Regional Boards > Mid-South

I-14 in Texas

<< < (2/155) > >>

Bobby5280:
I could certainly imagine an Interstate quality Northern bypass of Houston leaving I-10 at Beaumont and following along or near the TX-105 corridor.

Once the route gets close to the US-59/I-69 corridor it could be a tough slog to build. However traffic levels along TX-105 between Montgomery, Conroe and Cleveland have grown pretty bad. TX DOT has some conservative plans to 4-lane TX-105 between Conroe and Cleveland. With fast growth spreading in that area it may really need a Navasota-Cleveland freeway/turnpike or at least the beginnings of one via a divided highway with wide median.

It would be cheaper to hook a "I-14" bypass of Houston into the Northern part of the Grand Parkway and then have it follow TX-249 toward Navasota. But that wouldn't solve as many problems.

The part of this "I-14" coming from the Killeen and Temple area is tougher to justify. The preliminary route they have drawn is really jagged. It is doing more to whore itself to every community possible in Central Texas without giving car drivers and truckers a reasonably straight path they would expect from an Interstate.

I still contend Austin needs a complete East-West Interstate, not just Austin to Houston. From I-10 Exit 477 in West Texas, thru Fredericksburg, Austin, Brenham, Hempstead and back down to I-10 at Exit 763 in Houston. US-290 will eventually claw its way out the Western side of Austin. I would prefer the route as "I-14" but "I-12" wouldn't be the end of the world. Still, I think TX-71 between Austin and Columbus (I-10) has a better shot of a freeway upgrade than this I-14 concept to connect some military bases, especially when the bases don't even need it.

Regarding Amarillo, that is an important transportation hub. It's certainly vital for freight rail. For a long time I've thought US-287 between Amarillo and Fort Worth should be upgraded to Interstate quality, with the upgrade going to Ennis and I-45. The I-32 designation has been mentioned for this corridor. Any bypass around Dallas-Fort Worth would probably have to involve the proposed Loop 9 corridor.

I have co-workers and other friends who like to drive to Houston by way of TX-6 from Waco through College Station. Houston will at least have an Interstate quality connection to College Station via the Tomball Tollway extension of TX-249 to Navasota.

Grzrd:
This article reports that the Gulf Coast Strategic Highway Coalition is on board with having the west terminus at Loop 338 in Odessa and "that language has been filed":


--- Quote ---Midland-Odessa is one step closer to getting a new interstate – and possibly a southern loop.
At its annual meeting Tuesday, the Midland-Odessa Transportation Alliance, or MOTRAN, announced that Gulf Coast Strategic Highway Coalition is on board with changing its plans and moving the western terminus of the upcoming Interstate 14 project to the Midland-Odessa area.
As previously reported, MOTRAN has pushed for a change to I-14’s western terminus, which originally was planned to start at the junction of I-10 and U.S. Route 190 west of Iraan. MOTRAN President James Beauchamp said in his presentation that the I-14 coalition will pursue having the terminus start at Loop 338 in Odessa. The new interstate would run parallel with I-20 into Midland.
The Reporter-Telegram has reported in the past that I-14 could break off from I-20 at State Highway 158 and run south along U.S. Route 87 to Brady. However, according to an updated – though not final – map during the presentation, a new break-off point would be south of I-20 across from Loop 250 and curve toward and connect with SH 158, creating the western portion of a southern loop around the city.
The map also showed a roadway with a terminus at SH 158 extending eastward directly across from the west junction that curved north to I-20 with the eastern intersection with Loop 250, thus filling out the southern loop and creating a complete loop around the city.
Beauchamp said the new I-14 route would have about six times more traffic than the original route.
The route adjustment requires congressional approval, but “we’ve gotten (the change) retooled, and that language has been filed,” Beauchamp said.
Beauchamp said it’s important to have I-14 start in Odessa and continue into Midland. “That way, it is unquestionable that both communities will have access to the highway.”  ....
– A broad look at I-27: I-27 is unique in the U.S. interstate system in that it has a terminus not connected to another interstate. Ports-to-Plains and MOTRAN are looking to fix that by having I-27 connect with I-20. The terminus point remains to be seen. Ports-to-Plains is pushing for a connection near Big Spring. MOTRAN, however, is asking for a complete study that evaluates U.S. Route 385, SH 349 and other routes for consideration.
--- End quote ---

The article also includes a photo of MOTRAN swag. This may or may not be a wonderful Christmas gift for a roadgeek:

The Ghostbuster:
The highways were always great, in my opinion. As for the article, is it likely that this proposal of Interstate 14 will actually be constructed?

sparker:

--- Quote from: Grzrd on December 08, 2016, 08:36:19 PM ---This article reports that the Gulf Coast Strategic Highway Coalition is on board with having the west terminus at Loop 338 in Odessa and "that language has been filed":


--- Quote ---Midland-Odessa is one step closer to getting a new interstate – and possibly a southern loop.
At its annual meeting Tuesday, the Midland-Odessa Transportation Alliance, or MOTRAN, announced that Gulf Coast Strategic Highway Coalition is on board with changing its plans and moving the western terminus of the upcoming Interstate 14 project to the Midland-Odessa area.
As previously reported, MOTRAN has pushed for a change to I-14’s western terminus, which originally was planned to start at the junction of I-10 and U.S. Route 190 west of Iraan. MOTRAN President James Beauchamp said in his presentation that the I-14 coalition will pursue having the terminus start at Loop 338 in Odessa. The new interstate would run parallel with I-20 into Midland.
The Reporter-Telegram has reported in the past that I-14 could break off from I-20 at State Highway 158 and run south along U.S. Route 87 to Brady. However, according to an updated – though not final – map during the presentation, a new break-off point would be south of I-20 across from Loop 250 and curve toward and connect with SH 158, creating the western portion of a southern loop around the city.
The map also showed a roadway with a terminus at SH 158 extending eastward directly across from the west junction that curved north to I-20 with the eastern intersection with Loop 250, thus filling out the southern loop and creating a complete loop around the city.
Beauchamp said the new I-14 route would have about six times more traffic than the original route.
The route adjustment requires congressional approval, but “we’ve gotten (the change) retooled, and that language has been filed,” Beauchamp said.
Beauchamp said it’s important to have I-14 start in Odessa and continue into Midland. “That way, it is unquestionable that both communities will have access to the highway.”  ....
– A broad look at I-27: I-27 is unique in the U.S. interstate system in that it has a terminus not connected to another interstate. Ports-to-Plains and MOTRAN are looking to fix that by having I-27 connect with I-20. The terminus point remains to be seen. Ports-to-Plains is pushing for a connection near Big Spring. MOTRAN, however, is asking for a complete study that evaluates U.S. Route 385, SH 349 and other routes for consideration.
--- End quote ---

The article also includes a photo of MOTRAN swag. This may or may not be a wonderful Christmas gift for a roadgeek:



--- End quote ---

Ever since the I-14 (TX version) proposal was floated, I sort of figured that San Angelo would come into play -- that the original leg along or below US 190 down to I-10 was just a "placeholder", so to speak.  San Angelo is to TX what Fresno is to CA -- a sizeable burg (not at Fresno city's 500K, but still the center of its region) bypassed by the I-system.  Midland and/or Odessa are just trying to get some local projects done -- striking while the iron's reasonably hot.  Port-to-Plains has been batted around for decades without any progress, so the interests that be in W. Texas are simply trying to maneuver the newer I-14 proposal to their advantage (and if that provokes renewed interest in P-to-P, that's icing on their cake!).  But unless there's interest in placing I-14 along TX 71 through the heart of "hill country" (unlikely for a myriad of reasons), east of Brady the most feasible corridor remains along US 190.  However, if the full proposal gets legs, I for one wouldn't be at all surprised to see plans for corridor improvement along US 183 up to Lampasas to connect to the main I-14 trunk -- an effective (though a bit indirect) limited access route from Austin & environs to points west -- emptying out onto I-20 rather than I-10.  Austin to Houston would be addressed separately.

Bobby5280:
If I had to bet, I would bet connections between Austin and Houston will be built out long before this "I-14" concept.

I can understand people in Midland and Odessa wanting to cash in on this porky "I-14" thing. But the reality is money directed at that jaggy, crooked pipe dream will be money potentially taken away from unfinished road projects in Midland and Odessa. Loop 338, TX-191, Loop 250 and US-385 all need their own improvements.

San Angelo should be connected to the Interstate system. But I think an extension of I-27 through Big Spring is the best way to do it (via the Ports to Plains corridor effort). I also think I-44 should be extended from Wichita Falls to Abilene, if not to San Angelo. It's a point of debate where the road should go South of San Angelo. The Ports to Plains Corridor includes Del Rio. I think it would be cheaper and more beneficial to build it to Junction, TX (ending at I-10), creating a fairly direct link to San Antonio. The ports in Corpus Christi and Brownsville can be reached faster that way. How much NAFTA traffic crosses the border at Del Rio anyway?

There aren't any major destinations large enough along this proposed I-14 corridor to generate the traffic counts needed to justify building it through the hill country of West Texas. It would be pretty expensive to build the highway correctly -meaning building a more direct new terrain route rather than following existing roads along a very jagged, wasteful and ultimately pointless path.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page