US 82 Texas Corridor Study

[splashflash]

US 82 Texas Corridor Study

The US 82 corridor between Texarkana and Witchita Falls could provide a useful relief route for I-30 and Dallas - Fort Worth.  Further west, US 82 is concurrent with US 277, a potential future interstate south to Abilene from Witchita Falls. West of Seymour, US 82 is a beeline to Lubbock, an alternative to I-20 and US 84 from Fort Worth.

The study will wrap up in a little more than a year.

"The US 82 Corridor Study will examine currently planned transportation projects, analyze safety, connectivity, and mobility concerns, as well as identify short-, medium-, and long-term improvements to address the needs of the corridor. Findings and recommendations will assist in guiding the future of the corridor as it evolves."

https://www.txdot.gov/content/txdotreimagine/us/en/home/projects/projects-studies/statewide/us82-corridor-study.html

https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/statewide/us82-corridor-study/_jcr_content/root/responsivegrid_1551407878/columncontrol_copy_c/col1/image.coreimg.png/1661392020049/us82-corridor-map.png

A news article mentions that a four lane divided highway between Henrietta and Nocona had been promised since 1972.  https://www.noconanews.net/2020/05/07/txdot-acquiring-property-to-widen-us-hwy-82/

https://surveymonkey-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/survey/112627905/917649f8-9477-419c-952c-52c1b7d56e10.png

[Bobby5280]

A very good case could be made for upgrading US-82 to Interstate standards from the US-287 junction in Henrietta, TX to the I-30 junction in New Boston, TX.

Inside of that span, US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman (from I-35 to US-75) most definitely needs to be upgraded into an Interstate quality corridor. That situation is starting to become urgent. If TX DOT doesn't at least move to secure ROW they'll have the same kind of stupid mess on their hands that they now have with US-380 between Denton and McKinney.

For a very long time I've thought US-287 between Amarillo and Fort Worth should be upgraded to Interstate standards and even given an Interstate number. I think "I-32" would be appropriate. That Henrietta to New Boston stretch of US-82 could become an "I-34" segment; the road would be about 230 miles long, which is enough for a 2di designation. Plus the Interstate could potentially be extended along the US-82 corridor thru Texarkana into Arkansas to towns like Magnolia and El Dorado, ending at the future I-69 corridor.

I'm kind of surprised US-82 hasn't already been 4-laned between Henrietta and Nocona.

East of Sherman some sections of US-82 that were limited access Super 2 have been upgraded to 4-lane limited access. There are some grade intersections and side road entrances into US-82 that would have to be cleaned up. But US-82 from Sherman to Paris would be a relatively easy project to upgrade to Interstate quality.

US-277 from Wichita Falls to Abilene would be easy to upgrade to Interstate standards. It's already 4-lane divided with town bypasses at or near Interstate quality. The town of Anson is one exception; it would need a new bypass along the East side of town. But doing something like possibly extending I-44 farther into Texas would depend on what happens with I-27. If the I-27 corridor is extended down to San Angelo and Del Rio then that would give more merit to an I-44 extension to San Angelo. Both I-27 and I-44 would become more effective NAFTA-style corridors.

[splashflash]

The town of Anson is one exception; it would need a new bypass along the East side of town.

Would that have been left because rather than a straight shot south to Abilene, 277 forms an isosceles triangle south of Stamford?  Perhaps there was consideration of straightening the route?

[Road Hog]

A complete overhaul of US 82 is overdue. It's already being used as a truck route and the 2-lane portions of it get stacked up, even with a few passing lanes. Even if the traffic is at speed, the highway is normally crawling with state troopers and/or speed traps in towns that it runs straight through.

It's now 4-lane divided through Grayson and Fannin County up to the Lamar County line, but east of that to New Boston it's almost all 2-lane except for the Paris loop and a few passing lanes.

[sprjus4]

A very good case could be made for upgrading US-82 to Interstate standards from the US-287 junction in Henrietta, TX to the I-30 junction in New Boston, TX.

Inside of that span, US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman (from I-35 to US-75) most definitely needs to be upgraded into an Interstate quality corridor. That situation is starting to become urgent. If TX DOT doesn't at least move to secure ROW they'll have the same kind of stupid mess on their hands that they now have with US-380 between Denton and McKinney.

I'm curious, what are the traffic volumes on US-82?

[Bobby5280]

I don't know the VPD counts for US-82 in that part of Texas. But having driven on it from time to time, it's clear to me that more of it needs to be upgraded 100% to Interstate standards. The Gainesville to Sherman leg is an urgent situation. But really that whole Herietta to New Boston stretch needs to be upgraded so it can serve as an effective relief/bypass route for the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex. The DFW region is still adding population rapidly. A lot of the growth is spreading North toward the Red River. US-82 goes right through the middle of that.

Would that have been left because rather than a straight shot south to Abilene, 277 forms an isosceles triangle south of Stamford?  Perhaps there was consideration of straightening the route?

I think the odd location of Anson works as a wedge to divide some of the Southbound US-277 traffic, depending on each vehicle's destination. US-277 makes a weird dog leg turn at Anson to back track Eastward on its way to Abilene. A motorist heading from Wichita Falls to Big Spring might not want to go that way. They might take US-180 West to Snyder then pick up TX-350 into Big Spring. It wouldn't be Interstate highway, but they would shave a some mileage off the drive.

In the big picture view, a possible extension of I-44 still makes sense to overlap US-277 all the way to Abilene. A new terrain bypass East of Anson would shave off a couple or so miles. US-277 South of Anson is flanked by frontage roads and is pretty much a freeway ready corridor.

I don't understand why a bypass for Anson wasn't built back when the US-277 four-lane project was underway. My guess is the town's residents probably didn't want it.

[J N Winkler]

Per TxDOT's statewide planning map (to make things simple, click "Clear overlays" and then "AADT" in the left-side menu), for US 82, traffic volumes are in the 3,000 VPD range between Nocona and Henrietta.  As this is well below the usual 10,000 VPD threshold for widening to four-lane divided, it is not so surprising it is still two lanes.

The corridor between Sherman/Denison and New Boston is a bit of a mixed bag.  There are quiet segments with moderately difficult geometry and AADT as low as 4,000 VPD between DeKalb and Detroit (east of Paris), but the entire length between Sherman/Denison and Paris is either over or uncomfortably close to the 10,000 VPD threshold.

[usends]

A news article mentions that a four lane divided highway between Henrietta and Nocona had been promised since 1972.

A week ago I drove between Henrietta and Sherman, and can confirm that construction is underway on the four-lane between Henrietta and Nocona.  Once that's done, a 140-mile segment of 82 (from Henrietta all the way to Honey Grove) will be similar to 287 in north TX (i.e. basically all four-laned except through a few towns).

[splashflash]

A news article mentions that a four lane divided highway between Henrietta and Nocona had been promised since 1972.

A week ago I drove between Henrietta and Sherman, and can confirm that construction is underway on the four-lane between Henrietta and Nocona.  Once that's done, a 140-mile segment of 82 (from Henrietta all the way to Honey Grove) will be similar to 287 in north TX (i.e. basically all four-laned except through a few towns).

The road counts at Honey Grove show a rapid rise to 9,145 in 2021 from just over 6,000 in 2020 and slow growth annually up until 2020.  TxDoT looks prescient to conduct this study now, reviewing all recent and current US 82 projects.  With rising traffic, safety improvements are high on their list.

[Bobby5280]

The Federal Government really needs to get involved at helping these corridor upgrades in Texas to get completed much faster. Texas is on the border with Mexico and has the most busy inland "ports" for commercial traffic. There is a rapidly growing trend of big companies "near-shoring" more of their production out of China and into places like Mexico or other parts of Central America.

The COVID pandemic and all the supply chain disruptions associated with it made companies pay dearly for being too reliant on China. Then there is the factor of the Chinese government becoming more of a global asshole. They're increasing animosity with the US on several fronts. There's the brutal treatment of the Uyghur population and other ethnic minorities. The Chinese military is building artificial military islands all over the South Pacific to extend the reach of their air force. They're trying to figure out an angle to invade Taiwan without it blowing up in their faces. They're trying to build up an alliance with the Putin regime in Russia. And they've been keeping the North Korean government operational. Really, it's insane for big American companies to continue having a lot of their products made and shipped out of China. More and more are seeing the light on this.

Mexico is an obvious alternative to China. It takes far less time to export finished products out of Mexico into American markets. Even under normal circumstances anything coming from China will spend a month on a boat. Mexico's highway infrastructure is pretty crappy though. And its rail network isn't much better. But if more companies from around the world invest in Mexico the infrastructure situation will improve. Ultimately though that means a lot more commercial traffic is going to be crossing the Texas-Mexico border. Activity at Laredo, Del Rio and the Rio Grande Valley cities is going to get more heavy. That's going to put more traffic onto I-35 and other North-South corridors. If Mexico really booms I think it will fuel another wave of population growth in Texas cities. Corridors like US-82 near the Red River will see traffic counts jump. Texas (and the US government) has to get ready for it.

[Henry]

As you may remember, I'm all for upgrading the Amarillo-New Boston corridor to Interstate standards. Of the unused even numbers between 30 and 40, I like I-32 best, with I-34 as my second choice.

[The Ghostbuster]

Would it be possible to upgrade the US 82 corridor to a four-lane highway or freeway (built to Interstate Standards) without adding an Interstate designation to the corridor? I think that Texas has enough Interstate Highways as it is (so does North Carolina, but that's another story and thread).

[Scott5114]

Would it be possible to upgrade the US 82 corridor to a four-lane highway or freeway (built to Interstate Standards) without adding an Interstate designation to the corridor? I think that Texas has enough Interstate Highways as it is (so does North Carolina, but that's another story and thread).

It would be possible, but "X state has enough Interstates" would be a bogus reason for doing so. (Texas is the second-largest state in both land area and population, so chances are it probably has far fewer Interstates than one would expect it to, anyway.)

[kphoger]

US-277 from Wichita Falls to Abilene would be easy to upgrade to Interstate standards. It's already 4-lane divided with town bypasses at or near Interstate quality. The town of Anson is one exception; it would need a new bypass along the East side of town. But doing something like possibly extending I-44 farther into Texas would depend on what happens with I-27. If the I-27 corridor is extended down to San Angelo and Del Rio then that would give more merit to an I-44 extension to San Angelo. Both I-27 and I-44 would become more effective NAFTA-style corridors.

There's also the undivided, at-grade part on the west side of Wichita Falls.  I don't remember:  have there been any actual plans to upgrade that section?

[Bobby5280]

It would be possible, but "X state has enough Interstates" would be a bogus reason for doing so. (Texas is the second-largest state in both land area and population, so chances are it probably has far fewer Interstates than one would expect it to, anyway.)

Yeah, no kidding. Anyone can look at a map of the overall continguous 48 states and see Texas' Interstate corridors are pretty spread out. Even if all the currently proposed corridors (I-69, I-2, I-14 & I-27 extension) are fully built-out that would leave Texas' Interstates no more densely packed than regions such as the Northeast US. The population level in the Texas Triangle and far South Texas is pretty enormous.

Texas could have quite a few more freeways and toll roads signed as Interstates, but many are signed as state or US highways instead. Chances are pretty likely that if US-82 was upgraded to Interstate quality from Wichita Falls to Texarkana TX DOT would still leave it signed as US-82.

There's also the undivided, at-grade part on the west side of Wichita Falls.  I don't remember:  have there been any actual plans to upgrade that section?

TX DOT did have plans to extend Kell Freeway to the Holliday Bypass following a new terrain alignment. Those plans have pretty much been shelved. Now all they plan to do is slightly widen the existing US-82/277 road. It's currently 4-lane non-divided. They'll widen it enough to add a center turn lane.

On the bright side, the door may still be open for a future freeway extension there. The area on the SW edge of Wichita Falls is pretty crappy looking. Most of the businesses alongside US-82/277 between Wichita Falls and Holliday are all small industrial businesses. I can't imagine anyone wanting to build nice new residential housing subdivisions next to any of that.

[kphoger]

TX DOT did have plans to extend Kell Freeway to the Holliday Bypass following a new terrain alignment. Those plans have pretty much been shelved.

Is that why there are ghost ramps on the inside of the ROW at Holliday?  Or were was it built that way just in case, and that plan come after the fact?

Now all they plan to do is slightly widen the existing US-82/277 road. It's currently 4-lane non-divided. They'll widen it enough to add a center turn lane.

Honestly, that alone will go a long way to improving safety.

[Bobby5280]

The Holliday Bypass just isn't finished. They've been building it out in piece-meal fashion since the late 2000's.

I don't know the construction time line for the 5-laning project for US-82/277 between Holliday and Wichita Falls. The end result will be a modest improvement. Still, TX DOT needs to be prepared for extending Kell Freeway some day. Hopefully this US-82 corridor study will take some of this into account.

I think a lot more trucks are going to be using that route in the years ahead. The near-shoring trend of moving a lot of production from China to Mexico could affect that. But there is also quite a lot of logistical activity taking place in the geographical center of the US. For instance, Amazon opened one huge facility on the South side of Oklahoma City in 2018. Then in 2022 they opened an even bigger facility next door. A couple of big (but undisclosed) companies intend to build new sites here in Lawton, potentially bringing a few thousand new jobs.

[J N Winkler]

TxDOT did have plans to extend Kell Freeway to the Holliday Bypass following a new terrain alignment. Those plans have pretty much been shelved.

Is that why there are ghost ramps on the inside of the ROW at Holliday?  Or were was it built that way just in case, and that plan come after the fact?

Looking at the Holliday Bypass in Google Maps, it appears that what look like ghost ramps are in fact mainlane stubs for a future extension of the freeway, at which point the current mainlanes between interchanges will become frontage roads.

I don't recall at the moment whether the construction plans for the bypass included survey lines for the future mainlanes.  I suspect it did.  The current facility was built under TxDOT CCSJ 0156-04-094, let May 2004, with the work divided between CSJ 0156-04-094 (Wichita County) and CSJ 0156-05-041 (Archer County).  (I'm not sure why this contract takes the Wichita County CSJ as its CCSJ given that the bulk of the work and the contract value were in Archer County.)  HistoricAerials shows clearing and grubbing in the west and rough grading in the east in 2004 and the finished facility, complete with stubs, in 2008.

[kphoger]

Sorry, I don't know why I called them "ghost ramps".  They're kind of the opposite of that.

[splashflash]

AtkinsRéalis completes US 82 Safety Improvement Feasibility Study in Partnership with TxDOT's Paris District

The study corridor is an 18-mile stretch of US 82 from the Cooke County line to the FM 1417 interchange in Grayson County

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/atkinsr%C3%A9alis-completes-us-82-safety-improvement-study-aaron-autry-hxjbe

Initial Proposed Transportation Solutions: 0-10 years

> Add safety signage, adjust signal timing, add flashing beacons and safety lighting

> Re-stripe study corridor with 6" reflective pavement markings

> Mill, seal and overlay mainlanes from Cooke County line to FM 901

> Apply high friction surfacing to improve traction from FM 901 to east of Gibbons Road

> Replace bridge guardrail

> Implement roadway safety improvements:


Add acceleration, deceleration and auxiliary lanes, and extend left-turn lanes
Reconfigure ramps
Adjust median crossovers
Expand turn-around areas at certain median crossovers
Restrict intersecting roadway and driveway access to the US 82 mainlanes
Increase intersecting roadway turn radii
Extend two-way frontage road from US 377 to Shawnee Trail

Interim Proposed Transportation Solutions: 10-20 years

> Extend two-way frontage road from Shawnee Trail to Riley Road

> Reconstruct ramps at FM 901 and convert two-way frontage roads to one-way

> Add grade-separated interchange at Southmayd Road

> Apply high friction surfacing to improve traction from the Cooke County line to FM 901 and from Gibbons Road to FM 1417



Ultimate Proposed Transportation Solutions: 20 or more years out

> Convert to an access-controlled freeway with grade-separated interchanges:


Improve existing grade-separated interchanges at SH 56, US 377, FM 901, SH 289 and FM 1417
Add new grade-separated interchanges at Noland/Riley Road, Spalding Road, Blythe/Hazelwood Road, Gibbons Road and Lamberth Road
> Convert two-way frontage roads to one-way and add other one-way frontage roads


The safety benefits of these phased improvements are projected to be significant. Compared to the No-Build Alternative, the initial short-term improvements are projected to result in a 22 percent decrease in crashes, with the ultimate set of improvements expected to reduce crashes by 39%.

[Bobby5280]

It's good to see a controlled access freeway is a long term consideration. Some of the construction and development activity proposed for the Lake Texoma area could force that "20 years" time line to speed up very dramatically.

The Margaritaville resort and a $6 billion master-planned community with 7500 homes and apartments will make a big economic impact on Denison. Big projects like that make headlines, but I'm sure there are plenty of other smaller development projects in the works too. US-82 is the main East-West corridor for the Lake Texoma region. As more homes and resorts get built on both sides of the Red River US-82 will see an ever increasing local traffic burden. And then there is still the issue of US-82 functioning as a relief route bypassing the DFW metroplex.

[RoadMaster09]

As you may remember, I'm all for upgrading the Amarillo-New Boston corridor to Interstate standards. Of the unused even numbers between 30 and 40, I like I-32 best, with I-34 as my second choice.

That is my thinking too. I'd do it in two stages:

* Stage 1: Easy to upgrade 4-lane expressway, with interchanges at major/busy junctions (i.e., anywhere a signal is warranted, or with another NHS-level highway). Needs to be prioritized.

* Stage 2: Interstate-grade freeway. Probably already warranted in a few sections. Once done, I-34 seems like the best designation, to allow I-32 to be used on the connection from Amarillo to Fort Worth.

[bwana39]

TX.

Inside of that span, US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman (from I-35 to US-75) most definitely needs to be upgraded into an Interstate quality corridor. That situation is starting to become urgent. If TX DOT doesn't at least move to secure ROW they'll have the same kind of stupid mess on their hands that they now have with US-380 between Denton and McKinney.

Realistically it is only the Cooke County part. The R.O.W. for the four lane with service roads in in place from SH-56 west of Whitesboro to Sherman.  The biggest issue is right at Whitesboro HS. Even there, the Right of way is intact, it is just that access to the school would be lessened. Ideally, the access point would be moved to Main Street.

From the Cooke County line to I-35 either eats up a bunch of homes adn businesses or it would have to be rerouted like the reroutes from the old (SH-56) route to the current(new) US-82 route aver the past 30-40 years.

[Bobby5280]

An Interstate-quality upgrade of US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is certainly much more feasible than the US-380 situation farther South between Denton and McKinney. US-82 has enough ROW in place for an Interstate quality upgrade thru Grayson County.

Still there is a LOT of at grade intersections and driveways that will have to be cut off with new, continuous frontage roads. The on/off ramps of some existing freeway exits will have to be replaced with new slip ramps, possibly in different locations. A bunch of the existing US-82 pavement needs to be replaced.

US-82 from Whitesboro to Gainesville is a problem: not enough room to add frontage roads next to the main lanes. The closer US-82 gets to Gainesville more structures crowd the highway. It certainly looks like a new terrain path for a freeway would be required.

[rte66man]

An Interstate-quality upgrade of US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is certainly much more feasible than the US-380 situation farther South between Denton and McKinney. US-82 has enough ROW in place for an Interstate quality upgrade thru Grayson County.

Still there is a LOT of at grade intersections and driveways that will have to be cut off with new, continuous frontage roads. The on/off ramps of some existing freeway exits will have to be replaced with new slip ramps, possibly in different locations. A bunch of the existing US-82 pavement needs to be replaced.

US-82 from Whitesboro to Gainesville is a problem: not enough room to add frontage roads next to the main lanes. The closer US-82 gets to Gainesville more structures crowd the highway. It certainly looks like a new terrain path for a freeway would be required.

TxDOT is already planning for a Gainesville bypass to the south. IIRC, they already have plans for the leg east from I-35 back to US82. Looks like it will go east from 35 at FM218 which explains the building of a long 35 overpass that is way too long for a simple FM interchange.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5876661,-97.1645612,3a,75y,241.16h,83.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9YlD9ditvBk_ItmxWVM8yQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu