US-287 between Fort Worth (and Ennis) and Wichita Falls if not Amarillo thread

Started by TheBox, September 03, 2023, 09:47:23 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bobby5280

It's great news they're actually launching a formal Interstate study on the US-287 corridor. But the proverbial push was turning into a shove with regards to the Fort Worth-Dectaur segment. That chunk has been very long overdue for a full Interstate quality upgrade. It's just nuts how many new housing subdivisions and giant logistics buildings have been going up North and Northwest of Fort Worth. There is so much growth happening that they not only desperately need to bring US-287 up to Interstate status in that area, but they also need to upgrade TX-114 to Interstate quality to US-287 in Rhome.

The Fort Worth-Amarillo segment of US-287 built up as an Interstate highway would be highly valuable to the big picture functions of the overall Interstate system. DFW would have an equivalent diagonal East-West route alternative to I-20.

I don't think there is nearly as much need for an Interstate running from Ennis down to Beaumont. If I-14 was to be fully completed into Louisiana the freeway going North out of Beaumont could be extended to meet it. Otherwise, I think the focus should be I-40 in Amarillo down to I-45 in Ennis.


sprjus4

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on August 15, 2024, 02:02:57 PMThat map doesn't mention I-2 however is no further extension planned?
Is I-2 officially planned to be extended to Laredo?

Bobby5280

The exit numbers along the existing segment of I-2 certainly suggest an eventual extension to Laredo.

Then we have to consider all the other corridor planning and study activity currently in the works. They're looking at a bypass of Sullivan City, which would extend the La Joya bypass farther West. A corridor is being planned as a Northern bypass from Rio Grande City over to Roma. That cluster of small cities and towns is not included as part of the Rio Grande Valley metro from McAllen over to Brownsville (which has over 1 million people). If I-2 gets extended to Roma that would be about the halfway point to Laredo.

Laredo itself is a fairly large city. It has over 200,000 people. IIRC the city has the busiest inland border crossing in the US, at least in terms of commercial traffic, if not overall. Brownsville is a serious port city. I-2 would provide a better connection between the two.

sprjus4

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 16, 2024, 12:00:46 AMThe exit numbers along the existing segment of I-2 certainly suggest an eventual extension to Laredo.

Then we have to consider all the other corridor planning and study activity currently in the works. They're looking at a bypass of Sullivan City, which would extend the La Joya bypass farther West. A corridor is being planned as a Northern bypass from Rio Grande City over to Roma. That cluster of small cities and towns is not included as part of the Rio Grande Valley metro from McAllen over to Brownsville (which has over 1 million people). If I-2 gets extended to Roma that would be about the halfway point to Laredo.

Laredo itself is a fairly large city. It has over 200,000 people. IIRC the city has the busiest inland border crossing in the US, at least in terms of commercial traffic, if not overall. Brownsville is a serious port city. I-2 would provide a better connection between the two.
But again, there's no official plan to extend I-2.

MikieTimT

Quote from: Henry on August 15, 2024, 10:57:34 PM
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on August 15, 2024, 06:42:40 PMMeanwhile, it's about ----g time that US 287 was at least brought up and looked at.  Fort Worth <=> Amarillo should have already had something working or done *long* before I-14's possibility was a gleam in anyone's eye.
All the more reason to hope for something in the 30s, or even I-28! I'd prefer they make this I-32, though.

Seems like a running theme in the IHS to have 2DI I-2* even routes as NW<->SE running routes, so I-28 would be perfect.  Sure would be nice of ANY of these would span more than a couple of states, however.

Bobby5280

I don't like "I-28" as a number for the US-287 corridor. It's North of I-30. The only way "I-28" would make any sense is if the segment from Corsicana to Beaumont was ever built. I think chances are very slim for that happening. Much of existing US-287 going SE from Corsicana is a 2 lane route.

I think "I-32" is a far better choice. It's the first step above I-30. Plus it would leave room for "I-34" as a possibility for the US-82 corridor on the Northern fringes of the DFW region. US-82 from Henrietta to New Boston may end up functioning as a serious regional bypass for DFW. One scenario would be trucks coming down from the Rockies and heading to the Gulf Coast. They would be driving along "I-32", but rather than go straight thru DFW they might take "I-34" across to Texarkana to connect with I-49. The Northeast US has a number of Interstates that work as regional bypasses of major cities. The DFW metro has close to 8 million people. That's pretty major.

Quote from: sprjus4But again, there's no official plan to extend I-2.

Still, it looks like they doing that anyway.

Out of all the proposed Interstate corridors in Texas, I think I-2 has better chances of being fully built out to Laredo than I-14 going to San Angelo or I-27 going North of Dumas or even Amarillo. Far South Texas has a surprisingly large population. Add to that all of the border and port commerce. On top of that add in the tourism angle via Padre Island.

MikieTimT

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 16, 2024, 10:46:53 AMI don't like "I-28" as a number for the US-287 corridor. It's North of I-30. The only way "I-28" would make any sense is if the segment from Corsicana to Beaumont was ever built. I think chances are very slim for that happening. Much of existing US-287 going SE from Corsicana is a 2 lane route.

I think "I-32" is a far better choice. It's the first step above I-30. Plus it would leave room for "I-34" as a possibility for the US-82 corridor on the Northern fringes of the DFW region. US-82 from Henrietta to New Boston may end up functioning as a serious regional bypass for DFW. One scenario would be trucks coming down from the Rockies and heading to the Gulf Coast. They would be driving along "I-32", but rather than go straight thru DFW they might take "I-34" across to Texarkana to connect with I-49. The Northeast US has a number of Interstates that work as regional bypasses of major cities. The DFW metro has close to 8 million people. That's pretty major.

Quote from: sprjus4But again, there's no official plan to extend I-2.

Still, it looks like they doing that anyway.

Out of all the proposed Interstate corridors in Texas, I think I-2 has better chances of being fully built out to Laredo than I-14 going to San Angelo or I-27 going North of Dumas or even Amarillo. Far South Texas has a surprisingly large population. Add to that all of the border and port commerce. On top of that add in the tourism angle via Padre Island.

They are studying the route all the way down to Beaumont, so it'll potentially intersect I-10, well south of I-20 as well.  There isn't going to be a grid compliant number for a diagonal with the mileage they're studying.  They've already got a "standard" going with the other I-2* even numbered Interstates on diagonals.

Bobby5280

TX DOT can study the Corsicana-Beaumont segment of US-287 if they want to do so. I strongly doubt any Interstate would ever be built along that full length, particularly from Corsicana going farther Southeast. I can see US-287 from Beaumont up to maybe Woodville getting built as an Interstate, but that's only if the whole I-14 thing gets fleshed out. I'm skeptical I-14 will be built much at all outside the Texas Triangle.

Even if the Corsicana-Beaumont segment of US-287 was upgraded to Interstate standards, that's much more of a North-South route. The Fort Worth-Amarillo segment is runs more East-West. An even number designation makes sense there, but not "I-28."

US 89

I'm skeptical of how much an interstate upgrade from Fort Worth to Amarillo would meaningfully improve along that stretch. The entire corridor is already four-lane divided and flows pretty well in my experience.

There are a number of towns west of Wichita Falls that could use a bypass - Childress and Quanah in particular come to mind - but I just don't see a full interstate upgrade along the whole stretch being worth the cost.

In_Correct

Quote from: US 89 on August 17, 2024, 11:16:06 AMI'm skeptical of how much an interstate upgrade from Fort Worth to Amarillo would meaningfully improve along that stretch. The entire corridor is already four-lane divided and flows pretty well in my experience.

There are a number of towns west of Wichita Falls that could use a bypass - Childress and Quanah in particular come to mind - but I just don't see a full interstate upgrade along the whole stretch being worth the cost.

If you are referring to U.S. 287, not so in my experience. It must be 6 laned with continuous one way frontage roads. And every thing else costs much more than road construction.
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

sprjus4

Quote from: In_Correct on August 17, 2024, 01:14:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 17, 2024, 11:16:06 AMI'm skeptical of how much an interstate upgrade from Fort Worth to Amarillo would meaningfully improve along that stretch. The entire corridor is already four-lane divided and flows pretty well in my experience.

There are a number of towns west of Wichita Falls that could use a bypass - Childress and Quanah in particular come to mind - but I just don't see a full interstate upgrade along the whole stretch being worth the cost.

If you are referring to U.S. 287, not so in my experience. It must be 6 laned with continuous one way frontage roads. And every thing else costs much more than road construction.

6 lanes from Fort Worth all the way to I-40 on the Panhandle? Sure... that's realistic.

US 89

Quote from: sprjus4 on August 17, 2024, 09:36:47 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on August 17, 2024, 01:14:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 17, 2024, 11:16:06 AMI'm skeptical of how much an interstate upgrade from Fort Worth to Amarillo would meaningfully improve along that stretch. The entire corridor is already four-lane divided and flows pretty well in my experience.

There are a number of towns west of Wichita Falls that could use a bypass - Childress and Quanah in particular come to mind - but I just don't see a full interstate upgrade along the whole stretch being worth the cost.

If you are referring to U.S. 287, not so in my experience. It must be 6 laned with continuous one way frontage roads. And every thing else costs much more than road construction.

6 lanes from Fort Worth all the way to I-40 on the Panhandle? Sure... that's realistic.

Don't forget the continuous one-way frontage roads, to serve all that dense development along it...

Plutonic Panda

Quote from: sprjus4 on August 17, 2024, 09:36:47 PM
Quote from: In_Correct on August 17, 2024, 01:14:21 PM
Quote from: US 89 on August 17, 2024, 11:16:06 AMI'm skeptical of how much an interstate upgrade from Fort Worth to Amarillo would meaningfully improve along that stretch. The entire corridor is already four-lane divided and flows pretty well in my experience.

There are a number of towns west of Wichita Falls that could use a bypass - Childress and Quanah in particular come to mind - but I just don't see a full interstate upgrade along the whole stretch being worth the cost.

If you are referring to U.S. 287, not so in my experience. It must be 6 laned with continuous one way frontage roads. And every thing else costs much more than road construction.

6 lanes from Fort Worth all the way to I-40 on the Panhandle? Sure... that's realistic.
Not that it'll happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if it did. If any Vinny would pull it off It would be Texas.

In_Correct

This configuration as I proposed is needed between north of Fort Worth and Decatur ( or perhaps Wichita Falls ultimately ) ...
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

Bobby5280

US-287 needs to be a 3x3 facility from the I-35W split up through Decatur. Then it can drop down to a 2x2 freeway. Traffic counts are certainly heavy enough to justify a rural Interstate upgrade from Wichita Falls down to Fort Worth. It gets a little iffy West of Wichita Falls. But then again the AADT counts on US-287 between Wichita Falls and Amarillo are often higher than the numbers on I-27. Plus there simply is a pretty serious amount of heavy truck traffic on that highway.

splashflash

US 287 between Witchita Falls and Amarillo has seen some grisly fatalities.  The justification for more grade separations is high because of the high volume of truck traffic and the overall base level.


Robinsml

It's about time. US 287 already has enough traffic on it from DFW to Amarillo. Call it a westward extension of Interstate 30.

MikieTimT

Quote from: Robinsml on August 18, 2024, 09:22:54 PMIt's about time. US 287 already has enough traffic on it from DFW to Amarillo. Call it a westward extension of Interstate 30.

Probably the most logical extension of I-30 possible.

The Ghostbuster

If the US 287 corridor ever gets an Interstate designation, it should be numbered Interstate 32 (or 34, 36, or 38). The Interstate Guide's Future Routes page says Roads and Bridges magazine once suggested the Interstate 32 designation for the corridor (pending upgrades, of course): https://www.aaroads.com/interstate-guide/future/#032.

Bobby5280

I don't like the idea of numbering a US-287 Interstate as "I-30." That would turn I-30 into a V-shaped route with both ends hitting I-40. That would be weird. If I-30 was going to be extended I would have preferred it to run over what is now being called I-57 up to Sikeston. I-30 may be short, but it's still very much a major Interstate route.

If US-287 does get an Interstate designation I'm hoping I-32 wins out.

Molandfreak

Knowing Texas, it'll probably end up being I-27S. Gotta have all the suffixes!
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PMAASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

wxfree

My first thought was that it doesn't need an Interstate number.  The TxDOT web page only mentions rebuilding the road to Interstate standards.  I like that they're not obsessed with putting red white and blue signs on every stretch of freeway.  But, this is a long stretch between two significant cities, much of which is rural.  In my mind, that covers the purpose of the Interstate system more than a bypass of a major city.  A state highway could perform the same function, and a freeway is justified due to the traffic level and urban nature of the area.  Long freeways across rural areas connecting distant cities is the most fundamental purpose of the Interstate system, especially if the cities happen to be in different states.

As for numbers, I prefer to make silly suggestions that are only suitable if you look at it strangely.  Make it I-27, which would run south out of Amarillo in both directions and fit in the grid.  Another idea is I-45, which already tilts northwest.  Run it along I-30 and I-35W to connect the two pieces.  This wouldn't get it out of Texas, but it would make it a lot longer and connect to a different piece of the Interstate system, one that's in Texas only because of the odd shape and doesn't connect to the rest of the Texas Interstates.  If we want a suffix, call it I-20N, since it's kind of a mirror image, running west from Fort Worth, tilted north instead of south, and ending at another Interstate that continues to the western states.
I'd like to buy a vowel, Alex.  What is E?

vdeane

I like the idea of making this an interstate because the way the western end of I-44 is just dangling with no connection to the interstate system despite being nowhere near a coast or border is annoying.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position of NYSDOT or its affiliates.

Bobby5280

I think the segment of US-287 from Ennis (I-45) to Amarillo (I-40) is an increasingly important connection for the overall Interstate highway system. DFW is the 4th most populated metro in the US. If Chicago keeps losing population DFW will rise to #3 behind NY and LA.

The Ghostbuster

They're not planning on adding an Interstate designation to the US 67 corridor from Dallas southwestward towards Cleburne, are they? Wait a second, this is Texas. An Interstate designation could pop up anywhere, even in places where it doesn't make 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.