Lubbock wants to take Interstate 27 south – much further south

[afguy]

he Lubbock City Council wants the federal government to extend Interstate 27.  A non-binding resolution addressed to both federal and state officials was on the City Council agenda for Tuesday.

One possible extension of I-27 from Lubbock to Laredo goes through Big Spring.  Another possibility takes I-27 though Midland.

"This resolution supports the designation of the extension of Interstate 27 as a future interstate by the U.S. Congress..."  City of Lubbock records said.

"The proposed extension would connect Interstate 27 with the Interstates 20 and 10 in Texas,"  the city said.  "Further, the eventual extension will serve three existing border crossings with Mexico and provide additional support to the energy and agricultural industries."

https://www.everythinglubbock.com/news/local-news/lubbock-wants-to-take-interstate-27-south-much-further-south/1879134428

[silverback1065]

waste of money.

[noelbotevera]

waste of money.

How else will the tumbleweeds migrate south for the winter? Texas winters are no laughing matter.

[cjk374]

Can't decide on Big Spring or Odessa/Midland?? You don't have too. Say hello to I-27E & I-27W!!!   

[texaskdog]

make the road to Abilene a freeway lol  make it go to Austin

[Henry]

I just read that one part would take it to Laredo, to meet up with I-35, I-69 and I-2. Pretty soon, that small town on the Rio Grande will have lots more interstate choices instead of one!

[longhorn]

Kind of makes sense, Hwy 84 is four lanes from Lubbock to Sweetwater.

Might relieve I35/hwy 287 of truck traffic too.

[Bobby5280]

If the choice was up to me I would extend I-27 through Big Spring and down to San Angelo and then continue the diagonal direction to Junction, TX and I-10. That would create a larger Amarillo to San Antonio corridor. If I-27 was extended Northward up to Limon, CO and I-70 that would be an even bigger Denver to San Antonio corridor.

The San Angelo to Junction idea conflicts with the Ports to Plains Corridor concept of going straight South from San Angelo down to Del Rio, TX and the Mexican Border (and then farther South to Laredo and the Rio Grande Valley cities). But those plans, along with the I-69 extension, were drafted when lawmakers in Texas were all about free trade agreements like NAFTA. Now with protectionism and anti-immigrant furor dominating some political circles it's a tougher sell to build a highway the closely hugs the border.

[froggie]

Effectively, they're recommending/pushing that the Ports-to-Plains Corridor to the south become an I-27 extension.  The Corridor splits in the Lamesa vicinity, with one leg following TX 349 to Midland and the other leg continuing down US 87 to Big Spring and beyond.  The two legs rejoin near Sterling City (the Midland leg via TX 158).

[The Ghostbuster]

I doubt Interstate 27 will be extended either northward or southward anytime soon, if ever. This is probably wishful thinking.

[Chris]

AADT figures from TxDOT (click to enlarge):



Of these corridors, only SH 349 is not a four lane divided highway, though it seems to be a 4-lane undivided highway for most of its length. The traffic volumes are more or less in the same range for these potential I-27 corridors, US 84 has consistent volumes near or over 10,000 vehicles per day, US 62/385 has a longer stretch with lower volumes halfway Lubbock and Odessa, but US 87 dips to the lowest volumes briefly south of Lamesa, at only 4,000 v.p.d.

[Bobby5280]

Effectively, they're recommending/pushing that the Ports-to-Plains Corridor to the south become an I-27 extension.  The Corridor splits in the Lamesa vicinity, with one leg following TX 349 to Midland and the other leg continuing down US 87 to Big Spring and beyond.  The two legs rejoin near Sterling City (the Midland leg via TX 158).

I wouldn't be opposed to a leg of I-27 going through Midland, upgrading the TX-349 and TX-158 corridors. Both roads are mostly undivided 4-lane now. They carry a quite a bit of heavy truck traffic, due in part to all the oil patch activity out there.

What I would not like: if a Southern extension of I-27 to Midland came at the expense of a more direct route going through Big Spring on to San Angelo.

I doubt Interstate 27 will be extended either northward or southward anytime soon, if ever. This is probably wishful thinking.

The Midland-Odessa area is currently growing pretty rapidly (along with several other urban/suburban areas in Texas). That's one factor that would favor extending I-27. The Front Range cities in Colorado have a lot of growth. US-287 is the only halfway decent North-South route in Eastern Colorado that bypasses the mountains to get down to Texas, Oklahoma, etc.

What hurts Texas is the state is so damn big and the state has multiple corridors deserving Interstate quality upgrades, such as US-287 between Amarillo and Dallas-Fort Worth. But there's only so much in the way of resources, even with a state population approaching 30 million. The limited focus going on outside of big metros seems to be focused on I-69 projects.

Of these corridors, only SH 349 is not a four lane divided highway, though it seems to be a 4-lane undivided highway for most of its length. The traffic volumes are more or less in the same range for these potential I-27 corridors, US 84 has consistent volumes near or over 10,000 vehicles per day, US 62/385 has a longer stretch with lower volumes halfway Lubbock and Odessa, but US 87 dips to the lowest volumes briefly south of Lamesa, at only 4,000 v.p.d.

US-87 through Big Spring and San Angelo won't ever develop VPD counts typical of other Interstate highways in its current form. Long distance traffic coming up from other areas, such as San Antonio, will stick with other routes like I-35 and US-287 to get to places in the Texas Panhandle or Colorado Front Range. Build a through route that actually directly connects major destinations like Denver and San Antonio and those VPD counts will shoot up a bunch.

[GreenLanternCorps]

AADT figures from TxDOT (click to enlarge):



Of these corridors, only SH 349 is not a four lane divided highway, though it seems to be a 4-lane undivided highway for most of its length. The traffic volumes are more or less in the same range for these potential I-27 corridors, US 84 has consistent volumes near or over 10,000 vehicles per day, US 62/385 has a longer stretch with lower volumes halfway Lubbock and Odessa, but US 87 dips to the lowest volumes briefly south of Lamesa, at only 4,000 v.p.d.

How do those counts compare to I-27 North of Lubbock?

[kphoger]

How do those counts compare to I-27 North of Lubbock?

15490 @ FM-37
16195 @ I-27-BL (Plainview)
11770 @ FM-3183
11427 @ US-87 (Kress)
9547 @ FM-928
9518 @ SH-86
11310 @ FM-214
11151 @ FM-1881
10556 @ FM-285
11187 @ TX-217
11834 @ US-60 (Canyon)

[texaskdog]

funny how they built I-27 so many years ago

[edwaleni]

It would make more sense to terminate it at Del Rio near Laughlin AFB.

Its the last formal border crossing west up the Rio Grande before El Paso that can support trucks and commercial traffic.

Other than that, its doesnt seem viable.

They would be better off replacing the damaged rail bridge at Presidio so they can reconnect Texas Pacifico RR with the port of Topolobampo.

This will bring Asian container traffic directly through Texas instead of the congested port of Long Beach.

[Bobby5280]

I wonder how port traffic at various places along the US coasts (Pacific, Gulf, Atlantic) has changed following the upgrade to the Panama Canal.

[edwaleni]

I wonder how port traffic at various places along the US coasts (Pacific, Gulf, Atlantic) has changed following the upgrade to the Panama Canal.

Only a few ports on the east coast upgraded to support Panamax ships. Port of Miami, NY-NJ and Virginia (Norfolk).

There are lots of ports that claim Panamax ability, like Jacksonville, FL, Charleston SC or Savannah GA, but they cannot take full loads due to lack of channel depth. 

All of them are fighting for federal dollars to upgrade and/or dredge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Panamax_port

[sparker]

Regardless of whether a I-27 southern extension uses US 87 via Big Spring or TX 349/158 via Midland (both of which are included in the current HPC #38 language), it's likely to do something like Bobby proposes, but via the proposed I-14 branch down US 83 from Eden to Junction.  Since the I-14 backers from San Angelo and M/O have a bit off a head start regarding PR and probable TXDOT cooperation, if the Lubbock concept indeed takes hold, the two promotional parties will likely sit down at some point and hash out just what'll go where, and what it will be numbered as.  Ironically, San Angelo, with its long history of whining about being excluded from the Interstate network, will have two corridor concepts to play with (and possibly play the parties against one another to maximize their benefits).  The argument will be whether to favor a concept that directs Lubbock and/or M/O traffic to San Antonio and, by extension, Corpus Christi -- or to Del Rio and Laredo en route to I-2 and the lower Rio Grande Valley.  Fancifully, it's Panamax vs. NAFTA; the Gulf of Mexico or Mexico itself (between Asian trade and cross-border commerce, it'd be difficult to determine which of these concepts the Trump administration would hold in greatest contempt!). 

[index]

Can't decide on Big Spring or Odessa/Midland?? You don't have too. Say hello to I-27E & I-27W!!!   

If I-27 is going to Laredo, and a suffixed Interstate was involved in this process the most sensible outcome would probably be a 27W spurring off to Odessa-Midland and the main 27 going off down to Laredo. Although don't see why a 3DI wouldn't do that job, but knowing what Texas pursued with I-69W/69C/69E, wouldn't be surprised if they took the suffixed option.

[Roadgeekteen]

I-27 always seemed like a dead end.

[kphoger]

It would make more sense to terminate it at Del Rio near Laughlin AFB.

Its the last formal border crossing west up the Rio Grande before El Paso that can support trucks and commercial traffic.

When I've crossed the border at Del Rio, I've hardly seen any trucks at all.  Monclova and Sabinas just don't seem to be a big node for international commercial traffic.

[Beltway]

AADT figures from TxDOT (click to enlarge):

[Map snipped]

Those 3 highways barely warrant 4 lanes. 

Extending I-27 southward would be just another Vanity Interstate Highway.

[edwaleni]

It would make more sense to terminate it at Del Rio near Laughlin AFB.

Its the last formal border crossing west up the Rio Grande before El Paso that can support trucks and commercial traffic.

When I've crossed the border at Del Rio, I've hardly seen any trucks at all.  Monclova and Sabinas just don't seem to be a big node for international commercial traffic.

The city of Mondova accounts for the highest production of steel of Mexico and Latin America, hence its nickname "The Steel Capital".

Today Monclova has one of the highest commercial, industrial and financial developments, and it is currently one of the cities with the lowest poverty rates in Mexico. Its metropolitan area is among the 10 most competitive urban areas in the country, and it also has the highest labor productivity

Honestly anything from there would no doubt cross at Piedras Negras.  Again pointing out that extending I-27 south of Lubbock isn't all that valuable.

[kphoger]

It would make more sense to terminate it at Del Rio near Laughlin AFB.

Its the last formal border crossing west up the Rio Grande before El Paso that can support trucks and commercial traffic.

When I've crossed the border at Del Rio, I've hardly seen any trucks at all.  Monclova and Sabinas just don't seem to be a big node for international commercial traffic.

The city of Mondova accounts for the highest production of steel of Mexico and Latin America, hence its nickname "The Steel Capital".

Today Monclova has one of the highest commercial, industrial and financial developments, and it is currently one of the cities with the lowest poverty rates in Mexico. Its metropolitan area is among the 10 most competitive urban areas in the country, and it also has the highest labor productivity

Honestly anything from there would no doubt cross at Piedras Negras.  Again pointing out that extending I-27 south of Lubbock isn't all that valuable.

Commercial traffic I've seen between Monclova and Allende (where the highway splits to either Piedras or Acuña) doesn't even come close to the amount of commrecial traffic I've seen between Monterrey and Laredo.  The trucks I have seen north of Monclova are generally junkier, short-haul rigs that by all appearances have both an origin and a destination within Mexico.  In contrast, trucks north of Monterrey are generally nice and shiny, and a lot of them sport US license plates on the trailer; some are even dual-plated tractors being driven by one of the remaining cross-border companies.

AADT between Allende and Piedras is 15,464 (on the north side of Nava).
AADT between Morelos and Acuña doesn't even top 2,500.