Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MaxConcrete]

This will convert the freeway, which is mostly still in its original configuration from its 1956 opening, into a 6-lane boulevard with some architectural enhancements. This freeway removal was part of the plan to get South Dallas support for the Trinity Parkway, which of course has been canceled. (The Trinity Parkway would have been a continuation of the new connector.)

Views of the existing freeway: http://dfwfreeways.com/us175/driving-wright

US 175 is (or will be) routed on the new connector from the sharp corner to IH 45. Does anyone know if the connector is open to traffic?

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/12033001.htm

County:   DALLAS   Let Date:   12/03/19
Type:   RECONSTRUCT FREEWAY TO 6 LANE DIVIDED ARTERIAL   Seq No:   3001
Time:   0 X   Project ID:   NH 2013(596)
Highway:   US 175   Contract #:   12193001
Length:   5.544   CCSJ:   0092-01-052
Limits:   
From:   SOUTH OF BUDD STREET   Check:   $100,000
To:   IH 45   Misc Cost:   $1500000.00
Estimate   $88,513,084.97   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $88,478,471.49   -0.04%   JOHNSON BROS. CORPORATION, A SOUTHLAND COMPANY
Bidder 2   $93,733,770.00   +5.90%   WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 3   $100,899,669.77   +13.99%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

[debragga]

I drove on US 175 into downtown last week and it wasn't open yet. I couldn't find any news about when it would open online either

[Beltway]

The radical environmentalist/transit groups will undoubtedly pleased.

[Bobby5280]

In all fairness, the old South Central Freeway is largely unneeded since I-45 is just a few blocks to the West. This freeway removal project will not remove the C F Hawn Freeway, which is a far more significant stretch of road leading out the the SE outskirts of Dallas. The new connector from I-45 to the C F Hawn Freeway might actually make the connection to that SE route more efficient.

[sprjus4]

The radical environmentalist/transit groups will undoubtedly pleased.

I would generally agree, but the short segment is being demolished because it was slightly realigned to meet I-45 a couple miles south of the current junction. Once the new link opens, the old freeway will be pointless.

At first, I thought it was referring to the entire freeway between I-45 and I-20, but it’s only that short stretch being bypassed by the new connector. Nothing like I-81 in Syracuse per se, or the proposal to demolish part of the US-75 freeway north of I-30 which is a major freeway leaving downtown to the north, and is a long-distance freeway extending well north of the metro to Oklahoma.

Edit - Here's a map of the situation. The red represents the segment that will be demolished, the green represents the new direct connector to I-45. The US-175 freeway east of I-45 will not be demolished.

[Beltway]

The radical environmentalist/transit groups will undoubtedly pleased.

I would generally agree, but the short segment is being demolished because it was slightly realigned to meet I-45 a couple miles south of the current junction. Once the new link opens, the old freeway will be pointless.

That makes sense … that will make a system improvement.

A 3.0 mile segment of I-40 was relocated from downtown Oklahoma City to 1/2 mile south, to deal with the problem of an old 6-lane viaduct, and provided an 8-lane new highway segment.  In an overall scheme of things, not a "freeway removal."  Same with the Dallas segment.

[Phudman]

That east bound curve on US 175 is the worst section of freeway in the DFW area. Good riddance!

[Henry]

Hell yes, it needs to go! And kudos to the city planners for building the new freeway link, making the old road redundant.

[mgk920]

The piece of road always struck me as being something that was just kind of bodged together over time using the major existing traffic carriers as they evolved.  That crossover should have been built when the original I-45 was built.

I agree, that is a freeway relocation, just like I-30 in downtown Fort Worth was a couple of decades ago, not a 'removal'.

Mike

[Chris]

That east bound curve on US 175 is the worst section of freeway in the DFW area. Good riddance!

I believe it was first built as a US 75 freeway which was a precursor to I-45. The southern extension is now SH 310. It makes you wonder if it was ever signed as I-45 before the modern I-45 opened to traffic.

US 175 has a 20 mph curve for through traffic, something like that doesn't belong on a mainline freeway.



The imagery on Google Earth is dated 9/8/2019 and you can see the project almost completed. But they don't seem to have widened I-45 beyond its existing six lanes. So there are basically twelve lanes of traffic merging into six at that location.

[MaxConcrete]

But they don't seem to have widened I-45 beyond its existing six lanes. So there are basically twelve lanes of traffic merging into six at that location.

I'm nearly certain the interior shoulders of I-45 are being converted to traffic lanes, to make it 4x4. I haven't driven that segment since May, but work was well underway at that time. Yes, it's still going to be a problem to merge US 175 traffic into I-45.

For those not familiar, that section of I-45 was the site of the first major anti-freeway controversy in Dallas, which was in 1970. Original plans called for an elevated freeway. The very low income, predominantly black area protested and received substantial political backing. so TxDOT lowered the freeway to the ground and built it on the narrowest possible right-of-way. Even though the properties along the freeway are very substandard and distressed (and include a liquor store with a Big Tex sign), there was no way local interests were going to let TxDOT widen the right-of-way. Hence, the conversion of the interior shoulders into traffic lanes. It will be interested to see how much of a traffic issue develops on that section.

Some more background from the book. I cite this as the first removal of a structurally sound, non-dead-end freeway. Although (as some have noted) this could be classified as a relocation, even though it is only for a fraction of the original length. In my view, this would be a relocation if the new freeway connected to both endpoints of the removed freeway, which is not the case.



Here's an excellent view of the entire corridor

[-- US 175 --]

IMO (and I'm sure I'll be in the minority on this), the other 2 movements (WB=>SB, NB=>EB) should be included in this project, especially since this is a terminus, and a fix for a problem that went on for entirely too long.  Even if the predominant traffic flow is and will be the 2 movements being built now, there will be little support to go back and add the other 2 movements any time soon (if the length of time the S. Central (now S.M.Wright)/C.F. Hawn "interchange" went without help or replacement, is any indication).

[rte66man]

The radical environmentalist/transit groups will undoubtedly pleased.

I would generally agree, but the short segment is being demolished because it was slightly realigned to meet I-45 a couple miles south of the current junction. Once the new link opens, the old freeway will be pointless.

That makes sense … that will make a system improvement.

A 3.0 mile segment of I-40 was relocated from downtown Oklahoma City to 1/2 mile south, to deal with the problem of an old 6-lane viaduct, and provided an 8-lane new highway segment.  In an overall scheme of things, not a "freeway removal."  Same with the Dallas segment.

The new section of I40 is 10 lanes from Shields west to the western OKC Boulevard interchange. It only narrows there due to the antiquated Amarillo junction

[Bobby5280]

Yeah, and even though the I-44/I-40 junction is Oklahoma's only effective directional Interstate interchange, that thing really needs to be replaced soon. The ramp geometry is not very good (limited to around 40mph) and there's a number of left exits. That site is a natural for a modern four level stack interchange. If that spot was Texas territory there would be a big tall stack there already.

[Brian556]

That east bound curve on US 175 is the worst section of freeway in the DFW area. Good riddance!

I believe it was first built as a US 75 freeway which was a precursor to I-45. The southern extension is now SH 310. It makes you wonder if it was ever signed as I-45 before the modern I-45 opened to traffic.

US 175 has a 20 mph curve for through traffic, something like that doesn't belong on a mainline freeway.



The imagery on Google Earth is dated 9/8/2019 and you can see the project almost completed. But they don't seem to have widened I-45 beyond its existing six lanes. So there are basically twelve lanes of traffic merging into six at that location.

The 1961 Dallas County General Highway Map shows an I-45 shield on the old highway: https://tslarc.tsl.texas.gov/maps/map05105.jpg

[dfwmapper]

IMO (and I'm sure I'll be in the minority on this), the other 2 movements (WB=>SB, NB=>EB) should be included in this project, especially since this is a terminus, and a fix for a problem that went on for entirely too long.  Even if the predominant traffic flow is and will be the 2 movements being built now, there will be little support to go back and add the other 2 movements any time soon (if the length of time the S. Central (now S.M.Wright)/C.F. Hawn "interchange" went without help or replacement, is any indication).

Adding that would have killed the project completely. Too many trees and acres of wetlands would have had to have been removed to build the other ramps. Plus there's not really any need for it. I-20 and Loop 12 provide adequate connections to that part of town, and the new configuration of the Loop 175/SH 310 interchange will add a third connection.

[rte66man]

That east bound curve on US 175 is the worst section of freeway in the DFW area. Good riddance!

I believe it was first built as a US 75 freeway which was a precursor to I-45. The southern extension is now SH 310. It makes you wonder if it was ever signed as I-45 before the modern I-45 opened to traffic.

US 175 has a 20 mph curve for through traffic, something like that doesn't belong on a mainline freeway.



The imagery on Google Earth is dated 9/8/2019 and you can see the project almost completed. But they don't seem to have widened I-45 beyond its existing six lanes. So there are basically twelve lanes of traffic merging into six at that location.

The 1961 Dallas County General Highway Map shows an I-45 shield on the old highway: https://tslarc.tsl.texas.gov/maps/map05105.jpg

IIRC, it had I45 shields. We used to travel from OK to Houston in the mid yo late 60's. I was a road geek at a very early age and tracked such stuff. Probably drove my parents crazy but they didn't say anything......

[bugo]

The piece of road always struck me as being something that was just kind of bodged together over time using the major existing traffic carriers as they evolved.  That crossover should have been built when the original I-45 was built.

The ramp that US 175 follows through the curve was not always a mainline highway. At one time, US 75 and possibly I-45 followed the Central Expressway and the exit with the sharp curve in it was originally the beginning of US 175. That's why it is the way it is. It wasn't built to carry a mainline US highway, but an exit from one to the beginning of another. It is still way substandard but it makes a little more sense when you learn that it wasn't always the mainline.

[bugo]

I believe it was first built as a US 75 freeway which was a precursor to I-45. The southern extension is now SH 310. It makes you wonder if it was ever signed as I-45 before the modern I-45 opened to traffic.

The 1961 Dallas County General Highway Map shows an I-45 shield on the old highway: https://tslarc.tsl.texas.gov/maps/map05105.jpg

This map shows the Central Expressway marked as FAI (Federal Aid Interstate) beginning at the junction of it and the Good-Latimer Expressway all the way to the county line. That indicates that it was indeed I-45. Here is a small excerpt:



Here is a topo map from 1968 showing I-45 routed along the Central Expressway:

[Brian556]

I believe it was first built as a US 75 freeway which was a precursor to I-45. The southern extension is now SH 310. It makes you wonder if it was ever signed as I-45 before the modern I-45 opened to traffic.

The 1961 Dallas County General Highway Map shows an I-45 shield on the old highway: https://tslarc.tsl.texas.gov/maps/map05105.jpg

This map shows the Central Expressway marked as FAI (Federal Aid Interstate) beginning at the junction of it and the Good-Latimer Expressway all the way to the county line. That indicates that it was indeed I-45. Here is a small excerpt:



Here is a topo map from 1968 showing I-45 routed along the Central Expressway:

The 1961 THD Dallas Co General Highway Map shows an I-45 shield just north of where you cut it off

[The Ghostbuster]

Would it have been possible to make the new US 175/Interstate 45 interchange a full interchange instead of a partial interchange? Or would that have been overkill?

[NE2]

Would it have been possible to make the new US 175/Interstate 45 interchange a full interchange instead of a partial interchange? Or would that have been overkill?

Read the fucking thread.

[Alps]

Would it have been possible to make the new US 175/Interstate 45 interchange a full interchange instead of a partial interchange? Or would that have been overkill?

Read the fucking thread.

A little more polite: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26040.msg2462553#msg2462553

[bugo]

Would it have been possible to make the new US 175/Interstate 45 interchange a full interchange instead of a partial interchange? Or would that have been overkill?

Read the fucking thread.

A little more polite: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=26040.msg2462553#msg2462553

SPUI polite?

[-- US 175 --]

Would it have been possible to make the new US 175/Interstate 45 interchange a full interchange instead of a partial interchange? Or would that have been overkill?

There's not really much in that area except junk and scrap yards, a major UP (and others allowed) RR corridor, and the Trinity River bottoms.  Not much there that would be a barrier to having the other 2 movements.  Maybe in the future, they can be added.