AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  


New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: Ports-to-Plains Corridor update  (Read 32819 times)


  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2151
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 04:18:53 PM
Re: Ports-to-Plains Corridor update
« Reply #100 on: November 19, 2017, 02:22:32 AM »

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.


  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6924
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 05:41:50 PM
Re: Ports-to-Plains Corridor update
« Reply #101 on: November 20, 2017, 01:40:16 AM »

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!


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.