Am i the only one who despises the Texas frontage road system? I just find the entire system shitty and cumbersome.
They sure make for some wierd interchanges in some areas.
The only drawback I see to frontage roads is the physical space needed both for them and the freeway/turnpike. The rights of way can be really wide even for a standard freeway with 2 lanes in each direction.
However, I see plenty of benefits to frontage roads. I really like the "Texas U-Turns" common along frontage roads at many exits in Texas. If you missed an exit or just need to get to a destination on the opposite side of the freeway those Texas U-Turns allow you to avoid waits at one or two traffic lights on the at grade level of the interchange. Frontage roads in some locations can spur a great deal of commercial development, which is good if encouraging development in that location is intended.
Frontage roads are often an unavoidable necessity for roads that are upgraded from busy streets or divided expressways with at grade intersections into super highways. There's usually a good bit of commercial or residential development that must still have driveway access to that thoroughfare. Driveways directly onto a freeway defeat the purpose of building a freeway. Obviously this freeway upgrade process usually involves at least some pain. It's rare for cities and towns to have enough long term fore sight to identify a major thoroughfare as a future freeway corridor. They usually just let businesses and homes build right up to the edge of the existing road rather than mandate large enough set backs to provide room for the future freeway. So, when the freeway upgrade becomes necessary a bunch of existing property must be bought and demolished, drastically raising the cost of the project. Texas is famous for building divided streets with giant medians specifically to avoid that really stupid problem. Future freeway ROW is preserved long term with that approach. Oklahoma's law makers still haven't figured out that lesson. Idiots.
In rural areas, it's a bit much, but in urban areas, the service drives they have are very nice. They're not unlike the service drives one finds around places like Metro Detroit. I dearly wish we had service drives like that around Chicagoland (other than on the Ike and Ryan in Chicago itself).
Texas's over-reliance on frontage roads are a mixed blessing. They certainly take some getting used to.
They can be a helpful at times: you can spot bigger stores/hotels/restaurants easier. It keeps more traffic off the arterials and local streets, I suppose. It's also probably a lot easier (and cheaper) for TXDOT to modify the slip ramp onto the frontage roads to accommodate increased traffic. On the other hand, much of the through freeway in urban areas have limited to no more room for expansion - removing the frontage road isn't going down without a fight for the local business owners and enterprises. I can't comment on that specifically, but that's what I perceive.
Other drawbacks seem to be that rush hour traffic bunches seemingly everyone onto said frontage roads. Sometimes the slip-ramp or gore point is placed well aft of where you'd visually expect the ramp to be, so I confess a GPS is nice to have (although they miss them too, naturally) the first time I reach an unfamiliar location; at least once, the location I needed to visit was just a few hundred feet arrears of the ramp. If you miss an exit or slip-ramp, you've essentially missed 2-3 exits unless you can cut around on local streets. Sometimes you desired location is on the other side of the interstate...double-check to make sure you've chosen the "U-turn" area or the frontage road and not the slip ramp back onto the highway.
They seem to be rather unnecessary in rural areas, but there's also isolated areas where it does give ranch and private residence access and keeps slow-moving traffic onto the frontage roads until they're ready to join at highway speeds. Countering that, sometimes the frontage roads in urban areas are already moving swiftly at 50-60 mph...better hope you have an unobstructed view of traffic and a lead foot!
The biggest advantage to me is that is gives traffic somewhere to go if there is an accident causing congestion on the freeway.
The biggest disadvantage is the conflict point that is created where an exit ramp meets a frontage road.
I love Texas' roads, and that includes the frontage roads. One thing I wish is that the older rural ones would have longer acceleration lanes, as it can be kind of dicey to merge into 75-mph traffic from a slip designed for about 25 mph.
In rural areas, frontage roads are often two-way traffic on both sides. Traffic is supposed to yield to the ramps, but it creates an obvious accident hazard.
In certain places, needed sections of frontage roads are missing. A local example is I-10 in El Paso. They are finally adding parallel frontage to I-10 between Mesa St (Exit 11) and Sunland Park Dr (Exit 13), years if not decades overdue. But no provision for them east of there, preferably to the west side of the utep campus. There is missing westbound frontage in the original "spaghetti" bowl area, in the antiquated Patriot Frwy/Raynolds interchange area.
I am also a fan of the Texas Turnarounds, frontage roads with the Texas Turnarounds in urban areas are a godsend if you know how to navigate side streets to avoid red light lines at rush hours :sombrero:
My only gripe is the lack of acceleration/deceleration lanes that runs rampant throughout the system. I get it, you save money by cutting corners on interstate design to lay down a freeway. A perfect example of this is in Lubbock where traffic from Milwaukee Ave joins up with eastbound Marsha Sharp freeway (US 62/82). Whatever TxDOT engineer thought that an on-ramp with as much traffic destined to come from Milwaukee Ave headed into town should have next to no acceleration lane when freeway traffic is descending from a bridge and gives not enough sight distance for either drivers to plan for merging, and went ahead with that design deserves to be fired.
Unfortunately GSV is not updated for this location, but I will include the link to the area in question so you can see how there was more than enough room to put in a continuous lane to the exit for Loop 289 (which needs a flyover to connect to northbound Loop 289, but that's a whole other subject).
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5434275,-101.955816,3a,75y,68.65h,81.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfH3qSC5P79cY2V3QeID9VA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5434275,-101.955816,3a,75y,68.65h,81.32t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sfH3qSC5P79cY2V3QeID9VA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656)
Oklahoma DOT seems to have no problem with passing lanes but they seem to have hesitations when adding grade separations because that usually will mean bypassing the town. This is also why the controlled access roads are usually tolled so that people will be discouraged to use them.
Frontage roads solves the problem of bypassing towns. It cannot possibly cost any business because all the businesses have to do is move to the frontage roads! :sombrero: TX-DOT will bypass the towns and there does not even appear to be a problem with businesses. Perhaps TX-DOT actually helps the businesses move to the frontage roads! :colorful:
Also, for whichever businesses that are in McAlester that complained about grade separations (the frontage roads already exist) saying "The motorists will no longer be able to see our businesses!": That is what road signs are for. They have road signs that say which exit and if there is a highway interchange nearby and which lanes to be in to take the exits. There are also other road signs that say "GAS. FOOD. LODGING." which will have the names of the affected businesses.
Frontage Roads solves piles of problems! :cool: If it is in a town of any size they will provide access to businesses without slowing traffic. The businesses can be near the highway even though the highway is controlled access. I think having frontage roads is successful. It makes much more sense to have businesses near the highway instead of noise walls.
If it is in a rural area there are many areas where farms and also smaller residential properties that live near the highway. If the frontage roads are built, then development can pile on the frontage roads without piling on the main carriageways.
Many other states have frontage roads near the highway, but it is not a part of the highway. The on ramps and off ramps are completely separate. Texas incorporates the frontage roads and uses slip ramps onto and from the highway. Instead of having to build separate ramps, they use the existing frontage roads. Also, the frontage roads are converted into two one way pairs.
One of the things I have noticed is that the slip ramps appear to be backwards, (just like front doors of The WJM Newsroom) but actually the frontage roads are not backwards. Where you would expect an on ramp, there is an off ramp because there is plenty of time to decelerate (on the frontage road) before reaching the frontage road's traffic light or stop sign. The same applies to accelerating onto the main carriageways. They use the frontage roads to accelerate and by the time somebody reaches the slip ramp, they can easily merge onto the main carriageways.
Also, TX-DOT uses Texas Turnaround lanes. And with I-35 between Gainesville and Denton, there are separate dedicated U-Turn exits as well. :D Also, in this area, the flyovers go over the main carriageways AND the frontage roads. This means that if there are ramps (including cloverleaf ramps), they will be safely on the frontage road. :) (Again, about McAlester ... The U.S. 270 Interchange has its cloverleaf directly on the main carriageways, meaning traffic from 270 attempting to merge on U.S. 69 might have to come to a complete stop if there is too much traffic on the carriageway to merge on to it. Even though there are frontage roads in McAlester, they are separate from the ramps).
TX-DOT has been building and converting highways by leaving plenty of space in the medians. They build the frontage roads first and construct main carriageways later. If I worked for TX-DOT, then I would insist on having even more room in the medians to add trees. And also plenty of room between the carriage ways and the frontage roads for future construction of carriageways to access a future stack interchange. Even crazier: Make it 4 lanes (in the same direction) meaning 2 lanes for the Leftbound and 2 lanes for the Rightbound. And then the frontage roads have their separate interchanges. It is basically a Cloverleaf with Diamond interchange (for the fornage roads) and a Stack interchange (for the main carriageways). :-P It is basically a 3 + 4 + 3 + 2 + trees + 2 + 3 + 4 + 3 or however you type that that. 3 lane frontage roads, 4 lanes approaching a stack interchange, and 3 lanes as part of the main carriage ways (with the possibility of a an expansion total of 5 lanes, which means 3 + 4 + 5 + 2 + trees + 2 + 5 + 4 + 3) ... The lanes closest to the trees are managed lanes. Bridges might be necessary for the managed lanes to bypass the Main Carriageways to directly exit onto the Stack Interchange Roads and The Frontage Roads. I do not know how Managed Lanes work, but if they don't have occasional ramps that fly over the main carriage ways, then the managed lanes are surround by tons of other lanes.
But by building the frontage roads first, then they avoid development that gets in the way of upgrading to controlled access. They try to plan ahead but I would like to see some type of expansion of U.S. 377 before development is piling onto it. I guess because of its close proximity to Interstate 35, U.S. 377 is probably going to be upgraded to only a 5 to 7 lane avenue or a 4 to 6 lane boulevard from The Red River to Granbury. If there is even room to do that.
And when doing road construction on a main carriageway, the traffic is simply redirected onto the frontage roads. :biggrin: Compare with Oklahoma I-35, they have redirected the traffic onto the opposite carriageway when doing road construction. Google Maps reveals that there are paved Xs created in the medians.
There are several disadvantages to the frontage roads:
Obviously they medians are way too narrow. It would be nice to have a 1,000 feet (or even better, 1,000 meter) median to add all these carriageways and trees.
I mentioned at least 3 lanes for the frontage roads would be nice. This includes a Gainesville style frontage roads that has the inner lanes as a slip ramps with even more lanes at traffic lights. Another inner lane is a Turnaround Lane, the lane next to it is a Left Turn Lane, the two lanes next are "Go Straight" lanes, and the outermost lane is a right turn lane. (Meaning 5 + 4 + 5 + 2 + trees + 2 + 5 + 4 + 5) because a problem with frontage roads is that it reduces to ONE lane near slip ramps and then the slip ramp becomes the passing lane. :-/
Another issue is that I-35 frontage roads in Cooke County and northern Denton County frontage roads have no bridges over water nor bridges over rail. :-| There is a forced get on the highway or use the Turnaround lane. I-35E in Denton has bridges for the frontage roads, but that is a single track so they will have to just redo all the bridges to make room for more tracks.
But when these issues are resolved, then that means there are actually zero disadvantages to frontage roads. :bigass:
Quote from: ColossalBlocks on March 23, 2017, 09:55:18 AM
Am i the only one who despises the Texas frontage road system? I just find the entire system shitty and cumbersome.
I agree. They're bad for walkability and impossible to serve decently with transit.
I am not a fan of the frontage roads in Texas, though when I go there I pull on my big boy pants and deal with them.
Besides the various geometric deficiencies mentioned, there are also issues with design consistency (some Texas turnarounds have protected acceleration lanes, some don't) and lane continuity (some frontage roads have spiral striping patterns that force you to change lanes before every light). Kphoger has said in another discussion of frontage roads that he prefers the ones in Texas to those in Wichita. I respectfully disagree--Wichita's frontage roads are mostly on Kellogg Avenue and have been built or reconstructed within a 20-year timeframe, so design is of a generally higher standard and more consistent than is the case with older frontage roads in Texas, though there are some places in east Wichita where it is advantageous to exit early just to avoid trying to change across two or three lanes with heavy fast traffic.
I have found that the ease of locating businesses on frontage roads is largely chimerical. Visibility has more to do with on-premises signing and line of sight, which is easy enough to arrange even with backage access only. Meanwhile, frontage road access tends to promote very heavy visual clutter that makes it very hard to find specific businesses without looping past twice. And in terms of safety and vehicle sympathy, it is easier to turn into and out of a backage road with a low operating speed than a frontage road where a significant share of the traffic is speed-adapted and thus moving nearly at freeway speeds.
Quote from: In_Correct on March 24, 2017, 03:12:05 AM
One of the things I have noticed is that the slip ramps appear to be backwards, (just like front doors of The WJM Newsroom) but actually the frontage roads are not backwards. Where you would expect an on ramp, there is an off ramp because there is plenty of time to decelerate (on the frontage road) before reaching the frontage road's traffic light or stop sign. The same applies to accelerating onto the main carriageways. They use the frontage roads to accelerate and by the time somebody reaches the slip ramp, they can easily merge onto the main carriageways.
I believe you're talking about "X ramps", which is used where traffic volumes are high enough that a typical diamond interchange would see significant tailbacks.
Here is a link (http://d2dtl5nnlpfr0r.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-5105-1.pdf) you might find interesting (warning to mobile users: this links to a .pdf file) on the topic.
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 24, 2017, 01:49:46 PM
Kphoger has said in another discussion of frontage roads that he prefers the ones in Texas to those in Wichita. I respectfully disagree--Wichita's frontage roads are mostly on Kellogg Avenue and have been built or reconstructed within a 20-year timeframe, so design is of a generally higher standard and more consistent than is the case with older frontage roads in Texas, though there are some places in east Wichita where it is advantageous to exit early just to avoid trying to change across two or three lanes with heavy fast traffic.
I might note that I live on the east side, and you live on the west side. :-/
Not having frontage roads cross rivers or lakes is a huge problem. This is because when an accident occurs, there is not reasonable way around it. I-30 at Lake Ray Hubbard is the worst, followed by I-35 at the Red River. I-35E at Lake Lewisville is getting them; they will open soon
Quote from: In_Correct on March 24, 2017, 03:12:05 AM
One of the things I have noticed is that the slip ramps appear to be backwards, (just like front doors of The WJM Newsroom) but actually the frontage roads are not backwards. Where you would expect an on ramp, there is an off ramp because there is plenty of time to decelerate (on the frontage road) before reaching the frontage road's traffic light or stop sign. The same applies to accelerating onto the main carriageways. They use the frontage roads to accelerate and by the time somebody reaches the slip ramp, they can easily merge onto the main carriageways.
TxDOT has gone on a rather extensive campaign of reversing ramps to this configuration in urban and suburban areas, since it's more efficient and avoids a lot of problems with traffic trying to cut over multiple lanes to turn right or get on the freeway after turning onto the frontage road.
And for what it's worth TxDOT no longer plans continuous frontage roads as part of new freeways. Some of this is to avoid shunpiking on toll facilities (and I expect TxDOT now plans new freeways with the prospect of turning them over to toll authorities to actually build in the back of their minds; most of the Austin CTRMA toll roads were originally planned as TxDOT projects, for example), but it's a general statewide policy to reduce ROW and construction costs - it's gotten to the point it's cheaper to buy out the access rights than build frontage roads.
Quote from: Brian556 on March 25, 2017, 05:18:41 PM
Not having frontage roads cross rivers or lakes is a huge problem. This is because when an accident occurs, there is not reasonable way around it.
This doesn't seem to be an issue in any of the other 46 lower-48 states that don't consistently use frontage roads. (I'm acknowledging Arkansas' occasional use of them here as a frontage-road state).
Quote from: lordsutch on March 25, 2017, 06:47:14 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on March 24, 2017, 03:12:05 AM
One of the things I have noticed is that the slip ramps appear to be backwards, (just like front doors of The WJM Newsroom) but actually the frontage roads are not backwards. Where you would expect an on ramp, there is an off ramp because there is plenty of time to decelerate (on the frontage road) before reaching the frontage road's traffic light or stop sign. The same applies to accelerating onto the main carriageways. They use the frontage roads to accelerate and by the time somebody reaches the slip ramp, they can easily merge onto the main carriageways.
TxDOT has gone on a rather extensive campaign of reversing ramps to this configuration in urban and suburban areas, since it's more efficient and avoids a lot of problems with traffic trying to cut over multiple lanes to turn right or get on the freeway after turning onto the frontage road.
And for what it's worth TxDOT no longer plans continuous frontage roads as part of new freeways. Some of this is to avoid shunpiking on toll facilities (and I expect TxDOT now plans new freeways with the prospect of turning them over to toll authorities to actually build in the back of their minds; most of the Austin CTRMA toll roads were originally planned as TxDOT projects, for example), but it's a general statewide policy to reduce ROW and construction costs - it's gotten to the point it's cheaper to buy out the access rights than build frontage roads.
But I thought that the newer highways build the frontage roads first??
Quote from: lordsutch on March 25, 2017, 06:47:14 PMAnd for what it's worth TxDOT no longer plans continuous frontage roads as part of new freeways. Some of this is to avoid shunpiking on toll facilities (and I expect TxDOT now plans new freeways with the prospect of turning them over to toll authorities to actually build in the back of their minds; most of the Austin CTRMA toll roads were originally planned as TxDOT projects, for example), but it's a general statewide policy to reduce ROW and construction costs - it's gotten to the point it's cheaper to buy out the access rights than build frontage roads.
My understanding is that at one point in the early noughties (2002?), the Texas Transportation Commission proposed to end the presumption that new freeways would be built with frontage roads, as outlined in this leaflet:
ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/pio/newsrel/frquest.pdf
This report by Kockelman et al. (cited in the TTI research report on ramp reversals and X interchanges Kphoger linked to above) outlines some of the justifications:
https://ctr.utexas.edu/wp-content/uploads/pubs/1873_2.pdf
However, I was under the impression a public outcry forced the TTC to back down.
Quote from hbelkins:
QuoteThis doesn't seem to be an issue in any of the other 46 lower-48 states that don't consistently use frontage roads. (I'm acknowledging Arkansas' occasional use of them here as a frontage-road state).
I guess in other states you just have to sit still until the accident is cleared, meanwhile in Texas, you can just go around them on the frontage road.
To me, its very important to have an alternate route for freeway traffic, whether it be a frontage road, or a close parallel US Highway, since freeway accidents are so asininely frequent
Quote from: hbelkins on March 25, 2017, 09:47:05 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on March 25, 2017, 05:18:41 PM
Not having frontage roads cross rivers or lakes is a huge problem. This is because when an accident occurs, there is not reasonable way around it.
This doesn't seem to be an issue in any of the other 46 lower-48 states that don't consistently use frontage roads. (I'm acknowledging Arkansas' occasional use of them here as a frontage-road state).
In the Little Rock area there are plenty of frontage roads. But most freeways have a corresponding old highway to detour on, like US 64 or 70 off I-40.
It's all in what you're used to, I guess. Having lived with them all my life, I can get around without a frontage road, but I prefer them.
Quote from: Brian556 on March 26, 2017, 12:48:03 AMI guess in other states you just have to sit still until the accident is cleared, meanwhile in Texas, you can just go around them on the frontage road.
It depends on the state, but typically there are detours available on surface routes, and some of these are permanently signposted; the
MUTCD makes an "Emergency" banner available for this purpose, and Pennsylvania (for example) has color-coded permanent detours.
For a person on a long interurban highway trip, I think it actually makes more sense to detour early and wide on surface roads far removed from the freeway corridor than to rely on frontage roads. Even when the frontage road has the same lane count as the freeway mainline in the same direction, which in Texas often does not happen outside urban areas, there is no guarantee it will cross bodies of water, and there are usually bottlenecks at ramps that result in long waits on the freeway. 30 minutes spent waiting in a queue on the freeway is equivalent in time cost (though not mileage) to detouring to an uncongested route in the next county, provided of course you learn of the crash early enough to take advantage of the last opportunity to exit onto such a detour.
Quote from: Brian556 on March 26, 2017, 12:48:03 AMTo me, it's very important to have an alternate route for freeway traffic, whether it be a frontage road, or a close parallel US Highway, since freeway accidents are so asininely frequent.
The tradeoff is that frontage roads tend to be correlated with close exit spacing, which degrades both traffic operations and safety on the freeway and thus makes accidents more likely in the first place. This is one of the reasons TxDOT cited for wanting to back away from the presumption that new freeways will be built with frontage roads.
When all is said and done, I think a driver in Texas is about as vulnerable to accident-related delay as a driver in most other states.
Even if there is an alternate most people will not stray off the interstate. Akthough some of thr GPS followers will go down cowpaths if they are dirrcted.. All common sense and basic map skills are gone
LGMS428
Quote from: Brian556 on March 26, 2017, 12:48:03 AM
Quote from hbelkins:
QuoteThis doesn't seem to be an issue in any of the other 46 lower-48 states that don't consistently use frontage roads. (I'm acknowledging Arkansas' occasional use of them here as a frontage-road state).
I guess in other states you just have to sit still until the accident is cleared, meanwhile in Texas, you can just go around them on the frontage road.
To me, its very important to have an alternate route for freeway traffic, whether it be a frontage road, or a close parallel US Highway, since freeway accidents are so asininely frequent
Again, that doesn't seem to be much of an issue elsewhere. I doubt that traffic moves freely on the highway onto the frontage road when there's an accident...I'm sure there's a significant backup just to get to that detour route.
Quote from: jwolfer on March 26, 2017, 12:16:14 PM
Even if there is an alternate most people will not stray off the interstate. Akthough some of thr GPS followers will go down cowpaths if they are dirrcted.. All common sense and basic map skills are gone
LGMS428
I have to chime in on that one, yes its true the GPS gives people a reason not to familiarize themselves with surroundings or to learn about directions. Its giving people an instant means to go from A to B and why would most want to even care what is around them or what those green guides and yellow warnings say.
Anyway, I wish Florida would have a toll free alternate to FL 528 as I am getting tired of telling people that they must stay on the toll road to reach the airport. We have frontage roads, but only from Orange to Tradeport and the one from Tradeport to the Airport & FL 436 does not align with it either. To explain to a motorist to make 3 left turns is confusing to them, try explaining how to stay on McCoy Road at Tradeport or to access Bear Road from Jetport which is just as easy and real simple as well, I cannot do.
quote from roadman65:
Quote
I have to chime in on that one, yes its true the GPS gives people a reason not to familiarize themselves with surroundings or to learn about directions. Its giving people an instant means to go from A to B and why would most want to even care what is around them or what those green guides and yellow warnings say.
Anyway, I wish Florida would have a toll free alternate to FL 528 as I am getting tired of telling people that they must stay on the toll road to reach the airport. We have frontage roads, but only from Orange to Tradeport and the one from Tradeport to the Airport & FL 436 does not align with it either. To explain to a motorist to make 3 left turns is confusing to them, try explaining how to stay on McCoy Road at Tradeport or to access Bear Road from Jetport which is just as easy and real simple as well, I cannot do.
I agree. It's lousy that they rigged it so that you have to pay a toll to access the airport easily.
This, along with partial interchanges, are two things about FL's roads that are worse than Texas
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 26, 2017, 12:10:55 PM
Quote from: Brian556 on March 26, 2017, 12:48:03 AMI guess in other states you just have to sit still until the accident is cleared, meanwhile in Texas, you can just go around them on the frontage road.
For a person on a long interurban highway trip, I think it actually makes more sense to detour early and wide on surface roads far removed from the freeway corridor than to rely on frontage roads. Even when the frontage road has the same lane count as the freeway mainline in the same direction, which in Texas often does not happen outside urban areas, there is no guarantee it will cross bodies of water, and there are usually bottlenecks at ramps that result in long waits on the freeway.
[...]
When all is said and done, I think a driver in Texas is about as vulnerable to accident-related delay as a driver in most other states.
The worst accident-related jam I encountered was in 2014 when a trucker overturned on northbound I-35W in Fort Worth north of I-820 somewhere. The entire roadway was blocked, so everyone and their uncle were getting off onto the frontage road (which, by the way, I notice ends at Heritage Trace Pkwy). Having dealt with replacing a broken wheel bearing in the middle of the Mexican desert the day before and having therefore gotten into our motel in San Marcos after midnight, I was in no mood to deal with traffic. I did a U-turn (thank you, Texas crossovers!) and took alternate routes through the city: TX-183 to TX-121 to TX-114 and back to I-35W. Well, it turned out TX-183 was under major construction (finishing up the express lanes), and there was a small wreck along there too, so we still wasted a good half-hour trudging through Fort Worth at 15 mph. I have no idea if we saved time or not.
And that was the last time I drove through the DFW metro; I now choose to use an 821-mile-long bypass. (Literally, my new route deviates from my old one for 821 miles, all in order to avoid Fort Worth, and I'm never switching back.)
Quote from: kphoger on March 27, 2017, 01:46:29 PMAnd that was the last time I drove through the DFW metro; I now choose to use an 821-mile-long bypass. (Literally, my new route deviates from my old one for 821 miles, all in order to avoid Fort Worth, and I'm never switching back.)
Yeah, I've been finding DFW to be a Chinese wall too, though I haven't had an experience quite as bad as the one you described. I took US 281 to San Antonio last October and while that worked tolerably well, I got tired of the chipseal, the poor-boy cross-sections from Lampasas southward, and the curves along SH 59 between Bowie and Jacksboro (which I used to make the shuffle from US 81 in Oklahoma and far northern Texas to US 281). I took I-35 back and found the abrupt slowdowns going through construction (widening between Temple and Waco, and NTE north of Fort Worth) unnerving.
Then, in February, I went to Houston, taking an all-Interstate route on the outbound journey, and swore off I-35E until they finish the widening--nobody was observing the workzone speed limit and my poor car was bouncing over asphalt lumps and manhole covers trying to keep up with the pack. On the return trip I ran past the north end of I-45 and kept going on US 75--it was mostly smooth sailing (and also my first in-person sighting of the High Five and the segment with cantilevered frontage roads) until I hit Oklahoma, started working my way back to I-35, and discovered what a horror show SH 22 and SH 78 are between Durant and Tishomingo.
For the trips you do, I suspect having a ultimate destination more or less due south of Big Spring helps limit out-of-way travel as you detour through West Texas. For destinations inside or on the edge of the Texas Triangle, avoiding-DFW itineraries get tricky.
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 27, 2017, 09:49:50 PM
For the trips you do, I suspect having a ultimate destination more or less due south of Big Spring helps limit out-of-way travel as you detour through West Texas. For destinations inside or on the edge of the Texas Triangle, avoiding-DFW itineraries get tricky.
Yes, and in fact the new route is shorter. Well, it's fewer miles, at least. The old route through Fort Worth and crossing by way of the CCTR at Colombia had a grand total of zero stoplights, fewer than five speed bumps, and two or three stop signs–all of which were at or south of the border. Not so with the new route, so there isn't actually any drive time savings.....unless there's a traffic jam in Fort Worth, which I've encountered during roughly half of my trips through there.
I had never considered using US-277 all the way through Texas before, because I assumed it would slow a driver down a lot, going through a bunch of towns along the way. And so I explored the options for bypassing Fort Worth but still ending up at I-35 near Pearsall. What I discovered is that the closer-in bypass routes have the best scenery through hill country, but they also have upwards of twenty or thirty stoplights between Wichita Falls and the San Antonio area. And that's not to mention that a few of them involve arriving into San Antonio where traffic is heavy and construction projects seem to be never-ending.
I kept plotting new routes through Texas, pushing my way farther and farther west from I-35, adding more and more miles to the itinerary: US-281 through Jacksboro and Lampasas, combinations of TX-16 and US-183 through Cisco to Kerrville, wrapping around San Antonio through Hondo... Nothing satisfied. By the time I considered swinging even farther west than Brownwood and Kerrville, I realized my routings were closer to the magnet of US-277 than they were to that of I-35. And what I found was a route (north of the border) with light traffic,
1/
3 of it four lanes divided, the rest with wide shoulders and occasional passing lanes, fewer than a dozen stoplights, speed limits mostly 70 to 75 mph, fewer miles, highway tolls in shifted to cheaper Oklahoma and the ability to pay cash, and only one city (OKC) bigger than 300k population. The Mexican portion is significantly slower going but still pleasantly scenic, and the tolls are cheaper.
Quote from: kphoger on March 28, 2017, 01:34:54 PMI kept plotting new routes through Texas, pushing my way farther and farther west from I-35, adding more and more miles to the itinerary: US-281 through Jacksboro and Lampasas, combinations of TX-16 and US-183 through Cisco to Kerrville, wrapping around San Antonio through Hondo... Nothing satisfied. By the time I considered swinging even farther west than Brownwood and Kerrville, I realized my routings were closer to the magnet of US-277 than they were to that of I-35. And what I found was a route (north of the border) with light traffic, 1/3 of it four lanes divided, the rest with wide shoulders and occasional passing lanes, fewer than a dozen stoplights, speed limits mostly 70 to 75 mph, fewer miles, highway tolls in shifted to cheaper Oklahoma and the ability to pay cash, and only one city (OKC) bigger than 300k population. The Mexican portion is significantly slower going but still pleasantly scenic, and the tolls are cheaper.
I took US 277 between Wichita Falls and Anson in late 2002 for my second (and still most recent) trip to Mexico, when I crossed at Presidio but approached from US 67 rather than FM 170. It proved to be a nice quiet drive, and over time it has gotten better--for example, one of the first construction plans sets I downloaded from TxDOT (which has been uploading plans to a public-access FTP server since 2001) was for a freeway bypass which carries US 277 around Seymour. The Houston-Harte expressway, which I have never actually driven but which was another early-noughties TxDOT project, makes it easier to get around San Angelo. The expressway segment north of Anson also had a rest area, though I'm not sure if that has succumbed to the budget-driven fad for rest area closures.
Quote from: J N Winkler on March 29, 2017, 09:59:39 AM
I took US 277 between Wichita Falls and Anson in late 2002 for my second (and still most recent) trip to Mexico, when I crossed at Presidio but approached from US 67 rather than FM 170. It proved to be a nice quiet drive, and over time it has gotten better--for example, one of the first construction plans sets I downloaded from TxDOT (which has been uploading plans to a public-access FTP server since 2001) was for a freeway bypass which carries US 277 around Seymour. The Houston-Harte expressway, which I have never actually driven but which was another early-noughties TxDOT project, makes it easier to get around San Angelo. The expressway segment north of Anson also had a rest area, though I'm not sure if that has succumbed to the budget-driven fad for rest area closures.
There are almost no two-lane sections left between Wichita Falls and Abilene, and Anson is the only town you actually drive through between the two.
If you're referring to the sheltered picnic tables just a short distance north of Anson, they're still there and I'm not sure how budget cuts would really affect something that requires almost no maintenance. I'm not aware of any toilets-included rest areas anywhere between Wichita Falls and Del Rio, although there are a couple of such canopied picnic tables.
The more useful San Angelo bypass for US-277 drivers is Loop-306, which is now four lanes divided in its entirety. Switching from westbound US-87/Loop-306 to southbound US-277 requires some local road knowledge, specifically when to turn onto a parallel frontage road not marked not marked for US-277 (
map link here (https://goo.gl/maps/29QK1oeuwvn)), but that's about it. Following posted signage leads to
this convoluted nonsense (https://goo.gl/maps/XD9CnANumbL2).
I wish more could be done with US-277 between Wichita Falls and Abilene. I'd personally like to see I-44 extended at least to I-20. That would make the I-44 corridor even more useful as a long distance route. It just seems stupid for it to dead end in Wichita Falls. I have watched the progress on the US-277 widening project between Wichita Falls and Abilene. It looks like TX DOT is on the home stretch of that project. The bypass around Dundee was one of the last projects to replace the old 2 lane route and that was in progress last year. Almost forgot: TX DOT still needs to build a bypass for Anson.
In the Wichita Falls area I'd like to see TX DOT connect Kell Freeway to the Holliday bypass and finish that out of a full fledged freeway to the West side of Holliday. TX DOT needs to do this before development swallows up any reasonably affordable corridor to connect the two segments. The stretch of Seymour Highway between Wichita Falls and Holliday as a bunch of industrial type development next to the existing road. I think they would need to bypass that to the South of the existing highway.
Regarding DFW, it's tricky to avoid the metroplex. But avoiding it if possible is probably a good idea. Almost every major route going through there has massive road construction projects in progress. Google Earth imagery for nearly all of the DFW area was updated to 1/27/2017 and shows all these projects. None of the big projects look like they're going to be done soon.
Regarding traffic jams and Frontage Roads, one of the worst recent traffic jams I was in took place North of Houston on I-45. My girlfriend and I were driving into Houston late at night. Some accident had the main Southbound lanes of I-45 shut down. All traffic was diverted to the frontage roads. The traffic lights at the surface streets had us in gridlock. I think frontage roads would work better if there were limits on the number of business driveways spilling out directly onto them. Houston's surface street network is really outdated in many places, so there's no filtering and control of surface street traffic movement. That actually allows jams to happen on the main surface arterials. The jam accumulates onto the frontage roads and then it backs up onto the freeways. When we drive into DFW or Houston which ever of us isn't driving checks Google Maps to see traffic flow and adjust our route accordingly.
Quote from: In_Correct on March 24, 2017, 03:12:05 AM:
Another issue is that I-35 frontage roads in Cooke County and northern Denton County frontage roads have no bridges over water nor bridges over rail. :-| There is a forced get on the highway or use the Turnaround lane. I-35E in Denton has bridges for the frontage roads, but that is a single track so they will have to just redo all the bridges to make room for more tracks.
Yeah there are quite a few places like that here in Houston. There's also quite a few cases where two freeways meet but the frontage roads for the two freeways don't intersect. Like at IH 45 and 610, IH 610 and SH 288. At all three, the driver is either forced onto the freeway, or the road turns snd merges into the intersecting frontage road, which then makes the driver have to go to the next intersection, then turn around and head back to the where that side of the frontage road turns snd merges into the other freeway frontage road.
Luckily they seem to be avoiding this problem with new freeway-freeway interchanges and even trying to fix the older ones.
Quote from: Brian556 on March 26, 2017, 12:48:03 AM
Quote from hbelkins:
QuoteThis doesn't seem to be an issue in any of the other 46 lower-48 states that don't consistently use frontage roads. (I'm acknowledging Arkansas' occasional use of them here as a frontage-road state).
I guess in other states you just have to sit still until the accident is cleared, meanwhile in Texas, you can just go around them on the frontage road.
To me, its very important to have an alternate route for freeway traffic, whether it be a frontage road, or a close parallel US Highway, since freeway accidents are so asininely frequent
In north Texas, clearing wrecks is agonizingly slow. In Houston, it goes tremendously faster. You are right in DFW, there ALLWAYS need to be an alternative.
The truly rural (as opposed to medium sized town) frontage roads are truly over built. Interstate 30 from The west side of Texarkana to nearly Sulphur Springs does not continuous frontage roads. The real issue with frontage roads in the small towns is access to business. The frontage roads provide places for services for the Freeway without the traffic going into the town. It is a mixed bag. The businesses along the bypassed route are even more left out than had there been no frontage roads.
I will add this though, when you convert a highway to limited access and the property owners along the route are now cut off from the mainlanes, the only option in a lot of cases is frontage roads. There are options when a freeway runs along a greenfield route, but far and wide the Texas freeways are only going on new routings to bypass towns.
As to hating the frontage roads because of how the X ramps work, The x pattern seems to work considerably better than their predecessors as to keeping the traffic moving both on the frontage road and the mainlanes. Now you get off right after the over / underpass for the previous exit and you get on the freeway right before the intersection (over / underpass) for the next exit.
In my opinion, feeder roads are a great idea, but if they are wider than 3 lanes, then it becomes hard to turn right of them immediately after coming off the highway. Nevertheless, I like the way they work.
Quote from: bwana39As to hating the frontage roads because of how the X ramps work, The x pattern seems to work considerably better than their predecessors as to keeping the traffic moving both on the frontage road and the mainlanes.
I usually call "X" ramps by a different term: "braided" ramps. Generally, I like how they connect freeways to frontage roads. But they obviously cost more money to build. One fly-over slip ramp going over another at-grade slip ramp is going to cost a lot more money to build than two at-grade slip ramps in different locations. Braided ramps are more efficient since they can provide double the opportunity for drivers to leave or enter the freeway. So they're superior in locations with dense development along the frontage roads.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 21, 2021, 09:02:09 PM
I usually call "X" ramps by a different term: "braided" ramps. Generally, I like how they connect freeways to frontage roads. But they obviously cost more money to build. One fly-over slip ramp going over another at-grade slip ramp is going to cost a lot more money to build than two at-grade slip ramps in different locations. Braided ramps are more efficient since they can provide double the opportunity for drivers to leave or enter the freeway. So they're superior in locations with dense development along the frontage roads.
X ramps are not necessarily braided. The term 'braided ramps' implies that one ramp goes over the other on a grade separation. The term 'X ramps', however, just means that the locations of all the on- and off-ramps along a stretch are flip-flopped from the more 'normal' configuration–no grade separation necessarily required.
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 21, 2021, 06:26:42 PM
In my opinion, feeder roads are a great idea, but if they are wider than 3 lanes, then it becomes hard to turn right of them immediately after coming off the highway. Nevertheless, I like the way they work.
You are right with traditional ramps, the so-called ez-on/ez-off where the exit is immediately before the intersection on the FEEDER (OK I used the Houston term, my mom used it all of her life. She lived in Houston in the early 1960's).
The problem has been mostly mitigated using X ramps. Where you exit onto the frontage road just after the previous overpass and have significantly more room to merge right. These are especially prevalent on the Gulf Freeway.
Quote from: bwana39 on January 22, 2021, 11:03:03 AM
Quote from: CoreySamson on January 21, 2021, 06:26:42 PM
In my opinion, feeder roads are a great idea, but if they are wider than 3 lanes, then it becomes hard to turn right of them immediately after coming off the highway. Nevertheless, I like the way they work.
You are right with traditional ramps, the so-called ez-on/ez-off where the exit is immediately before the intersection on the FEEDER (OK I used the Houston term, my mom used it all of her life. She lived in Houston in the early 1960's).
The problem has been mostly mitigated using X ramps. Where you exit onto the frontage road just after the previous overpass and have significantly more room to merge right. These are especially prevalent on the Gulf Freeway.
US 231 in Huntsville, AL is set up this way, and I think it is a really nice setup for moving traffic.
Quite frankly the only downside to having frontage roads is in some areas it requires excessive amounts of ROW displacement in urban areas. Nothing like having to tear out entire strips of businesses when you upgrade that 1980s era bypass from 4 lanes with 2 continuous frontage roads to 4 or 5 lanes each direction and TXDOT used very narrow ROW. But then again these days TXDOT has somewhat better planning most of the time they will do frontage roads first then build in the mainlanes. For example the TX360 Tollway was originally planned as a freeway from I20 to US287 but to speed up the process they turned over the main lanes to the NTTA. Here is the thing they built the frontage roads in phases beginning 20 or so years before ground broke on the tollway. There was what 3 phases I believe to get 360 to US 287. First was 1994 from I 20 to Arlington-Webb-Britton Road (Now New York Ave-Eden Road). Then came 1997 with an Extension to Broad Street or what Became Heritage Parkway then in 2003 the 2 way 60 MPH one lane each direction super service road (basically used the ROW for the southbound frontage road) built from Heritage Parkway to US 287. When they finally did the full upgrade thanks to years of planning that area is now seeing large amounts of urban growth. That was a good example of how to prepare. Personally the only thing I hate about the Texas system is they don't have a setup to really promote visiting the city centers they bypass. I think it would have been nice for TXDOT when they build a bypass and eventually decide in some cases to hand over the road to the city please keep the business routing up with a number even if it is city maintained. Why people might ask? Because having the word business attached to it would signify there is something there for people to stop and fill up or cultural districts. I believe Canada has done this where they have provincial roads signed in cities when the city maintains it.
The frontage roads have attracted a lot of commercial and industrial activity. Houston looks like an endless strip of retail from the freeway.
On the other hand, these strips also act like a noise barrier to residential neighborhoods. I was watching some highway videos from Houston and realized how few noise barriers there are.
(https://i.imgur.com/057hCQq.jpg)
Funny thing: It took me forever to realize frontage/service/gateway/access (depending on where in the state you are) were almost exclusively a Texas thing, even after driving in almost every state. I just didn't really notice that every other states exit ramps went straight to the intersecting road, until it was pointed out to me. Then I said, I guess businesses don't have interstate highways as their addresses then. All the business are on the intersecting road? That's weird.
I always knew of the system so it's actually weirder for me that I can't drive on a road that parallels the main lanes in other states. It seems more of a hassle to get back on the freeway. You have just a few access points and can't drive along the highway.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
Funny thing: It took me forever to realize frontage/service/gateway/access (depending on where in the state you are) were almost exclusively a Texas thing, even after driving in almost every state. I just didn't really notice that every other states exit ramps went straight to the intersecting road, until it was pointed out to me. Then I said, I guess businesses don't have interstate highways as their addresses then. All the business are on the intersecting road? That's weird.
I always knew of the system so it's actually weirder for me that I can't drive on a road that parallels the main lanes in other states. It seems more of a hassle to get back on the freeway. You have just a few access points and can't drive along the highway.
I grew up in St. Louis, and Missouri uses a lot of 2 way frontage roads on both sides of their freeways, so for a while, I thought those were normal. Though most exits go directly onto the perpendicular road instead of the frontage road, main exception is those on I-270 WB with Dunn Rd. This leads to sometimes the godawful spacing between the ramp and the frontage road (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8032744,-90.7709551,144m/data=!3m1!1e3). Also the frontage roads have their own road name, unlike TX's, like I-70's in St. Charles County is called Veterans Memorial Pkwy, with the businesses alongside it using that road name in their address.
Though there are examples of one way frontage roads with slip ramps from the main freeway, similar to TX's, like I-64's between exits 19 and 24 and MO 364's between exits 8 and 13.
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 25, 2021, 05:42:19 PM
I grew up in St. Louis, and Missouri uses a lot of 2 way frontage roads on both sides of their freeways, so for a while, I thought those were normal. Though most exits go directly onto the perpendicular road instead of the frontage road, main exception is those on I-270 WB with Dunn Rd. This leads to sometimes the godawful spacing between the ramp and the frontage road (https://www.google.com/maps/@38.8032744,-90.7709551,144m/data=!3m1!1e3). Also the frontage roads have their own road name, unlike TX's, like I-70's in St. Charles County is called Veterans Memorial Pkwy, with the businesses alongside it using that road name in their address.
Though there are examples of one way frontage roads with slip ramps from the main freeway, similar to TX's, like I-64's between exits 19 and 24 and MO 364's between exits 8 and 13.
Except the WB one along that stretch of US 40 has an annoying gap at MO 141. (https://goo.gl/maps/eY4oZKiU2CMLxASC6)
There's also the North and South Highway Drive along I-44 from MO 141 east to the Meramec River. I think MoDOT is trying to convert some of the I-70 outer roads to one way but in St. Charles County but is facing opposition.
The last time I drove around in the Dallas Metroplex, I had the option of driving on the Tollway, or just follow the free frontage road which paralleled the tollway. The frontage roads were one-way roads and the speed limit was around 45 MPH, but I don't think I was ever able to make it through more than one traffic light at a time -- I think they purposely rigged it that way to get you to consider "paying" to bypass most of the frontage road.
Cleveland also has a stretch or two along I-90 and SR-2 (Lakeland Freeway) where there are one-way frontage roads with pre-intersection turnarounds that bypass the traffic lights.
Driving along the frontage roads that flank the Dallas North Tollway might be somewhat tolerable in off-peak traffic hours, but doing that is an absolute slog during the morning or evening rush. I can barely stand driving around on surface streets in North Dallas zones like Addison. Some of the traffic lights take a very long time to change.
Some of the tolls on DFW area toll roads and express lanes can get a bit expensive (especially when you compare them to the much lower toll prices in Oklahoma). But there are times where it's worth it to pay several dollars extra to bypass one heck of a traffic jam. A driver's time, patience and grasp to sanity is worth something.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 25, 2021, 11:18:47 PM
Driving along the frontage roads that flank the Dallas North Tollway might be somewhat tolerable in off-peak traffic hours, but doing that is an absolute slog during the morning or evening rush. I can barely stand driving around on surface streets in North Dallas zones like Addison. Some of the traffic lights take a very long time to change.
Some of the tolls on DFW area toll roads and express lanes can get a bit expensive (especially when you compare them to the much lower toll prices in Oklahoma). But there are times where it's worth it to pay several dollars extra to bypass one heck of a traffic jam. A driver's time, patience and grasp to sanity is worth something.
The excessive tolls are on the TXDOT owned express lanes NTTA just does the billing for them. The NTTA owned tolls are more reasonable. The 360 South Tollway is around $2.00-3.00 one way for 9 miles. Compared to $10 surge pricing from gantry to gantry on the North Tarrant Express for example. Even then they left the frontage roads so people can go through 8 signalized intersections for free before the tollway ends to end up at US 287 as the SH 360 designation still resides on the frontage roads.
I think having frontage roads on the bypasses do lead to the towns moving out to the bypasses. Looking at the Midlothian Texas US 287 bypass it took about 10 years but now the city moved to the bypass so it no longer goes around Midlothian instead the city now goes several miles south. The city gained several chain businesses a third or fourth grocery store (Kroger). Also the US67 bypass which eventually became the only US67 routing in Midlothian when 9th street (business US67) was turned back to the city and the southern section became spur 73 now has Walmart and other businesses.
Quote from: thenetwork on January 25, 2021, 11:01:43 PM
The last time I drove around in the Dallas Metroplex, I had the option of driving on the Tollway, or just follow the free frontage road which paralleled the tollway. The frontage roads were one-way roads and the speed limit was around 45 MPH, but I don't think I was ever able to make it through more than one traffic light at a time -- I think they purposely rigged it that way to get you to consider "paying" to bypass most of the frontage road.
Huh? Does the toll road authority do the stoplight timing there?
Quote from: motorola870I think having frontage roads on the bypasses do lead to the towns moving out to the bypasses. Looking at the Midlothian Texas US 287 bypass it took about 10 years but now the city moved to the bypass so it no longer goes around Midlothian instead the city now goes several miles south.
It's only natural for new retail and residential development to sprout up alongside freeway quality bypasses around towns, particularly if the bypass is served by continuous frontage roads, as is the case along parts of US-287 and all of US-67 in Midlothian.
That's where the traffic is traveling.Frontage roads are key to preserving space for any future freeway upgrades. On the East side of Midlothian (where the frontage roads on US-287 end after Midlothian Parkway) it turns into a stupid mess. Businesses build right up next to US-287 rather than be set back an appropriate distance. There is a short freeway upgrade project in progress nearby, which will include a new exit for Walnut Grove Road. But when that project is finished there will still be a non-freeway gap with a couple at-grade intersections and driveways between the US-287 freeway in Midlothian and this new freeway segment.
There's numerous other examples of this poor zoning across the country. US-287 through Decatur is a disorganized joke. More freeway quality spot-upgrades are planned on both the North and South sides of Decatur. But in town it's a mess since businesses were allowed to encroach the space where frontage roads would have ran. The US-63 bypass around Bono, AR is another example of a poorly planned bypass. The South end of the bypass has been overrun with businesses. If I-555 was ever extended from Jonesboro to Walnut Ridge the Interstate would have to bypass the Bono bypass. It's a bypass of a bypass!
Of course now more and more towns just want to road upgrades built at all. They don't want an upgraded highway running through the town. But they don't want an Interstate quality route going around the town either.
There's a good bit of that going on here in Oklahoma in some spots, like the US-69 corridor.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2021, 12:06:03 PM
Frontage roads are key to preserving space for any future freeway upgrades.
On that note, sometimes, I wonder where all the ROW came from to upgrade the Katy Freeway from a 6 lane freeway to something that rivals ON 401 in Toronto in size.
Quote from: SkyPesosOn that note, sometimes, I wonder where all the ROW came from to upgrade the Katy Freeway from a 6 lane freeway to something that rivals ON 401 in Toronto in size.
In the case of the massive Katy Freeway upgrade they had to bulldoze a whole lot of existing properties.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2021, 01:03:47 PM
Quote from: SkyPesosOn that note, sometimes, I wonder where all the ROW came from to upgrade the Katy Freeway from a 6 lane freeway to something that rivals ON 401 in Toronto in size.
In the case of the massive Katy Freeway upgrade they had to bulldoze a whole lot of existing properties.
They also bought the MKT railroad right-of-way that used to run north of I-10.
In contrast to the Texas frontage road system is California's exit ramp to some other road that you have to follow to get to the one you exited for. I find that system a bit more confusing.
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 26, 2021, 12:11:48 PMOn that note, sometimes, I wonder where all the ROW came from to upgrade the Katy Freeway from a 6 lane freeway to something that rivals ON 401 in Toronto in size.
If you want a fine-grained look at the clearances that were necessary to accommodate the widening, HistoricAerials.com is a good place to start.
As an example, just west of the I-610 stack, 1995 imagery suggests much of the ROW was already cleared on the north side. 2002 imagery (color, better resolution), taken the year TxDOT began letting the large construction contracts, shows some commercial development (strip malls, etc.) on the south side. 2010 imagery shows this replaced by the relocated eastbound feeder and grassed-over parcels that are probably not economic to develop. In fact, a comparison of 2002 and 2010 aerials along the corridor shows a number of commercial buildings on both sides of the freeway, some fairly large, that were torn down and replaced with grass even though they were not in the footprint of the freeway itself. I suspect this happened because they lost nearly all of their parking to the freeway ROW, making them unattractive to retail tenants.
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 26, 2021, 04:17:33 PM
Quote from: SkyPesos on January 26, 2021, 12:11:48 PMOn that note, sometimes, I wonder where all the ROW came from to upgrade the Katy Freeway from a 6 lane freeway to something that rivals ON 401 in Toronto in size.
If you want a fine-grained look at the clearances that were necessary to accommodate the widening, HistoricAerials.com is a good place to start.
As an example, just west of the I-610 stack, 1995 imagery suggests much of the ROW was already cleared on the north side. 2002 imagery (color, better resolution), taken the year TxDOT began letting the large construction contracts, shows some commercial development (strip malls, etc.) on the south side. 2010 imagery shows this replaced by the relocated eastbound feeder and grassed-over parcels that are probably not economic to develop. In fact, a comparison of 2002 and 2010 aerials along the corridor shows a number of commercial buildings on both sides of the freeway, some fairly large, that were torn down and replaced with grass even though they were not in the footprint of the freeway itself. I suspect this happened because they lost nearly all of their parking to the freeway ROW, making them unattractive to retail tenants.
As a Houstonian, I can tell you that ROW clearance for the Katy Freeway expansion didn't start until the early 2000s. The MKT ran on the northern edge of the ROW from Post Oak Blvd. to Katy-Fort Bend Rd. in Katy. After the railroad was removed around 1996 or 1997, there was still ROW needed north of the railroad easement in some sections, except where it shifted to the south to avoid a cemetery. ROW clearance started in 2001. West of Beltway 8, there was more room to work with, and Old Katy Road which ran parallel to the Katy Freeway became the new westbound feeder road between the Beltway and almost to State Highway 6. Only a little stub of Old Katy Road survives to this day. This brought back a memory. I remember seeing a Home Depot being built before the project started and noticed it was WAY back from the freeway at the time, but it was built with the widening in mind. Construction started around 2004.
Pictures of the old ROW from 2001: http://www.texasfreeway.com/Houston/photos/i10w/i10_right-of-way.shtml
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 26, 2021, 03:21:58 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2021, 01:03:47 PM
Quote from: SkyPesosOn that note, sometimes, I wonder where all the ROW came from to upgrade the Katy Freeway from a 6 lane freeway to something that rivals ON 401 in Toronto in size.
In the case of the massive Katy Freeway upgrade they had to bulldoze a whole lot of existing properties.
They also bought the MKT railroad right-of-way that used to run north of I-10.
The latter accounted for the vast majority of the increased RoW. In some places on the south side, businesses were bought out, but I don't remember many being bought on the north side.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
Then I said, I guess businesses don't have interstate highways as their addresses then. All the business are on the intersecting road? That's weird.
Oklahoma has a fair number of frontage roads, but these tend to have their own names, so businesses along them don't just use the interstate as part of the address. For instance, the I-35 service road in Norman is "Interstate Drive", so Red Lobster is at 302 N. Interstate Dr., not 302 N. I-35. Likewise, in parts of Oklahoma City, the service roads take the name of whatever street was there before the interstate was built, so the I-240 service road is SW 74th Street.
In the event that a service road doesn't have a unique name, it will be explicitly referred to as "I-35 Service Road" or "I-35 Frontage Road" and this will be part of the address.
A thought I had from the thread title, that ended up not being the content of the thread itself, is that I do kind of dislike TxDOT's highway classification system. Other than interstates, all of the road classifications give you little to no indication of what sort of road you're going to be getting on. State highways, loops, spurs, FM/RMs–it doesn't matter, any of them could be something from a two-lane road with at-grade intersections all the way up to a full blown freeway and you'll have no idea until you get there. You'd think having as many route classifications as they do that they'd have one of them for state route freeways (of which Texas has dozens), but nope.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 26, 2021, 06:04:52 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
Then I said, I guess businesses don't have interstate highways as their addresses then. All the business are on the intersecting road? That's weird.
Oklahoma has a fair number of frontage roads, but these tend to have their own names, so businesses along them don't just use the interstate as part of the address. For instance, the I-35 service road in Norman is "Interstate Drive", so Red Lobster is at 302 N. Interstate Dr., not 302 N. I-35. Likewise, in parts of Oklahoma City, the service roads take the name of whatever street was there before the interstate was built, so the I-240 service road is SW 74th Street.
In the event that a service road doesn't have a unique name, it will be explicitly referred to as "I-35 Service Road" or "I-35 Frontage Road" and this will be part of the address.
A thought I had from the thread title, that ended up not being the content of the thread itself, is that I do kind of dislike TxDOT's highway classification system. Other than interstates, all of the road classifications give you little to no indication of what sort of road you're going to be getting on. State highways, loops, spurs, FM/RMs–it doesn't matter, any of them could be something from a two-lane road with at-grade intersections all the way up to a full blown freeway and you'll have no idea until you get there. You'd think having as many route classifications as they do that they'd have one of them for state route freeways (of which Texas has dozens), but nope.
Texas freeways have names too, and those names will appear on addresses, but sometimes they don't so 2900 N I-35 is possibly an address as well as 15042 N Stemmons Freeway.
That has always been a gripe of mine. I hate how Texas highways can be anything. It makes planning a trip, especially for and RVer, more difficult because it can be any variety of highway.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
I guess businesses don't have interstate highways as their addresses then. All the business are on the intersecting road? That's weird.
Of course the businesses don't have the Interstate as their addresses: you don't get to them from the Interstate! Can you imagine if every property fronting Interstate r/o/w had an Interstate address, yet you had to get to all of them from other streets? Disaster! No, trust me, you want the address to match the street you actually enter the business from.
In areas without frontage roads, though, most business lots
don't front the Interstate r/o/w. A lot of that land is either green space or residential neighborhoods.
Quote from: kphoger on January 26, 2021, 06:31:28 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
I guess businesses don't have interstate highways as their addresses then. All the business are on the intersecting road? That's weird.
Of course the businesses don't have the Interstate as their addresses: you don't get to them from the Interstate! Can you imagine if every property fronting Interstate r/o/w had an Interstate address, yet you had to get to all of them from other streets? Disaster! No, trust me, you want the address to match the street you actually enter the business from.
In areas without frontage roads, though, most business lots don't front the Interstate r/o/w. A lot of that land is either green space or residential neighborhoods.
Yes, I was speaking how I did when the lightbulb went off that not all states have frontage roads like Texas. Before I realized it, having an interstate as an address was common place. (Example: 2015 S IH 35, Austin, TX 78741 is an actual address, because there is a frontage road there) When it finally dawned on me that there isn't always a frontage road along a freeway, I was shocked that the town I was in's Walmart wasn't on the interstate per-se. Instead, I had to turn on the cross street to get to the Walmart, instead of ridding the service road and turning at the driveway. Trust me, it's more of a juxtapose going from a frontage road plenty society to a place that has none than you would think.
What I do not like about Texas is the fact that US 77 and US 67 are poorly signed along the interstates in the DFW area. Plus US 90 is another one in Greater Houston where the Katy Freeway took over the old US 90 arterial.
In San Antonio you have US 87, US 90, and 281 all signed greatly there and the companion routes for I-27 in the Panhandle, but in those areas it is not at all signed.
I know CO and NM as well as AR does it, but its all over! In Texas its in different areas of the state just as traffic signals vary in that state in installations (horizontal to vertical, black to yellow colors, and even two red arrows to one red arrow left turn signals). I usually like a line drawn for consistency in areas even in Florida as lately each county is now using its own method of signalizing intersections as before all the state pretty much used concrete strain poles and span wire installations except in downtown areas of the big cities, is a little annoying.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 26, 2021, 06:52:54 PM
What I do not like about Texas is the fact that US 77 and US 67 are poorly signed along the interstates in the DFW area. Plus US 90 is another one in Greater Houston where the Katy Freeway took over the old US 90 arterial.
In San Antonio you have US 87, US 90, and 281 all signed greatly there and the companion routes for I-27 in the Panhandle, but in those areas it is not at all signed.
I know CO and NM as well as AR does it, but its all over! In Texas its in different areas of the state just as traffic signals vary in that state in installations (horizontal to vertical, black to yellow colors, and even two red arrows to one red arrow left turn signals). I usually like a line drawn for consistency in areas even in Florida as lately each county is now using its own method of signalizing intersections as before all the state pretty much used concrete strain poles and span wire installations except in downtown areas of the big cities, is a little annoying.
You'll like Missouri's signage then, and their cookie cutter mast arms design used at most intersections. Not a bad thing though, as I think they're as good as California's signals setup
Quote from: Scott5114A thought I had from the thread title, that ended up not being the content of the thread itself, is that I do kind of dislike TxDOT's highway classification system. Other than interstates, all of the road classifications give you little to no indication of what sort of road you're going to be getting on. State highways, loops, spurs, FM/RMs–it doesn't matter, any of them could be something from a two-lane road with at-grade intersections all the way up to a full blown freeway and you'll have no idea until you get there. You'd think having as many route classifications as they do that they'd have one of them for state route freeways (of which Texas has dozens), but nope.
I don't mind Texas having state highways that are Interstate quality. Even the "Spur" and "Loop" sub-sets of Texas state highways don't bother me when they get blown up into full blown freeways. FM/RM roads that turn into an Interstate quality thing are more odd.
Usually the Farm/Ranch to Market roads start out as modest highways and then just get upgraded and upgraded again as development alongside the road and nearby grows. I'm guessing when TX DOT made the original FM/RM designation they didn't count on the road possibly needing a lot of upgrades later.
There is always lots of ideas and requests for various freeways and toll roads in Texas named after state highways or even FM/RM roads to be re-named as Interstates. Many of us already know this: changing a highway's route number and/or designation type has consequences. Businesses alongside an existing highway really dislike any naming changes because it affects their advertising costs and ability for customers to reliably find their location. Then there's the risk of it goofing up mail delivery and other services.
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 26, 2021, 06:12:06 PM
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 26, 2021, 06:04:52 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 25, 2021, 02:47:39 PM
Then I said, I guess businesses don't have interstate highways as their addresses then. All the business are on the intersecting road? That's weird.
Oklahoma has a fair number of frontage roads, but these tend to have their own names, so businesses along them don't just use the interstate as part of the address. For instance, the I-35 service road in Norman is "Interstate Drive", so Red Lobster is at 302 N. Interstate Dr., not 302 N. I-35. Likewise, in parts of Oklahoma City, the service roads take the name of whatever street was there before the interstate was built, so the I-240 service road is SW 74th Street.
In the event that a service road doesn't have a unique name, it will be explicitly referred to as "I-35 Service Road" or "I-35 Frontage Road" and this will be part of the address.
A thought I had from the thread title, that ended up not being the content of the thread itself, is that I do kind of dislike TxDOT's highway classification system. Other than interstates, all of the road classifications give you little to no indication of what sort of road you're going to be getting on. State highways, loops, spurs, FM/RMs—it doesn't matter, any of them could be something from a two-lane road with at-grade intersections all the way up to a full blown freeway and you'll have no idea until you get there. You'd think having as many route classifications as they do that they'd have one of them for state route freeways (of which Texas has dozens), but nope.
Texas freeways have names too, and those names will appear on addresses, but sometimes they don't so 2900 N I-35 is possibly an address as well as 15042 N Stemmons Freeway.
That has always been a gripe of mine. I hate how Texas highways can be anything. It makes planning a trip, especially for and RVer, more difficult because it can be any variety of highway.
Most cities in Texas have significant rules for changing street addresses (as does the USPS). While HWY XX may reroute, 37th Avenue remains basically the same.
The Stemmons Freeway USED to be US-77. Now it is I-35E. The street addresses along the frontage roads addresses remained the same in spite of the renumbering. As a caveat RL Thornton Freeway follows US-67 which I-30 followed to downtown, but south of downtown is I-35E. So following RLT does not mean you stay on I-35E going north of downtown.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2021, 10:55:48 PM
There is always lots of ideas and requests for various freeways and toll roads in Texas named after state highways or even FM/RM roads to be re-named as Interstates. Many of us already know this: changing a highway's route number and/or designation type has consequences. Businesses alongside an existing highway really dislike any naming changes because it affects their advertising costs and ability for customers to reliably find their location. Then there's the risk of it goofing up mail delivery and other services.
The thing is, Texas already has so many classes of highway, all of which are allowed to duplicate one another, that adding another wouldn't really affect much. You could change all the freeways from "State Highway 130" to "Freeway 130" or whatever, keeping the same numbers, and directions and addresses using "Highway 130" wouldn't necessarily have to change. The only thing that would really change is the shield and codes in the TxDOT database going from "SH" to "FW" or whatever.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 27, 2021, 02:13:29 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 26, 2021, 10:55:48 PM
There is always lots of ideas and requests for various freeways and toll roads in Texas named after state highways or even FM/RM roads to be re-named as Interstates. Many of us already know this: changing a highway's route number and/or designation type has consequences. Businesses alongside an existing highway really dislike any naming changes because it affects their advertising costs and ability for customers to reliably find their location. Then there's the risk of it goofing up mail delivery and other services.
The thing is, Texas already has so many classes of highway, all of which are allowed to duplicate one another, that adding another wouldn't really affect much. You could change all the freeways from "State Highway 130" to "Freeway 130" or whatever, keeping the same numbers, and directions and addresses using "Highway 130" wouldn't necessarily have to change. The only thing that would really change is the shield and codes in the TxDOT database going from "SH" to "FW" or whatever.
I agree BUT. The problem is when it is a freeway part way and then not a freeway the rest. I agree particularly like SPUR 366 (Woodall Rogers FWY) SH183 (Carpenter / Airport Freeway 183/121) or US-80 from Terrell. All of these have freeway to freeway continuity. On the other hand, US175 from I-45 to I-20 fits. US-175 to past Kaufman is all freeway, then somewhere past Kaufman, it transitions to a 4-lane arterial without grade separation, eventually having stretches as two lanes before it gets to its endpoint in Jacksonville. How would you define that leaving I-20 going east?
As goofy as this sounds, I once saw a dead end sign 26 miles from the dead end. There was no access past that point, but...
I am specifically talking about state highways. US highways you can't really do anything about without changing the number to an Interstate. If it were really necessary to explicitly show it as a freeway, you could make a state freeway designation and run it concurrent with the US route for that portion, although I think that's probably excessive.
As for state routes that are partially freeway and partially not, you could change the freeway part to a freeway designation and then leave the rest as a state highway, the same way many states have state route extensions of Interstates. So for example, in Corpus Christi, the Crosstown Expressway would become FW 286. When the freeway ends, the original SH 286 designation would continue past that.
Quote from: Scott5114 on January 27, 2021, 07:10:46 PM
I am specifically talking about state highways. US highways you can't really do anything about without changing the number to an Interstate. If it were really necessary to explicitly show it as a freeway, you could make a state freeway designation and run it concurrent with the US route for that portion, although I think that's probably excessive.
As for state routes that are partially freeway and partially not, you could change the freeway part to a freeway designation and then leave the rest as a state highway, the same way many states have state route extensions of Interstates. So for example, in Corpus Christi, the Crosstown Expressway would become FW 286. When the freeway ends, the original SH 286 designation would continue past that.
(https://i.imgur.com/8CVVBNa.png)
I love the frontage road system. I wish all states would incorporate it where possible.
Some thing I can add to the discussion of State Roads and F.M. Roads being Freeways: The fact that the State Roads and F.M. Roads ever being freeways when there are plenty of U.S. Highways is what confuses me. For example: My often mentioned U.S. 377 has taken for ever to even be considered for added lanes. It still looks like an old worn out Service Road ... A Service Road for the nearby B.N.S.F. line.
Are there any freeway mainlines that actually have status as FM or RM roads (as opposed to frontage roads being classified as FM or RM, as with Westheimer Road/FM 1093 and the Westpark Tollway)?
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on January 26, 2021, 03:23:15 PM
In contrast to the Texas frontage road system is California's exit ramp to some other road that you have to follow to get to the one you exited for. I find that system a bit more confusing.
I recently spent some time in the SF Bay Area, and holy crap was I frustrated. Entrance/Exits on opposite sides of the freeway often were not at the same cross streets. You have to drive to the next major cross road to get on the freeway to go the opposite direction. Took a bit to figure it out and holy crap is it a terrible design.
There is no comparison to a Texas feeder road interchange with dedicated u-turn lanes.
Pixel 4
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 31, 2021, 07:45:13 PM
Are there any freeway mainlines that actually have status as FM or RM roads (as opposed to frontage roads being classified as FM or RM, as with Westheimer Road/FM 1093 and the Westpark Tollway)?
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14151.msg2564993#msg2564993 addresses this.
Yep, the Emmett F. Lowry Freeway in Texas City. Still labeled as FM-1764 a decade later.
Quote from: bwana39 on January 31, 2021, 10:15:27 PM
Quote from: J N Winkler on January 31, 2021, 07:45:13 PM
Are there any freeway mainlines that actually have status as FM or RM roads (as opposed to frontage roads being classified as FM or RM, as with Westheimer Road/FM 1093 and the Westpark Tollway)?
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=14151.msg2564993#msg2564993 addresses this.
Yep, the Emmett F. Lowry Freeway in Texas City. Still labeled as FM-1764 a decade later.
Define freeway. Years before SH-45 came to Austin/Cedar Park, the Parmer, FM-620 was a 100% freeway intersection with frontage roads. FM-620 in that stretch was a freeway for about a mile, not hardly a major freeway or anything, but it did have it. When SH-45 (toll) was built basically on top of the existing freeway section, they had to make that intersection free of toll. That's why there is one lane east and one lane west separated by jersey barrier that goes under Parmer Lane. by law since it was a freeway intersection before the toll way, they had to make that intersection have a free bypass.
Quote from: roadman65 on January 26, 2021, 06:52:54 PM
What I do not like about Texas is the fact that US 77 and US 67 are poorly signed along the interstates in the DFW area. Plus US 90 is another one in Greater Houston where the Katy Freeway took over the old US 90 arterial.
In San Antonio you have US 87, US 90, and 281 all signed greatly there and the companion routes for I-27 in the Panhandle, but in those areas it is not at all signed.
I know CO and NM as well as AR does it, but its all over! In Texas its in different areas of the state just as traffic signals vary in that state in installations (horizontal to vertical, black to yellow colors, and even two red arrows to one red arrow left turn signals). I usually like a line drawn for consistency in areas even in Florida as lately each county is now using its own method of signalizing intersections as before all the state pretty much used concrete strain poles and span wire installations except in downtown areas of the big cities, is a little annoying.
I go back and forth on this issue myself. San
Antonio has way too much on some of those signs. If a person is autistic and one of their little interests/tics/ stimming habits is to read the big green signs aloud, it can get intense. Totally hypothetical situation. Not something I have to do to not feel like the world is going to stop.
But I also kind of agree with you. Keep the multiplexes fully signed. IH10/US 90 everywhere, IH69/US 59. Hell I say bring back US 75 and slap it on IH 45
At a few interchanges in Kansas City, KDOT compromises by showing only the main routes on the BGSes, then has all the concurrent routes and where they go displayed on one of the legs of the gantry with conventional-road shields and arrows. Keeps the BGSes nice and orderly for 90% of drivers that want that information, and still keeps the information around for the few that want to follow the concurrent routes.