US 82 Texas Corridor Study
The US 82 corridor between Texarkana and Witchita Falls could provide a useful relief route for I-30 and Dallas - Fort Worth. Further west, US 82 is concurrent with US 277, a potential future interstate south to Abilene from Witchita Falls. West of Seymour, US 82 is a beeline to Lubbock, an alternative to I-20 and US 84 from Fort Worth.
The study will wrap up in a little more than a year.
"The US 82 Corridor Study will examine currently planned transportation projects, analyze safety, connectivity, and mobility concerns, as well as identify short-, medium-, and long-term improvements to address the needs of the corridor. Findings and recommendations will assist in guiding the future of the corridor as it evolves."
https://www.txdot.gov/content/txdotreimagine/us/en/home/projects/projects-studies/statewide/us82-corridor-study.html
https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/statewide/us82-corridor-study/_jcr_content/root/responsivegrid_1551407878/columncontrol_copy_c/col1/image.coreimg.png/1661392020049/us82-corridor-map.png
A news article mentions that a four lane divided highway between Henrietta and Nocona had been promised since 1972. https://www.noconanews.net/2020/05/07/txdot-acquiring-property-to-widen-us-hwy-82/
https://surveymonkey-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/survey/112627905/917649f8-9477-419c-952c-52c1b7d56e10.png
A very good case could be made for upgrading US-82 to Interstate standards from the US-287 junction in Henrietta, TX to the I-30 junction in New Boston, TX.
Inside of that span, US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman (from I-35 to US-75) most definitely needs to be upgraded into an Interstate quality corridor. That situation is starting to become urgent. If TX DOT doesn't at least move to secure ROW they'll have the same kind of stupid mess on their hands that they now have with US-380 between Denton and McKinney.
For a very long time I've thought US-287 between Amarillo and Fort Worth should be upgraded to Interstate standards and even given an Interstate number. I think "I-32" would be appropriate. That Henrietta to New Boston stretch of US-82 could become an "I-34" segment; the road would be about 230 miles long, which is enough for a 2di designation. Plus the Interstate could potentially be extended along the US-82 corridor thru Texarkana into Arkansas to towns like Magnolia and El Dorado, ending at the future I-69 corridor.
I'm kind of surprised US-82 hasn't already been 4-laned between Henrietta and Nocona.
East of Sherman some sections of US-82 that were limited access Super 2 have been upgraded to 4-lane limited access. There are some grade intersections and side road entrances into US-82 that would have to be cleaned up. But US-82 from Sherman to Paris would be a relatively easy project to upgrade to Interstate quality.
US-277 from Wichita Falls to Abilene would be easy to upgrade to Interstate standards. It's already 4-lane divided with town bypasses at or near Interstate quality. The town of Anson is one exception; it would need a new bypass along the East side of town. But doing something like possibly extending I-44 farther into Texas would depend on what happens with I-27. If the I-27 corridor is extended down to San Angelo and Del Rio then that would give more merit to an I-44 extension to San Angelo. Both I-27 and I-44 would become more effective NAFTA-style corridors.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2022, 07:43:16 PM
The town of Anson is one exception; it would need a new bypass along the East side of town.
Would that have been left because rather than a straight shot south to Abilene, 277 forms an isosceles triangle south of Stamford? Perhaps there was consideration of straightening the route?
A complete overhaul of US 82 is overdue. It's already being used as a truck route and the 2-lane portions of it get stacked up, even with a few passing lanes. Even if the traffic is at speed, the highway is normally crawling with state troopers and/or speed traps in towns that it runs straight through.
It's now 4-lane divided through Grayson and Fannin County up to the Lamar County line, but east of that to New Boston it's almost all 2-lane except for the Paris loop and a few passing lanes.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2022, 07:43:16 PM
A very good case could be made for upgrading US-82 to Interstate standards from the US-287 junction in Henrietta, TX to the I-30 junction in New Boston, TX.
Inside of that span, US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman (from I-35 to US-75) most definitely needs to be upgraded into an Interstate quality corridor. That situation is starting to become urgent. If TX DOT doesn't at least move to secure ROW they'll have the same kind of stupid mess on their hands that they now have with US-380 between Denton and McKinney.
I'm curious, what are the traffic volumes on US-82?
I don't know the VPD counts for US-82 in that part of Texas. But having driven on it from time to time, it's clear to me that more of it needs to be upgraded 100% to Interstate standards. The Gainesville to Sherman leg is an urgent situation. But really that whole Herietta to New Boston stretch needs to be upgraded so it can serve as an effective relief/bypass route for the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex. The DFW region is still adding population rapidly. A lot of the growth is spreading North toward the Red River. US-82 goes right through the middle of that.
Quote from: splashflashWould that have been left because rather than a straight shot south to Abilene, 277 forms an isosceles triangle south of Stamford? Perhaps there was consideration of straightening the route?
I think the odd location of Anson works as a wedge to divide some of the Southbound US-277 traffic, depending on each vehicle's destination. US-277 makes a weird dog leg turn at Anson to back track Eastward on its way to Abilene. A motorist heading from Wichita Falls to Big Spring might not want to go that way. They might take US-180 West to Snyder then pick up TX-350 into Big Spring. It wouldn't be Interstate highway, but they would shave a some mileage off the drive.
In the big picture view, a possible extension of I-44 still makes sense to overlap US-277 all the way to Abilene. A new terrain bypass East of Anson would shave off a couple or so miles. US-277 South of Anson is flanked by frontage roads and is pretty much a
freeway ready corridor.
I don't understand why a bypass for Anson wasn't built back when the US-277 four-lane project was underway. My guess is the town's residents probably didn't want it.
Per TxDOT's statewide planning map (https://www.txdot.gov/apps/statewide_mapping/StatewidePlanningMap.html) (to make things simple, click "Clear overlays" and then "AADT" in the left-side menu), for US 82, traffic volumes are in the 3,000 VPD range between Nocona and Henrietta. As this is well below the usual 10,000 VPD threshold for widening to four-lane divided, it is not so surprising it is still two lanes.
The corridor between Sherman/Denison and New Boston is a bit of a mixed bag. There are quiet segments with moderately difficult geometry and AADT as low as 4,000 VPD between DeKalb and Detroit (east of Paris), but the entire length between Sherman/Denison and Paris is either over or uncomfortably close to the 10,000 VPD threshold.
Quote from: splashflash on December 31, 2022, 05:23:36 PM
A news article mentions that a four lane divided highway between Henrietta and Nocona had been promised since 1972.
A week ago I drove between Henrietta and Sherman, and can confirm that construction is underway on the four-lane between Henrietta and Nocona. Once that's done, a 140-mile segment of 82 (from Henrietta all the way to Honey Grove) will be similar to 287 in north TX (i.e. basically all four-laned except through a few towns).
Quote from: usends on January 01, 2023, 01:25:19 PM
Quote from: splashflash on December 31, 2022, 05:23:36 PM
A news article mentions that a four lane divided highway between Henrietta and Nocona had been promised since 1972.
A week ago I drove between Henrietta and Sherman, and can confirm that construction is underway on the four-lane between Henrietta and Nocona. Once that's done, a 140-mile segment of 82 (from Henrietta all the way to Honey Grove) will be similar to 287 in north TX (i.e. basically all four-laned except through a few towns).
The road counts at Honey Grove show a rapid rise to 9,145 in 2021 from just over 6,000 in 2020 and slow growth annually up until 2020. TxDoT looks prescient to conduct this study now, reviewing all recent and current US 82 projects. With rising traffic, safety improvements are high on their list.
The Federal Government really needs to get involved at helping these corridor upgrades in Texas to get completed much faster. Texas is on the border with Mexico and has the most busy inland "ports" for commercial traffic. There is a rapidly growing trend of big companies "near-shoring" more of their production out of China and into places like Mexico or other parts of Central America.
The COVID pandemic and all the supply chain disruptions associated with it made companies pay dearly for being too reliant on China. Then there is the factor of the Chinese government becoming more of a global asshole. They're increasing animosity with the US on several fronts. There's the brutal treatment of the Uyghur population and other ethnic minorities. The Chinese military is building artificial military islands all over the South Pacific to extend the reach of their air force. They're trying to figure out an angle to invade Taiwan without it blowing up in their faces. They're trying to build up an alliance with the Putin regime in Russia. And they've been keeping the North Korean government operational. Really, it's insane for big American companies to continue having a lot of their products made and shipped out of China. More and more are seeing the light on this.
Mexico is an obvious alternative to China. It takes far less time to export finished products out of Mexico into American markets. Even under normal circumstances anything coming from China will spend a month on a boat. Mexico's highway infrastructure is pretty crappy though. And its rail network isn't much better. But if more companies from around the world invest in Mexico the infrastructure situation will improve. Ultimately though that means a lot more commercial traffic is going to be crossing the Texas-Mexico border. Activity at Laredo, Del Rio and the Rio Grande Valley cities is going to get more heavy. That's going to put more traffic onto I-35 and other North-South corridors. If Mexico really booms I think it will fuel another wave of population growth in Texas cities. Corridors like US-82 near the Red River will see traffic counts jump. Texas (and the US government) has to get ready for it.
As you may remember, I'm all for upgrading the Amarillo-New Boston corridor to Interstate standards. Of the unused even numbers between 30 and 40, I like I-32 best, with I-34 as my second choice.
Would it be possible to upgrade the US 82 corridor to a four-lane highway or freeway (built to Interstate Standards) without adding an Interstate designation to the corridor? I think that Texas has enough Interstate Highways as it is (so does North Carolina, but that's another story and thread).
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on January 02, 2023, 07:23:29 PM
Would it be possible to upgrade the US 82 corridor to a four-lane highway or freeway (built to Interstate Standards) without adding an Interstate designation to the corridor? I think that Texas has enough Interstate Highways as it is (so does North Carolina, but that's another story and thread).
It would be possible, but "X state has enough Interstates" would be a bogus reason for doing so. (Texas is the second-largest state in both land area and population, so chances are it probably has far
fewer Interstates than one would expect it to, anyway.)
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2022, 07:43:16 PM
US-277 from Wichita Falls to Abilene would be easy to upgrade to Interstate standards. It's already 4-lane divided with town bypasses at or near Interstate quality. The town of Anson is one exception; it would need a new bypass along the East side of town. But doing something like possibly extending I-44 farther into Texas would depend on what happens with I-27. If the I-27 corridor is extended down to San Angelo and Del Rio then that would give more merit to an I-44 extension to San Angelo. Both I-27 and I-44 would become more effective NAFTA-style corridors.
There's also the undivided, at-grade part on the west side of Wichita Falls. I don't remember: have there been any actual plans to upgrade that section?
Quote from: Scott5114It would be possible, but "X state has enough Interstates" would be a bogus reason for doing so. (Texas is the second-largest state in both land area and population, so chances are it probably has far fewer Interstates than one would expect it to, anyway.)
Yeah, no kidding. Anyone can look at a map of the overall continguous 48 states and see Texas' Interstate corridors are pretty spread out. Even if all the currently proposed corridors (I-69, I-2, I-14 & I-27 extension) are fully built-out that would leave Texas' Interstates no more densely packed than regions such as the Northeast US. The population level in the Texas Triangle and far South Texas is pretty enormous.
Texas could have quite a few more freeways and toll roads signed as Interstates, but many are signed as state or US highways instead. Chances are pretty likely that if US-82 was upgraded to Interstate quality from Wichita Falls to Texarkana TX DOT would still leave it signed as US-82.
Quote from: kphogerThere's also the undivided, at-grade part on the west side of Wichita Falls. I don't remember: have there been any actual plans to upgrade that section?
TX DOT
did have plans to extend Kell Freeway to the Holliday Bypass following a new terrain alignment. Those plans have pretty much been shelved. Now all they plan to do is slightly widen the existing US-82/277 road. It's currently 4-lane non-divided. They'll widen it enough to add a center turn lane.
On the bright side, the door may still be open for a future freeway extension there. The area on the SW edge of Wichita Falls is pretty crappy looking. Most of the businesses alongside US-82/277 between Wichita Falls and Holliday are all small industrial businesses. I can't imagine anyone wanting to build nice new residential housing subdivisions next to any of that.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 03, 2023, 12:55:57 PM
TX DOT did have plans to extend Kell Freeway to the Holliday Bypass following a new terrain alignment. Those plans have pretty much been shelved.
Is that why there are ghost ramps on the inside of the ROW at Holliday? Or were was it built that way just in case, and that plan come after the fact?
Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 03, 2023, 12:55:57 PM
Now all they plan to do is slightly widen the existing US-82/277 road. It's currently 4-lane non-divided. They'll widen it enough to add a center turn lane.
Honestly, that alone will go a long way to improving safety.
The Holliday Bypass just isn't finished. They've been building it out in piece-meal fashion since the late 2000's.
I don't know the construction time line for the 5-laning project for US-82/277 between Holliday and Wichita Falls. The end result will be a modest improvement. Still, TX DOT needs to be prepared for extending Kell Freeway some day. Hopefully this US-82 corridor study will take some of this into account.
I think a lot more trucks are going to be using that route in the years ahead. The near-shoring trend of moving a lot of production from China to Mexico could affect that. But there is also quite a lot of logistical activity taking place in the geographical center of the US. For instance, Amazon opened one huge facility on the South side of Oklahoma City in 2018. Then in 2022 they opened an even bigger facility next door. A couple of big (but undisclosed) companies intend to build new sites here in Lawton, potentially bringing a few thousand new jobs.
Quote from: kphoger on January 03, 2023, 01:03:44 PMQuote from: Bobby5280 on January 03, 2023, 12:55:57 PMTxDOT did have plans to extend Kell Freeway to the Holliday Bypass following a new terrain alignment. Those plans have pretty much been shelved.
Is that why there are ghost ramps on the inside of the ROW at Holliday? Or were was it built that way just in case, and that plan come after the fact?
Looking at the Holliday Bypass in Google Maps, it appears that what look like ghost ramps are in fact mainlane stubs for a future extension of the freeway, at which point the current mainlanes between interchanges will become frontage roads.
I don't recall at the moment whether the construction plans for the bypass included survey lines for the future mainlanes. I suspect it did. The current facility was built under TxDOT CCSJ 0156-04-094 (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2004/wichita.htm), let May 2004, with the work divided between CSJ 0156-04-094 (Wichita County) and CSJ 0156-05-041 (Archer County). (I'm not sure why this contract takes the Wichita County CSJ as its CCSJ given that the bulk of the work and the contract value were in Archer County.) HistoricAerials shows clearing and grubbing in the west and rough grading in the east in 2004 and the finished facility, complete with stubs, in 2008.
Sorry, I don't know why I called them "ghost ramps". They're kind of the opposite of that.
AtkinsRéalis completes US 82 Safety Improvement Feasibility Study in Partnership with TxDOT's Paris District
The study corridor is an 18-mile stretch of US 82 from the Cooke County line to the FM 1417 interchange in Grayson County
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/atkinsr%C3%A9alis-completes-us-82-safety-improvement-study-aaron-autry-hxjbe
Initial Proposed Transportation Solutions: 0-10 years
> Add safety signage, adjust signal timing, add flashing beacons and safety lighting
> Re-stripe study corridor with 6" reflective pavement markings
> Mill, seal and overlay mainlanes from Cooke County line to FM 901
> Apply high friction surfacing to improve traction from FM 901 to east of Gibbons Road
> Replace bridge guardrail
> Implement roadway safety improvements:
Add acceleration, deceleration and auxiliary lanes, and extend left-turn lanes
Reconfigure ramps
Adjust median crossovers
Expand turn-around areas at certain median crossovers
Restrict intersecting roadway and driveway access to the US 82 mainlanes
Increase intersecting roadway turn radii
Extend two-way frontage road from US 377 to Shawnee Trail
Interim Proposed Transportation Solutions: 10-20 years
> Extend two-way frontage road from Shawnee Trail to Riley Road
> Reconstruct ramps at FM 901 and convert two-way frontage roads to one-way
> Add grade-separated interchange at Southmayd Road
> Apply high friction surfacing to improve traction from the Cooke County line to FM 901 and from Gibbons Road to FM 1417
Ultimate Proposed Transportation Solutions: 20 or more years out
> Convert to an access-controlled freeway with grade-separated interchanges:
Improve existing grade-separated interchanges at SH 56, US 377, FM 901, SH 289 and FM 1417
Add new grade-separated interchanges at Noland/Riley Road, Spalding Road, Blythe/Hazelwood Road, Gibbons Road and Lamberth Road
> Convert two-way frontage roads to one-way and add other one-way frontage roads
The safety benefits of these phased improvements are projected to be significant. Compared to the No-Build Alternative, the initial short-term improvements are projected to result in a 22 percent decrease in crashes, with the ultimate set of improvements expected to reduce crashes by 39%.
It's good to see a controlled access freeway is a long term consideration. Some of the construction and development activity proposed for the Lake Texoma area could force that "20 years" time line to speed up very dramatically.
The Margaritaville resort and a $6 billion master-planned community with 7500 homes and apartments will make a big economic impact on Denison. Big projects like that make headlines, but I'm sure there are plenty of other smaller development projects in the works too. US-82 is the main East-West corridor for the Lake Texoma region. As more homes and resorts get built on both sides of the Red River US-82 will see an ever increasing local traffic burden. And then there is still the issue of US-82 functioning as a relief route bypassing the DFW metroplex.
Quote from: Henry on January 02, 2023, 10:13:54 AM
As you may remember, I'm all for upgrading the Amarillo-New Boston corridor to Interstate standards. Of the unused even numbers between 30 and 40, I like I-32 best, with I-34 as my second choice.
That is my thinking too. I'd do it in two stages:
* Stage 1: Easy to upgrade 4-lane expressway, with interchanges at major/busy junctions (i.e., anywhere a signal is warranted, or with another NHS-level highway). Needs to be prioritized.
* Stage 2: Interstate-grade freeway. Probably already warranted in a few sections. Once done, I-34 seems like the best designation, to allow I-32 to be used on the connection from Amarillo to Fort Worth.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2022, 07:43:16 PM
TX.
Inside of that span, US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman (from I-35 to US-75) most definitely needs to be upgraded into an Interstate quality corridor. That situation is starting to become urgent. If TX DOT doesn't at least move to secure ROW they'll have the same kind of stupid mess on their hands that they now have with US-380 between Denton and McKinney.
Realistically it is only the Cooke County part. The R.O.W. for the four lane with service roads in in place from SH-56 west of Whitesboro to Sherman. The biggest issue is right at Whitesboro HS. Even there, the Right of way is intact, it is just that access to the school would be lessened. Ideally, the access point would be moved to Main Street.
From the Cooke County line to I-35 either eats up a bunch of homes adn businesses or it would have to be rerouted like the reroutes from the old (SH-56) route to the current(new) US-82 route aver the past 30-40 years.
An Interstate-quality upgrade of US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is certainly much more feasible than the US-380 situation farther South between Denton and McKinney. US-82 has enough ROW in place for an Interstate quality upgrade thru Grayson County.
Still there is a LOT of at grade intersections and driveways that will have to be cut off with new, continuous frontage roads. The on/off ramps of some existing freeway exits will have to be replaced with new slip ramps, possibly in different locations. A bunch of the existing US-82 pavement needs to be replaced.
US-82 from Whitesboro to Gainesville is a problem: not enough room to add frontage roads next to the main lanes. The closer US-82 gets to Gainesville more structures crowd the highway. It certainly looks like a new terrain path for a freeway would be required.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on February 25, 2024, 11:46:00 AM
An Interstate-quality upgrade of US-82 between Gainesville and Sherman is certainly much more feasible than the US-380 situation farther South between Denton and McKinney. US-82 has enough ROW in place for an Interstate quality upgrade thru Grayson County.
Still there is a LOT of at grade intersections and driveways that will have to be cut off with new, continuous frontage roads. The on/off ramps of some existing freeway exits will have to be replaced with new slip ramps, possibly in different locations. A bunch of the existing US-82 pavement needs to be replaced.
US-82 from Whitesboro to Gainesville is a problem: not enough room to add frontage roads next to the main lanes. The closer US-82 gets to Gainesville more structures crowd the highway. It certainly looks like a new terrain path for a freeway would be required.
TxDOT is already planning for a Gainesville bypass to the south. IIRC, they already have plans for the leg east from I-35 back to US82. Looks like it will go east from 35 at FM218 which explains the building of a long 35 overpass that is way too long for a simple FM interchange.
https://www.google.com/maps/@33.5876661,-97.1645612,3a,75y,241.16h,83.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s9YlD9ditvBk_ItmxWVM8yQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
The plans for a "US-82 relief route" for Gainesville have been in development for several years. Unfortunately those plans consist only of a quarter partial loop from I-35 South of Gainesville up to US-82 East of Gainesville.
That's a pretty dopey concept for a "US-82 relief route."
An actual US-82 relief route around Gainesville would have both ends of the relief route terminating at US-82 both East and West of Gainesville. The relief route would go around Gainesville either to the North or South of town. The, uh, thing they're studying only looks like a partial relief route for I-35 traffic, not US-82 traffic.
I think a US-82 North bypass around Gainesville would be more feasible to build. The new terrain route could start around Whitesboro and work due West, bypassing Gainesville to the North. Then the freeway could drop down into the existing US-82 route West of Gainesville. TX DOT could still build a partial loop highway around Gainesville. But the North side or quadrant could be doubled up with a proper US-82 bypass route.
The TXDOT US 82 Corridor study has been completed and posted on the website: https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/statewide/us82-corridor-study.html
Scroll to the middle of the page and download the PDF files.
Early impressions: it doesn't look like TX DOT will pursue very many substantial projects along the US-82 corridor.
Perhaps the biggest possibility is a new freeway bypass around the North side of Gainesville. TX DOT at least mentions the need to do a study.
I kind of laughed a bit about the "concerns of a sign jungle" along Loop 286 around the North side of Paris. The North half of that loop could have been a properly functional Interstate quality freeway. But either TX DOT and/or the local city government allowed businesses to build right up onto the main lanes of the highway. Driveway entrances are everywhere, even connecting to on/off ramps at freeway style exits. Likewise various commercial business street signs are installed close to the road. Visibility conflicts exist between all the business signs and ground mounted green traffic signs. None of these problems would have existed if they had bothered to build continuous frontage roads in the first place.
In Wichita Falls it looks like they're probably going to not do a damned thing about US-82 between the West end of Kell Freeway and the Holliday Bypass. They do acknowledge that not-divided 4-lane segment of US-82 has a really high concentration of vehicle crashes. A bunch of industrial tin shed style buildings are built alongside the road. There are lots of driveways for service vehicles. The real solution is extending Kell Freeway around all that junky clutter and connecting to the Holliday Bypass. There were plans to do just that, but those plans got shot down. I guess it might take a really grisly collision with multiple fatalities to change some minds. For now, all they're going to do is pay lip service to it with "improved road markings," other signs or some other cheap shit.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 04, 2024, 02:12:33 PMEarly impressions: it doesn't look like TX DOT will pursue very many substantial projects along the US-82 corridor.
Perhaps the biggest possibility is a new freeway bypass around the North side of Gainesville. TX DOT at least mentions the need to do a study.
I kind of laughed a bit about the "concerns of sign jungle" along Loop 286 around the North side of Paris. The North half of that loop could have been a properly functional Interstate quality freeway. But either TX DOT and/or the local city government allowed businesses to build right up onto the main lanes of the highway. Driveway entrances are everywhere, even connecting to on/off ramps at freeway style exits. Likewise various commercial business street signs are installed close to the road. Visibility conflicts exist between all the business signs and ground mounted green traffic signs. None of these problems would have existed if they had bothered to build continuous frontage roads in the first place.
At least, let's hope they'll change their minds for the gap between I-35/Gainesville and US-75/Sherman before it became a repeat of the US-380 situation.
On a off-topic sidenote, I wonder why US-62 isn't completely multiplexed with US-82 at Lubbock? Instead of continuing on the Marsha Sharp freeway, US-62 left the freeway to use 19th street only to reach US-82 near the northern junction of Loop-289.
If TX DOT can at least get a new terrain bypass built around the North side of Gainesville that will solve some of the problems. The stretch of US-82 from Gainesville to Whitesboro has turned into a big mess. That new terrain bypass might end up needing to be built around both Gainesville and Whitesboro. To the East of Whitesboro US-82 looks much easier to upgrade to Interstate standards.
I'm guessing the split of US-62 and US-82 within Lubbock has to do with getting state or federal funding for certain city streets. US-62 (and TX-114) runs along the South edge of the Texas Tech campus as a surface street. The Marsha Sharp Freeway (US-82) runs along the North edge of campus. US-84 runs North South along Ave Q and then Clovis Road.
The situation reminds me how OK-7 formerly ran inside of Lawton. Its terminus had been moved around at least a couple times within the past 30 years. Finally the state truncated its West terminus at I-44 on the East side of town. No more state highway maintenance funds for surface streets like Lee Blvd or Sheridan Road. We have a huge industrial park out on the West side of the city yet there are no direct connections with any highways. They plan to extend Goodyear Blvd up to US-62 where a new $16 million diamond interchange of some type will be built. That will put a lot more truck traffic onto Rogers Lane: a city street trying to pretend at being a freeway yet has some serious safety flaws.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 04, 2024, 05:15:28 PMIf TX DOT can at least get a new terrain bypass built around the North side of Gainesville that will solve some of the problems. The stretch of US-82 from Gainesville to Whitesboro has turned into a big mess. That new terrain bypass might end up needing to be built around both Gainesville and Whitesboro. To the East of Whitesboro US-82 looks much easier to upgrade to Interstate standards..
The ROW for Full frontage roads is intact all the way to the Cooke County line I doubt there will be any greenfield building in Grayson County. On the other hand, anything done in Gainesville will almost surely be a bypass situation.
Yeah, the frontage road segments along US-82 in Whitesboro end right at the county line running North-South. Once US-82 proceeds West into Cooke County the real mess begins.
While US-82 going over Whitesboro has enough room to be fully upgraded to Interstate standards there isn't a pain-free way how to make a Gainesville bypass dove-tail into it. Lots of small to medium sized homes are scattered all over that area. Plus there are larger industrial and agricultural buildings mixed into the situation. Lake Dealey and Camp Sweeny is another serious obstacle.
If they did upgrade US-82 in place going by Whitesboro they would probably have to do the upgrade work at least as far West as the FM-678 interchange going into Oak Ridge. TX DOT would have to buy/clear some properties along the way, but they would be stuck doing the same thing by building a new terrain route.
Let's hope they also reserve some ROW when the Dallas North Tollway (or Grayson County tollway) for a stack interchange with US-82 when traffic level warrant it and speaking of tollways, I wonder if Grayson county might be tempted to convert US-82 into a tollway while the service roads are free in a similar way to TX-121/Sam Rayburn tollway?
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on September 09, 2024, 04:19:25 PMLet's hope they also reserve some ROW when the Dallas North Tollway (or Grayson County tollway) for a stack interchange with US-82 when traffic level warrant it and speaking of tollways, I wonder if Grayson county might be tempted to convert US-82 into a tollway while the service roads are free in a similar way to TX-121/Sam Rayburn tollway?
Not likely. They would find the funding to do the necessary upgrades to US82. TXDOT would not be up for converting just one county along the route to a toll road either.
Strategically speaking, it would be better to keep US-82 maintained as a "free" super highway over the Northern reaches of the DFW Metroplex. I see US-82 as being one of at least 2 or more relief highways to move long distance commercial traffic around the Metroplex. I think it would be better to keep such highways toll free so they can help attract as much long distance "thru" commercial traffic as possible.
I totally see the possibility for the US-82 corridor from US-287 in Henrietta to I-30 in New Boston being an Interstate, even a 2-digit Interstate such as "I-34." Fictional Highway Alert: the potential would be there for the same Interstate to extend across parts of Southern Arkansas if the needs justified it. Currently, IMHO, the Henrietta-New Boston leg is a worthwhile Northern bypass for nearly 8 million residents in DFW.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 12, 2024, 10:21:12 PMStrategically speaking, it would be better to keep US-82 maintained as a "free" super highway over the Northern reaches of the DFW Metroplex. I see US-82 as being one of at least 2 or more relief highways to move long distance commercial traffic around the Metroplex. I think it would be better to keep such highways toll free so they can help attract as much long distance "thru" commercial traffic as possible.
I totally see the possibility for the US-82 corridor from US-287 in Henrietta to I-30 in New Boston being an Interstate, even a 2-digit Interstate such as "I-34." Fictional Highway Alert: the potential would be there for the same Interstate to extend across parts of Southern Arkansas if the needs justified it. Currently, IMHO, the Henrietta-New Boston leg is a worthwhile Northern bypass for nearly 8 million residents in DFW.
There will be development east of Texarkana over the next decade as the bromine extraction industry around Magnolia in the Smackover Formation transitions into a lithium extraction industry that dwarfs the bromine portion. There's too many big energy players sinking money into what seems to be a no-brainer to take the brine coming out of the bromine plants that would otherwise be pumped back into the formation and pull the high concentrations of lithium out of the "waste" product before pumping back into the ground. I don't necessarily subscribe to the idea that we'll all be driving electric cars in 8 years, but the need for lithium for various kinds of products that we all take for granted in addition to battery storage systems for power grid substations like what's going up down the road from me for voltage and frequency resilience means that the current low prices for lithium are an anomaly in the market and will be short lived.
There will be lots of development in the energy sector around Magnolia and El Dorado, so US-82, being one of the priorities of ARDOT's 4-lane grid system, will be at minimum upgraded to 4 lane divided/5 lane Arkansas freeway within the next 20 years from Texarkana to El Dorado. I think an interstate along there is far-fetched, but would be less so if I-69 ever truly got a push between Shreveport and Memphis, also far fetched in the next couple of decades.
Arkansas' having the 12th biggest road network in the nation along with near bottom rankings in wealth would preclude them from adding yet another Interstate to the list of priorities when I-57, I-49, and allegedly I-69 are already on the radar. When I-57 gets completed through Arkansas, and I-49 gets pushed north of Texarkana, only then does I-69 get any love other than Super-2 bypasses of the cities in south Arkansas.
The Great River Bridge and Mississippi's segment of I-69 are the two big variables currently making I-69 not yet worth building in Southern Arkansas. Why spend all that money if the road would only dead-end at McGehee?
That situation would make it less likely for a potential Interstate along US-82 to be extended East of Texarkana. If it could connect into I-69 in the El Dorado area that would work better. There would probably be a lot of commercial traffic using that as an alternative to the I-40 bottleneck between Little Rock and Memphis. The new bridge would make all the difference.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on September 13, 2024, 01:21:04 PMThe Great River Bridge and Mississippi's segment of I-69 are the two big variables currently making I-69 not yet worth building in Southern Arkansas. Why spend all that money if the road would only dead-end at McGehee?
That situation would make it less likely for a potential Interstate along US-82 to be extended East of Texarkana. If it could connect into I-69 in the El Dorado area that would work better. There would probably be a lot of commercial traffic using that as an alternative to the I-40 bottleneck between Little Rock and Memphis. The new bridge would make all the difference.
I think the Magnolia to Greenville part only happens if the Magnolia / ElDorado to McGeHee portion does not. Ironically they are almost identical mileage to Memphis AND using US-82, no new bridge required.