I-14 in Texas

[The Ghostbuster]

I doubt Interstate 14 will be built outside of Texas, so 14's eastern terminus should probably be at Interstate 45.

[bwana39]

I doubt Interstate 14 will be built outside of Texas, so 14's eastern terminus should probably be at Interstate 45.

It can probably be a good fit for I-69, a small maybe to US-287, but that would be about the max.

[Molandfreak]

Madisonville and even Huntsville are pretty far North of Houston for I-14 to function as any sort of relief corridor for the Houston metro.

I'm actually saying that thru traffic on I-10 that is neither going to Houston nor San Antonio can use it to avoid traffic hell in both cities since they don't really have a reason to go through either. Call it I-12 on steroids.

I realize that's a pretty niche, obscure reason to build the corridor since it would only apply to a few hundred vehicles per day, but hey, that seems to be the entire justification for I-69 in Arkansas and Louisiana.

[MaxConcrete]

TxDOT held a public meeting today for the 7-mile section of I-35 which will serve both I-35 and I-14.

The plans are highly ambitious. TxDOT is finally planning to build a section of I-35 to the size actually needed. Yay!

The existing I-35 in this section has six main lanes and frontage roads on a mostly narrow (300ft) right-of-way.
The proposed facility has six express lanes, 8 regular lanes and frontage roads on a 500-foot-wide right-of-way. See page 14 in the presentation.

The schematics show only the proposed right-of-way width. The presentation says construction could start in 2030.

The schematics for this section are now available at the public meeting web site.

The design is very ambitious and impressive, with a minimum of 14 main lanes. See schematics 2 through 7 for the main section.

The presentation says "construction is anticipated to begin in 2030 for Segment 1" (section 1 is the I-35 shared section), but that seems very soon and I expect it to be later. A large right-of-way clearance is required, which by itself could take years.

[Great Lakes Roads]

TxDOT held a public meeting today for the 7-mile section of I-35 which will serve both I-35 and I-14.

The plans are highly ambitious. TxDOT is finally planning to build a section of I-35 to the size actually needed. Yay!

The existing I-35 in this section has six main lanes and frontage roads on a mostly narrow (300ft) right-of-way.
The proposed facility has six express lanes, 8 regular lanes and frontage roads on a 500-foot-wide right-of-way. See page 14 in the presentation.

The schematics show only the proposed right-of-way width. The presentation says construction could start in 2030.

The schematics for this section are now available at the public meeting web site.

The design is very ambitious and impressive, with a minimum of 14 main lanes. See schematics 2 through 7 for the main section.

The presentation says "construction is anticipated to begin in 2030 for Segment 1" (section 1 is the I-35 shared section), but that seems very soon and I expect it to be later. A large right-of-way clearance is required, which by itself could take years.

The existing ROW is 450 feet, so they would have to buy a bunch of properties/empty lands to get to the proposed 500 feet ROW. Also, I like that they are adding a D-C (direct-connector) ramp from I-14 EB to I-35 SB.

[Chris]

A Texas style freeway between two regional cities.

Is 14 lanes really needed for 130,000 - 145,000 vehicles per day? This would make it one of the widest freeways in the entire country, with 4-3-3-4 or 5-3-3-5 lanes, plus frontage roads.

I suppose its designed to accommodate growth far into the future. Given the existing highway layout, this link would continue to carry the most traffic in the region.

[Plutonic Panda]

My take is the wide wider the better that'll make it so this road won't ever have to be widened for a very long time.

[Anthony_JK]

The concurrency of I-14 and I-35, combined with the need for continuous I-35 express lanes, are the justification for the widening. Or, so I believe. 

[I-55]

5 lanes each way would probably serve well for the next 40 years if I were to imagine. Existing traffic warrants 4 each way, 5 lanes would be more comfortable though and serve future demand better.

Side Note: Here's my typical overall travel lanes to AADT ratios for rural freeways (still tweaking a bit):

AADT                   Scenarios
<35,000               Comfortable 4 lanes
35,000-40,000      Begin 6-lane discussion, 4 lanes still comfortable
40,000-50,000      4 lanes tight, 6-lanes ideal
50,000-60,000      4-lanes overwhelmed (especially with high truck volumes), 6-lanes ideal
60,000-85,000      6-lane all day
85,000-100,000     Begin looking into 8-lane, 6-lane begins tightening
100,000-150,000   8-lane range
150,000+             10-lane, any added lanes above this only marginally effective

[Bobby5280]

The design of the I-14/I-35 concurrency is more than just making the road wide. The real purpose is filtering the thru I-35 traffic -keeping it (mostly) separate from the traffic using the two I-35/I-14 interchanges, as well as local exits. The six separate lanes for I-35 will eliminate a lot of potential weaving conflicts and accidents.

Six lanes seems appropriate for the thru travel lanes of I-35. It's pretty much at least 3x3 lanes wide or more from the I-35 E/W split down thru the Austin-San Antonio region. 

A mixture of 5-6 lanes in each direction for the "local" traffic seems good for current traffic levels and future growth. The immediate purpose is providing plenty of room for vehicles to change lanes when needed to reach exit ramps.

This project should be pretty impressive looking when it is finished.

[vdeane]

The design of the I-14/I-35 concurrency is more than just making the road wide. The real purpose is filtering the thru I-35 traffic -keeping it (mostly) separate from the traffic using the two I-35/I-14 interchanges, as well as local exits. The six separate lanes for I-35 will eliminate a lot of potential weaving conflicts and accidents.

Six lanes seems appropriate for the thru travel lanes of I-35. It's pretty much at least 3x3 lanes wide or more from the I-35 E/W split down thru the Austin-San Antonio region. 

A mixture of 5-6 lanes in each direction for the "local" traffic seems good for current traffic levels and future growth. The immediate purpose is providing plenty of room for vehicles to change lanes when needed to reach exit ramps.

This project should be pretty impressive looking when it is finished.

Is this setup just between the I-14 interchanges, or does it extend beyond?  I'm wondering if there will actually be an I-35/I-14 concurrency, or if it will be more like I-80 and I-29 in Council Bluffs, which travel the same corridor but don't actually share pavement.

[Bobby5280]

The way the schematic looks on the roll plots the separate 3x3 thru lanes for I-35 exist only through the I-14/I-35 concurrency. The lanes begin just South of the South I-14/I-35 interchange and end at the Northern I-14/I-35 interchange in Temple.

[longhorn]

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/wac/i14extension/011326-schematics-2.pdf

The new I-35-to-I-14 northbound-to-westbound connector in Belton is to be replaced. That was short-lived.

[Bobby5280]

Yep. The existing NB I-35 to WB I-14 flyover ramp is in the way of where the I-35 local lanes would be built. So the existing ramp has to go. One thing I find kind of disappointing: the replacement flyover ramp is proposed to be a single lane ramp. The same goes for the new EB I-14 to SB I-35 ramp: just one lane. It's kind of a new standard for Interstate-to-Interstate Y interchanges to have ramps with 2 lanes or more. The other ramps from I-14 to I-35 do have 2 or more lanes.

[longhorn]

The dangerous part of the I-14/I-35 interchange in Belton gets fixed too, and not a moment too soon. Where EB I14 and NB  I35 merge is a sharp turn by today's engineering standards. Though some will loose their homes and I think a closed Apt complex is there too, and it will be gone. It will be monumentally better for drivers on both interstates. The sightlines will be much better.

Still funny to me that WB I14 ramp will have a life of under 10 years. The replacing of that 1970s engineered interchange will be worth it. Hopefully TXdot also fixes the steep incline leaving Belton.

[vdeane]

Still funny to me that WB I14 ramp will have a life of under 10 years.

In NY we wouldn't even be allowed to do that because much of the NYSDOT budget is funded by bonds and those have a requirement that everything they fund last at least 10 years!

[sprjus4]

Still funny to me that WB I14 ramp will have a life of under 10 years.

In NY we wouldn't even be allowed to do that because much of the NYSDOT budget is funded by bonds and those have a requirement that everything they fund last at least 10 years!

Makes sense... not sure why they would spend millions of dollars for a flyover to just tear it down a few years later...

[bwana39]

Still funny to me that WB I14 ramp will have a life of under 10 years.

In NY we wouldn't even be allowed to do that because much of the NYSDOT budget is funded by bonds and those have a requirement that everything they fund last at least 10 years!

Makes sense... not sure why they would spend millions of dollars for a flyover to just tear it down a few years later...

They honestly build some for construction detour.....

[Chris]

https://www.coveleaderpress.com/news/190-bypass-widening-project-start-next-week

Work begins next week to upgrade six miles of the Copperas Cove bypass of US 190 to Interstate standards. It will be completed by early 2029:

The six-mile project will widen the highway from Clarke Roade to the Lampasas County Line, from two lanes to a four-lane divided highway.

Preparing U.S. Highway 190 to interstate highway standards is part of that process.

[longhorn]

This would have been so much cheaper if they built it like this from the beginning. With the amount of traffic on that stretch long overdue.

[Bobby5280]

Yeah, I have to agree the Super 2 approach doesn't always work so well in the long run. Construction cost inflation can ruin any savings they intended to net by choosing to build the second pair of lanes later.

At least they don't have to buy much, if any, new ROW for this project in Copperas Cove. But, wow, highway building costs have really spiked in the 10 or so years since they finished the first phase of this bypass.

[longhorn]

TxDot is building those tall night lights along I-14 in Killeen. The same ones that are along I-35 from Georgetown to San Marcos.

[bwana39]

https://www.coveleaderpress.com/news/190-bypass-widening-project-start-next-week

It will be completed by early 2029:

It WILL be??? Its preliminarily scheduled completion date is 2029. I-30 in Texarkana , scheduled completion 2023. US-59 (I-69) in Nacogdoches scheduled 2024.

They might be finished with the current project in NAC by 2028. I-30 in Texarkana is probably looking at 2029.

[MaxConcrete]

The candidate site for the SpaceX Terafab at the Gibbons Creek Reservoir is located near the potential alignments for I-14 and I-214. It is also very close to the proposed high speed rail station.

I marked the candidate site on the latest map of feasible I-14 corridors, and added the Texas High Speed Rail alignment.

Public hearing announcement

If this candidate site is selected and the Terafab project moves forward, it would probably expedite parts of the I-14 project, especially the east loop I-214.

Full size map

[splashflash]

Belton to Temple I-14/I-35 Segment Public Comments from Open House in January

https://links-2.govdelivery.com/CL0/https:%2F%2Fftp.txdot.gov%2Fpub%2Ftxdot%2Fget-involved%2Fwac%2Fi14extension%2F011326-comment-matrix.pdf/1/0101019dfe936c2b-0fbf8a4e-ca0b-4bf6-93f2-8fa52929d014-000000/86FvcJOxuEnggAMLe2St0IBI6_UumcyIopKN_QXxix0=452