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 would be a tall order to upgrade all of US-67 on the South fringe of the DFW metro up to Interstate standards. The segment from Midlothian (US-287) up to downtown Dallas is going to get more and more busy. It's easy to imagine the existing 2x2 lane segments from Midlothian on North getting widened to 3x3 or even 4x4. Going SW of Midlothian the freeway turns into a mostly 4-lane divided route with lots of development crowding it in various places. It would be difficult and costly to turn it into a continuous freeway all the way to Cleburne.


rte66man

US67 is already 3x3 from the split with 35E past the I-20 interchange to just past Wintergreen Rd. It looks like it is being expanded from there to Belt Line Rd
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

Bobby5280

It would make sense for them to expand the US-67 freeway down to Midlothian and US-287. US-67 starts turning into a mess of sorts a little farther Southwest from there, starting at Venus. The zone from I-35W/Alvarado on West to Keene looks like it would be pretty challenging to turn into a freeway.

Road Hog

Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 21, 2024, 12:00:51 PMThey'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.
I'm sure the city fathers in Midlothian (I think there is one mother on the city council there) would delight in there being 2 I-shields crisscrossing their city. But the 67 segment is at best a 3DI to Alvarado. 287 has better staying power.

MaxConcrete

WFFA has a news report and video about Haslet and the US 287 project just north of the I-35W split.

Remaining vacant land in Haslet is rapidly being transformed into subdivisions.

The article says that the first project on US 287 is scheduled to receive bids in late 2026, and subsequent phases are not yet scheduled. However, the TxDOT UTP shows multiple projects funded and scheduled for FY 2025-2028.
www.DFWFreeways.com
www.HoustonFreeways.com

Bobby5280

It's just idiotic how state lawmakers have let the situation on US-287 get this bad and yet still have nothing actually in progress to fix it. Any moron could have seen this coming 20 damned years ago. It has been just that obvious.

Even without the population boom on the North and Northwest sides of Fort Worth upgrading US-287 to Interstate quality from the I-35W split up to Rhome and even Decatur has been badly needed since at least the late 1990's.

TX DOT and lawmakers may get a grace period of time to deal with this problem if the nation's housing industry goes into a steep downturn (and hatefully high home prices are just egging it on to burst that price bubble). Effects of a bad recession last only so long. IIRC, growth in the DFW Metroplex didn't pause for long, if at all, in the late 2000's when the last housing price bubble exploded.

The difference is pretty crazy when you're driving on I-35W going North out of Fort Worth and then get on US-287 going toward Wichita Falls. The existing US-287 road looks like beaten up crap compared to the re-build of I-35W. It's just 4 lanes and it's falling apart.

motorola870

Quote from: Road Hog on August 23, 2024, 12:39:08 AM
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on August 21, 2024, 12:00:51 PMThey'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.
I'm sure the city fathers in Midlothian (I think there is one mother on the city council there) would delight in there being 2 I-shields crisscrossing their city. But the 67 segment is at best a 3DI to Alvarado. 287 has better staying power.
If they did a 3-di from I35E to I35W I would call it I535 as the states in between Minnesota and Texas have used every other number up besides I735.

Are they going to do bypasses around Venus and Alvarado to make a Interstate possible or just sign it from the US287 intersection to I35E if it were to happen?

I had a thread on here a while back mentioning the potential of 287 and 67 in the metro becoming 3-di.

Bobby5280

I still believe US-287 from the I-45 interchange in Ennis up to I-40 in Amarillo has 2-digit Interstate route potential. An upgraded US-67 from Dallas down thru Midlothian and farther Southwest would only work as a 3-digit route.

Aside from the I-69 and I-14 efforts Texas has a long history of not applying Interstate route numbers to new freeways. I think it's fairly likely if US-67 was fully upgraded to Interstate standards from Dallas down to Cleburne the route would probably still be called US-67.

In regard to possible bypasses of Venus and Alvarado, I don't think that would happen. It's more likely US-67 would get upgraded to Interstate standards along the current alignment. The problem with bypasses is planners would have a hard time making the proposed bypass alignments avoid hitting a lot of residential homes. It's the lesser of two evils to widen the existing alignment. Most of the existing buildings affected would be commercial chain stores. It's easier to re-build those things than a bunch of family homes.

motorola870

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 07, 2024, 03:12:24 PMI still believe US-287 from the I-45 interchange in Ennis up to I-40 in Amarillo has 2-digit Interstate route potential. An upgraded US-67 from Dallas down thru Midlothian and farther Southwest would only work as a 3-digit route.

Aside from the I-69 and I-14 efforts Texas has a long history of not applying Interstate route numbers to new freeways. I think it's fairly likely if US-67 was fully upgraded to Interstate standards from Dallas down to Cleburne the route would probably still be called US-67.

In regard to possible bypasses of Venus and Alvarado, I don't think that would happen. It's more likely US-67 would get upgraded to Interstate standards along the current alignment. The problem with bypasses is planners would have a hard time making the proposed bypass alignments avoid hitting a lot of residential homes. It's the lesser of two evils to widen the existing alignment. Most of the existing buildings affected would be commercial chain stores. It's easier to re-build those things than a bunch of family homes.
The problem with Venus and Alvarado not getting bypasses is you are looking at taking out pretty much all of the Restaurants in both of those cities are plopped down right up to the road. There still is room for a small bypass section of Venus around the FM157 section but the land is filling fast. Alvarado may need to do some weird configuration where they have elevated main lanes and keeping frontage lanes for businesses there isn't much room for a freeway through there and TXDOT has waited too long to do a short bypass they would have to do a multi mile loop to bypass the town.

There was some rumblings that they are looking at building a stack interchange at I35W and US67 but looking at the existing properties along that they are looking at having to potentially demolish the CVS, Quiktrip and a carwash to have direct connecting ramps.

Bobby5280

Quote from: motorola870The problem with Venus and Alvarado not getting bypasses is you are looking at taking out pretty much all of the Restaurants in both of those cities are plopped down right up to the road.

Are any of those restaurants and other commercial businesses unique in any way? Most are chain businesses. It's not a new thing for a national or regional chain to shut down an existing location and build new elsewhere. This is essentially what is happening along parts of US-380 between Denton and McKinney. Commercial businesses that build up in the corner of a volleyball interchange with two super highways should know better about the risk they're taking.

Around a dozen commercial businesses (mostly chain restaurants and convenience stores) are built into three corners of the intersection of I-35W and TX-114. They'll all have to be demolished when TX DOT finally builds a 5-level stack interchange there. Those businesses won't have a leg to stand on if they want to fight an eminent domain action in court. The Buc-ee's location looks like it is far enough away from the intersection to avoid harm. However a flyover ramp may clip the NE edge of its parking lot.

It's far less disruptive to remove a bunch of commercial businesses and build a new freeway (or wider freeway) along the existing road. It's far more harmful to displace family homes. We all know how unreasonably bad the current real estate market is currently. Anyone who has lived in their home for a considerable amount of time and either paid it off or locked in a low interest rate would face very difficult hardship being forced to move. The fair market value money they receive for their house wouldn't buy much in this very price-inflated market. They would probably be forced to buy (or even rent) a home in a more distant location.

sprjus4

See the stack flyover at US-281 / Loop 1604 in San Antonio. You could probably squeeze in a stack interchange at I-35 / SH-114 without having to take any businesses outright.

abqtraveler

Quote from: Bobby5280 on October 07, 2024, 03:12:24 PMAside from the I-69 and I-14 efforts Texas has a long history of not applying Interstate route numbers to new freeways. I think it's fairly likely if US-67 was fully upgraded to Interstate standards from Dallas down to Cleburne the route would probably still be called US-67.


That's because I-14, I-69, and let's add I-27 to that as well, are congressionally-designated corridors. The others that TxDOT are upgrading are not, and may not be upgraded to full interstate standards.
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

BJ59

Quote from: sprjus4 on October 15, 2024, 09:06:58 PMSee the stack flyover at US-281 / Loop 1604 in San Antonio. You could probably squeeze in a stack interchange at I-35 / SH-114 without having to take any businesses outright.
I could see there being a possibility of building ramps on the northern part of the interchange. A ramp from I-35W southbound to TX-114 westbound would be easy since the Speedway has a lot of open land. I could see them possibly squeezing in a ramp to connect TX-114 east to I-35W north. However, the rest would be super tricky without taking out businesses, especially a TX-114 Eastbound to I-35W southbound connection.

I wonder though if a full stack is needed, or if only certain connections would need to be built. TX-170/Alliance Gateway already kind of serves as a connection from TX-114 Westbound to I-35W southbound, and vice versa. The interchange in my opinion could have an interchange without a westbound to southbound ramp (as well as a northbound to eastbound ramp)

Bobby5280

I think if a freeway to freeway interchange ended up being built between TX-114 & I-35W it would (eventually) feature ramps serving all eight directions.

One factor to consider is the demographics of people living in the immediate area (Trophy Club, Westlake, Roanoke, all the new subdivisions getting built West of I-35W, etc). A lot of people with money live in that area and more are moving there. I don't think those people would like a partial (cheaper) interchange.

The other factors: traffic levels on the existing frontage roads is getting worse with the growing amount of retail businesses, restaurants, etc. The explosion of growth in giant logistics warehouses being built in that area is another traffic generator. The I-35/TX-114 interchange also serves as an access point for Alliance Airport. The thru traffic needs to be separated on freeway main lanes and freeway directional ramps rather than being forced into local frontage road traffic.

Finally, the partial interchange of TX-170 and I-35W is more than 5 miles South of the I-35W/TX-114 interchange. There are other freeway to freeway interchanges in DFW (including full stacks) that are spaced closer together than that.

I still think around a dozen chain businesses built into the corners of the I-35W/TX-114 interchange would be removed if a 5-level stack was built there. It would be quite an engineering trick to be able to offset the center of a stack interchange over the vacant NW quadrant of land. Such a thing would likely require a cast-segmental design with fewer bridge piers and longer spans. Texas rarely ever builds anything like that. Most Texas freeway interchanges are the blocky Stonehenge looking variety.

Finrod

Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 19, 2024, 11:00:02 PMI 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.

Using the stats from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_statistical_area

From 2020 to 2023 Dallas made up about 36% of the gap between itself and Chicago.  That would put Dallas on track to pass Chicago for 3rd by 2030.  Houston isn't far behind Dallas and back-of-the-envelope math has Houston passing Chicago for 4th by 2040 or so.

Check out Atlanta at 6th, having passed DC, Philly, and Miami just in the last three years.
Internet member since 1987.

Hate speech is a nonsense concept; the truth is hate speech to those that hate the truth.

People who use their free speech to try to silence others' free speech are dangerous fools.



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.