U.S. 287 Corridor Interstate Feasibility Study in Texas

[ElishaGOtis]

I think it is very short-sighted to suggest that you need to stop building roads completely, especially when there is a fairly good need for this corridor to come to fruition.

Maybe if they decided to build it with toll lanes.... 

Over the past decade it seems as though 90% of freeway lanes Colorado builds is tolled lanes. Making it worse is Colorado has some of the most expensive tolls in the country. US 287 thru the eastern plains is the best route to take I-27. I drive to Texas multiple times a year and do not take 287 anymore due to the dangers on that road. It needs upgraded. I either go over Raton Pass or thru Kansas to I-135 to I-35.

What about a full-up toll ROAD?  US-290 and US-183 in Austin come to mind.

[Plutonic Panda]

I think it is very short-sighted to suggest that you need to stop building roads completely, especially when there is a fairly good need for this corridor to come to fruition.

Maybe if they decided to build it with toll lanes.... 

Over the past decade it seems as though 90% of freeway lanes Colorado builds is tolled lanes. Making it worse is Colorado has some of the most expensive tolls in the country. US 287 thru the eastern plains is the best route to take I-27. I drive to Texas multiple times a year and do not take 287 anymore due to the dangers on that road. It needs upgraded. I either go over Raton Pass or thru Kansas to I-135 to I-35.

What about a full-up toll ROAD?  US-290 and US-183 in Austin come to mind.

As much as I hate toll roads, I would be perfectly fine with Colorado connecting a toll road to the Oklahoma panhandle up to Limon which would obviously connect to Texas' I-27.

[Road Hog]

You all can have a discussion about north of Amarillo. Just make it all controlled access from Ennis to about Vernon or so and I will be happy.

[abqtraveler]

Even I-25 needs a good amount of work. There are locations along that road South of Colorado Springs that clearly do not meet current Interstate standards. A couple of exits down that way are damned near hard right turns. Some of the bridges look like they date back to the 1960's or earlier.

That stretch of I-25 between Pueblo and Colorado Springs was mostly built directly over the old US-85/87 roadway. Some of those interchanges are RIRO interchanges, which were previously at-grade intersections that were closed off to cross-traffic to allow the interstate designation.

[Bobby5280]

That stretch of I-25 definitely sucks. One of those hard right turn exits is near the BNSF rail bridge that partially collapsed via a major train derailment not too long ago.

Even when CDOT has re-built portions of that I-25 segment they do the bare minimum. They re-built the I-25 main lanes on the South side of Colorado Springs but didn't add any new lanes. They kept it in 2x2 configuration, despite the heavy traffic that occurs there. A portion of I-25 on the North side of Pueblo was re-built a few years ago. Again, the finished product was a mostly 2x2 road. But they did build some decorative flourishes on some of the bridges and ramps.

I-25 on the South side of Pueblo is like a friggin' slalom course. I'll usually drive it going 55mph or slower. And I'll see people speeding through there going 70mph or faster nearly losing it in through those S-turns.

[abqtraveler]

That stretch of I-25 definitely sucks. One of those hard right turn exits is near the BNSF rail bridge that partially collapsed via a major train derailment not too long ago.

Even when CDOT has re-built portions of that I-25 segment they do the bare minimum. They re-built the I-25 main lanes on the South side of Colorado Springs but didn't add any new lanes. They kept it in 2x2 configuration, despite the heavy traffic that occurs there. A portion of I-25 on the North side of Pueblo was re-built a few years ago. Again, the finished product was a mostly 2x2 road. But they did build some decorative flourishes on some of the bridges and ramps.

I-25 on the South side of Pueblo is like a friggin' slalom course. I'll usually drive it going 55mph or slower. And I'll see people speeding through there going 70mph or faster nearly losing it in through those S-turns.

That's the unfortunate byproduct of Colorado enacting legislation to prioritize funding for mass transit over roads in the name of "social justice" and combating climate change. They truly believe that by making your drive as miserable as possible, they can force more people out of their cars and onto the bus or the train. Their approach does not appear to be working as they hoped.

[Plutonic Panda]

They need to do both. Their "HSR" plan is laughable with the first phase averaging something like 45 or 50 mph. Then they claim upgrades will come later to make it faster. I don't even think the first phase is scheduled to come online until the 2030s or later. It doesn't feel like Colorado is serious about much.

[Bobby5280]

That's the unfortunate byproduct of Colorado enacting legislation to prioritize funding for mass transit over roads in the name of "social justice" and combating climate change. They truly believe that by making your drive as miserable as possible, they can force more people out of their cars and onto the bus or the train. Their approach does not appear to be working as they hoped.

The lawmakers pushing this stuff are grossly out of touch. For one thing: they don't practice what they preach. Do any of these people use mass transit? Hell no. I don't imagine any of those people standing out in the rain or snow at a bus stop. If they're not driving their own expensive personal vehicles they might be using a private car service. Or they might be commuting in the back seats of limousines, getting driven around by chauffeurs named Sanders. Whip out a jar of Grey Poupon™ mustard from the back seat fridge for good measure.

But these same people insist mass transit is good enough for ordinary people. They don't bother to think just how damned spread-out the cities and towns are along the Front Range. They don't bother to think how impractical it can be for people to commute using mass transit. Unless someone lives in a really dense urban area they might be walking a long way to the nearest bus stop or light rail station. Once they're there they might be waiting a good while for the next bus or train. That wait can be extremely not-pleasant depending on the weather. When the passenger is finally on the bus or train the actual ride goes quite a bit slower than that of an automobile. If it's a long ride it will equal lots more stops and even more time lost. That still doesn't factor in all the "interesting" people the passenger may encounter along the way. Personal vehicles at least have doors that lock.

I'm think a bunch of these mass transit and "high speed rail" plans are just good ole boy network scams. Lawmakers make deals with friends and take the taxpayers for a ride.

I'm not against mass transit, but the modes of transportation need to be presented to the public realistically. Warts and all. And they need to not be financial black holes that waste vast amounts of money.

If lawmakers are truly desperately concerned about climate change, why not do a full court press push for work-at-home setups? Cut out the damned daily commute to downtown completely.

[splashflash]

Minutes now available on TxDot US 287 Interstate Study page.
Scroll to bottom of page to get access to meeting PDFs.
https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/statewide/us287-corridor-interstate-feasibility-study.html

Haven't read the reports yet, but thought I'd share links now.  Total cost $24B.

[Plutonic Panda]

Any word on what the cost would be from the segment from Fort Worth to Amarillo?

[splashflash]

Any word on what the cost would be from the segment from Fort Worth to Amarillo?

PowerPoint presentations don't break it down into increments other than the three segments.
$7.2B for the central segment - 40 projects
$2.5B for the northwest segment - 107 projects

[The Ghostbuster]

The first thing I would do is concentrate on getting bypasses built around the towns that don't currently have bypasses. Still, it's going to take a lot of work to upgrade US 287 into an Interstate Standard freeway.

[MaxConcrete]

Any word on what the cost would be from the segment from Fort Worth to Amarillo?

PowerPoint presentations don't break it down into increments other than the three segments.
$7.2B for the central segment - 40 projects
$2.5B for the northwest segment - 107 projects

$2.5 billion seems low for the northwest segment, since it is 292 miles long and needs multiple bypasses. For example the Riviera bypass on US 77 (I-69E) is listed for July bidding at $206 million. By the time any projects move forward (probably after 2050) for US 287, full rebuild of existing pavement will generally be needed.

$7.2 billion seems high for the 163-mile central segment, since all the expensive urban sections are already built. The area around Corsicana could be expensive.

$2.3 billion seems low for the 216-mile southeast segment, which currently has the lowest standards.

As SplashFlash says, it's impossible to reach any conclusions since no project-specific costs are provided. It's not clear if these costs are for full interstate upgrade, or just the recommended projects.

Some projects in the Central section will proceed in the near future. In my opinion, most of the proposed projects for the northwest and southeast sections are post-2050, or may never happen, depending on future funding and traffic levels.

[splashflash]

The $11.99B figure appears to be the sum total of short, medium and long term projects.  $24B appears to be for whole route to become an interstate.  Maybe only the central segment is to become an interstate + multimodal (grade separated rail?).  The report should be out soon as the April 2, 2025 slide show it was 90% complete while at the end of February it was 50% complete.

[Bobby5280]

$2.5 billion seems low for the northwest segment, since it is 292 miles long and needs multiple bypasses.

The $2.5 billion figure might seem low, but the Northwest segment would be, by far, the easiest one to build.

The study map makes it look like the East end of the NW segment starts at the Montague/Wise County line near Sunset. US-287 turns into a freeway at that point and runs several miles, bypassing Bowie. Henrietta has an existing freeway bypass. Jolly has an existing exit. Bellevue presents the only real construction challenge between Bowie and Wichita Falls.

US-287 is mostly a freeway from Wichita Falls to Vernon. A few odd-ball driveways connecting to the main highway lanes could be cut off by extending frontage roads. Some exit ramps will have to be re-built to current standards (and to help deal with those driveways). New terrain freeway bypasses would be needed in Chillicothe, Quanah, Childress, Memphis, Clarendon and Claude. Some of those bypasses may not be very long or out of the way. It might be cheaper/easier to upgrade US-287 in place thru the even smaller towns (Lelia Lake, Hedley, Estelline, Goodlett). Between the towns US-287 is often in wide open space where options like adding frontage roads or building new freeway lanes between the existing highway lanes is do-able.

US-87/287 between Amarillo and Dumas is another easy upgrade, at least logistically speaking.

$7.2 billion seems high for the 163-mile central segment, since all the expensive urban sections are already built. The area around Corsicana could be expensive.

I wonder if they're factoring in some of the urban upgrades to the US-287 corridor within Fort Worth to that cost figure. There is still a lot of work to do with US-287 between I-20 and I-45. While some new segments of freeway exist, such as recent work in Ennis, there is still a lot of regular 4-lane road with at-grade intersections and driveways.

Decatur remains the biggest issue for US-287 NW of Fort Worth. Not only does it need a new freeway upgrade thru town on the existing US-287 alignment, that upgraded freeway probably needs to be at least 3x3 lanes wide. When I'm driving to DFW I already feel like I'm in the DFW metro when I reach Decatur.

[splashflash]

The study map makes it look like the East end of the NW segment starts at the Montague/Wise County line near Sunset. New terrain freeway bypasses would be needed in Chillicothe, Quanah, Childress, Memphis, Clarendon and Claude.

Unfortunately bypasses were resisted by towns, shown on the pinmaps and comments by the district attorney of Childress on page 10 of the 4th round of the Northwest section report minutes.  Interstate may be outside even long-term plans for that segment. 

[The Ghostbuster]

If they oppose building bypasses around their towns, what other options are there (besides no-build)? It's not like they will allow freeway conversions to plow straight through their towns.

[splashflash]

If they oppose building bypasses around their towns, what other options are there (besides no-build)? It's not like they will allow freeway conversions to plow straight through their towns.

Or offer buyouts or relocation grants to fuel and convenience stations.

[Bobby5280]

If they oppose building bypasses around their towns, what other options are there (besides no-build)? It's not like they will allow freeway conversions to plow straight through their towns.

TX DOT has built freeway segments straight thru some towns. The I-69C segment in Falfurrias is one fairly recent example. That town isn't much smaller than Childress; it has 4420 residents compared to 5770 in Childress.

Still, it would be pretty damned destructive to plow a freeway upgrade thru Childress on the existing US-287 alignment. They would basically have to buy and clear all the properties along one side of US-287. TX DOT had to do something similar when building that freeway segment in Falfurrias. In this case the property takings would risk the existing county emergency management building and quite a few local/chain businesses. They might be able to shift the property clearings between the North side of US-287 and South side. But they definitely would have to dodge the county courthouse on the South side of the road in the middle of town. Such an undertaking would be very costly even if the locals largely agreed to the plan.

One other idea they could do in Childress is build a new freeway segment alongside or over the top of the BNSF rail line. Armstrong Park would get erased. That would at least keep the Interstate in town rather than going well outside of it.

The most practical solution is a green-field route around the North side of town.

I'm sure TX DOT would have a much faster/easier time building out new freeway segments between the towns and then handle the bypasses later. At any rate, the biggest mouth to feed with the whole US-287 corridor in Texas is the segment from Decatur to Ennis. That will suck up much of any available funding. All the at-grade driveway crap in the Wichita Falls area needs to be fixed.

[splashflash]

The interstate feasibility and corridor study reports have now been posted.  https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/statewide/us287-texas-corridor-study.html

The feasibility study has cost and benefits ratio of 3.25 for the whole corridor at present time.

For a central segment calculations for focused interim improvements by 2040 (22 interchanges in central, 2 interchanges in southeast, 15 miles of full interstate in central, and direct connects to I-35E, US 67 and SH 360) showed a hefty 4.04 cost to benefit ratio. Costs are $2.2B. The full interstate cost for the central segment is $5.1B. the complete corridor to become an interstate by 2050 had a slightly lower 3.77 cost to benefit ratio is achieved, but cost is $24.5B.

[Bobby5280]

I hope TX DOT can at least build new freeway bypasses around towns along US-287 in the manner they did for the US-277 four lane upgrade between Wichita Falls and Abilene.

After driving back home from Colorado this past weekend I really wish Dalhart, TX had a bypass. There was a hell of a traffic jam caused by some sort of construction at the intersection of US-54 and US-87. Part of the problem was caused by a temporary traffic signal rigged up there.

[The Ghostbuster]

I would imagine that a northern bypass would be constructed around Dalhart, so both US 87 and US 385 could be placed on the bypass. Maybe a connector road along the south side of town would allow US 54 to bypass Dalhart as well.

[Bobby5280]

Any freeway bypass around Dalhart would be lengthy due to the geographical shape of the town's development. A North bypass would be more feasible. Rita Blanca Lake and the creek that feeds it would be a serious obstacle for a South/West bypass alignment. A thru-town route over existing US-87 would be very disruptive and likely require a significant stretch of elevated freeway to span over one of the two intersecting freight rail lines (among other obstacles).

I think a bypass for Dumas would get built years before one would get completed for Dalhart. Stratford might even jump ahead since it's on the US-287/"I-27N" main line of the Ports to Plains Corridor.

The Central Segment shown in the US-287 Texas Corridor Study would obviously be the portion most desperately in need of upgrades, starting from I-45 in Ennis and moving Northwest up to Decatur and beyond.