News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered at https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=33904.0
Corrected several already and appreciate your patience as we work through the rest.

Main Menu

In preparation for I-27 extension, expect bypass and/or 4-lane upgrades...

Started by TheBox, June 08, 2021, 06:58:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

DJStephens

Quote from: BlueOutback7 on March 18, 2022, 08:49:03 PM
I wonder how they will get it through Amarillo. The northern terminus feeds right into Downtown. Will TXDOT route it around the city on Loop 337 with the remaining piece becoming an x27? An elevated freeway would destroy the downtown area and a tunnel would be too expensive.

Don't believe it will ever be routed straight through (it should have been routed straight through back in the day) but a twin viaduct system similar to the ones in Wichita Falls could be pursued.   Am of belief a "cut and cover" trench is the best long term solution.   With deck park(s), and air rights being sold.
Remember the first time in Amarillo, mid nineties, there were a lot more vacant properties in between and around the twin one way couplets that have existed for a long time.   


Stephane Dumas

Quote from: DJStephens on March 20, 2022, 12:04:27 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on March 18, 2022, 08:49:03 PM
I wonder how they will get it through Amarillo. The northern terminus feeds right into Downtown. Will TXDOT route it around the city on Loop 337 with the remaining piece becoming an x27? An elevated freeway would destroy the downtown area and a tunnel would be too expensive.

Don't believe it will ever be routed straight through (it should have been routed straight through back in the day) but a twin viaduct system similar to the ones in Wichita Falls could be pursued.   Am of belief a "cut and cover" trench is the best long term solution.   With deck park(s), and air rights being sold.
Remember the first time in Amarillo, mid nineties, there were a lot more vacant properties in between and around the twin one way couplets that have existed for a long time.   

Talk about a missed opportunity, when these properties was vacant...

Then when TXDOT will reroute I-27 on Loop-335, if they had studied the possibility to use the Eastern loop part since it pass near the airport?

Thegeet

hot take: I think they will somehow force the freeway thru town, even if it means a revolt.

MATraveler128

Quote from: Thegeet on March 20, 2022, 10:15:24 PM
hot take: I think they will somehow force the freeway thru town, even if it means a revolt.

I guess they could, although it would be very destructive. At least the ICC in Shreveport doesn't pass through heavy commercial development. Sending it through downtown would rip it apart. Just loop it on TX 335.
Decommission 128 south of Peabody!

Lowest untraveled number: 56

bwana39

Quote from: BlueOutback7 on March 20, 2022, 10:21:32 PM
Quote from: Thegeet on March 20, 2022, 10:15:24 PM
hot take: I think they will somehow force the freeway thru town, even if it means a revolt.

I guess they could, although it would be very destructive. At least the ICC in Shreveport doesn't pass through heavy commercial development. Sending it through downtown would rip it apart. Just loop it on TX 335.

I agree fully!. There is no reason to route I-27 through downtown Amarillo.

My point was the "Renaissance at Allendale" was built as either a stop to I-49 ICC or more likely as a way to make money by the almost sure forced sale.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

Bobby5280

There is no way I-27 is ever going to get routed up through Downtown Amarillo. That is a pipe dream. Even 20 years ago it was a non-starter. BTW, this issue has been debated here in the past. People often bring up the I-44 viaduct in Wichita Falls as an example of how it could be done in Amarillo. But that is quite an apples to oranges comparison to downtown Amarillo.

The Holliday and Broad Street viaducts span 10 blocks to the West of downtown Wichita Falls. It's a little more than 3/4 of a mile long. A similar approach in Amarillo would be over twice as long, 29 blocks and over 2 miles. The viaducts would have to be built directly through downtown, not off to the side of it. Plus the BNSF rail lines provide an additional obstacle. The intersection with BL-40/Historic US-66 has its own set of complications.

A lot of new development and downtown beautification has taken place in Amarillo's downtown district within the last 10 or so years. Not only are there busy office towers where lots of people are working daily, but there's also now a thriving night life district in the same area. Attempting to build an elevated freeway through that would be highly destructive to all that growth.

The only work-able alternative of pushing I-27 directly thru downtown Amarillo would be a deep bore tunnel. But the costs of tunneling are so hideously extreme. We're talking multiple billions of dollars. There is no point of building such a thing in a modest sized city of 200,000 people. For what it would cost just to tunnel I-27 under downtown Amarillo you could build out much of a North extension of I-27 clear up to Limon, Colorado and I-70. Even a pair of elevated viaducts running nearly 30 city blocks would cost quite a lot of money, funding that could be better spent building out more miles of I-27 elsewhere.

If I-27 gets extended North of Amarillo the designation will get looped around the downtown area.

Plutonic Panda

I don't really the issue of rerouting the new interstate west of Amarillo. It doesn't much it any travel time Amarillo is still small enough where it won't have to be built that far out of the way unlike it would in a metro like Dallas.

Anthony_JK

Given how I-27 approaches Amarillo from the SW, using Loop 335 is a no-brainer.

Henry

Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 19, 2022, 12:30:37 AM
Quote from: kphogerEagle Pass is much more significant.

Eagle Pass is definitely near a more important junction in Mexico's highway network. On the bright side Eagle Pass is South of Del Rio, in between Del Rio and Laredo. An I-27 extension intended to bounce to Del Rio and then Laredo would obviously have to pass through Eagle Pass along the way.

What will be interesting is how an I-27 link would be built between Eagle Pass and Laredo. Will it follow US-277 and US-83 in that out of the way bend to Carrizo Springs? Or will it take a more straight shot, hugging closer to the Rio Grande? There would be advantages to the latter. It would cut some miles off the route. It could upgrade the FM-1472 corridor and more closely serve a lot of distribution facilities on the North side of Laredo.

Quote from: BlueOutback7I wonder how they will get it through Amarillo. The northern terminus feeds right into Downtown. Will TXDOT route it around the city on Loop 337 with the remaining piece becoming an x27? An elevated freeway would destroy the downtown area and a tunnel would be too expensive.

It's a foregone conclusion an extension of I-27 North out of Amarillo would be routed around the West half of Loop 335. There is no way I-27 is going to get extended directly thru downtown Amarillo. The existing I-27 route inside the 335 loop would be re-numbered somehow. Maybe a 3-digit I-27 spur. Much of the freeway upgrade of Loop 335 will probably be finished before any work gets started on I-27 between Amarillo and Dumas.
Well, since there are no I-x27s around (will Loop 289 in Lubbock ever get upgraded into one?), I think it would only be right that I-127 be created after the western reroute around Loop 335 has been completed. While we're at it, let's upgrade the eastern half of Loop 335 as well and then try to decide whether to number it an I-x27 or I-x40 (and the westernmost I-x40 is I-240 in Oklahoma City!).
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

Bobby5280

I wouldn't put it past TX DOT to simply "downgrade" the designation of the existing I-27 segment inside Loop 335 as "US-87." That would at least keep the route naming consistent in downtown and the two freeway segments North and South of downtown Amarillo. TX DOT has shown very little inclination to rename existing Texas Loop highways as Interstate named routes. One half of Loop 335 would be re-named I-27 if I-27 actually gets extended North of Amarillo. In Lubbock I don't expect Loop 289, Spur 327 or even US-82 going thru Lubbock to carry Interstate designations. I think something big would have to happen on the federal level to change the thinking (and that would only happen if the change in mindset included a whole lot of federal funding).

bwana39

Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 21, 2022, 10:05:12 PM
I wouldn't put it past TX DOT to simply "downgrade" the designation of the existing I-27 segment inside Loop 335 as "US-87." That would at least keep the route naming consistent in downtown and the two freeway segments North and South of downtown Amarillo. TX DOT has shown very little inclination to rename existing Texas Loop highways as Interstate named routes. One half of Loop 335 would be re-named I-27 if I-27 actually gets extended North of Amarillo. In Lubbock I don't expect Loop 289, Spur 327 or even US-82 going thru Lubbock to carry Interstate designations. I think something big would have to happen on the federal level to change the thinking (and that would only happen if the change in mindset included a whole lot of federal funding).

The term DOWNGRADE seems to suggest the road would be diminished when in fact it is only the label that would be downgraded.

I-20 from Terrell to I-30 in far east Dallas was made to be JUST US-80 when I-20 was rerouted around the southern sides of Dallas , Fort Worth and Arlington.  It has expanded from 2x2 to 3x3 or more in the decades since. Clearly not a downgrade.
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

sprjus4

^ That route is still mostly a 4 lane limited access highway.

Henry

Quote from: bwana39 on March 21, 2022, 10:34:22 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 21, 2022, 10:05:12 PM
I wouldn't put it past TX DOT to simply "downgrade" the designation of the existing I-27 segment inside Loop 335 as "US-87." That would at least keep the route naming consistent in downtown and the two freeway segments North and South of downtown Amarillo. TX DOT has shown very little inclination to rename existing Texas Loop highways as Interstate named routes. One half of Loop 335 would be re-named I-27 if I-27 actually gets extended North of Amarillo. In Lubbock I don't expect Loop 289, Spur 327 or even US-82 going thru Lubbock to carry Interstate designations. I think something big would have to happen on the federal level to change the thinking (and that would only happen if the change in mindset included a whole lot of federal funding).

The term DOWNGRADE seems to suggest the road would be diminished when in fact it is only the label that would be downgraded.

I-20 from Terrell to I-30 in far east Dallas was made to be JUST US-80 when I-20 was rerouted around the southern sides of Dallas , Fort Worth and Arlington.  It has expanded from 2x2 to 3x3 or more in the decades since. Clearly not a downgrade.
The antithesis of this would be I-69 through Houston, since that was (and still is) known as US 59. There's also I-69C and I-69E, which are also taking over existing US routes in McAllen and Brownsville, respectively. So as this would show, the cookie crumbles both ways.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

Bobby5280

Quote from: bwana39The term DOWNGRADE seems to suggest the road would be diminished when in fact it is only the label that would be downgraded.

I never suggested the freeway would be physically reduced to some kind of surface street. I clearly wrote TX DOT would likely "downgrade" the highway's designation, not its highway type.

Such a move would be consistent with TX DOT policies. They only seem to be in agreement with signing new Interstate routes when there is some political push behind it, like with I-69 and I-14. Otherwise they seem perfectly happy allowing freeways and toll roads to carry US Highway or State Highway designations.

My own guess is there's maybe a 10%-20% chance TX DOT would give I-27 inside Loop-335 a new 3-digit Interstate designation to I-40 and downtown. It would raise a question about what to do with the US-87 freeway North of downtown Amarillo. Would that have to be given another 3-digit I-x27 name? It's just a lot easier for them to name that whole stretch inside Loop-335 as US-87.

thisdj78

They could route I-27 on the west loop and make it more "direct"  by adding mini spurs. On the south end it almost looks like ROW is set aside for it:



Plutonic Panda

^^^ thank you! That is exactly how I envisioned it as well. Of course we could also do it my way and build a tunnel under downtown.  :bigass:

Thegeet

Good idea but  I don't see TxDOT being motivated to build curves.

KCRoadFan

Quote from: DJStephens on March 20, 2022, 12:04:27 PM
Quote from: BlueOutback7 on March 18, 2022, 08:49:03 PM
I wonder how they will get it through Amarillo. The northern terminus feeds right into Downtown. Will TXDOT route it around the city on Loop 337 with the remaining piece becoming an x27? An elevated freeway would destroy the downtown area and a tunnel would be too expensive.

Don't believe it will ever be routed straight through (it should have been routed straight through back in the day) but a twin viaduct system similar to the ones in Wichita Falls could be pursued.   Am of belief a "cut and cover" trench is the best long term solution.   With deck park(s), and air rights being sold.
Remember the first time in Amarillo, mid nineties, there were a lot more vacant properties in between and around the twin one way couplets that have existed for a long time.

<sarcasm>
Do it like I-78 in Jersey City - just route it along the streets with the traffic lights! Maybe work with the City of Amarillo or TXDOT (whoever maintains those streets) to sync the lights up and create longer green intervals for the north-south traffic.
</sarcasm>

rte66man

Quote from: thisdj78 on March 22, 2022, 02:47:11 PM
They could route I-27 on the west loop and make it more "direct"  by adding mini spurs. On the south end it almost looks like ROW is set aside for it:




You need to move your south curve a mile west to the new loop
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

Thegeet

If they decide to loop it, I think they will only use sharp turns or half hearted flyovers.

In_Correct

Quote from: rte66man on March 22, 2022, 10:05:43 PM
Quote from: thisdj78 on March 22, 2022, 02:47:11 PM
They could route I-27 on the west loop and make it more "direct"  by adding mini spurs. On the south end it almost looks like ROW is set aside for it:




You need to move your south curve a mile west to the new loop

Also, that proposed Interchange needs to be reworked in favor of the new route. People should not need to have to take an Interchange on Interstate 27 in order to stay on Interstate 27. Instead, the ramps should go to the old route.
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

mvak36

Quote from: In_Correct on March 23, 2022, 03:44:19 AM
Quote from: rte66man on March 22, 2022, 10:05:43 PM
Quote from: thisdj78 on March 22, 2022, 02:47:11 PM
They could route I-27 on the west loop and make it more "direct"  by adding mini spurs. On the south end it almost looks like ROW is set aside for it:




You need to move your south curve a mile west to the new loop

Also, that proposed Interchange needs to be reworked in favor of the new route. People should not need to have to take an Interchange on Interstate 27 in order to stay on Interstate 27. Instead, the ramps should go to the old route.

Would they still keep the old route as a freeway? Seems like it would be a good 3di of I-27. Also for Loop 335, they could probably do something like the 495 beltway in DC where it is concurrent with I-27 on the western half.
Counties: Counties visited
Travel Mapping: Summary

ethanhopkin14

Quote from: In_Correct on March 23, 2022, 03:44:19 AM
Quote from: rte66man on March 22, 2022, 10:05:43 PM
Quote from: thisdj78 on March 22, 2022, 02:47:11 PM
They could route I-27 on the west loop and make it more "direct"  by adding mini spurs. On the south end it almost looks like ROW is set aside for it:




You need to move your south curve a mile west to the new loop

Also, that proposed Interchange needs to be reworked in favor of the new route. People should not need to have to take an Interchange on Interstate 27 in order to stay on Interstate 27. Instead, the ramps should go to the old route.

What are the Legs of Amarillo?

I-55

Quote from: mvak36 on March 23, 2022, 11:29:20 AM
Would they still keep the old route as a freeway? Seems like it would be a good 3di of I-27. Also for Loop 335, they could probably do something like the 495 beltway in DC where it is concurrent with I-27 on the western half.

Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 21, 2022, 10:05:12 PM
I wouldn't put it past TX DOT to simply "downgrade" the designation of the existing I-27 segment inside Loop 335 as "US-87." That would at least keep the route naming consistent in downtown and the two freeway segments North and South of downtown Amarillo. TX DOT has shown very little inclination to rename existing Texas Loop highways as Interstate named routes. One half of Loop 335 would be re-named I-27 if I-27 actually gets extended North of Amarillo. In Lubbock I don't expect Loop 289, Spur 327 or even US-82 going thru Lubbock to carry Interstate designations. I think something big would have to happen on the federal level to change the thinking (and that would only happen if the change in mindset included a whole lot of federal funding).

The old route would likely remain a non-interstate freeway. If they really cared about 3di designations there'd be several new designations for existing freeways in the DFW, Houston, and Austin areas in particular. Signing Loop 335 concurrent with I-27 would be consistent to what has been done in Laredo with Loop 20 and US-59 (and I think with I-69W as well)
Let's Go Purdue Basketball Whoosh

DJStephens

Quote from: jlam on March 16, 2022, 08:47:06 PM
I doubt that any of us will live to see New Mexico fulfill their part.

Agreed.  The section of US 64 - 87 W of the texas line, has been four laned already.  But in sloppy low budget style.   Roughly seventeen to twenty years ago.   They could have re-built it then, to much higher standards.  And am still opposed to the notion of sending long distance freight to Raton Pass.  Makes no sense.   



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.