Ports-to-Plains Corridor update

[Bobby5280]

I would much rather see parts of I-27 extended than I-14, especially if we're talking West Texas. In the big picture scope of things I-27 could provide a faster, more efficient, less mountainous path for traffic between the Gulf Coast, high plains cities like Amarillo & Lubbock but more importantly the bigger cities like Denver and Colorado Springs on the front range of the Rockies. I-14 doesn't have any of that big picture reach. The backers of I-14 are using the goal of linking military posts as a way to sell this concept, but highways aren't the primary mode to move military hardware these days. Air and rail are actually more important. I can see building I-14 East to College Station and Huntsville, but that's about it for now.

[sparker]

Actually, if plans to extend the P-to-P down to Laredo as a southern I-27 extension (via San Angelo & Del Rio) solidify, that would effectively satisfy the wishes of Rep. Will Hurd -- the leading objector to an I-14 alignment toward San Angelo rather than SW to I-10 because it would avoid his district -- for an additional Interstate route within that district (#23).  Essentially US 277, the basic alignment for most of the extension, features most of its mileage within the district itself; that should make Rep. Hurd happy as a clam, since the chances are that the P-to-P will see funding long before any part of the I-14 corridor west of Lampasas.  But attention to I-27 will likely have the effect of clearing the path for locating I-14 along a Brady-San Angelo alignment rather than down to I-10 -- although that corridor will simply be a line on a map for quite some time to come unless dedicated funds somehow miraculously emerge.  But this is Texas -- so one never knows!