News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

US-87 in New Mexico (future I-27)

Started by TheBox, December 03, 2023, 03:22:09 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

TheBox

According to the proposed I-27 extension (aka Ports-to-Plains corridor), US-87 will be used from TX/NM state line around Clayton all the way to Raton.
In the grand scheme of things it is meant to connect Colorado with the Texas Panhandle on an interstate scale.

That being said it's likely one of the last segments that'll be done and saved for last in 50+ years from now (same with US-277/US-83 south of San Angelo in Texas)
But until the time comes, it currently is 4-lane divided expressway that needs bypasses around Clayton, Grenville, Des Moines, Capulin, and Raton; easier said than done for New Mexico.
Wake me up when they upgrade US-290 between the state's largest city and growing capital into expressway standards if it interstate standards.

Giddings bypass, Elgin bypass, and Elgin-Manor freeway/tollway when?


triplemultiplex

NM will build a four-lane, undivided bypass with no grade separations and T-intersections on either end for any one of those towns and call it a "relief route".
:meh:
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

abqtraveler

Quote from: TheBox on December 03, 2023, 03:22:09 PM
According to the proposed I-27 extension (aka Ports-to-Plains corridor), US-87 will be used from TX/NM state line around Clayton all the way to Raton.
In the grand scheme of things it is meant to connect Colorado with the Texas Panhandle on an interstate scale.

That being said it's likely one of the last segments that'll be done and saved for last in 50+ years from now (same with US-277/US-83 south of San Angelo in Texas)
But until the time comes, it currently is 4-lane divided expressway that needs bypasses around Clayton, Grenville, Des Moines, Capulin, and Raton; easier said than done for New Mexico.
Last legislative session, IIRC, New Mexico lawmakers allocated some funds for NMDOT to perform an engineering study on US-64/87 from Texas line to Raton to determine what it will take to upgrade that stretch to interstate standards. An article from KRQE back in the spring estimated it would cost up to $1.3 billion to upgrade 64/87 to I-27, but it appears to be supported by the communities along the corridor, and was backed by both of New Mexico's senators when the bill made its way through Congress.  Unfortunately, it will likely sit as an idle project until Congress earmarks funding for it, since New Mexico claims they have no money to move the project forward.

https://www.krqe.com/news/new-mexico/plans-in-place-for-a-new-interstate-between-texas-and-new-mexico/
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

DJStephens

#3
     Not happening.  Even with localized support from Raton area businesses, and a few local politicians, the fact remains the entire US 64/87 corridor - W from the TX line is sub-standard for such a fantasy.   It "could" have been upgraded, starting several decades ago to become an I grade route.  The early - mid 00's "upgrade" could have been far more wisely thought out and executed.  Meaning take a stair step process towards a credible I grade facility.  Many other states take that route, and use that thought process. 
     That was not done here, on US 64/87.   Tens of millions was squandered on a regressively designed four lane product.   Narrow median, narrow shoulders, improper subgrade and basecourse placement and compaction, the list goes on.   That's what known as a "throwaway improvement". 
     The whole idea of "attracting" additional long haul freight to Raton Pass is absurd.  The conditions, the geography and topology, the weather in winter, the grades (ironically worse on CO side), the crumbling pavements, and narrow profile and substandard exits (ironically worse on CO side) make this whole scenario completely ridiculous.   

Plutonic Panda

Has there at least been any movement on a Clayton bypass? Hell at this point I'd be happy with at least a two lane bypass that could be upgraded in the future.

abqtraveler

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on December 08, 2023, 04:25:04 PM
Has there at least been any movement on a Clayton bypass? Hell at this point I'd be happy with at least a two lane bypass that could be upgraded in the future.
In the 15 years I've lived in New Mexico, I have neither seen nor heard of any discussion of a bypass around Clayton.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Bobby5280

I see no point in building a bypass around Clayon (as well as Capulin and Des Moines) unless there was an real game plan to upgrade that portion of US-64/87 to Interstate standards. I can't imagine such a thing happening unless the federal government provided nearly all the funding for the upgrade and did a lot of arm-twisting to make sure the project got finished. It's going to take that plus Texas moving to build out all of their portion to Texline to Interstate standards.

Much of the highway between Raton and the TX state line would have to be re-built due to all the bad choices made in the 2000's and early 2010's when the 4-lane upgrade was built. That contributes to that estimated $1.3 billion price tag to upgrade the road to Interstate standards. Of course, with as bad a job as the NM state government did with the first upgrade, NM DOT is going to end up having to replace the main lanes of that highway anyway. They can play games with asphalt overlays and other nonsense for only so long. It's just throwing good money after bad.

But, yeah, the NM state government will never upgrade US-64/87 to Interstate standards on their own volition (and check book). It's going to require a LOT of outside (federal) help to make it happen.

abqtraveler

Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 09, 2023, 01:25:55 PM
I see no point in building a bypass around Clayon (as well as Capulin and Des Moines) unless there was an real game plan to upgrade that portion of US-64/87 to Interstate standards. I can't imagine such a thing happening unless the federal government provided nearly all the funding for the upgrade and did a lot of arm-twisting to make sure the project got finished. It's going to take that plus Texas moving to build out all of their portion to Texline to Interstate standards.

Much of the highway between Raton and the TX state line would have to be re-built due to all the bad choices made in the 2000's and early 2010's when the 4-lane upgrade was built. That contributes to that estimated $1.3 billion price tag to upgrade the road to Interstate standards. Of course, with as bad a job as the NM state government did with the first upgrade, NM DOT is going to end up having to replace the main lanes of that highway anyway. They can play games with asphalt overlays and other nonsense for only so long. It's just throwing good money after bad.

But, yeah, the NM state government will never upgrade US-64/87 to Interstate standards on their own volition (and check book). It's going to require a LOT of outside (federal) help to make it happen.
Lack of funding is a bogus excuse, especially when the governor and lawmakers in New Mexico bragged all year about a $2 billion budget surplus. That would easily pay for completing the conversion of US-64/87 to an interstate. But...since it doesn't serve either Albuquerque or Santa Fe, upgrading 64/87 will sit on the back burner indefinitely...if not completely taken off the stove.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Rothman



Quote from: abqtraveler on December 10, 2023, 07:16:19 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 09, 2023, 01:25:55 PM
I see no point in building a bypass around Clayon (as well as Capulin and Des Moines) unless there was an real game plan to upgrade that portion of US-64/87 to Interstate standards. I can't imagine such a thing happening unless the federal government provided nearly all the funding for the upgrade and did a lot of arm-twisting to make sure the project got finished. It's going to take that plus Texas moving to build out all of their portion to Texline to Interstate standards.

Much of the highway between Raton and the TX state line would have to be re-built due to all the bad choices made in the 2000's and early 2010's when the 4-lane upgrade was built. That contributes to that estimated $1.3 billion price tag to upgrade the road to Interstate standards. Of course, with as bad a job as the NM state government did with the first upgrade, NM DOT is going to end up having to replace the main lanes of that highway anyway. They can play games with asphalt overlays and other nonsense for only so long. It's just throwing good money after bad.

But, yeah, the NM state government will never upgrade US-64/87 to Interstate standards on their own volition (and check book). It's going to require a LOT of outside (federal) help to make it happen.
Lack of funding is a bogus excuse, especially when the governor and lawmakers in New Mexico bragged all year about a $2 billion budget surplus. That would easily pay for completing the conversion of US-64/87 to an interstate. But...since it doesn't serve either Albuquerque or Santa Fe, upgrading 64/87 will sit on the back burner indefinitely...if not completely taken off the stove.

Heh.  "Lack of funding" = "Different set of priorities than certain roadgeeks."

Budget surpluses already have a lot of draws on them from various areas, not just transportation.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

abqtraveler

Quote from: Rothman on December 10, 2023, 07:20:40 PM


Quote from: abqtraveler on December 10, 2023, 07:16:19 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 09, 2023, 01:25:55 PM
I see no point in building a bypass around Clayon (as well as Capulin and Des Moines) unless there was an real game plan to upgrade that portion of US-64/87 to Interstate standards. I can't imagine such a thing happening unless the federal government provided nearly all the funding for the upgrade and did a lot of arm-twisting to make sure the project got finished. It's going to take that plus Texas moving to build out all of their portion to Texline to Interstate standards.

Much of the highway between Raton and the TX state line would have to be re-built due to all the bad choices made in the 2000's and early 2010's when the 4-lane upgrade was built. That contributes to that estimated $1.3 billion price tag to upgrade the road to Interstate standards. Of course, with as bad a job as the NM state government did with the first upgrade, NM DOT is going to end up having to replace the main lanes of that highway anyway. They can play games with asphalt overlays and other nonsense for only so long. It's just throwing good money after bad.

But, yeah, the NM state government will never upgrade US-64/87 to Interstate standards on their own volition (and check book). It's going to require a LOT of outside (federal) help to make it happen.
Lack of funding is a bogus excuse, especially when the governor and lawmakers in New Mexico bragged all year about a $2 billion budget surplus. That would easily pay for completing the conversion of US-64/87 to an interstate. But...since it doesn't serve either Albuquerque or Santa Fe, upgrading 64/87 will sit on the back burner indefinitely...if not completely taken off the stove.

Heh.  "Lack of funding" = "Different set of priorities than certain roadgeeks."

Budget surpluses already have a lot of draws on them from various areas, not just transportation.
Well I'm not suggesting that upgrading US-64/87 to an interstate should be a priority. Actually, I think it's a very bad idea, given that you would have a second interstate merging with I-25/US-85 at Raton and dumping even more traffic into the bottleneck at Raton Pass. NMDOT has been doing a lot of work in recent years to improve I-25/US-85/87 on its side of Raton Pass (adding climbing lanes, straightening the roadway, and trying to soften the grades a bit), but AFAIK, Colorado hasn't done anything on its side, and I don't know if they have any plans for any improvement to I-25/US-85/87 from the state line to Trinidad.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

The Ghostbuster

I think upgrades to the future Interstate 27 corridor south of Lubbock will happen sooner than upgrades north of Amarillo. Texas is likely far more gung-ho about extending Interstate 27 than New Mexico is.

Bobby5280

I think it's going to be easier for TX DOT to get its work done on I-27 than it will be for other states. The state government seems to have more willpower to make it happen. Plus the weather is warmer year 'round, making for better road building conditions for more of the year.

Towns in the Texas Panhandle like Dumas and Stratford could be waiting a long time on Interstate quality upgrades to US-287 if TX DOT and state lawmakers choose to hinge those upgrades on activity (or lack thereof) in OK, CO and NM. I think there is a legit case to improve US-287 to Interstate quality up to Stratford. But I-27 to the South of Lubbock is very easy to push as a much bigger priority.

DJStephens

#12
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 10, 2023, 07:16:19 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 09, 2023, 01:25:55 PM
I see no point in building a bypass around Clayon (as well as Capulin and Des Moines) unless there was an real game plan to upgrade that portion of US-64/87 to Interstate standards. I can't imagine such a thing happening unless the federal government provided nearly all the funding for the upgrade and did a lot of arm-twisting to make sure the project got finished. It's going to take that plus Texas moving to build out all of their portion to Texline to Interstate standards.

Much of the highway between Raton and the TX state line would have to be re-built due to all the bad choices made in the 2000's and early 2010's when the 4-lane upgrade was built. That contributes to that estimated $1.3 billion price tag to upgrade the road to Interstate standards. Of course, with as bad a job as the NM state government did with the first upgrade, NM DOT is going to end up having to replace the main lanes of that highway anyway. They can play games with asphalt overlays and other nonsense for only so long. It's just throwing good money after bad.

But, yeah, the NM state government will never upgrade US-64/87 to Interstate standards on their own volition (and check book). It's going to require a LOT of outside (federal) help to make it happen.
Lack of funding is a bogus excuse, especially when the governor and lawmakers in New Mexico bragged all year about a $2 billion budget surplus. That would easily pay for completing the conversion of US-64/87 to an interstate. But...since it doesn't serve either Albuquerque or Santa Fe, upgrading 64/87 will sit on the back burner indefinitely...if not completely taken off the stove.
A wiser choice of a portion of that supposed surplus would be to straighten and trench I-25 (which already exists and is antiquated) in South Albuquerque.   Spend the $200-$300 million to straighten, trench, widen, and deck over.   And do it right the first time.   

abqtraveler

Quote from: DJStephens on December 14, 2023, 10:06:55 AM
Quote from: abqtraveler on December 10, 2023, 07:16:19 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 09, 2023, 01:25:55 PM
I see no point in building a bypass around Clayon (as well as Capulin and Des Moines) unless there was an real game plan to upgrade that portion of US-64/87 to Interstate standards. I can't imagine such a thing happening unless the federal government provided nearly all the funding for the upgrade and did a lot of arm-twisting to make sure the project got finished. It's going to take that plus Texas moving to build out all of their portion to Texline to Interstate standards.

Much of the highway between Raton and the TX state line would have to be re-built due to all the bad choices made in the 2000's and early 2010's when the 4-lane upgrade was built. That contributes to that estimated $1.3 billion price tag to upgrade the road to Interstate standards. Of course, with as bad a job as the NM state government did with the first upgrade, NM DOT is going to end up having to replace the main lanes of that highway anyway. They can play games with asphalt overlays and other nonsense for only so long. It's just throwing good money after bad.

But, yeah, the NM state government will never upgrade US-64/87 to Interstate standards on their own volition (and check book). It's going to require a LOT of outside (federal) help to make it happen.
Lack of funding is a bogus excuse, especially when the governor and lawmakers in New Mexico bragged all year about a $2 billion budget surplus. That would easily pay for completing the conversion of US-64/87 to an interstate. But...since it doesn't serve either Albuquerque or Santa Fe, upgrading 64/87 will sit on the back burner indefinitely...if not completely taken off the stove.
A wiser choice of a portion of that supposed surplus would be to straighten and trench I-25 (which already exists and is antiquated) in South Albuquerque.   Spend the $200-$300 million to straighten, trench, widen, and deck over.   And do it right the first time.
That might be the only way to get the I-25 Albuquerque S-curve straightened out and widened is to trench it, since the residents in the "historic" neighborhood immediately to the west of that stretch have vowed to fight tooth-and-nail to stop NMDOT from shifting the alignment any further west from what it is now. Immediately to the east is the South Diversion Channel and the central maintenance complex for Albuquerque Public Schools. Finally, there are a couple of cemeteries that abut either side of the highway around the interchange with Gibson Boulevard. With all that, it'll be a tough challenge coming up with a viable solution to the dreaded S-curve.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Sykotyk

The biggest issue with the route is that long haul freight traveling north from Amarillo destined for anywhere north of Pueblo in Colorado as far north as Cheyenne or northwestern points such as western Montana over to Seattle will take US287 through flat eastern Colorado. Trucks are not going to willingly climb a mountain and subject themselves to what I-25 is from Pueblo to Denver. Even with the small towns of Lamar, Springfield, Eads, Dumas, Cactus, and the four-way stop in Stratford, it's far simpler to just take US287.

Any point north of I-270 in Denver, and it's 20 miles shorter taking US287 than to take the current US87 to I-25 routing.

Bobby5280

Just for the sake of safety, both ODOT and CDOT need to work together on the stretch of US-287 between Boise City, OK and Campo, CO. That is a dangerous stretch of 2-lane road. The highway needs to be upgraded to a divided 4-lane highway with a substantial median and cable barriers installed. ODOT has done this on other 4-lane divided highways in rural parts of Oklahoma.

Even if the road wasn't Interstate quality and 100% limited access the act of dividing the highway and having physical barriers present would prevent head-on collisions that do happen out there. A passenger vehicle colliding head-on with a semi is bound to translate into fatalities.

Oklahoma is pretty good at building out 4-lane divided highways. Colorado sucks ass at doing so. That needs to change in the Eastern part of the state.

pderocco

Quote from: Sykotyk on May 30, 2024, 08:17:31 AMThe biggest issue with the route is that long haul freight traveling north from Amarillo destined for anywhere north of Pueblo in Colorado as far north as Cheyenne or northwestern points such as western Montana over to Seattle will take US287 through flat eastern Colorado. Trucks are not going to willingly climb a mountain and subject themselves to what I-25 is from Pueblo to Denver. Even with the small towns of Lamar, Springfield, Eads, Dumas, Cactus, and the four-way stop in Stratford, it's far simpler to just take US287.

Any point north of I-270 in Denver, and it's 20 miles shorter taking US287 than to take the current US87 to I-25 routing.
Looks like the only reason to connect Amarillo to Raton is that it's not very far. But who wants to go there?

The US-287 alignment up to Limon looks like a better path for I-27, although it's a much bigger project. It would stay under a mile high, and, as you said, shorten the trip up past Denver. It would also avoid freeway-phobic NM entirely.

Another possibility would be to turn west at Lamar, and go to Pueblo. That would serve a lot of towns along the Arkansas River, not to mention Colorado Springs, but it would still leave the climb over 7300 foot Monument Hill.

DJStephens

Quote from: pderocco on May 31, 2024, 01:08:04 AMThe US-287 alignment up to Limon looks like a better path for I-27, although it's a much bigger project. It would stay under a mile high, and, as you said, shorten the trip up past Denver. It would also avoid freeway-phobic NM entirely.

Given the terrain of Raton Pass, the inclines, worse on the CO side, btw, the weather in winter, the altitude, and a whole host of other realities, simply cannot fathom the desire to "attract" more long distance freight there.  Simply madness, and nuts.   



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.