC or Tulsa projects. On the other hand, if this diverts Raton-bound traffic and brings dollars to Oklahoma that wouldn't be spent there to begin with, the route starts to make a lot more sense. It's the exact reason I-95 in Delaware and New Hampshire is tolled.

The Ghostbuster

I think Interstate 27 might have a more difficult time getting constructed north of Amarillo than getting constructed south of Lubbock. An Amarillo-to-Dumas upgrade to interstate standards would likely be doable, but then it would depend on where Interstate 27 would go from there. If 27 followed US 87 to Raton, NM, it would follow a roadway that is two lanes between Dumas and Hartley, but four lanes the rest of the way to Raton, save for the numerous towns it goes through. That route would probably be preferable to sending 27 up the US 287 corridor to Limon, which would go through sparsely populated land with a few towns here and there. The US 287 corridor likely doesn't need any further upgrades to the existing highway, certainly not an upgrade to an interstate standard freeway. I would start with extending 27 towards Laredo first, then concentrate on extending it to Raton.

Bobby5280

Quote from: TXtoNJThere's literally no reason for Oklahoma to build this route if tolls can't be extracted.

Safety issues, such as head-on collisions, make a legit case for that portion of US-287 to at least be a 4-lane divided (and barrier separated) highway.

Some people dislike driving over Raton Pass. The US-64/87 highway thru NE NM kind of sucks. But I still prefer driving over both rather than taking US-287 into Southern Colorado. The route via Raton is safer.

The OTA can cross-pledge turnpike bonds from one turnpike project to another. Still, I think a 40 mile tolled segment of possible-future I-27 is going to operate more substantially in the red than most other turnpikes in OTA's system. Depending on the tolls charged quite a few drivers might shun-pike it, especially if the existing US-287 2-lane road remains available to use. I think it would be more cost effective to build that highway as a "free" Interstate. That way there isn't a parallel "free" 2-lane legacy US-287 to maintain along with a new 40 mile turnpike. If that segment of US-287 was upgraded as a toll-free facility the highway upgrades could be phased in more gradually (four lane it first then add grade separations later).

The thing that needs to happen is the Feds need to fund most of the highway upgrade, like a 90-10 split or better. This short chunk of US-287 is still part of the Ports to Plains Corridor. It's not a local street or highway of only state interest. ODOT and OTA aren't going to fund much of that project on their own.

Quote from: The GhostbusterIf 27 followed US 87 to Raton, NM, it would follow a roadway that is two lanes between Dumas and Hartley, but four lanes the rest of the way to Raton, save for the numerous towns it goes through. That route would probably be preferable to sending 27 up the US 287 corridor to Limon, which would go through sparsely populated land with a few towns here and there.

The 2/3 lane road between Dumas and Hartley is due to be expanded to four lanes sometime in the (maybe) near future.

The Feds would pretty much have to foot the whole bill and maybe even watch-dog construction progress in order for an I-27 route to make its way thru NE New Mexico. State leaders aren't going to cough up any tax dollars for it.

I'm very certain US-287 thru OK and SE CO would attract a great deal more truck traffic if the road was at least four lane divided. It already has an advantage of not going over Raton Pass. But the road in that OK/CO border region is dicey as a mere 2-lane facility.

I think NE NM and SE CO are comparable in terms of sparse population. Towns like Clayton, Capulin and Raton aren't really any bigger than Lamar, Springfield and Eads. NE NM just has better scenery (and it doesn't have any many stinky feed lots and cattle processing facilities near the road).

splashflash

Colorado seems to have as little interest as NM in new interstates.  CDOT planned  only a couple miles of passing lanes for US 287.  Nebraska is at least twinning US 26 and 385 and L62.

Maybe Kansas would be interested.  Shoot the corridor straight north from Stratford, hugging the KS / CO border to  KS 27?

Bobby5280

I wouldn't see any mileage or time savings value in diverting a possible North extension of I-27 into the Western edge of Kansas. There wouldn't be any point of extending I-27 North of Amarillo if the extension wouldn't overlap either US-64/87 to Raton and/or US-287 up to Limon. Interstates should connect to other Interstates (or other major destinations, such as a coastal port or national border crossing).

In terms of building any new corridors, I still think a Denver-OKC corridor would be a very beneficial thing to the larger highway network. If they just started with an ordinary 2-lane road going diagonal from Kit Carson, CO to Fort Supply, OK it would attract a lot of commercial traffic as well as other motorists in personal vehicles.

US 89

As someone who has driven from Salt Lake City or Denver to and from the southeastern US many times, the lack of NW/SE diagonal routes is noticeable and I would most certainly use any high-quality corridor that went southeast from Denver. Honestly, even a simple complete four-laned US 287 from Amarillo to Limon would be really nice. Bypasses around towns like Lamar would only make that more attractive.

A corridor further to the southeast (i.e. towards OKC) would be nice as well, but 287 needs the attention first and there's no way Colorado is going to be on board with a brand new corridor. If you want to see that, you'll have to convince Oklahoma to four-lane US 412 and US 270 heading east and southeast from Boise City, which seems like a pretty hard sell.

Bobby5280

#221
A diagonal corridor from Denver to OKC could be built out in a series of incremental chunks.

Like I said earlier, the Ports to Plains corridor would extend the diagonal segment from Limon down to Kit Carson. That's at least one significant portion of the diagonal road. The next chunk would be a diagonal from Kit Carson to the Western outskirts of Garden City, KS. Such a thing would help a lot of commercial traffic move more efficiently between the Denver area and the towns of Garden City and Dodge City (where a hell of a lot of livestock and agri-business activity takes place).

In Oklahoma ODOT has to do something about that gawd-awful bend in OK-3 between Okarche and Watonga. There needs to be a more efficient 4-lane route from the OKC metro up to Woodward. The route upgrade doesn't need to go all the way to Boise City. Just run it up to Fort Supply where that diagonal ends.

The two diagonals that end at Kit Carson and Fort Supply are pretty much pointing at each other. If that gap was filled directly, even with just a 2-lane road to start, it would be pretty convenient for a lot of motorists cutting across the Great Plains. There is really very little in our national highway network allowing traffic from the Mountain/Pacific Northwest to go directly to the Southeast US. There's lots of diagonals going the opposite direction SW to NE. The nation's population has been shifting very significantly. There is a lot of population growth along the Front Range in Colorado as well as parts of Utah. And the Boise area is booming (at least for now). A lot of people have been moving to the Southeast US too.

But, yeah, the P2P up US-287 needs to be a priority. And ODOT (or OTA) needs to make a priority out of OK-3 in the NW part of the state. If those issues are handled it will set the stage for the rest of the thing to be built.

Duke87

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 09, 2023, 12:15:51 AM
I could see building a 3-digit I-x27 route North of Dumas up to Stratford (where the 4-lane US-287 highway reverts to 2-lanes). I don't think it's appropriate calling the spur "I-27N" at all. That would create a conflict with the NB and SB cardinal directions listed on signage. It would either have to be "I-27E" or another 2-digit designation, such as "I-31."

If congress writes a designation into law, it will be signed as whatever they say and there's not a damned thing anyone else can do about it. So I-27N it is, if any of it ever gets built. Yes, this is a good argument for why congress shouldn't be in the business of picking route numbers, but they are.

Especially since route number choices get political. The plan previously was to have 27E just be 27 and to have 27W be 227 which makes sense, but an advocacy group out of Odessa-Midland bitched that they were getting shafted getting only a 3di with the "primary" route avoiding them. So they successfully got it changed to 27E/W to ensure they stay on (perceived) equal footing with the shortcut route.

The people making these decisions don't know or care that FHWA made deliberate effort to eliminated suffixed interstates. Nor do they necessarily care what roads do or don't make objective sense to improve to interstate standards. They grab their crayon and draw a few lines.
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

Bobby5280

An "I-27N" thing running North-South would be ridiculous. There have been wrong-way concurrencies of two routes. But I don't think we've had a wrong-way signed single route before, but that's what Southbound I-27N would be. It would fun to troll these idiot politicians, "I-27N is wrong, it should be I-27S! Cuz, I-27S would be SUPER!"

borninamarillo

Quote from: aboges26 on March 28, 2021, 10:00:48 PM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on March 28, 2021, 09:54:25 PM
If Interstate 27 is extended northward along US 87 and 287, how will it get through downtown Amarillo without destroying the downtown area? Perhaps two of the four streets that span northward from the 27/40 interchange (S. Buchannan St./Pierce St. S./S. Fillmore St./S. Taylor St.), will have elevated freeways constructed over the existing streets similar to the ones built off the end of Interstate 44 in Wichita Falls.

I-27 is slated to run along the west side of Loop 335 when the time comes with the remainder of I-27 inside the loop becoming a 3DI.  There is no chance of I-27 being extended north from its current terminus.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.