Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[longhorn]

Good, I hope 190 is renamed I-14, if only to keep cheap Bell county from laying that large aggregate down instead doing a proper repaving.

I must also add 190/36 from Temple to Heidenheimer is interstate grade too.

[aboges26]

Good, I hope 190 is renamed I-14, if only to keep cheap Bell county from laying that large aggregate down instead doing a proper repaving.

I must also add 190/36 from Temple to Heidenheimer is interstate grade too.

Unless Google Maps is far behind and I have missed a thread about an upgrade on the forum, US 190 is barely interstate grade between I-35 and S 1st Street in Temple, let alone, all the way to Heidenheimer.  Lots of at-grades and driveways, businesses such as Kolache Kitchen, etc.

https://www.google.com/maps/@31.068203,-97.3510393,1384m/data=!3m1!1e3

An extension of the current interstate-grade facility west of I-35 should be continued eastward straight to Heidenheimer to provide a southern bypass of Temple.

[Gnutella]

I would have routed I-14 through Austin, but that's just me.

[codyg1985]

I don't see how this interstate designation is even justified outside of the Temple area. I think Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia have zero interest in this thing.

[mvak36]

I suppose worst case it would an east-west interstate right through the middle of Texas (if it never gets built outside of it).

[Bobby5280]

An Interstate link between Houston and Austin is easy to justify. Hell, the Austin area is big enough and important enough to justify building an Interstate highway West out of Austin by Fredericksburg all the way to I-10. Pretty much all along or near the US-290 corridor. That would be my idea of "I-14" or maybe another "I-12". Regardless of what the route is called, that's the most needed new Interstate corridor in Central Texas.

A lot of US-290 between Houston and Austin has already been upgraded to Interstate standards. US-290 is (slowly) being upgraded more and more heading West out of Austin.

TX-71 from Columbus, TX and I-10 up to Toll-130 in Austin is four laned much of the way with some freeway grade segments in Bastrop, Smithville and La Grange.

Outside of the Killen & Temple area US-190 doesn't have a whole lot of "in progress" upgrades that would develop into a logical East-West Interstate corridor. Between Temple and Huntsville US-190 runs a pretty damned crooked, distance wasting path. It's almost a "W" shape really. There's no need in running "I-14" from Cameron down to Milano and then back up to Hearne and then down to College Station. A new terrain route needs to span from Cameron DIRECT to College Station. Even with that said, "I-14" would be best if it bypassed around the North side of the College Station area and stayed on a new terrain route much of the way to Huntsville. Locking the corridor along US-190 the whole way is just plain stupid. And it might be even more costly to build considering all the businesses and residences built up alongside the highway much of the way.

This I-14 proposal is even harder to justify East of Huntsville, especially if it's just going to dead end at the Sabine River. There's hardly any traffic out there. On top of that TX DOT will have a pretty expensive new bridge to build over Lake Livingston, considering the current US-190 bridge is a smaller 2-lane bridge. Maybe "I-14" could go as far as Livingston and terminate at I-69. Past that there's no point unless it went all the way to Alexandria, LA.

Out west, San Angelo could possibly be a Western terminus for "I-14" if TX DOT could ever get I-27 extended down from Lubbock, through Big Spring, San Angelo and Junction, TX. That route would give the San Antonio region an effective North-South Interstate corridor into the Texas Panhandle, High plains and Rockies. If I-14 couldn't be built that far then it would be easier to turn it Southwest to Junction, TX and I-10.

[TXtoNJ]

I don't see how this interstate designation is even justified outside of the Temple area. I think Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia have zero interest in this thing.

It's not. This is almost certainly a disguised jobs program wrapped up with Texas A&M graduates trying to get an interstate through College Station. Texas politics at their stupidest.

The only segment outside of Belton-Killeen that's even justifiable is the Livingston-Alexandria, LA segment, and that would only be as part of a longer corridor that connects to the Northeast via Jackson, MS.

[US71]

KCEN-TV has a write-up about it. I read elsewhere that it will likely be 10-15 years before the roadway is completed.

[wdcrft63]

I don't see how this interstate designation is even justified outside of the Temple area. I think Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia have zero interest in this thing.

Probably that's true for Louisiana and Mississippi. Alabama does have a plan to extend I-85 westward from Montgomery to I-20/59; this would be part of the proposed I-14.

[Rover_0]

^ I also fail to see why the eastern terminus is at some random state highway - it should either be at the future location of I-69, or continue into Louisiana and end at I-49 near Alexandria.

The western terminus does not seem logical either - they are simply going to follow US 190 and duplicate much of I-10?  IMHO they should have gone for a route through San Angelo and a western terminus somewhere on I-20.

Maybe sending I-14 to San Angelo and up to I-20 at Big Spring (via US-87) or Midland (US-87/TX-158) wouldn't be a bad idea.

[Bobby5280]

Going from San Angelo up to Big Spring would make more sense, at least in my opinion. Such a routing would be able to tie into a potential Southern extension of I-27 from Lubbock down to Big Spring. Of course, I'd like to see I-27 go South from San Angelo down diagonally down to Junction where it would tie into I-10. That would give Amarillo, Lubbock, Big Spring and San Angelo a direct Interstate quality path to San Antonio (and farther to the Gulf Coast via I-37). Such a corridor could then push Northward into Colorado, perhaps up to Kit Carson and Limon to complete a Denver to San Antonio corridor.

[Anthony_JK]

At best, the current freeway portion of US 190 from Copperas Cove to Belton is deserving of an I-x35 spur designation. Everything else only deserves 4-laning, not freeway grade...and certainly not I-14.

The only way an I-14 would be feasible would be if the proposal included completely upgrading LA 28 through North Louisiana, as well as a freeway loop around Alexandria (or an upgrade of MacArthur Drive/US 71/US 165 to freeway standards), and a freeway through Ferriday/Vidalia/Natchez along the US 425/US 84 corridor. With far more important priorities on the table (I-49 South, I-49 Shreveport ICC, Baton Rouge loop or improving I-10, maybe I-69 in NW LA), I can't see this corridor being an Interstate. 4-laning would be sufficient.

[dfwmapper]

It's not. This is almost certainly a disguised jobs program wrapped up with Texas A&M graduates trying to get an interstate through College Station. Texas politics at their stupidest.

And no one in College Station gives a crap about a freeway connection to Temple. Houston, absolutely; I-45/Dallas, yes; Austin, maybe. Anything else, nah.

[noelbotevera]

Why not have it be an El Paso-Houston via Austin route? You've pretty much nailed down all of the major cities and the connections if you do that.

[dfwmapper]

Why not have it be an El Paso-Houston via Austin route? You've pretty much nailed down all of the major cities and the connections if you do that.

But why? Once you get west of the US 290/SH 71 separation (and especially past US 281), there just isn't the traffic volume to justify a full freeway.

[codyg1985]

I don't see how this interstate designation is even justified outside of the Temple area. I think Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia have zero interest in this thing.

Probably that's true for Louisiana and Mississippi. Alabama does have a plan to extend I-85 westward from Montgomery to I-20/59; this would be part of the proposed I-14.

I thought the proposed routing for I-14 followed US 84 across Mississippi and then made a diagonal from the MS/AL state line northeast to Montgomery?

[Roadster]

Texas will be getting a new Interstate.

Interstate 14 will be created (formerly known as Hwy 190 route) in the midsection of the state. 

 http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/Central-Texas-Corridor-Designated-As-Future-Interstate-360954771.html

[MikeTheActuary]

Texas will be getting a new Interstate.

Interstate 14 will be created (formerly known as Hwy 190 route) in the midsection of the state.

So, when will 14N, 14S, 14X, 14Y, and 14Z be prescribed? 

[Grzrd]

I thought the proposed routing for I-14 followed US 84 across Mississippi and then made a diagonal from the MS/AL state line northeast to Montgomery?

Here is a snip from a map of the five alternatives presented in the Expert Working Group's Report to Congress on the 14th Amendment Highway Corridor:



Prior discussion in this thread.

edit

Alternative 1 is the "all interstate" option (I suppose it could also be called the "I-14 option") and has (in 2013 dollars) an estimated cost of $6.6 billion to $7.6 billion:

Alternative 1 (the all Interstate design) is by far the most costly alternative, with an estimated cost ranging from $6.6 to $7.6 billion, nearly double the cost of the next highest alternative. Alternative 1 requires the construction of over 178 miles of new roadway on new ROW, and about 97 miles of upgrades to existing highways to meet Interstate design standards.

Here is a snip from a table that breaks down the cost of Alternative 1 for each section:

[longhorn]

Texas will be getting a new Interstate.

Interstate 14 will be created (formerly known as Hwy 190 route) in the midsection of the state. 

 http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/Central-Texas-Corridor-Designated-As-Future-Interstate-360954771.html

Interesting, per that article, 190 between CC and Temple could be renamed within the year..........Interesting.

I did not notice before the I-14 routing would follow 190 east of Cameron, that's dumb, its an unnecessary zig zag. However this is the area of the state that killed the Trans Texas Highway that would have relieved congested I-35, so the ability to acquire land by imminent domain may not be politically feasible.

[longhorn]

Ok, after some more research, it seems to be a done deal. Will be odd after years of saying, "190" to, "14", and seeing interstate shields.

http://kdhnews.com/military/u-s-to-be-renamed-interstate/article_4548540c-9dc4-11e5-bac4-efc9d4914c13.html

http://kdhnews.com/fort_hood_herald/opinion/on_the_record/it-s-official-interstate-will-be-coming-to-fort-hood/article_585cfeb2-9e91-11e5-9309-9fe214061895.html

I agree with one of the posts that its way past time for an interstate between Austin and Houston. In some areas, its absolutely dangerous to have that much traffic ( and there's a lot of it) moving at 70mph toward each other with just a double yellow line as the divider.

[halork]

So, when will 14N, 14S, 14X, 14Y, and 14Z be prescribed? 

They blew it. I-14 should be I-10N. 

[jbnv]

They blew it. I-14 should be I-10N. 

It's too far north to be a logical branch of I-10.

[Bobby5280]

Naming US-190 "I-14" from Copperas Cove, across Killeen & Fort Hood, to Belton & I-35 is all about pumping up the egos of a few connected politicians and pork-i-fying some agendas. That short segment of freeway may be all there is of "I-14" for many years to come. It will be a little like I-97 in Maryland, except the West end of it will just dangle out there in the sticks rather than end at any logical terminus. Texas has a lot of debt and they have bigger Interstate projects on the agenda, like I-69.

"I-14" could also make for a more messy looking map. I-10, I-20, I-40 and I-70 are somewhat evenly spaced. Then "I-14" will be thrown in there, with its porky, jaggy route. I wonder if the "W" shaped portion near College Station is there on purpose, perhaps as a tribute to our previous President.

I agree with one of the posts that its way past time for an interstate between Austin and Houston. In some areas, its absolutely dangerous to have that much traffic (and there's a lot of it) moving at 70mph toward each other with just a double yellow line as the divider.

The traffic is heavy and with good reason, both Austin and Houston are big population centers. Austin now has over 900,000 residents living within its city limits and the Austin-Round Rock metro area has nearly 2 million people. And then there's Houston; it's city limits population is over 2.2 million people and metro population is 6.3 million. It is very easy to justify at least one all Interstate quality link between those two big destinations. Really, one could make a case for two Interstate quality connections, upgrading both US-290 and TX-74 to Interstate standards the whole way.

[longhorn]

And now that 190 will be an interstate, maybe TxDot can fix the glaring omission in at the I-35 intersection in Belton. Nice I-35 to west 190/I-14 soon to open direct connector. So why in the world did TxDot not make a 190/I-14 to south I-35 connector? One has to get off to the accessroad, turn right to I-35's access road, then merge. Hopefully this budget oversight is fixed soon.