As sometimes facts and figures escape me, I was just now again thinking about whether US 75 ends at Spur 366 or at I-30. The designation file says that I-345 ends from I-30 to a connection with US 75 and SS 366. That pretty definitively means that that the two roads are not concurrent.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/ih/ih0345.htm (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/ih/ih0345.htm)
Wanting to see more detail, I looked up the minute order, which doesn't even mention I-345 but describes how I-20 changed to I-30. I then looked up the only minute order regarding US 75 since the 1939 redescription, in which the route was truncated. I'm not a real history buff, but I was surprised to find out that the elevated freeway carrying I-345 never was US 75. I have the 1984 highway map, which shows it this way, but I'd never noticed it.
The map can be seen here. The version I have is a little newer and labels the eastern side of the couplet "Pearl."
https://tslarc.tsl.texas.gov/maps/map05814-005.jpg (https://tslarc.tsl.texas.gov/maps/map05814-005.jpg)
When US 75 was truncated to Spur 366 in 1987, the discontinued route segments were assigned different designations, including the Pearl Expressway section through downtown, which was made SS 559. This route was cancelled in 1991 and became Dallas city streets. Until 1987 US 75 went through downtown. I'd assume it was signed along the freeway, as it is today (until just now, I assumed it was along the freeway). This makes me wonder how it was signed through downtown. As a business route?
I always thought that I-345 was signed as US 75 for simplicity, and that the signs were outdated but historically accurate, but it turns out the road never carried that number and the signs are just wrong.
For the truncation minute order, scroll down to 85364 on page 26.
https://publicdocs.txdot.gov/minord/MinuteOrderDocLib/003674442.pdf (https://publicdocs.txdot.gov/minord/MinuteOrderDocLib/003674442.pdf)
Yes, there used to be Business 75 button copy BGS on Central Expy/Cesar Chavez until about 15ish years ago.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on May 10, 2019, 10:56:52 PM
Yes, there used to be Business 75 button copy BGS on Central Expy/Cesar Chavez until about 15ish years ago.
That's recent enough for me to remember, but back then my interest in roads was just an interest that I didn't actively pursue beyond collecting maps.
The site where I found that map is a good resource, but can be a bit of a pain to use if you aren't familiar with it. I had a bit of a time figuring it out. Here are the instructions. Go to the main page.
https://www.tsl.texas.gov/apps/arc/maps/ (https://www.tsl.texas.gov/apps/arc/maps/)
Enter your search terms. I type in a county name, because I'm really only interested in county highway maps, but you can type in a city as well. If you hit "Search", it will show the full inventory of maps. If you select "Image" first it will show only maps that can be viewed online. The county highway detail maps are where it gets challenging. I entered "Dallas" and selected "Image" and hit "Search" and then selected 05814, "General Highway Map. Detail of Cities and Towns in Dallas County, Texas." For each set of detail maps, there's only one entry on the results page. It starts at the northwest corner of the county. If you click the picture, it will open that map. If you click the number, it will show you that northwest map thumbnail again. The trick is to scroll down to the bottom of the page. There, it will show the thumbnails for the other detail maps of that county. You look at each one and estimate or guess which shows the part of the county you want, and then click the picture (not the number).
Simplicity? I Simply Call It The Unfinished Corridor. (Unfinished Interstate 45).
I can remember in the 60's traveling from OK to Houston. Central Expressway at the southern end gave you 2 choices to proceed south, either "Central" or "Good-Latimer". Since both were surface streets, I was never sure what the difference was as they came back together just south of I-30
As fascinating as the history of Interstate 345/US 75 would be, I'd be more interested in what is in store for the future of these highways. Will "A New Dallas" get their wish in removing 345? I think Dallas would be nuts to remove 345, but I'm not the one making the decisions. Although it's been 5 years since the 345 removal plan was first announced, I suspect they will not proceed with demolishing it, but I could be wrong.
Also, US 75 once ran through the west end of Downtown
Quote from: The GhostbusterAs fascinating as the history of Interstate 345/US 75 would be, I'd be more interested in what is in store for the future of these highways. Will "A New Dallas" get their wish in removing 345? I think Dallas would be nuts to remove 345, but I'm not the one making the decisions. Although it's been 5 years since the 345 removal plan was first announced, I suspect they will not proceed with demolishing it, but I could be wrong.
I'm hoping they don't completely remove the freeway segment between I-30 and Woodall Rodgers Freeway. I think it would yield pretty severe consequences in traffic loads for I-30 and I-35E through the recently completed "Horseshoe." There is quite a bit of traffic coming up toward downtown Dallas from I-45. Add to that the C.F. Hawn Freeway (US-175) and improvements happening there as it merges into I-45. Not all the vehicles are leaving the freeway right at downtown; plenty continue on up North Central to points farther North. Remove the existing un-signed I-345 freeway by Deep Ellum and it will be like hitting a dead end for all that traffic. Those vehicles either have to go way around the Horseshoe and the Woodall Rodgers Freeway to get back to North Central Expressway. Or, if the vehicles are coming up from far enough outside of town, they'll have to take I-20 and I-635 way around.
The best thing, but also most expensive, would be removing the existing elevated freeway next to Deep Ellum and replacing it with a new freeway depressed into a trench and preferably capped with a deck park. It would be like the 3 block long deck park over the top of the Woodall Rodgers freeway, but longer.
Replacing the elevated freeway with a surface boulevard pigged with lots of street light signals would really suck. But that may end up being what happens.
They should not have designed that even at Amarillo. It is bad enough with the numerous towns with highways that split into one way streets through down towns. Dallas is way too large for that.
Interstate 345 is a necessary Bridge over more than just roads. The span of this bridge really is not that long: An interchange, several rail roads, and another interchange. Several city streets in between them is a coincidence.
Interstate 345 Trench would require digging under the freight rail roads and moveing the passenger subway tunnels. (also the passenger rail should be grade separated also. We need more grade separations. Not less.)
It would also require reconstruction of the Interchanges for S.H. 366 and Interstate 30. This should not be a problem. TX DOT loves to expand Interchanges.
As for a concrete deck park: That can be constructed much later. One thing at a time. First the roads have to be dug, but since they built Klyde Warren Park, a park over The Unfinished Corridor between Elm Street and Canton Street would be possible. The rest of it is Curved, near Rail Lines, or Interchanges.
And I am not going to visit the silly gentrified "Sit Down Restaurant" neighbourhood even if they trench The Unfinished Corridor.
Regarding Amarillo, the downtown area was built like it was long before any Interstate routes were built there. It's not practical to build a freeway through downtown Amarillo. If I-27 is to be extended North from Amarillo it will have to be routed on the Western half of the city's loop. And that appears to be the direction they're going.
Regarding subway tunnels, there aren't any subway lines in the zone between downtown Dallas and Deep Ellum. The light rail lines are running at grade in that zone. One of the train lines does go underneath North Central Expressway just North of Woodall Rodgers Freeway, but that's it.
Does anyone think Interstate 345 should have been signposted? Or would it be like US 27/Interstate 124 in Chattanooga, US 131/Interstate 296 in Grand Rapids, and US 50/US 301/Interstate 595 between New Carrollton, MD and Annapolis, MD (among other unsigned 3dis)? An unnecessary duplication of existing designations?
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on May 15, 2019, 04:05:56 PM
Does anyone think Interstate 345 should have been signposted? Or would it be like US 27/Interstate 124 in Chattanooga, US 131/Interstate 296 in Grand Rapids, and US 50/US 301/Interstate 595 between New Carrollton, MD and Annapolis, MD (among other unsigned 3dis)? An unnecessary duplication of existing designations?
I agree with the decision not to sign it. It doesn't end like a spur or in any way give the sense that it's a separate road. Aside from the glaring technical violation, having it signed as US 75 going north and as I-45 going south makes navigation easier.
Instead of Signing it, they should Finish it. And the entire route should have one designation: Interstate 45.
And they need to finish The Unfinished Corridor now. If they wait, I really doubt that they will be able to finish it by 2035.
Either solution will take decades to build. They can Finish burying "Interstate 345" which will take a long time.
If they try S.H. 366 as a permanent alternative route, It will need to be a multiple deck highway, which is some thing that people will want to demolish. :banghead:
I would not be surprised if after they bury Interstate 345, they will need to multiple deck it. :biggrin:
I agree that Interstate 345 is too many designations. Previously I was unable to find Interstate 345. When ever some body mentioned they want to keep Interstate 345, I was looking for spurs designed to stop traffic congestion. I am alarmed that Interstate 345 is simply an Interchange & Rail Bridge of The Unfinished Corridor and that people would be okay with destroying it as well as part of a highway system servicing half a Billion people.
Quote from: In_CorrectAnd they need to finish The Unfinished Corridor now. If they wait, I really doubt that they will be able to finish it by 2035.
Texas' part is getting close to completion, at least with regards to the section of US-75 going North out of Dallas up to the Red River. Downtown Dallas is another can of worms. The big difficulty with "The Unfinished Corridor" is within Oklahoma. It's pretty clear US-75 will eventually be improved to full Interstate standards at least up to Durant. The freeway upgrade project in Calera and up by Choctaw Casino will take care of a big chunk of that.
Improvement projects along the US-69/75 corridor will be much slower North of Durant. There are at least plans for freeway upgrades in McAlester and Muskogee. But the obstructionist towns like Atoka and Stringtown will do their best to keep "The Unfinished Corridor" unfinished. On the sort of bright side, most counties in Oklahoma are losing population; only the metros of OKC & Tulsa are gaining any population at all. These little towns with their rapidly aging populations and little opportunity for working age adults appear to have a bleak long term future. By the year 2035 a bunch of those currently occupied homes in Atoka and Stringtown will be vacant, maybe boarded up, falling into ruin or even bulldozed. By then the remaining residents will be begging for anything (such as a new Interstate) to help put those communities back on the map.
An Interstate 45 upgrade to Caddo could be done easily.
But I won't consider it Finished until they include Downtown Dallas. It is not that difficult to replace a bridge with a trench.
If the Deep Ellum advocates want it to beautify it, they can build a Deck Park. If They want it done faster, then They can pay for it them selves.
Quote from: In_CorrectAn Interstate 45 upgrade to Caddo could be done easily.
Up to Caddo, yes, relatively easy. No extra ROW required, no properties to buy and clear. From Durant to Caddo is limited access already. Upgrades to shoulders (including on a few bridges) would be necessary and maybe some upgrades to the geometry of a couple on/off ramps might also be necessary.
Freeway upgrades farther up to the South side of Tushka would be also be relatively easy since enough ROW is already preserved for both frontage roads and a freeway. The zone thru Tushka, Atoka and Stringtown is politically difficult. Bypasses would be required but those towns apparently have enough pull politically to block any bypass efforts. The corridor seriously needs to be upgraded to Interstate quality nonetheless due to the traffic load, particularly that from heavy trucks.
Downtown Dallas is a wildcard. Even if I-45 was extended into Oklahoma up to Tulsa or Big Cabin (I think Big Cabin is better and more do-able), there is a serious chance the potential I-45 corridor thru Downtown Dallas could be severed. That would probably force an I-45 re-routing into LBJ Freeway or even an extended George Bush Turnpike.
I don't think interests in Deep Ellum or Downtown Dallas on their own would be interested in anything else but tearing down the existing elevated freeway and turning it into a surface street. A trenched freeway capped with a deck park would actually be more beneficial to drivers farther out into the suburbs. So I would never expect downtown people to put up the money for such a thing. I wish the federal government wasn't as AWOL as it is on major infrastructure projects these days.
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
We have 12 years according to Project Tracker before they "Reconstruct Existing Roadway". If only Deep Ellum could decrease just as the smaller towns in Oklahoma the highways can be improved and upgraded faster.
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
In theory, all they would have to do is close the at-grade crossings south of Calera.
But that would "Destroy" neighbourhoods.
Mean while, McAlester and Calera are against trenching. Instead they have plans to elevate The Unfinished Corridor.
Quote from: RoadMaster09How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
When current projects in the works are completed I-45 could potentially be signed up to Durant, OK and the US-70 bypass. Even though Interstate quality upgrades to Caddo would be easy I-45 would still have to end at US-70 due to current signing rules.
Quote from: In_CorrectMean while, McAlester and Calera are against trenching. Instead they have plans to elevate The Unfinished Corridor.
Trenching is unnecessary in both locations. Neither project will be entirely elevated either. The main lanes just need to be bridged over key intersections and new slip ramps need to be built between the main lanes and frontage roads (much of which already exist).
BTW, the zone between Colbert and Calera has most properties already set back behind partial frontage road segments. Some at-grade crossings would have to be closed and maybe new bridges built over the US-69/75 main lanes. Chickasaw Road is the South end of the Calera freeway upgrade project. That intersection would probably need its own exit. Platte Cutoff Road would probably need an exit and bridge over the main lanes as well. There's a big salvage yard and manufactured home business pretty close to the Northbound lanes. Some things would have to be shifted around to fit freeway main lanes and continuous frontage roads through there.
I, too, was surprised to learn that US 75 has never been routed onto I-345, and I also agree that it is a stupid designation to start with, being that it's a basic continuation of its parent route. But it would be even more stupid to demolish the spur, because that could be a valuable part of any I-45 extension. I'd like to see it finished up to at least Checotah (where it would junction I-40), if not further.
It Is Not A Spur.
Quote from: HenryI'd like to see it finished up to at least Checotah (where it would junction I-40), if not further.
I don't think Checotah is far enough an extension of I-45. I think the Interstate should follow US-69 past Checotah and up until it meets I-44 at Big Cabin. I believe that's a more natural destination, considering the high amount of commercial trucking traffic on that corridor. I don't see I-40 being as significant a long distance destination since long haul traffic coming up from the DFW region and going to the I-40 corridor would more likely take I-30 to Little Rock or US-287 to Amarillo.
If the segment from Atoka thru Stringtown and on up to McAlester was all brought up to Interstate quality (bypasses in some places obviously) then I-45 could at least be
temporarily signed up to I-40. I just think it's more natural for it to go Big Cabin. It would also be acceptable to send I-45 up to Tulsa. But I think that's a more diffcult upgrade propsect. Upgrading US-75 thru Henryetta is a little tricky. Olkmulgee would require a substantial bypass. The Glenpool area on the South side of the Tulsa metro presents its own difficulties. And then there's the problem of all that truck traffic likely staying on US-69.
Don't see the point of keeping 345 just to satisfy some desire to complete a system. If the people who live there don't want it, so be it. 45 can be routed on LBJ east.
I doubt that would happen, plus you're going into fictional territory.
Actually the highways are not owned by the neighbourhoods nor causing any other type of destruction.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on May 21, 2019, 03:47:24 PM
Don't see the point of keeping 345 just to satisfy some desire to complete a system. If the people who live there don't want it, so be it. 45 can be routed on LBJ east.
Oh god, let's not start this (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=21756.0) again...
And for the record, I am strongly opposed to any proposed removal/downgrade of I-345.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 21, 2019, 02:44:12 PM
Quote from: HenryI'd like to see it finished up to at least Checotah (where it would junction I-40), if not further.
I don't think Checotah is far enough an extension of I-45. I think the Interstate should follow US-69 past Checotah and up until it meets I-44 at Big Cabin. I believe that's a more natural destination, considering the high amount of commercial trucking traffic on that corridor. I don't see I-40 being as significant a long distance destination since long haul traffic coming up from the DFW region and going to the I-40 corridor would more likely take I-30 to Little Rock or US-287 to Amarillo.
If the segment from Atoka thru Stringtown and on up to McAlester was all brought up to Interstate quality (bypasses in some places obviously) then I-45 could at least be temporarily signed up to I-40. I just think it's more natural for it to go Big Cabin. It would also be acceptable to send I-45 up to Tulsa. But I think that's a more diffcult upgrade propsect. Upgrading US-75 thru Henryetta is a little tricky. Olkmulgee would require a substantial bypass. The Glenpool area on the South side of the Tulsa metro presents its own difficulties. And then there's the problem of all that truck traffic likely staying on US-69.
That traffic light in Glenpool is ridiculous. Unfortunately, several buildings will have to be demolished when they build an interchange there. The status quo is unacceptable. US 75 is a non-stop four lane divided expressway with a long freeway section from Bartlesville to Okmulgee, a distance of about 80 miles, except for the one light in Glenpool. ODOT should be ashamed for not building an interchange here ~60 years after the expressway was built
Speaking of the US 75/141th Street non-interchange, that intersection was once the southern terminus of US 169. 141st through Glenpool was once OK 67. Union Avenue ended at 141st, and the part of the Okmulgee Beeline south of 141st wasn't built until years later so the US 169 designation ended at OK 67. A US highway ending at a non-coastal state highway is kind of weird but not without prescident. US 169 has been rerouted and no longer serves west Tulsa or Glenpool but it still has an odd terminus. US 64 and 169 are duplexed south of OK 51. The highway, the Mingo Valley Expressway, meets the Creek Turnpike in southeast Tulsa south of 91st Street. The Creek Turnpike, superfluously given the OK 364 designation a few years ago, is a toll road east of this interchange. There is a short section of the Creek Turnpike that is toll-free where the OK 364 designation piggybacks on the US 64/169 freeway. At Memorial Drive, US 64 exits the freeway and heads south towards Bixby. The toll road resumes west of Memorial. Straight ahead is the Creek Turnpike/OK 364. US 169 simply vanishes at the Memorial interchange. There is an End US 169 sign posted on the mainline just before the ramp to Memorial. The reason US 169 doesn't terminate at the interchange between the Broken Arrow Expressway/OK 51/US 64 is because the Mingo Valley Expressway is locally known as "169" and if it were US 64 alone it would confuse drivers. Incidentally, US 75 once served the eastern side of Tulsa. It originally went through Collinsville and Owasso and later followed what is now US 169 from OK 20 in Collinsville to I-44 in Tulsa where the Mingo Valley Expressway ended for several years. US 75 and 169 followed I-44/Skelly Drive west to the modern I-44/US 75 interchange just west of the Arkansas River. US 75 headed south on the Okmulgee Beeline (What is now US 75 between I-44 and I-244 was completed several years after the highway to the south was opened.) US 169.perfomed a vanishing act at the I-44/US 75 cloverleaf. US 169 also ended at 51st Street just south of OK 51 for a few years.
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
The bridges over the Red River are substandard, so perhaps I-45 should end at US 69 just south of the state line until new bridges are built and the freeway is complete ro US 70. Another advantage for ending I-45 at US 69 is that Texas can unilaterally extend it that far north without the hassle of getting Oklahoma involved.
Texas is notorious for being zealots when it comes to decommissioning US highways that were made obsolete by parallel Interstates. If I-45 is extended north of Dallas, US 75 will no doubt be truncated. Will US 75 end somewhere in Texas or will they truncate it to Atoka?
Quote from: TXtoNJ on May 21, 2019, 03:47:24 PM
Don't see the point of keeping 345 just to satisfy some desire to complete a system. If the people who live there don't want it, so be it. 45 can be routed on LBJ east.
The highway was there when most of the residents of that neighborhood moved there. They knew the freeway was there when they made the decision to move there, therefore they can just live with it. Removing this freeway would be absolutely catastrophic to Dallas' traffic. It is bad enough with I-345 in place but if it were gone, I-30, I-35E and TX 366 would be a nightmare to drive and would be a parking lot 24/7. They shouldn't inconvenience millions of motorists a year just because a bunch of hipsters don't want to look at that old ugly freeway because they are offended by it. I have been to Deep Ellum and the freeway is not that bad. Traffic on the side streets would increase dramatically if a surface street were built through there. It would take pedestrians longer to cross a street at grade than it currently takes to walk under the existing viaduct. They need to quit whining and do what does the greater good.
If this highway is removed, do you think the hipsters will proclaim victory and celebrate their win? No. They will just start demanding other highways be removed until there are no urban freeways in DFW. Why are these residents so special? Why do they get to make decisions that affect millions of motorists each year? I live very close to a highway. It gets loud at times but you don't see me advocating tearing the freeway down. So you can't call me a hypocrite.
Quote from: bugo on May 22, 2019, 06:08:11 AM
That traffic light in Glenpool is ridiculous. Unfortunately, several buildings will have to be demolished when they build an interchange there. The status quo is unacceptable. US 75 is a non-stop four lane divided expressway with a long freeway section from Bartlesville to Okmulgee, a distance of about 80 miles, except for the one light in Glenpool. ODOT should be ashamed for not building an interchange here ~60 years after the expressway was built
If they take the mainline on a slightly western curve, the Phillips station would be the only thing they would have to demolish. Sorta like what they did with OK74 at NW 150th in OKC.
That is a possibility but it would still be a huge job that would cost a lot of money
ODOT will eventually be forced to upgrade the intersections in Glenpool (even if an extension of I-45 north never happens) just out of local traffic concerns.
I don't know what to think of the partial bypass on the East side of Olkmulgee (OK Loop 56). It doesn't look like anything a future freeway could actually use; the ROW only looks wide enough for a 4-lane expressway with at-grade intersections. Too many driveways empty out onto it already. A new freeway through there would have to be built on a new terrain path. It would probably be easier to build a new bypass around the West side of Olkmulgee. And such a thing might be better since more industrial businesses are on that side of town.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 23, 2019, 03:51:21 PM
ODOT will eventually be forced to upgrade the intersections in Glenpool (even if an extension of I-45 north never happens) just out of local traffic concerns.
I don't know what to think of the partial bypass on the East side of Olkmulgee (OK Loop 56). It doesn't look like anything a future freeway could actually use; the ROW only looks wide enough for a 4-lane expressway with at-grade intersections. Too many driveways empty out onto it already. A new freeway through there would have to be built on a new terrain path. It would probably be easier to build a new bypass around the West side of Olkmulgee. And such a thing might be better since more industrial businesses are on that side of town.
That is the North Carolina tax busting way of doing business.
Quote from: bugo on May 22, 2019, 06:15:51 AM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
The bridges over the Red River are substandard, so perhaps I-45 should end at US 69 just south of the state line until new bridges are built and the freeway is complete ro US 70. Another advantage for ending I-45 at US 69 is that Texas can unilaterally extend it that far north without the hassle of getting Oklahoma involved.
Texas is notorious for being zealots when it comes to decommissioning US highways that were made obsolete by parallel Interstates. If I-45 is extended north of Dallas, US 75 will no doubt be truncated. Will US 75 end somewhere in Texas or will they truncate it to Atoka?
But those bridges aren't even 30 years old??
Also The Unfinished Corridor has sharp curves south of Red River, but it is not as bad as the curves all ready on Interstate 35.
Yes, extending Interstate 45 some place near Denison would happen first. It might take decades to extend it in to Oklahoma. It could make its way to the middle of Colbert, but there are no major highways nearby. Also in the stretch of The Unfinished Corridor near Colbert has many outdated narrow ramps. Or perhaps they are just striped badly. The Gore Markings are too short.
I read some where the original plan is to truncate U.S. 75 at Atoka when ever Interstate 45 is extended. ... unless they changed their minds and want to reroute U.S. 75 some place else then there could be separate U.S. 69, U.S. 75, and Interstate 45.
Quote from: bugo on May 22, 2019, 06:30:32 AM
Quote from: TXtoNJ on May 21, 2019, 03:47:24 PM
Don’t see the point of keeping 345 just to satisfy some desire to complete a system. If the people who live there don’t want it, so be it. 45 can be routed on LBJ east.
The highway was there when most of the residents of that neighborhood moved there. They knew the freeway was there when they made the decision to move there, therefore they can just live with it. Removing this freeway would be absolutely catastrophic to Dallas' traffic. It is bad enough with I-345 in place but if it were gone, I-30, I-35E and TX 366 would be a nightmare to drive and would be a parking lot 24/7. They shouldn't inconvenience millions of motorists a year just because a bunch of hipsters don't want to look at that old ugly freeway because they are offended by it. I have been to Deep Ellum and the freeway is not that bad. Traffic on the side streets would increase dramatically if a surface street were built through there. It would take pedestrians longer to cross a street at grade than it currently takes to walk under the existing viaduct. They need to quit whining and do what does the greater good.
If this highway is removed, do you think the hipsters will proclaim victory and celebrate their win? No. They will just start demanding other highways be removed until there are no urban freeways in DFW. Why are these residents so special? Why do they get to make decisions that affect millions of motorists each year? I live very close to a highway. It gets loud at times but you don't see me advocating tearing the freeway down. So you can't call me a hypocrite.
That is what I was trying to say. They act like a Highway destroyed their neighbourhoods and also destroyed their lives. But actually they do not own the land this "Foreign Invader" is built on. It is best if TX DOT decides to Eminent Domain
more land, not the other way around.
Hipsters do celebrate victories, but you are right: they also complain about every thing. The only people who complain more than Hipsters do are People Who Want To Be Hipsters.
Nothing makes them happy
ever! Either people are bossy and demanding and they do not even know why they want some thing.
We do not need a Paris, Texas design.
And it would be dangerous for Pedestrians if things became Pedestrian Friendly be cause all The Hipsters have in mind for "Pedestrian Friendly" is to minimize the infrastructure, not improve it.
A Deck Park would be perfect for Pedestrians. Until then they can beautify the existing bridge with the usual elegant piers that are seen in Texas Interchanges. Or The People That Live Nearby can keep quiet and accept that they have all ways lived near two major Interchanges and some very busy rail roads.
Quote from: In_Correct on May 23, 2019, 11:31:33 PM
Quote from: bugo on May 22, 2019, 06:15:51 AM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
The bridges over the Red River are substandard, so perhaps I-45 should end at US 69 just south of the state line until new bridges are built and the freeway is complete ro US 70. Another advantage for ending I-45 at US 69 is that Texas can unilaterally extend it that far north without the hassle of getting Oklahoma involved.
Texas is notorious for being zealots when it comes to decommissioning US highways that were made obsolete by parallel Interstates. If I-45 is extended north of Dallas, US 75 will no doubt be truncated. Will US 75 end somewhere in Texas or will they truncate it to Atoka?
But those bridges aren't even 30 years old??
It's not the age. I don't know why, but they have practically no inside shoulder. They knew better but cheaped out. Might be because TX wouldn't pay their share? That has been a recent problem with Red River bridges. ODOT plans them but TX is supposed to pay 50% but often doesn't pay up in a timely manner (see US377 Willis Bridge).
Quote from: rte66man on May 22, 2019, 09:34:43 PM
If they take the mainline on a slightly western curve, the Phillips station would be the only thing they would have to demolish. Sorta like what they did with OK74 at NW 150th in OKC.
That would be difficult because there is an interchange 1 mile south of 141st at 151st/OK 67. A highway that swung to the west would have to include a fairly sharp curve so it would line up with the highway to the south. There is also a bunch of development at US 75 and 138th Street which would have to be bulldozed (or else the highway will have another sharp turn on the north side of the interchange). You could also build a folded diamond with the ramps on the NW corner of the intersection. But getting 141st to fly over US 75 would include taking properties on both sides of the highway. It's a problem that doesn't have any easy solutions but it is a problem ODOT should have taken care of before all that development popped up and set aside the ROW for an interchange. What were they thinking when they built that college building at the SE corner of the interchange? Did ODOT not have an interchange in their plans for the distant future? They took out the 111th Street traffic light and converted it to an overpass with a partial interchange a few years ago, so at least they have made some process over the last few years.
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
By the current standard the designation would have to stop at US 380 in McKinney. The highway through Sherman is notoriously substandard with short on and off ramps (and too many of them at that) and terrible sight lines. Through trucks have to ride their Jake Brakes as a safety feature. That long-needed upgrade is scheduled to start at the end of this year. Once that is finished, I think it's a done deal that I-45 will be designated up to US 70 in Durant.
Quote from: Road Hog on June 07, 2019, 08:11:20 PM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
By the current standard the designation would have to stop at US 380 in McKinney. The highway through Sherman is notoriously substandard with short on and off ramps (and too many of them at that) and terrible sight lines. Through trucks have to ride their Jake Brakes as a safety feature. That long-needed upgrade is scheduled to start at the end of this year. Once that is finished, I think it's a done deal that I-45 will be designated up to US 70 in Durant.
Uhh, no.
Even after the Calera project is completed, there will be at least 9 at-grade intersections between there and Colbert. Plus each carriageway is substandard.
Quote from: Road Hog on June 07, 2019, 08:11:20 PM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
By the current standard the designation would have to stop at US 380 in McKinney. The highway through Sherman is notoriously substandard with short on and off ramps (and too many of them at that) and terrible sight lines. Through trucks have to ride their Jake Brakes as a safety feature. That long-needed upgrade is scheduled to start at the end of this year. Once that is finished, I think it's a done deal that I-45 will be designated up to US 70 in Durant.
Unless they have upgraded their ramps, Colbert has a similar problem. The ramps might not be a short as the area south of U.S. 82, but the ramps in The Colbert Freeway (yet another name for the infinitely designated The Unfinished Corridor?) are still very short.
About what I said about extending Interstate 45 at Atoka. There are no other U.S. Highways nearby that completely goes through Atoka. It would be a Fork In The Road. One direction "West" would be U.S. 75. "East" would be U.S. 69.
About extending Interstate 45 to Durant: Would Interstate 45 stop at the new U.S. 70, or the old "Main Street" alignment?
And I thought that the upgrade for Calera is only the north side of Calera, not the south side between Calera and Colbert.
Quote from: rte66man on June 07, 2019, 09:10:33 PM
Quote from: Road Hog on June 07, 2019, 08:11:20 PM
Quote from: RoadMaster09 on May 18, 2019, 12:00:58 AM
How far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
Uhh, no.
Even after the Calera project is completed, there will be at least 9 at-grade intersections between there and Colbert. Plus each carriageway is substandard.
By the current standard the designation would have to stop at US 380 in McKinney. The highway through Sherman is notoriously substandard with short on and off ramps (and too many of them at that) and terrible sight lines. Through trucks have to ride their Jake Brakes as a safety feature. That long-needed upgrade is scheduled to start at the end of this year. Once that is finished, I think it's a done deal that I-45 will be designated up to US 70 in Durant.
This Is Confusing.
:confused:
QuoteHow far north could I-45 be signed today if Texas and/or Oklahoma wanted to sign it? (In other words, at what point does it cease to be Interstate standard.)
I know the freeway ends at Colbert, OK.
QuoteBy the current standard the designation would have to stop at US 380 in McKinney. The highway through Sherman is notoriously substandard with short on and off ramps (and too many of them at that) and terrible sight lines. Through trucks have to ride their Jake Brakes as a safety feature. That long-needed upgrade is scheduled to start at the end of this year. Once that is finished, I think it's a done deal that I-45 will be designated up to US 70 in Durant.
QuoteUhh, no.
Even after the Calera project is completed, there will be at least 9 at-grade intersections between there and Colbert. Plus each carriageway is substandard.
Much Better.
:sombrero:
Yeah, I went back and fixed it. Sloppy on my part.
Would US 75 between LBJ and PGBT even meet standards for a new designation as an Interstate? There are no inside shoulders due to the HOV lanes. From what I remember in reading some of the materials on the LBJ expansions, there was an exemption that allowed existing Interstates to remove the inside shoulder if the space was being used to add an HOV lane, but I'm guessing that the exemptions wouldn't apply to a new designation, and therefore there's no realistic chance of extending I-45 beyond I-635.
For the record, most of the housing in and around Deep Ellum isn't even old enough to drink in Deep Ellum yet. There are a few exceptions; the townhouses between San Jacinto and Bryan were built in the early 80s, Marquis on Gaston (between Gaston and the DART tracks) opened in '96, and what is now Cortland Bryan Place (910 Texas St.) and the Live Oak Lofts (south corner of Good-Latimer and Live Oak) opened in 98 or 99, but pretty much everything else is 2000+. In any case, everyone who lives the area knew exactly what they were getting when they moved there, and I don't think there's really any call from residents or businesses in the area to tear down I-345. All it would do is make traffic miserable for the residents and kill off more businesses. As far as I can tell, the only people who actually want I-345 gone are real estate developers looking to make money building stuff in the wasteland between Good-Latimer and Pearl, and the general anti-freeway crowd who hate everything, even though none of them would actually live in Deep Ellum. I think there is plenty of local support for replacing the elevated structure with something below-grade with a deck over top, but only if it can somehow be done without a decade-long traffic snarl, so good luck with that.
Well, the way you do it is figure out how to burrow a new I-45 under Deep Ellum and Downtown Dallas to merge into North Central all while keeping the existing elevated freeway intact as long as possible. The tear-down of the elevated facility only occurs when the below grade new freeway is nearly completed and ready to merge with the existing North Central Expressway North of downtown.
That wasteland needs to be Eminent Domain and become the property of TX DOT.
Is The Land that the bridge crosses even the property of TX DOT?! :confused:
People such as Anti-Freeway People behave as if it is not.
As for keeping traffic lanes open during construction:
They will find a way to do it as they all ways have. I do not agree with closing half a bridge to do maintenance or construction while keeping very narrow lanes open. Even if they do not close The Bridge while building The Trench, they need to start reconstruction of Interstate 345 now so they can get it finished, done, and over with. Delaying the reconstruction is much worse than delaying the traffic during the reconstruction.