AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Author Topic: US-287 between Fort Worth (and Ennis) and Wichita Falls if not Amarillo thread  (Read 8631 times)

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 14544
  • Age: 25
  • Location: MA/NH border
  • Last Login: Today at 09:39:01 PM
    • Flickr account

TIL US 67 kept its number across the Mexican border
Logged
Clinched, minus I-93 (I'm missing a few miles and my file is incorrect)

Traveled, US 13, 44, and 50, and several state routes

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1085
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 08:59:21 PM

I had no idea Texas was this serious about it becoming an interstate. Are we thinking I-18? This would be welcome.

Wow, that's news to me. Definitely good news, since that corridor was not included in a recent consultant solicitation to study priority corridors.

I think a recommendation for interstate standards for the full corridor would be unrealistic, considering that the I-69 system will take another 30 years to be completed, and both I-14 and Port-to-Plains are being positioned to get funding.

A more realistic recommendation is for limited-access status on high-traffic sections, mainly Corsicana to west of Wichita Falls. West of Wichita Falls needs bypasses around urban sections (e.g. Childress). Southeast of Corsicana should have a minimum of 4x4 divided. There is already a study in progress for a new 20-mile-long freeway along the corridor north of Beaumont.
« Last Edit: December 16, 2023, 02:21:59 PM by MaxConcrete »
Logged

Plutonic Panda

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4122
  • Location: Los Angeles/OKC
  • Last Login: Today at 09:08:02 PM

Yes I definitely think the most needed section atm is between Amarillo and Dallas with the primarily focus being Wichita Falls and Fort Worth. I was shocked to see this as well.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1226
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 05:39:07 PM

I had no idea Texas was this serious about it becoming an interstate. Are we thinking I-18? This would be welcome.

I don't think all of US-287 would be designated as I-18 if it were upgraded to interstate standards for its entire length through Texas. I could see I-18 being applied to the stretch between Beaumont and Fort Worth. From Fort Worth to Amarillo, I would guess I-32, 34, 36, or 38. North of Amarillo, US-287 is already identified as a branch of Future I-27.

In reality, interstate designation for the entire US-287 corridor will be a long way off. I could see TxDOT prioritizing the removal of any remaining traffic lights between Fort Worth and Amarillo, which are mainly located along the 130-mile stretch between Chillicothe and Claude, but I don't see the entire corridor being brought up to interstate standards.
Logged
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

Molandfreak

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2117
  • Age: 28
  • Last Login: February 22, 2024, 11:22:01 PM
    • Instagram

I had no idea Texas was this serious about it becoming an interstate. Are we thinking I-18? This would be welcome.

I don't think all of US-287 would be designated as I-18 if it were upgraded to interstate standards for its entire length through Texas. I could see I-18 being applied to the stretch between Beaumont and Fort Worth. From Fort Worth to Amarillo, I would guess I-32, 34, 36, or 38. North of Amarillo, US-287 is already identified as a branch of Future I-27.

In reality, interstate designation for the entire US-287 corridor will be a long way off. I could see TxDOT prioritizing the removal of any remaining traffic lights between Fort Worth and Amarillo, which are mainly located along the 130-mile stretch between Chillicothe and Claude, but I don't see the entire corridor being brought up to interstate standards.
I hope common sense prevails here and whatever designation is applied to US 287 between DFW and Amarillo is continued to Raton, while mainline I-27 should go north into Colorado instead of the 27N branch if it is ever upgraded.
Logged
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4205
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: February 22, 2024, 09:39:06 PM

I'm skeptical about the US-287 segment between Dallas and Beaumont needing to be converted to Interstate quality. Although there is an outside chance US-287 from Beaumont up to Woodville (US-190) could be converted if all that I-14 stuff becomes reality.

The main focus of a US-287 Interstate feasibility study should be Fort Worth to Amarillo. The DFW metro is big enough to be worthy of a second Interstate going West out of the metro (with this one going to I-40). The stuff North of Amarillo would fall into Ports to Plains Corridor territory.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda
Are we thinking I-18?

No. The US-287 segment from Fort Worth to Amarillo is North of I-20 and I-30. I think "I-32" would be a much better designation. I think "I-34" from Wichita Falls to Texarkana (or Henrietta to New Boston actually) is a real possibility if the DFW metro keeps on growing.
« Last Edit: December 17, 2023, 01:22:02 AM by Bobby5280 »
Logged

vdeane

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14603
  • Age: 32
  • Location: The 518
  • Last Login: Today at 12:25:05 PM
    • New York State Roads

I had no idea Texas was this serious about it becoming an interstate. Are we thinking I-18? This would be welcome.

I don't think all of US-287 would be designated as I-18 if it were upgraded to interstate standards for its entire length through Texas. I could see I-18 being applied to the stretch between Beaumont and Fort Worth. From Fort Worth to Amarillo, I would guess I-32, 34, 36, or 38. North of Amarillo, US-287 is already identified as a branch of Future I-27.

In reality, interstate designation for the entire US-287 corridor will be a long way off. I could see TxDOT prioritizing the removal of any remaining traffic lights between Fort Worth and Amarillo, which are mainly located along the 130-mile stretch between Chillicothe and Claude, but I don't see the entire corridor being brought up to interstate standards.
I hope common sense prevails here and whatever designation is applied to US 287 between DFW and Amarillo is continued to Raton, while mainline I-27 should go north into Colorado instead of the 27N branch if it is ever upgraded.
It's Texas.  May as well rename the state to Suffixland at this point.

I'm skeptical about the US-287 segment between Dallas and Beaumont needing to be converted to Interstate quality. Although there is an outside chance US-287 from Beaumont up to Woodville (US-190) could be converted if all that I-14 stuff becomes reality.

The main focus of a US-287 Interstate feasibility study should be Fort Worth to Amarillo. The DFW metro is big enough to be worthy of a second Interstate going West out of the metro (with this one going to I-40). The stuff North of Amarillo would fall into Ports to Plains Corridor territory.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda
Are we thinking I-18?

No. The US-287 segment from Fort Worth to Amarillo is North of I-20 and I-30. I think "I-32" would be a much better designation. I think "I-34 from Wichita Falls to Texarkana (or Henrietta to New Boston actually) is a real possibility if the DFW metro keeps on growing.
Agreed - Dallas to Beaumont seems kinda redundant with I-45 to me.  Of course, this is Texas - maybe that part can be I-45E.

I'd love to see Amarillo to Fort Worth, however.  It would take care of that weird dead end on I-44 quite nicely.
Logged
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

splashflash

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 183
  • Location: Vancouver Island
  • Last Login: February 01, 2024, 06:01:22 PM

The 2025 study completion date falls before the Tarrant-Wise County 287 projects are tentatively scheduled - for  2026. 

The central segment of US 287 has traffic counts justifying interstate designation in short order.  It could be argued to be worthier of other Congress-designated corridors in the state. Whether any federal money appears is quite another question.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4205
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: February 22, 2024, 09:39:06 PM

Quote from: vdeane
I'd love to see Amarillo to Fort Worth, however.  It would take care of that weird dead end on I-44 quite nicely.

Yeah, I-44 would have something of a more proper end if US-287 was upgraded to Interstate quality thru Wichita Falls. Although I-44 is signed past US-287 down to the Broad/Holliday Street overheads.

One thing I want to see is I-44 extended from Wichita Falls down to Abilene and I-20 if not farther South to San Angelo and an eventual meeting with an extended I-27. That would actually be a better thing, especially if I-27 was extended down to Del Rio and Laredo. The end result would be really great for commercial trucking between Mexico and the US.
Logged

debragga

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 178
  • Age: 24
  • Location: Texas US-281 Corridor
  • Last Login: February 10, 2024, 03:32:17 AM

Instead of Amarillo to Fort Worth, I'd say the priority zone should be extended south to Ennis at I-45. That whole stretch from Fort Worth to Ennis is teeming with suburban growth, and it's THE route from Houston and points east to the Panhandle and beyond.
Logged

motorola870

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 121
  • Location: TX
  • Last Login: Today at 06:16:35 AM

Instead of Amarillo to Fort Worth, I'd say the priority zone should be extended south to Ennis at I-45. That whole stretch from Fort Worth to Ennis is teeming with suburban growth, and it's THE route from Houston and points east to the Panhandle and beyond.
I think they could get away with a 3di for either I20 or I45 for the segment from I20 to I45 in Ennis. Make US287 an Interstate from Amarillo to Ennis? The original corridor brought up to congress back in 2017 has been shortened with I27 and I27N being designated. I don't know if the section from I35W to I820 would be up to interstate standards because that section was originally built in the 60s while everything south of I20 was built beginning in the 70s. I could see I120 or I145 as a spur route due to the traffic counts in that section but it would require bringing the Waxahachie bypass into compliance for interstate standards and that would require that merge slip ramp for traffic coming from Bus 287 out of Waxahachie that merges from the left at the end of the bypass going northbound to either be rebuilt or eliminated (this is already being looked at for modification or removal) with bringing the entire corridor between I20 and I45 as grade separated with continuous frontage roads.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4205
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: February 22, 2024, 09:39:06 PM

Quote from: debragga
Instead of Amarillo to Fort Worth, I'd say the priority zone should be extended south to Ennis at I-45.

They already working on the segment of US-287 between I-20 and I-45. I'm not a fan of that tight trumpet interchange with I-45. But that could be an interim solution. Anyway, the freeway South around Ennis is a recent project. There are other grade separation projects in the works.

With that being said, I think TX DOT and other state agencies have been slow-walking progress on that part of the US-287 corridor. There is a lot of residential growth in the Mansfield and Midlothian areas.

The Southeast Connector project is a pretty big upgrade for US-287 in the I-20/I-820 zone. I think that will make it more urgent to upgrade the rest of US-287 to I-45 up to Interstate standards and maybe even do some widening to 3x3 configuration.

Nevertheless, the need for upgrading US-287 to Interstate standards North of Fort Worth is still going to be there regardless of what happens South of I-20. It's a problem that has to be remedied ASAP, not decades from now.

They at least have the intention of bringing the 8 miles of US-287 from I-35W to Avondale-Haslet Road up to Interstate quality. But they need to push another 6 miles farther up to TX-114 very soon as well. Then there's the 13 miles between Rhome and Decatur. Some portions of that road have freeway exits already. A bunch of it can be upgraded very easily without having to buy any new ROW.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8796
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:14:38 PM

I’m not a fan of that tight trumpet interchange with I-45. But that could be an interim solution.
What exactly is the issue with it?
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4205
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: February 22, 2024, 09:39:06 PM

The tight SB US-287 to NB I-45 cloverleaf ramp has a design speed of only 35mph.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8796
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:14:38 PM

The tight SB US-287 to NB I-45 cloverleaf ramp has a design speed of only 35mph.
And… what exactly is the issue with it? That is significantly higher design than most loop ramps, which are tighter and have a 25 mph design.

Not to mention, I don’t imagine the traffic volumes are anywhere high enough to justify a high speed flyover.
Logged

Strider

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 974
  • Location: Greensboro, NC
  • Last Login: February 22, 2024, 10:46:34 PM

I think TxDOT should focus on upgrading US 287 from Amarillo to Dallas-FT Worth area. Isn't that road one of the major trucking traffic? I don't live in Texas but if somebody knows of this, feel free to correct me.
Logged

bwana39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1836
  • Location: Near Texarkana TX
  • Last Login: Today at 05:41:01 PM

I think TxDOT should focus on upgrading US 287 from Amarillo to Dallas-FT Worth area. Isn't that road one of the major trucking traffic? I don't live in Texas but if somebody knows of this, feel free to correct me.

Yes,
US-287 is really busy. Lots of trucks. It is MOSTLY divided 2X2. THe real issue is that it still goes through most of the towns with low speed limits and traffic signals. A freeway would be best, but just bypassing the small to medium sized towns would be an immeasurable improvement.
Logged
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

US 89

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6250
  • Your friendly neighborhood meteorologist

  • Location: Tallahassee, FL
  • Last Login: Today at 09:23:28 AM
    • Utah Highways

I drove 287 from DFW to Amarillo last year. Based on what I remember from that, a Childress bypass alone would be really nice, and should be first priority regardless of any larger scale interstate upgrades.

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8796
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 09:14:38 PM

I would generally agree, the priority should be constructing limited access bypass routes around the small towns, eliminating all traffic signals between I-35W and I-40, and allowing a free-flow with a minimum of a 65 mph speed limit.

Any rural interstate upgrades (frontage roads, minor interchanges, etc.) would be a lower priority.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4205
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: February 22, 2024, 09:39:06 PM

Quote from: bwana39
US-287 is really busy. Lots of trucks. It is MOSTLY divided 2X2. THe real issue is that it still goes through most of the towns with low speed limits and traffic signals. A freeway would be best, but just bypassing the small to medium sized towns would be an immeasurable improvement.

Several towns along the way already have bypasses that are at/near Interstate quality. East of Wichita Falls there are bypasses for Jolly, Henrietta and the longer freeway segment from Bowie to Alvord. West of Wichita Falls there are bypasses for Iowa Park, Electra, Harrold, Oklaunion and Vernon. Additionally, a lot of US-287 between towns would be easy to upgrade, with little if any extra ROW required. A project to upgrade US-287 to Interstate standards would be working with a pretty substantial head start.

But US-287 between Fort Worth and Amarillo does have its obstacles.

I think Decatur is the most difficult nut to crack. Upgrading the existing roadway to Interstate standards looks like the best option (as opposed to a bypass around town). But it will require buying and clearing at least a couple dozen or more commercial properties to make room for main lanes and continuous frontage roads. Some businesses might get by with their parking lots "getting a haircut." With DFW Metroplex growth spreading farther Northwest the Decatur situation will grow more urgent.

Childress and other towns West of Wichita Falls need their own bypasses. But I wouldn't expect any of that to happen until some real plans are put into action following this corridor study.
Logged

 


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.