Why not project I-37 from its current northern terminus at I-35 near downtown along 281 as far as Loop 1604?
The original interstate plan called for Interstate 37 to run between Downtown Corpus Christi to Downtown San Antonio at I-35, and the piece linking to I-35 was completed in 1971.
The projects north of there for relocating US-281 onto a freeway facility were separate urban freeway projects not apart of the I-37 system, and were built and funded by the state. The freeway was constructed between 1978 and 1990 from south (I-35) to north (Loop 1604). The ongoing project will extend the freeway an additional 8 miles northward.
The reason why it was never immediately signed I-37 is because it was not built as apart of I-37, and ever since there had been no real official talks or active interest as far as I'm aware to extend it, and that's how it still remains today.
I could see it happening if there was ever interest and it was pursued, though in today's day and age, I'm sure somewhere on the freeway there's a segment that doesn't meet interstate standards and the FHWA won't allow it.
Texas has a lot of freeways signed only as US Highways or State Highways. That philosophy is not (and SHOULD NOT) change as long as the federal government wants to be a cheapskate, absentee, A-Hole, B!+c# when it comes to funding highway projects that affect the overall national system. Right now the United States hopelessly SUCKS at this infrastructure thing. We're nowhere where we were in the 1960's and 1970's when were building 1000 or more miles of new freeway per year, at a 90/10 fed/state funding percentage.
If Texas has to pony up all the dollars to build a freeway the highway should only ever carry a Texas state route marker on it. If the feds want one of their labels (like an Interstate marker) applied to it then they need to pony up the bucks and PAY FOR IT.
With that being said, US-281 going North out of San Antonio is probably going to remain as US-281 for the foreseeable future. Even if an Interstate label could be applied to the road it would be more logical to call that route "I-33." I mean, really, they could convert US-281 to Interstate quality from San Antonio clear up to Wichita Falls. That would provide a very effective rural bypass of the highly populated Austin and DFW metro areas. In the somewhat near term I expect US-281 to get upgraded to a freeway up to the US-290 corridor to augment East-West traffic on the US-290 corridor -something that could turn into another Interstate-quality corridor. It could be called a second and much longer "I-12" than the one in Louisiana. But given the feds' attitude the highway will more likely just remain being called US-290. In the long term I can see US-281 from San Antonio being extended up to meet the tail end of I-44 in Wichita Falls.
You'd be surprised how much federal money is spent on state and local routes.
Then again, Texas recently gambled by leaving $1 billion in fed funds on the table that was almost wiped out by a legislated recission. Lucky for them, the recission was repealed. Still, it makes you wonder if some gross mismanagement is going on down there.
I don't doubt there's still a lot of federal money being spent on state and local routes. But it sure isn't the 90/10 split that it used to be 30+ years ago. Yet the federal government is the one who keeps mandating ever more increasingly expensive standards on how highways and freeways are to be built. Meanwhile they decreased funding levels rather than raise them in proportion to those higher building/safety standards.
So right now individual states are pretty much on their own for their highway infrastructure needs. Whatever the feds are providing in terms of funding is being eaten up rapidly and leaving a big gap for states to fill. A huge, prosperous and highly populated state like Texas may manage "okay" with that. But smaller states like nearby Oklahoma end up struggling a whole lot worse with the situation. If the feds want to keep up with this charade for too many more years I will not be surprised to see toll gates erected on ordinary city streets. The RIFD technology is already there to do it.
Actually, the 90/10 split for interstates is still alive and well through the National Highway Performance Program and, to a lesser extent, the Highway Safety Improvement Program. This has been clarified multiple times on this forum and I am amazed there is still confusion over it.
That said, I should look up funding levels over the years. There have been modest increases over the last 15 years. Still, the major change with MAP-21 that was carried forward is that more federal funding was directed towards the NHS. I am not sure how intentional that was, but that's been the effect.
(Pre-MAP 21, the 90/10 split was available through Interstate Maintenance funding).
I'd like to see it extended all the way to Wichita Falls to get some traffic off I-35. Currently with backroads NB its 11 miles but :50 longer, SB it's 9 miles and :33 longer, and this in the middle of the day, not rush hour. With a freeway through there, missing Austin, Fort Worth, and Waco it would be a great alternative.
Does the 281 slalom north of downtown SA even meet current interstate standards? At the speed limit it is one of the most white knuckle drives in Texas.
Quote from: armadillo speedbump on December 26, 2019, 11:43:39 AM
All the speed limit it is one of the most white knuckle drives in Texas.
That stretch definitely caught me off guard the first time I drove it. 65 mph on an freeway with countless sharp curves, 4 lanes of traffic in one direction with almost no room for error, and at least two small, hard to see advisory speed 50 mph signs.
Should be posted at a maximum of 60 mph IMO.
Wonder how many sideswipes have occurred on that stretch.
If Texas builds an Interstate Quality Road (With Frontage Roads) and all these upgrades they do by them selves, TX DOT Needs to have some impressive sign resembling the Interstate sign.
It would be nice, even by themselves, upgrade U.S. 281 to Wichita Falls. These alternate routes such as an upgraded U.S. 281 would be just as good as Interstate 35. Traffic should just take these alternate routes instead of Interstate 35 being upgraded to endless double deck lanes.
Quote from: In_Correct on December 26, 2019, 12:21:06 PM
If Texas builds an Interstate Quality Road (With Frontage Roads) and all these upgrades they do by them selves, TX DOT Needs to have some impressive sign resembling the Interstate sign.
It would be nice, even by themselves, upgrade U.S. 281 to Wichita Falls. These alternate routes such as an upgraded U.S. 281 would be just as good as Interstate 35. Traffic should just take these alternate routes instead of Interstate 35 being upgraded to endless double deck lanes.
They built TX-130 and I-35 through Austin is still a mess. If you're referring to the issues in Austin, the majority of the problem is local traffic, not thru traffic. Thru traffic already has an interstate-grade bypass of the city.
Taking TX-130 has shaved off at least an hour of travel time through the city when I've taken it, mainly at peak hours.
There's no way residents in Austin would ever allow an update of I-35 to include elevated lanes. The $8 billion expansion project they're trying to fund would only add 2 additional HOV lanes in each direction. I-35 would be dug into a trench in the downtown area.
Regarding the TX-130
bypass of Austin, not all thru traffic takes it. Some people shunpike it to save a few dollars on the tolls. Although they could burn up more money than that idling away fuel in traffic jams along I-35.
Quote from: RothmanActually, the 90/10 split for interstates is still alive and well through the National Highway Performance Program and, to a lesser extent, the Highway Safety Improvement Program. This has been clarified multiple times on this forum and I am amazed there is still confusion over it.
If the formula is still alive and well the feds must have a long list of exceptions for it. There's a couple safety projects along I-44 in Lawton that are getting nowhere because ODOT wants the city of Lawton to pay half the cost.
One of these projects involves adding an actual sidewalk to one of the two
aging Gore Blvd bridges over I-44 at that outdated, traffic bottle-neck of an exit. Currently pedestrians have to cross the bridges by walking along a minimal right shoulder and street curb. Some people choose to just walk down and jay-walk across the Interstate main lanes rather than risk getting clipped by a side view mirror up on Gore Blvd. Unfortunately some of these people have been getting hit and even killed by vehicles on the Interstate. ODOT recently installed a taller chain link fence along SE Interstate drive in an attempt to prevent people from walking out onto the Interstate. But people are crouching under the fence at a couple street drainage spots. A couple mornings ago on my way into work I saw a pedestrian jay-walking I-44 right ahead of me
in dense fog. I'm glad I wasn't driving with my head up my ass, otherwise I could have hit the guy.
Quote from: armadillo speedbumpDoes the 281 slalom north of downtown SA even meet current interstate standards? At the speed limit it is one of the most white knuckle drives in Texas.
Despite the relatively tight turns that freeway looks like it meets current Interstate standards. The lanes and shoulders look wide enough. Most on/off ramps look like they have adequate geometry. The only exception is Basse Road with those two tight 20mph cloverleaf loops. It looks like a fairly old interchange. It's kind of surprising it hasn't been updated considering all the high dollar properties, golf clubs and retail stores nearby. A SPUI might be the only alternative there; those cloverleaf loops can't get any bigger.
Quote from: sprjus4 on December 26, 2019, 12:27:12 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on December 26, 2019, 12:21:06 PM
If Texas builds an Interstate Quality Road (With Frontage Roads) and all these upgrades they do by them selves, TX DOT Needs to have some impressive sign resembling the Interstate sign.
It would be nice, even by themselves, upgrade U.S. 281 to Wichita Falls. These alternate routes such as an upgraded U.S. 281 would be just as good as Interstate 35. Traffic should just take these alternate routes instead of Interstate 35 being upgraded to endless double deck lanes.
They built TX-130 and I-35 through Austin is still a mess. If you're referring to the issues in Austin, the majority of the problem is local traffic, not thru traffic. Thru traffic already has an interstate-grade bypass of the city.
Taking TX-130 has shaved off at least an hour of travel time through the city when I've taken it, mainly at peak hours.
Right, an extended 37/44 would be for long distance truckers not going to austin
Quote from: texaskdog on December 26, 2019, 04:40:41 PM
Right, an extended 37/44 would be for long distance truckers not going to austin
TX-130 is a
bypass of Austin for I-35 thru traffic.
Great but there are times when it is not quicker because they built it so far out. Plus it costs $16 to take the whole route.
Quote from: texaskdog on December 26, 2019, 06:20:46 PM
Great but there are times when it is not quicker because they built it so far out. Plus it costs $16 to take the whole route.
That's a rare day to have no traffic on I-35...
Any traffic jam on I-35, and TX-130 is usually the preferred route.
I've taken the route numerous times and have never had an issue paying the toll. It's relatively low considering it's almost 100 miles long, and the speed limit is 80 - 85 mph. Since I have out of state plates, the toll-by-plate rate is $19 one-way.
I've tried I-35 thru Austin because I looked at traffic and there was minimal congestion... ended up in at least 30 minutes of delay. This was during off peak hours on a Sunday.
Besides... you don't have to take the southern 40 miles. If you just want to avoid the worst areas of congestion, you can take the TX-45 connector half way through and it's only $8.64 with TxTag, $13 with pay-by-plate.
yes that's the things. its either not faster to go all the way around on the toll road or if it is its not worth $16 so its not very heavily used.
Quote from: sprjus4I've taken the route numerous times and have never had an issue paying the toll. It's relatively low considering it's almost 100 miles long, and the speed limit is 80 - 85 mph. Since I have out of state plates, the toll-by-plate rate is $19 one-way.
That's still a pretty expensive toll. By comparison I pay $3.50 (PikePass rate) one way to drive from Lawton up to Oklahoma City. It's $5.10 from the Red River up to OKC. The cash rate for the full length is $6.25.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 26, 2019, 11:40:13 PM
Quote from: sprjus4I've taken the route numerous times and have never had an issue paying the toll. It's relatively low considering it's almost 100 miles long, and the speed limit is 80 - 85 mph. Since I have out of state plates, the toll-by-plate rate is $19 one-way.
That's still a pretty expensive toll. By comparison I pay $3.50 (PikePass rate) one way to drive from Lawton up to Oklahoma City. It's $5.10 from the Red River up to OKC. The cash rate for the full length is $6.25.
Agree it's kind of expensive, but it's still something I would pay over Austin traffic. It's not like some of the tolls in the east, such as the HO/T lanes on I-95 leaving DC to the south where one can pay up to $30 at peak hours to bypass 30 miles of congestion. That, for instance, is something I would never pay. Too expensive for little gain. I'll sit out the 30 minute to 1 hour delay in the free lanes. I'd only pay it if I truly was in hurry to get somewhere.
The Chesapeake Expressway in Southeastern VA raises to $8 one-way for a 6-mile stretch, paralleled for that short distance by a rural 2-lane road. Again, something I wouldn't pay, especially for that short distance for little gain. But it does a good job capturing tourists from the north bound to the Outer Banks who have no problem paying it.
Then there's other modest tolls on long routes...
The New Jersey Turnpike is roughly $14 with E-ZPass for roughly 115 miles between Wilmington and New York City, completely bypassing Philadelphia.
The Pennsylvania Turnpike is similar as 161 miles between Ohio and Breezewood is roughly $22-24 with E-ZPass.
Those, for instance, are tolls I would pay, especially on a long-distance trip, especially if the free route is either a 2-lane road for 100 miles, or dumping me through a major metro at peak hour.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 26, 2019, 01:18:03 PM
Quote from: RothmanActually, the 90/10 split for interstates is still alive and well through the National Highway Performance Program and, to a lesser extent, the Highway Safety Improvement Program. This has been clarified multiple times on this forum and I am amazed there is still confusion over it.
If the formula is still alive and well the feds must have a long list of exceptions for it. There's a couple safety projects along I-44 in Lawton that are getting nowhere because ODOT wants the city of Lawton to pay half the cost.
That is a strange arrangement. I wonder if ODOT is on the same STIP cycle as NY. That could mean that their STIP is fully programmed (due to just starting in Ocrober) and the MPO has come along with this project and this is ODOT's way of squeezing it in and, to be blunt, showing some annoyance it wasn't included in the first place.
Then again, I wonder what the funding makeup really is of this 50/50 split. Is it truly local funding that ODOT wants ponied up, or do they provide the MPO with a federal suballocation and those are the funds that they want used? It's a major difference.
Quote from: armadillo speedbump on December 26, 2019, 11:43:39 AM
Does the 281 slalom north of downtown SA even meet current interstate standards? At the speed limit it is one of the most white knuckle drives in Texas.
Preach preacher! How that stretch passed engineering is beyond me.
Quote from: longhorn on December 27, 2019, 11:56:20 AM
Quote from: armadillo speedbump on December 26, 2019, 11:43:39 AM
Does the 281 slalom north of downtown SA even meet current interstate standards? At the speed limit it is one of the most white knuckle drives in Texas.
Preach preacher! How that stretch passed engineering is beyond me.
I think we might find some parts of the answer on this link. http://www.texasfreeway.com/SanAntonio/historic/281_1971_study/281_1971_study.shtml
Quote from: sprjus4Agree it's kind of expensive, but it's still something I would pay over Austin traffic. It's not like some of the tolls in the east, such as the HO/T lanes on I-95 leaving DC to the south where one can pay up to $30 at peak hours to bypass 30 miles of congestion. That, for instance, is something I would never pay. Too expensive for little gain. I'll sit out the 30 minute to 1 hour delay in the free lanes. I'd only pay it if I truly was in hurry to get somewhere.
I think the reversible HO/T lanes on I-95 in Northern VA have something of a captive audience. The sames goes for other toll roads and toll bridges there on the Eastern Seaboard. Motorists have no practical alternatives to I-95. I couldn't imagine taking US-1 down from DC well into Northern VA. They've improved the road a good bit, but it still has lots of stop light hell.
I remember traffic jams in the metro DC area being bad when I lived in the Northern VA area back in the 1980's. Now a bunch of that commerce moved South. A bunch of areas I remember being nothing but woods are now covered by shopping centers and housing developments. My family moved when the woods near Dale City were being cleared to build Potomac Mills. Back then the HO/T lanes on I-95 ended in Springfield just South of the Beltway. Now they go clear down past the Marine Corps base in Quantico and end in Aquia Harbor. That whole area around Stafford is built up now. Crazy.
Some of the traffic situation in DC/NVA remind of trouble spots in the Dallas area. The surface streets in the Addison area can be an absolute slog. LBJ Freeway is known for its horrible traffic jams. It's not so bad with the Tex-Express expansion now complete. Still, I'll pay extra to get on those
Lexus Lanes to shoot past a serious jam on the free lanes.
I'll continue to steer clear of I-35E between Dallas and Denton. I really HATE the current arrangement with those lanes striped a foot more narrow than usual. The US-281 Slalom in San Antonio may be a white-knuckle experience. I-35E up through Farmer's Branch, Carrollton and Lewisville will make you feel like you might trade paint at any moment.
Quote from: RothmanThat is a strange arrangement. I wonder if ODOT is on the same STIP cycle as NY. That could mean that their STIP is fully programmed (due to just starting in Ocrober) and the MPO has come along with this project and this is ODOT's way of squeezing it in and, to be blunt, showing some annoyance it wasn't included in the first place.
Then again, I wonder what the funding makeup really is of this 50/50 split. Is it truly local funding that ODOT wants ponied up, or do they provide the MPO with a federal suballocation and those are the funds that they want used? It's a major difference.
ODOT merely told Lawton's City Council they wanted our city to pay half the tab. It didn't sound like they cared how the city scrounged up the money for the added sidewalk for the Gore Blvd bridge over I-44. I think the situation is ridiculous. That interchange is not city property. Meanwhile people are still jay-walking across I-44 or risking getting clipped by car mirrors trying to walk along Gore Blvd over I-44. What really pisses me off is this dangerous situation has existed for many years and nothing is being done about it. Contrast that with Norman and I-35. Big upgrades have happened there. The new SPUIs at Lindsey and Main can be crossed on foot. The older bridges over I-35 at Robinson and Rock Creek Road have dedicated sidewalks. Going a little farther North into Moore and the bridges over I-35 are like those in Lawton: no accommodations for pedestrian and/or bicycles.
Quote from: Rothman on December 27, 2019, 09:44:03 AMThen again, I wonder what the funding makeup really is of this 50/50 split. Is it truly local funding that ODOT wants ponied up, or do they provide the MPO with a federal suballocation and those are the funds that they want used? It's a major difference.
Are sidewalks on Interstate bridges eligible for federal funding at the same ratios as the rest of the bridge?
Quote from: J N Winkler on December 27, 2019, 09:37:11 PM
Quote from: Rothman on December 27, 2019, 09:44:03 AMThen again, I wonder what the funding makeup really is of this 50/50 split. Is it truly local funding that ODOT wants ponied up, or do they provide the MPO with a federal suballocation and those are the funds that they want used? It's a major difference.
Are sidewalks on Interstate bridges eligible for federal funding at the same ratios as the rest of the bridge?
For the situation he's talking about, I believe so.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 27, 2019, 04:17:04 PM
Quote from: RothmanThat is a strange arrangement. I wonder if ODOT is on the same STIP cycle as NY. That could mean that their STIP is fully programmed (due to just starting in Ocrober) and the MPO has come along with this project and this is ODOT's way of squeezing it in and, to be blunt, showing some annoyance it wasn't included in the first place.
Then again, I wonder what the funding makeup really is of this 50/50 split. Is it truly local funding that ODOT wants ponied up, or do they provide the MPO with a federal suballocation and those are the funds that they want used? It's a major difference.
ODOT merely told Lawton's City Council they wanted our city to pay half the tab. It didn't sound like they cared how the city scrounged up the money for the added sidewalk for the Gore Blvd bridge over I-44.
The project, if federally funded (and why it wouldn't be is beyond me), would need to be added to the STIP through the MPO. Power dynamics do differ from MPO to MPO, so maybe ODOT has an arrangement that allows them to have control of the TIP in Lawton.
Anyway, again, the type of funding matters if it is a real 50/50 split. I suppose the 50% local share could be considered nonparticipating by FHWA in FMIS to allow ODOT to use the 90% share on its 50%, for example. It's just that even in NYC, that kind of thing is unheard of unless the City really wants a project and ponies up its own funds to get it done. We just don't know all the details here and it could be less dire than how it has been painted (e.g., Lawton just having to use federal funds allocated to it by ODOT).
I don't understand the situation and I think the arrangement reeks of political bias. There's one sense of regional bias with ODOT concentrating its resources in the OKC and Tulsa areas. And there's a sense of bias regarding anyone who gets around town in something other than an automobile. Making a city more walk-able and friendly to bicycles appears liberal. Pedestrians are getting killed but there's nothing but foot-dragging over the situation anyway. If a fault in highway design was resulting in fatal vehicle collisions ODOT would have been more proactive -like they've been with 4-laning OK-49 in Medicine Park and OK-7 between Lawton and Duncan.
The funny thing is the intersection with I-44 and Gore Blvd in Lawton is very inefficient and badly in need of a serious upgrade. Gore Blvd passes through 3 traffic signals there, which leads to all kinds of traffic back-ups, including backups on the WB I-44 off-ramp to Gore Blvd that sometimes have cars trailing well into the main right lane of the Interstate. The 2 Gore Blvd bridges over I-44 are really old. Tacking a new sidewalk onto the side of one old bridge just seems stupid when the whole interchange needs to be completely re-done. But ODOT isn't going to spend $20-$50 million on a completely new interchange design when they can't even manage a couple million for a sidewalk tacked onto an old bridge.
Not only does that interchange need re-doing. But the Comanche Tribe and ODOT need to work out an arrangement to build a pedestrian bridge over I-44 halfway between the Gore and Lee Blvd exits. A bunch of Interstate jay-walkers take that path as a short cut to get to the casino on the other side of the highway. I don't know how often ODOT traffic engineers bother to visit Lawton. But that area of I-44 is far different now from what it was 20 years ago. There's a bunch of hotels and other businesses close to the Interstate. There are far more cars and far more people on foot moving through that area now.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 27, 2019, 04:17:04 PM
ODOT merely told Lawton's City Council they wanted our city to pay half the tab. It didn't sound like they cared how the city scrounged up the money for the added sidewalk for the Gore Blvd bridge over I-44. I think the situation is ridiculous. That interchange is not city property. Meanwhile people are still jay-walking across I-44 or risking getting clipped by car mirrors trying to walk along Gore Blvd over I-44. What really pisses me off is this dangerous situation has existed for many years and nothing is being done about it. Contrast that with Norman and I-35. Big upgrades have happened there. The new SPUIs at Lindsey and Main can be crossed on foot. The older bridges over I-35 at Robinson and Rock Creek Road have dedicated sidewalks. Going a little farther North into Moore and the bridges over I-35 are like those in Lawton: no accommodations for pedestrian and/or bicycles.
Big difference between Norman's bridges and Lawton's. If ODOT was going to fully replace the Gore Ave bridges as was done in Norman, then you would have a better case. Tacking on sidewalks puts it into a different bucket. Why doesn't the Comanche Nation pony up some matching $$ as their casino is the reason for all the ped traffic?
The Comanche Nation Casino alongside I-44 would definitely need to be involved in helping fund a pedestrian bridge over I-44 halfway between the Gore Blvd and Lee Blvd exits. All the people I see jay-walking I-44 in that zone are headed to/from the casino.
As for the Gore Blvd crossing over I-44, not all the people on foot in that area are gamblers. Of the pedestrian gamblers, not all are headed to Comanche Nation Casino. Some walk farther East on Gore Blvd to Apache Casino. Gore Blvd is the primary connection between the East & West sides of Lawton. Some of the people I see hoofing through that area are walking to/from their jobs; I've seen employees of Cracker Barrel tip-toeing along those Gore Blvd bridges. Those who are too fearful of getting clipped by a side view mirror (or worse) end up jay-walking across the on/off ramps for the Gore Blvd exit and the main lanes of I-44 itself -which statistically seems like an even more dangerous choice.
To kind of pull the topic a bit back to US-281, if TX DOT did fully develop US-281 as an Interstate quality relief route of I-35 (from San Antonio up to Wichita Falls) it would put considerably more traffic onto the I-44 corridor up from Wichita Falls to OKC. If such a route was built and named something like "I-33" the segment of I-44 between WFTX and OKC could be renumbered "I-33" as well. Either way Lawton would be along that route. The situation for pedestrians at the Gore Blvd exit of I-44 would become even more hazardous as long distance traffic levels increase along the route.
But, yeah, I agree that tacking a new sidewalk onto the side of an old bridge is a bad idea compared to just replacing that interchange with a proper new design.
It sounds like a dedicated sidewalk bridge is best. Keep the pedestrians separated from roads as much as possible and safe on a completely different bridge.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 01, 2020, 05:03:56 PM
The Comanche Nation Casino alongside I-44 would definitely need to be involved in helping fund a pedestrian bridge over I-44 halfway between the Gore Blvd and Lee Blvd exits. All the people I see jay-walking I-44 in that zone are headed to/from the casino.
As for the Gore Blvd crossing over I-44, not all the people on foot in that area are gamblers. Of the pedestrian gamblers, not all are headed to Comanche Nation Casino. Some walk farther East on Gore Blvd to Apache Casino. Gore Blvd is the primary connection between the East & West sides of Lawton. Some of the people I see hoofing through that area are walking to/from their jobs; I've seen employees of Cracker Barrel tip-toeing along those Gore Blvd bridges. Those who are too fearful of getting clipped by a side view mirror (or worse) end up jay-walking across the on/off ramps for the Gore Blvd exit and the main lanes of I-44 itself -which statistically seems like an even more dangerous choice.
To kind of pull the topic a bit back to US-281, if TX DOT did fully develop US-281 as an Interstate quality relief route of I-35 (from San Antonio up to Wichita Falls) it would put considerably more traffic onto the I-44 corridor up from Wichita Falls to OKC. If such a route was built and named something like "I-33" the segment of I-44 between WFTX and OKC could be renumbered "I-33" as well. Either way Lawton would be along that route. The situation for pedestrians at the Gore Blvd exit of I-44 would become even more hazardous as long distance traffic levels increase along the route.
But, yeah, I agree that tacking a new sidewalk onto the side of an old bridge is a bad idea compared to just replacing that interchange with a proper new design.
There is no way this would happen. Stephenville Texas has already squashed a new bypass around town to replace the the 1960's era reroute of US377 around town at the time now it is just a 5 lane outer loop in the middle of town that has a concurrency with US67 for half of it and Washingston St. is still BUS 377. They aren't going to be up for a reroute of US281 around town. TXDOT has been planning a Super 2 from north of Stephenville to Interstate 20. Although eventually this grass roots movement to keep stephenville rural is likely to be squashed due to how Tarleton University is rapidly expanding. College student traffic might force them to act eventually.
Let me guess: the folks in Stephenville, TX who are fighting to keep the town rural probably have a lot of gray hair on their heads, right? There's a lot of older folks here in Oklahoma who want to keep their small towns "rural," but it's coming at a cost of them losing population. They're shedding young people like crazy due to the lack of job opportunities (not to mention the towns being a social dead zone). The kids grow up and flee to the big cities -where they struggle with much higher living costs. Trade one set of problems for another.
At any rate the residents of Stephenville don't own that entire region of Texas. If they want to block an upgrade-able US-281 bypass that runs close to Stephenville then TX DOT could just build such a route farther outside town, far enough outside Stephenville's town limits where they would have little recourse to stop it.
As it is, US-281 runs on a somewhat crooked, angular route through that part of Texas. It's possible to build an "I-33" relief route for I-35 that runs a more straight shot, bypassing Hamilton and Hico to the West and then going half way between Stephenville and Bluff Dale to take a more direct shot at Mineral Wells. Hell, "I-33" could go a good bit West of Jacksboro to gain a faster path to Wichita Falls.
I bump this thread to mention then the first freeway mainlanes on US-281 north of Loop-1604 are now open.
https://twitter.com/TxDOTSanAntonio/status/1276982341504729092
https://twitter.com/TexHwyMan/status/1277368012593672193
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on July 09, 2020, 01:30:22 PM
https://twitter.com/TxDOTSanAntonio/status/1276982341504729092
I guess I'm a roadgeek. Because I read that as "celebrate the news with a heart and a right turn".
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 28, 2019, 03:41:38 PM
I don't understand the situation and I think the arrangement reeks of political bias. There's one sense of regional bias with ODOT concentrating its resources in the OKC and Tulsa areas. And there's a sense of bias regarding anyone who gets around town in something other than an automobile. Making a city more walk-able and friendly to bicycles appears liberal. Pedestrians are getting killed but there's nothing but foot-dragging over the situation anyway. If a fault in highway design was resulting in fatal vehicle collisions ODOT would have been more proactive -like they've been with 4-laning OK-49 in Medicine Park and OK-7 between Lawton and Duncan.
The funny thing is the intersection with I-44 and Gore Blvd in Lawton is very inefficient and badly in need of a serious upgrade. Gore Blvd passes through 3 traffic signals there, which leads to all kinds of traffic back-ups, including backups on the WB I-44 off-ramp to Gore Blvd that sometimes have cars trailing well into the main right lane of the Interstate. The 2 Gore Blvd bridges over I-44 are really old. Tacking a new sidewalk onto the side of one old bridge just seems stupid when the whole interchange needs to be completely re-done. But ODOT isn't going to spend $20-$50 million on a completely new interchange design when they can't even manage a couple million for a sidewalk tacked onto an old bridge.
Not only does that interchange need re-doing. But the Comanche Tribe and ODOT need to work out an arrangement to build a pedestrian bridge over I-44 halfway between the Gore and Lee Blvd exits. A bunch of Interstate jay-walkers take that path as a short cut to get to the casino on the other side of the highway. I don't know how often ODOT traffic engineers bother to visit Lawton. But that area of I-44 is far different now from what it was 20 years ago. There's a bunch of hotels and other businesses close to the Interstate. There are far more cars and far more people on foot moving through that area now.
we have one pedestrian death a month on I-35 in Austin and often its a pedestrian crossing within a block of a bridge. they built 183 with some high poles in the median, problem solved
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on July 09, 2020, 01:30:22 PM
I bump this thread to mention then the first freeway mainlanes on US-281 north of Loop-1604 are now open.
Glad to see the project progressing. Per TxDOT, the flyovers from US-281 South to both Loop 1604 East and West are scheduled to open in the next 2 months, along with the new Redland Rd intersection that will pass under the new freeway with access to the frontage roads.
New Flyover Ramps at US-281 and Loop 1604 Set to Open (https://txdotsanantonio.blogspot.com/2020/08/new-flyover-ramps-at-us-281-and-loop.html)
Quote(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-mpg1BB_2qPY/XzA68rfai_I/AAAAAAAADfk/G1ta3Hh9I9cEnrfwW_k_dlG0XCEQIQOQACLcBGAsYHQ/w400-h254/ariel_direct%2Bconnector%2Bramps.png)
Get ready for a smoother commute as two new flyover ramps at the US 281 and Loop 1604 interchange are set to open to traffic. Scheduled for the weekend of August 15, the two new flyover ramps will offer drivers a seamless and direct connection from the southbound mainlanes of US 281 to the east- and westbound mainlanes of Loop 1604.
These new flyover ramps mark a major milestone on Segment 1 of the US-281N Expansion project, designed to improve traffic flow and reduce congestion on the most congested corridor in the San Antonio area.
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tpam6xBkk_I/XzA7O_aZb9I/AAAAAAAADfs/Vg7FZsMnNr4UMWGwWB64UJ-6Hhphwbi-wCLcBGAsYHQ/w320-h310/281_SB%2BDC%2BRamps%2BOpening_2020.08.07%2Bv01.jpg)
The addition of these flyover ramps will allow for seamless travel on six of the eight ramps planned for the US 281 and Loop 1604 interchange. The remaining two ramps are scheduled to open by the end of 2021.
Please note that construction is weather permitting and subject to change.
https://twitter.com/TxDOTSanAntonio/status/1292838425062772737
https://twitter.com/TxDOTSanAntonio/status/1295055700134178818
https://twitter.com/TxDOTSanAntonio/status/1309866654692765696
http://www.texashighwayman.com/281410.shtml
Found interesting article on the Loop 410 and US 281 exchange. Didn't know the lack of direct connection pre 2007 had a story behind it.
The last segment of the Phase 1 mainlines between Loop 1604 and Stone Oak Pkwy is now open to traffic. The final completion date for remaining work on the project is currently Fall 2021. Segment 2 remains under construction and will extend the freeway an additional 5 miles further north to Borgfeld Drive. That project is expected to be completed next year.
In total, both phases would have extended the US-281 freeway an additional 8 miles north from its former terminus at Loop 1604, now transitioning traffic directly onto rural 65 mph divided highway at its new terminus with no traffic signals or developed urban areas to traverse.
https://twitter.com/TxDOTSanAntonio/status/1365696468548538369
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 28, 2020, 11:38:58 PM
Let me guess: the folks in Stephenville, TX who are fighting to keep the town rural probably have a lot of gray hair on their heads, right? There's a lot of older folks here in Oklahoma who want to keep their small towns "rural," but it's coming at a cost of them losing population. They're shedding young people like crazy due to the lack of job opportunities (not to mention the towns being a social dead zone). The kids grow up and flee to the big cities -where they struggle with much higher living costs. Trade one set of problems for another.
At any rate the residents of Stephenville don't own that entire region of Texas. If they want to block an upgrade-able US-281 bypass that runs close to Stephenville then TX DOT could just build such a route farther outside town, far enough outside Stephenville's town limits where they would have little recourse to stop it.
As it is, US-281 runs on a somewhat crooked, angular route through that part of Texas. It's possible to build an "I-33" relief route for I-35 that runs a more straight shot, bypassing Hamilton and Hico to the West and then going half way between Stephenville and Bluff Dale to take a more direct shot at Mineral Wells. Hell, "I-33" could go a good bit West of Jacksboro to gain a faster path to Wichita Falls.
The keep it rural folks tend to be under 60. They are the ones who stayed around while all of their peers left town for bigger cities like Dallas, Houston, or even Waco. They enjoy their lifestyle. The biggest irony is that these conservative rednecks share many values with the urban tree huggers. The bottom line is both want to minimize urbanization of rural lands. The urbanists may want to minimize agricultural use but they both believe that spreading the urban sprawl is bad for the environment and bad for people.
Stephenville sprawls plenty along U.S. 377. It is not exactly a small town. With increase of traffic, people need the improved developed roads whether they want them or not. Also, the U.S. 281 super highway can be useful for people who want to avoid Dallas, Fort Worth, and Austin. U.S. 281 can easily be upgraded to a super highway east of Stephenville. A straight connection between F.M. 219 to near F.M. 144 should be far enough away from towns.
Does Jacksboro oppose highway improvements? U.S. 380 and U.S. 281 are eventually going to be widened.
Quote from: texaskdog on July 09, 2020, 03:05:49 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 28, 2019, 03:41:38 PM
I don't understand the situation and I think the arrangement reeks of political bias. There's one sense of regional bias with ODOT concentrating its resources in the OKC and Tulsa areas. And there's a sense of bias regarding anyone who gets around town in something other than an automobile. Making a city more walk-able and friendly to bicycles appears liberal. Pedestrians are getting killed but there's nothing but foot-dragging over the situation anyway. If a fault in highway design was resulting in fatal vehicle collisions ODOT would have been more proactive -like they've been with 4-laning OK-49 in Medicine Park and OK-7 between Lawton and Duncan.
The funny thing is the intersection with I-44 and Gore Blvd in Lawton is very inefficient and badly in need of a serious upgrade. Gore Blvd passes through 3 traffic signals there, which leads to all kinds of traffic back-ups, including backups on the WB I-44 off-ramp to Gore Blvd that sometimes have cars trailing well into the main right lane of the Interstate. The 2 Gore Blvd bridges over I-44 are really old. Tacking a new sidewalk onto the side of one old bridge just seems stupid when the whole interchange needs to be completely re-done. But ODOT isn't going to spend $20-$50 million on a completely new interchange design when they can't even manage a couple million for a sidewalk tacked onto an old bridge.
Not only does that interchange need re-doing. But the Comanche Tribe and ODOT need to work out an arrangement to build a pedestrian bridge over I-44 halfway between the Gore and Lee Blvd exits. A bunch of Interstate jay-walkers take that path as a short cut to get to the casino on the other side of the highway. I don't know how often ODOT traffic engineers bother to visit Lawton. But that area of I-44 is far different now from what it was 20 years ago. There's a bunch of hotels and other businesses close to the Interstate. There are far more cars and far more people on foot moving through that area now.
we have one pedestrian death a month on I-35 in Austin and often its a pedestrian crossing within a block of a bridge. they built 183 with some high poles in the median, problem solved
One a month? For a little while here in Houston there was like one every other day. And I'm still seeing people run across the freeway at places.
Glad to see there's a US 281 thread, and mostly just posting here so I can keep up to date with the expansion project north of Loop 1604. The section around Evans Road was a mess when I was there back in 2017, so I'm glad to see it's being converted to a full freeway. Can't wait to get back down there and check out the progress sometime.
http://texashighwayman.com/us281exp.shtml
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 28, 2020, 11:38:58 PM
Let me guess: the folks in Stephenville, TX who are fighting to keep the town rural probably have a lot of gray hair on their heads, right? There's a lot of older folks here in Oklahoma who want to keep their small towns "rural," but it's coming at a cost of them losing population. They're shedding young people like crazy due to the lack of job opportunities (not to mention the towns being a social dead zone). The kids grow up and flee to the big cities -where they struggle with much higher living costs. Trade one set of problems for another.
At any rate the residents of Stephenville don't own that entire region of Texas.
Sounds like when they say you can't put an NFL team in San Antonio, because Jerry won't allow it.
Quote from: texasdogSounds like when they say you can't put an NFL team in San Antonio, because Jerry won't allow it.
Yeah, I've heard those claims about Jerry Jones' clout with the rest of the NFL many times before. I think that clout is over-stated. He's not the only billionaire who owns an NFL team. And the last time I checked, the Dallas Cowboys haven't won a Super Bowl since freaking 1996. That's 25 years ago.
The Baltimore Ravens football team was founded 25 years ago and they've won two NFL titles since then (2001 & 2013). The Patriots have won 6 Super Bowls since then, the Broncos have won 3, the Packers have won 2, the Giants have won 2, the Bucaneers have won 2, the Steelers have won 2 and the remaining 7 titles have gone to single teams, some of whom won Super Bowl titles prior to 1996.
Anyway, the Cowboys are going through their longest title drought in the Super Bowl era -longer than the span between 1978 and 1993. And that one seemed pretty brutal (especially as bad as the Cowboys stank near the end of the 1980's).
The Cowboys still sell a lot of merchandise I suppose. But the situation is reaching critical mass in the Austin-San Antonio region. Both metros may be farther apart than Dallas and Fort Worth, but not by a heck of a lot. Rapidly growing cities like New Braunfels and San Marcos are filling the space in between
just like Arlington, Irving, Grand Prairie and Grapevine did between D and FW. Nearly 5 million people live in the Austin-San Antonio region. Adding to that, Austin has a growing amount of
star power, thanks to a steady stream of celebrities and business people moving there. If someone like Elon Musk decides he wants to own an NFL team and build a stadium somewhere in that area is Jerry Jones really going to be able to stop him?
I think the NFL already has enough teams. I figure it is only a matter of time before an existing team re-locates to the Austin-San Antonio region. But it's not entirely out of the question for an expansion team to go there either.
And, as Texas continues to grow, so will the roads. It takes a painfully long time for something like an Interstate highway corridor to materialize. But regular 4-laning projects can happen quite a bit faster. If done the right way those ordinary 4-lane roads can be upgraded to freeways if the need materializes. Residents in one town won't be able to derail an entire corridor project. Opponents of those efforts won't live forever either. At any rate, I think US-287 between Fort Worth and Amarillo should be a top priority for upgrades in that part of Texas. I took a road trip down to DFW last Thursday and was amazed by all the truck traffic on US-287 that evening.
It's not far at all. Distance in Texas is not like distance on the east coast. If I tell an east coaster something is only 8 hours away they think it's the end of the world. 80 miles from SA to Austin is nothing. Putting a stadium in between for a team would draw from each.
TxDOT has scheduled a public meeting to begin the environmental process to extend the freeway 6.3 miles to SH 46. The description says right-of-way will be widened to 400 ft.
https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/san-antonio/051821.html (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/san-antonio/051821.html)
It looks like US 281 could potentially be upgraded to freeway standards all the way to Farm-to-Market 306, where US 281 loses its frontage roads, and narrows down to a two-lane highway. There probably doesn't need to be a 281 freeway spanning all the way to FM 306, right? Then again, this is Texas, where anything goes.
The US-281 corridor has a lot of potential from the North side of San Antonio up at least to US-190 (edit: not US-290) in Lampasas where I-14 could be built someday.
The most difficult segment of US-281 to upgrade would be from Cibolo Creek (where the current Phase 2 freeway project ends) up through Bulverde and Spring Branch to the Guadalupe River. Freeway exits already exist at the intersections of Bulverde Road and TX-46.
North of the Guadalupe River US-281 (edit: not US-290) would be relatively easy to upgrade. The divided highway is a frontage road style setup up to FM-306. US-281 drops to 2 lanes North of that intersection, but there appears to be an ample amount of ROW available for expansion into a wide, 4-lane divided highway with future freeway upgrade potential. Bypasses would be necessary for towns to the North (Blanco, Johnson City, Marble Falls, Burnet). Still, I think it's reasonable for a US-281 freeway to, over time, extend up to Lampasas.
North of Lampasas I think a good case can be made to 4-lane US-281 to Wichita Falls. The military might like such a thing. Some troops have to drive between Fort Sill and Fort Hood. They often use US-281 for that purpose.
Edit: I don't know why I had US-290 on the brain so much to let it override typing the correct routes. But US-290 needs its own upgrades going West out of Austin. The population level is exploding in that region and it will need freeway improvements, both on existing freeways like I-35 and the addition of relief routes such as US-281.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 10, 2021, 11:52:44 PM
The most difficult segment of US-281 to upgrade would be from Cibolo Creek (where the current Phase 2 freeway project ends) up through Bulverde and Spring Branch to the Guadalupe River. Freeway exits already exist at the intersections of Bulverde Road and TX-46.
That's what this upcoming project would cover, at least up to SH-46. The interchange at SH-46 per the public notice from TxDOT would be fully replaced with a new overpass designed for future expansion, while the one at Bulverde Rd would be retained. One-way frontage roads would be constructed along the entire corridor in each direction in typical Texas fashion.
I agree, long term it would be good to upgrade it to at least US-
190 / Future I-14. It would also provide a western bypass of Austin entirely for I-35 through traffic.
Project Tracker has numerous road projects for U.S. 281 between Wichita Falls and San Antonio. They are not enough to indicate a complete Super Highway, (as no bypasses are planned) but it is a good start. At the speed that the roads are being constructed, large amounts of traffic will certainly be there. Even now Interstate 35 has too much traffic. Adding more lanes to Interstate 35 solves some of the problems, but the traffic at times still could be very slow and even detours needed such as U.S. 281 and U.S. 377. A U.S. 281 Super Highway would benefit Wichita Falls and San Antonio without needing to go through Fort Worth and Austin.
I think a US-281 super highway that went clear from San Antonio up to Wichita Falls would attract a BIG amount of long distance commercial truck traffic. They could bypass DFW and Austin and then use the connection to I-44 as a gateway from Texas up to the Northeast US. As I said earlier, the US Army (and even the Air Force) would like the improvement.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 12, 2021, 12:22:26 AM
I think a US-281 super highway that went clear from San Antonio up to Wichita Falls would attract a BIG amount of long distance commercial truck traffic. They could bypass DFW and Austin and then use the connection to I-44 as a gateway from Texas up to the Northeast US. As I said earlier, the US Army (and even the Air Force) would like the improvement.
I could see a reasonable long range plan to extend Interstate 37 along the US-281 corridor north towards Wichita Falls, then overtook the corridor up to Oklahoma City, truncating I-44 back to Oklahoma City. That way to have a single designation corridor paralleling I-35 between San Antonio and Oklahoma City as opposed to two.
Don't tell the grid sticklers though :banghead:
I agree though, US-281 should be widened to at minimum a 4 lane divided highway throughout with town bypasses.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 12, 2021, 12:59:48 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 12, 2021, 12:22:26 AM
I think a US-281 super highway that went clear from San Antonio up to Wichita Falls would attract a BIG amount of long distance commercial truck traffic. They could bypass DFW and Austin and then use the connection to I-44 as a gateway from Texas up to the Northeast US. As I said earlier, the US Army (and even the Air Force) would like the improvement.
I could see a reasonable long range plan to extend Interstate 37 along the US-281 corridor north towards Wichita Falls, then overtook the corridor up to Oklahoma City, truncating I-44 back to Oklahoma City. That way to have a single designation corridor paralleling I-35 between San Antonio and Oklahoma City as opposed to two.
Don't tell the grid sticklers though :banghead:
I agree though, US-281 should be widened to at minimum a 4 lane divided highway throughout with town bypasses.
Heck, I'd settle for the bypasses.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 12, 2021, 12:59:48 AM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 12, 2021, 12:22:26 AM
I think a US-281 super highway that went clear from San Antonio up to Wichita Falls would attract a BIG amount of long distance commercial truck traffic. They could bypass DFW and Austin and then use the connection to I-44 as a gateway from Texas up to the Northeast US. As I said earlier, the US Army (and even the Air Force) would like the improvement.
I could see a reasonable long range plan to extend Interstate 37 along the US-281 corridor north towards Wichita Falls, then overtook the corridor up to Oklahoma City, truncating I-44 back to Oklahoma City. That way to have a single designation corridor paralleling I-35 between San Antonio and Oklahoma City as opposed to two.
Don't tell the grid sticklers though :banghead:
I agree though, US-281 should be widened to at minimum a 4 lane divided highway throughout with town bypasses.
The hell with the gridmorons. It's in the German style of autobahnen still with numbers nearby their neighbors. 37 could continue up the west side of OKC on new terrain and come back to 35 well north of OKC. It could multiplex to Wichita and then subsume 135.
.
But, as to US 281 being four lanes from San Antonio to Wichita Falls, that would make total sense.... just like what you were thinking about I believe... the way US 290 was upgraded from Houston to Austin years ago to four lanes. I remember when it was two lanes, it was hell.
Even with acceleration of the already rapidly growing SA/Austin population, a freeway won't be needed north of Spring Branch for many, many years. 4-laning north to Hico and 220/67 to Cleburne is sufficient, along with some bypasses over time. Eventual medians added to the undivided sections.
I'd guess Marble Falls, Lampasas, and Burnet would be the biggest timesaving bypasses, with Lampasas having the most utility given the confluence of so many key routes. Johnson City really doesn't slow down a trip much, same for Evant.
Money doesn't grow on trees and inflation is going to screw us all thanks to undisciplined wasteful spending.
Important to note that a freeway design up to at least FM-306 was envisioned at some point in the future given the recent widening provided a nearly 300 foot median for a future mainline. The intersections are already equipped with all the typical interchange features like the U-Turn lanes. The current roadway would eventually be a frontage road.
With the way the Austin-San Antonio region is growing and forecast to further grow it will be very important for potential relief routes like US-281 to be improved dramatically. US-281 will need to be Interstate quality considerably farther North than just Spring Branch. I would say US-290 and Johnson City would be the minimum for long term improvement. Interstate quality up to Lampasas, US-190 and a possible connection to I-14 would make more sense.
In other highly populated regions of the US there are parallel super highway routes that compliment each other. There's I-5 and CA-99 in California's Central Valley. I-95, I-295 and the New Jersey Turnpike run parallel to each other much of the way between Wilmington, DE and the Southern outskirts of metro NYC. The DC-Baltimore area has similar examples. Same for South Florida.
I-35 from San Antonio up thru Austin is pretty over-loaded. I don't think the TX-130 toll road was designed efficiently enough to work as a proper I-35 relief route for both commercial and personal vehicle traffic. US-281 could effectively relieve more of the long distance traffic burden, particularly if the highway is at least 4-laned up to Wichita Falls.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 12, 2021, 06:51:26 PM
I don't think the TX-130 toll road was designed efficiently enough to work as a proper I-35 relief route for both commercial and personal vehicle traffic.
For the Dallas-Fort Worth to San Antonio corridor, it's an effective bypass for avoiding Austin. Now, traffic from Oklahoma to San Antonio and points south... there could be better options... but it still is effective for traffic sticking to the I-35 corridor for that particular portion.
The upgrades for U.S. 281 is not one bizarre proposal such as a proposal for Interstate 14. It is multiple upgrades that will be built over the years. No need to worry about Big Spending. It is also unlikely that they will plan for a very jagged corridor since many of the towns that would need to be bypassed would not want to have much to do with U.S. 281 after that. It would be necessary to realign U.S. 281 away from the towns and give them Business Routes. The Frontage Roads First Setups should continue with the Super Highway being completed a while longer after that.
Highways near D.F.W. are needing as much attention as U.S. 290 did. U.S. 81, U.S. 82, U.S. 287, U.S. 377, and U.S. 380 are examples of roads that must have upgrades. Unfortunately, waiting until it is too late makes it impossible for some of these highways to get the needed upgrades.
U.S. 380 from McKinney to Denton is an example of being too late to upgrade. Cross Roads might be able to accommodate upgrades. But with McKinney and Denton, they are in the middle of town. Construction Cranes every where right this very minute are all over the place. This results in an even more of increase to the constant traffic that is in U.S. 380. All of these highways and even Super Highways such as Interstate 35 have immense traffic. It is nearly impossible to construct badly needed upgrades to the Interchanges along Interstate 35, which often makes Interstate 35 unusable while people attempt to exit and enter Interstate 35.
The Interchange upgrades need to be this:
https://i.imgur.com/XBAJ74O.jpg
In Texas, people try to drive 2 out of their 3 + cars simultaneously.
Currently, U.S. 281 is far enough away from development. At least acquire the Right Of Way and preserve it ( this includes Right Of Way for very large Interchanges ) as the areas are not going to stay empty much longer.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 12, 2021, 06:55:00 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 12, 2021, 06:51:26 PM
I don't think the TX-130 toll road was designed efficiently enough to work as a proper I-35 relief route for both commercial and personal vehicle traffic.
For the Dallas-Fort Worth to San Antonio corridor, it's an effective bypass for avoiding Austin. Now, traffic from Oklahoma to San Antonio and points south... there could be better options... but it still is effective for traffic sticking to the I-35 corridor for that particular portion.
When I've used TX-130, it was while driving from Wichita to Monterrey and points southwest. That is, for me it was a true bypass of I-35: I departed I-35 at Georgetown and rejoined it on the south side of San Antonio (and
vice versa on the return trip). However, that indeed leaves the real reason I no longer go that route when driving to Mexico: there's no good alternate route around Dallas—Fort Worth.
My dream would be for a route from Wichita Falls to San Antonio that either (1) bypasses most of the towns along the way or (2) goes through them as an expressway (not necessarily freeway, but at least stop-free). Four lanes the whole way would be great, but some sections would probably still be fine with alternating passing lanes.
For such an alternate route, TX-16 could work, but US-281 makes a lot more sense.
Quote from: kphoger on May 13, 2021, 09:28:47 AM
My dream would be for a route from Wichita Falls to San Antonio that either (1) bypasses most of the towns along the way or (2) goes through them as an expressway (not necessarily freeway, but at least stop-free). Four lanes the whole way would be great, but some sections would probably still be fine with alternating passing lanes.
For such an alternate route, TX-16 could work, but US-281 makes a lot more sense.
Approximately how much of that stretch of US 281 is four lanes currently?
Very little of US-281 is 4 lanes north of Spring Branch, it's mostly a 2 lane road all the way to Wichita Falls passing through every town along the way. There's a couple 4 lane divided segments here and there but that's about it.
Here is the situation on US 281 between San Antonio (Loop 1604) and Wichita Falls (US 287), in terms of continuous passing opportunity (defined as at least two lanes in each direction):
* Loop 1604 to FM 306--24 miles (generally four-lane divided)
* US 290 overlap (north end in Johnson City)--6 miles (four-lane divided)
* Johnson City to CR 110 south of Evant--83 miles (four-lane undivided "poor boy")
* SH 199 junction southeast of Jacksboro to SH 114 junction northwest--16 miles (four-lane divided in rural areas, with undivided sections with center turn lane in periurban areas)
* FM 1954 to US 287 (final length leading into Wichita Falls)--6 miles (mix of four-lane divided and undivided "poor boy")
That is a total of 135 miles out of 320 that are at least four lanes with two in each direction. (I didn't attempt to count urban four-lane sections connecting two-lane segments at either end.) When I drove this route between Jacksboro and Johnson City as part of a 2016 visit to the LBJ ranch and San Antonio, I found it to be tiring. While the two-lane sections generally have passing lanes, traffic is heavy enough that it is difficult to avoid spending a large share of driving time in platoons. Much of this length is chipsealed and I blame it specifically for paint damage to the hood of the car I was driving (no chip in paint before, chip in paint after).
Did not realize the long "poor boy" stretch north of Johnson City, that's relieving to some extent.
I've not personally driven this corridor that far north of San Antonio - obviously - but was considering such this upcoming summer coming down from Oklahoma City to San Antonio as an alternative to I-35 and SH-130. Any suggestions for I-44 / US-281 vs. I-35 or potentially any other routes?
One reason I sort of saw US-281 as a more unpopular option was mainly the fact it's still mostly 2 lanes combined with the heavier traffic load and trucks it has with limited passing opportunities. It's almost sounding like if I simply hit I-35 at a better time (i.e. Fort Worth not at peak hours), combined with SH-130, I'd mostly be better off with that.
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 13, 2021, 06:51:18 PM
Here is the situation on US 281 between San Antonio (Loop 1604) and Wichita Falls (US 287), in terms of continuous passing opportunity (defined as at least two lanes in each direction):
* Loop 1604 to FM 306--24 miles (generally four-lane divided)
Thanks for the detailed overview! This first segment is the only one I'm personally familiar with, having driven it during my 2017 visit.
Quote from: J N Winkler on May 13, 2021, 06:51:18 PM
That is a total of 135 miles out of 320 that are at least four lanes with two in each direction. (I didn't attempt to count urban four-lane sections connecting two-lane segments at either end.) When I drove this route between Jacksboro and Johnson City as part of a 2016 visit to the LBJ ranch and San Antonio, I found it to be tiring. While the two-lane sections generally have passing lanes, traffic is heavy enough that it is difficult to avoid spending a large share of driving time in platoons. ...
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 13, 2021, 07:16:54 PM
One reason I sort of saw US-281 as a more unpopular option was mainly the fact it's still mostly 2 lanes combined with the heavier traffic load and trucks it has with limited passing opportunities. It's almost sounding like if I simply hit I-35 at a better time (i.e. Fort Worth not at peak hours), combined with SH-130, I'd mostly be better off with that.
That's what I was thinking as well. US 281 sounds like it would make a reasonable bypass of Austin, but too much two-lane highway remaining to be a good bypass of Dallas-Fort Worth. For a long-distance trip, I can't imagine it would be better than whatever traffic issues may arise in DFW outside of peak times.
Quote from: sprjus4 on May 13, 2021, 07:16:54 PMI've not personally driven this corridor that far north of San Antonio - obviously - but was considering such this upcoming summer coming down from Oklahoma City to San Antonio as an alternative to I-35 and SH-130. Any suggestions for I-44 / US-281 vs. I-35 or potentially any other routes?
One reason I sort of saw US-281 as a more unpopular option was mainly the fact it's still mostly 2 lanes combined with the heavier traffic load and trucks it has with limited passing opportunities. It's almost sounding like if I simply hit I-35 at a better time (i.e. Fort Worth not at peak hours), combined with SH-130, I'd mostly be better off with that.
I liked US 281 for the scenery--it is actually in the Hill Country, not just along the eastern fringe. But I did take I-35 (including I-35W in Fort Worth, but not SH 130) on the way back, and even with heavy construction going on in Waco, I found it a bit less stressful than dealing with the platoons on two-lane US 281. Since it is a freeway, rest areas and truck stops are more plentiful. And although I-35W is not quiet, it is one of the easier ways through the Chinese wall that is DFW.
One option to consider may be to take I-35 to near Fort Hood and then I-14/US 190 west to US 281 at Lampasas. This puts you in the Hill Country and then it is either poor-boy or four-lane divided all the way to the south end of the US 290 overlap. I don't know about conditions between Johnson City and San Antonio, however, since the LBJ Ranch part of my trip took me to Fredericksburg on US 290 and then back east via US 87 and I-10.
On my way south (from Wichita), I took I-44 out of Oklahoma City, then US 81 to Bowie, Texas, followed by SH 59 to pick up US 281 at Jacksboro. The SH 59 leg was a mistake--70 limit but lots of curves with reduced advisory speeds. If I had to do it again, I'd probably cross the Red River via SH 79 and pick up SH 148 at Petrolia. It is then apparently a mostly straight shot to Jacksboro.
When my friends drove from Wichita (KS) to Kerrville (TX) a couple of years ago, I recommended them to take TX-16 all the way from Windthorst (just south of Wichita Falls). They enjoyed the drive. When I plot a course on Google Maps right now from Guthrie (OK) to Pearsall (TX), here is how it breaks down:
Going 85 mph: I-35 → (I-35W) → I-35 → TX-130 → (I-10) → I-35
566 miles / 8 h 42 m
Using US-281: I-35 → I-44 → US-281 → I-35
561 miles / 8 h 52 m
Straight through Fort Worth: I-35 → (I-35W) → I-35
550 miles / 8 h 55 m
Using TX-16: I-35 → I-44 → (US-281) → TX-16 → I-10 → (I-410) → I-35
580 miles / 8 h 57 m
The locals' secret: I-35 → FM-51 → (I-20) → US-281 → I-35
552 miles / 9 h 5 m
So, as you can see, TX-16–even for long-distance routes–might be worth considering as another alternate route: 19 miles longer, but only 5 minutes longer, with much lower traffic counts.
Quote from: webny99That's what I was thinking as well. US 281 sounds like it would make a reasonable bypass of Austin, but too much two-lane highway remaining to be a good bypass of Dallas-Fort Worth. For a long-distance trip, I can't imagine it would be better than whatever traffic issues may arise in DFW outside of peak times.
I think I mentioned it earlier, but I've known quite a few military people who use US-281 as an alternative to I-35 for trips from Fort Sill down to Fort Hood or even the bases in the San Antonio area. Given the original "national defense" dual purpose of the Interstate highway system, one could try arguing US-281 should be upgraded some to improve transportation between Joint Base San Antonio, Fort Hood, Sheppard AFB and Fort Sill. Not everything moves between these posts via air or rail.
I personally can handle DFW traffic, so I would use US-287 and I-35 for road trips down to Austin or San Antonio. There are far more restaurants, convenience stores and other services along the US-287/I-35 combo than US-281. If the US-281 corridor between Wichita Falls and San Antonio was a minimum of 4-lane divided expressway and more of it Interstate quality I'd consider taking that.
Quote from: J N WinklerOn my way south (from Wichita), I took I-44 out of Oklahoma City, then US 81 to Bowie, Texas, followed by SH 59 to pick up US 281 at Jacksboro. The SH 59 leg was a mistake--70 limit but lots of curves with reduced advisory speeds. If I had to do it again, I'd probably cross the Red River via SH 79 and pick up SH 148 at Petrolia. It is then apparently a mostly straight shot to Jacksboro.
If you go that way you might want to try Bill's Catfish restaurant just SW of Waurika. It's along OK-79 about 2.5 miles SW of the split with US-70 and a little over a mile from the Red River. That place and the Rocking H steak house in Temple are the most popular restaurants in that area. People from Lawton and Duncan hit those places all the time. I'm sure Bill's probably attracts a few people up from Wichita Falls too.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 14, 2021, 03:39:16 PM
Quote from: webny99That's what I was thinking as well. US 281 sounds like it would make a reasonable bypass of Austin, but too much two-lane highway remaining to be a good bypass of Dallas-Fort Worth. For a long-distance trip, I can't imagine it would be better than whatever traffic issues may arise in DFW outside of peak times.
I think I mentioned it earlier, but I've known quite a few military people who use US-281 as an alternative to I-35 for trips from Fort Sill down to Fort Hood or even the bases in the San Antonio area. Given the original "national defense" dual purpose of the Interstate highway system, one could try arguing US-281 should be upgraded some to improve transportation between Joint Base San Antonio, Fort Hood, Sheppard AFB and Fort Sill. Not everything moves between these posts via air or rail.
I personally can handle DFW traffic, so I would use US-287 and I-35 for road trips down to Austin or San Antonio. There are far more restaurants, convenience stores and other services along the US-287/I-35 combo than US-281. If the US-281 corridor between Wichita Falls and San Antonio was a minimum of 4-lane divided expressway and more of it Interstate quality I'd consider taking that.
Quote from: J N WinklerOn my way south (from Wichita), I took I-44 out of Oklahoma City, then US 81 to Bowie, Texas, followed by SH 59 to pick up US 281 at Jacksboro. The SH 59 leg was a mistake--70 limit but lots of curves with reduced advisory speeds. If I had to do it again, I'd probably cross the Red River via SH 79 and pick up SH 148 at Petrolia. It is then apparently a mostly straight shot to Jacksboro.
If you go that way you might want to try Bill's Catfish restaurant just SW of Waurika. It's along OK-79 about 2.5 miles SW of the split with US-70 and a little over a mile from the Red River. That place and the Rocking H steak house in Temple are the most popular restaurants in that area. People from Lawton and Duncan hit those places all the time. I'm sure Bill's probably attracts a few people up from Wichita Falls too.
Bill's pulls from as far away as OKC. I have friends who drive down there regularly.
An update of US 281, the ~4.5 mile extension of the freeway main lanes from Stone Oak Parkway to the Comal County line opened to traffic on May 19.
The Texas Highway Man drove the new freeway:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBc8zfff7FA
Two lanes and a HOV lane. Odd when I drove it a couple a weeks ago and still odd seeing it on the video. The two lane stretch between north SAT and Johnson City through Blanco is painful. The passing lanes areas make it bearable and al little safer for passing. You still have to judge the passing , but at least you do not have to worry about oncoming traffic.
Yeah it does seem pretty odd to go to all that trouble only to end up with a sort of 3x3 lanes configuration. Some portions of the project have an over-sized right "shoulder" that looks like it would allow for an additional lane to be re-striped into existence.