Amarillo: new I-27/Loop 335 project proposed

[Brian556]

As for the US 290 situation in west Austin, and someone saying it was wasteful, the situation with FM 2499 in Flower Mound was also wasteful. In the late 90's, FM 2499 was extended from FM 1171 to FM 407. Knowing full well that it would need to be divided very soon, rather than building half of a divided highway, and adding the other side as traffic increased, they built a rural two-laner with shoulders in the middle of the ROW. Just 10 years later, they completely tore it out and put in a 6-lane unban divided roadway.

[Bobby5280]

I just watched a BigRigTravels or Big Rig Travels video called "U.S. Highway 287 going though downtown Amarillo" (or something like that) also U.S. 87 and U.S. 60. (The same road) I got to see the trench (northbound carriageway, either Buchanan or Filmore) that goes under the edge of the rail yard. It looks very nice and provides an example of what the rest of the highway would like if it was trenched. It's too bad. If they are going to dig two of the carriageways under a rail yard (and the other two carriageways are bridges going over the railroad) instead of bypassing the rail yard, then they ought to have trenched everything else.

This is presuming there were always plans to build an Interstate through the middle of downtown Amarillo when that was never the case. The downtown was there already. The super highways came later.

Then there is the matter of cost. It's one thing to make a pair of cut and cover tunnels for just a couple blocks under a rail line. It's an entirely different thing to build much longer cut and cover tunnels through the downtown area of a modest sized, not major, city.

It looks like when they built the bridge over the rail yard, it appears they actually built the bridges ON TOP OF BUILDINGS!! This is the first time I have seen that. Do they really build bridges on top of buildings?! So if they really do things like that, then they could extend the bridges over the rest of the 20 of 22 streets. (1st and 2nd street have southbound bridges going over them.)

East Pierce Street (US-60) goes over one single story building just North of East 1st Avenue (a BNSF office for the rail yard). The bridges in downtown Amarillo don't span over the top of multiple buildings. Also, it's not clear which was built first, the bridge or the building. By the way it's worth mentioning the Taylor Street and Pierce Street bridges don't meet current Interstate standards.

In decades or centuries past it was more common for road or rail bridges to span over the tops of buildings. Just go to Brooklyn (in person or via Google Street View) and you'll see huge but historical examples of this. It's very rare for any new highway project to have any bridges spanning over existing buildings or property.

One recent example is the re-built interchange with TX-114 and TX-121 in Grapevine, TX. There's a really long fly-over ramp that connects TX-114 East to TX-121 South. That ramp goes over the top of a Chevrolet dealership parking lot. The bridge has really high chain link fences on both sides for the portion that spans that commercial property -probably to keep any crap tossed by motorists from falling onto vehicles in the parking lot below.

None of this creates any precedent to build Interstate bridges or tunnels for I-27 through the middle of downtown Amarillo. The heights of the existing buildings and buildings that were there in downtown Amarillo previously would prevent building over the top of buildings. Bridges could only be built over existing streets. Current politics and urban design trends would make such a thing very difficult to build. Tunneling to modern standards is just too expensive. For the price of tunneling I-27 through downtown Amarillo most of an I-27 extension down toward San Antonio could be built. We're talking billions of dollars for either idea.

[US-175]

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/34663660/more-money-for-loop-335-project

According to the report, Amarillo was able to get $65 million out of TxDOT to help with Loop 335.  That now makes $150 million so far received; a total of $870 million is reportedly needed for the whole redo/upgrade/west side move.  Local officials are putting the $65 million toward the new west side alignment work.  A quick check of the project website (http://www.theamarilloloop.com) shows no updating yet.

[Henry]

This is good news! Puts us one step closer to seeing the whole thing get built.

[chays]

According to this page: http://www.theamarilloloop.com/maps/section-a.html , sections A-1 and A-2 are under construction.  drivetexas.org shows these projects as being complete by 4/3/2017.  Does anyone know if this means that these sections will be a bonafide freeway at that point, or will there still be more work to be done?

[Bobby5280]

Google Earth imagery of that zone is dated February 8, 2016. It shows quite a bit of progress on the A-1 and A-2 sections, but with still a lot left to complete. If those sections are finished by April 2017 I think it would just be the basics between I-27 and FM-1541. A freeway to freeway interchange with I-27 and Loop 335 will take a long time to build (it's not included in the A-1 and A-2 sections).

[aboges26]

I can confirm that sections A-1 and A-2 will be a bonafide freeway, 2 lanes each way with 2-3 lane frontage roads.  I will be going up to Amarillo soon enough and look forward to checking out the progress.

[txstateends]

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/37207043/construction-of-i-27-hollywood-intersection-to-begin-jan-8th

Starting today, work on the I-27/Loop 335 interchange begins.  Crossovers will be built between the Bell St. and Sundown Lane exits, which will take 2 months to do.  Once that is done, then main work on bridges at the interchange can start.

[txstateends]

Another article, with TV report video:
http://www.newschannel10.com/story/37218834/drivers-may-notice-traffic-delays-as-construction-continues-along-i-27?utm_content=buffer1f6ea&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

[txstateends]

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/37813818/from-freshmen-to-seniors-randall-high-students-likely-to-see-hollywood-road-project-throughout-high-school

During the next several days, the bridge for SB I-27 over Loop 335 will be demolished.  All Loop 335 traffic is being diverted along the I-27 service roads until the bridge demo is complete.  Traffic congestion is anticipated, as there is a high school and elementary school less than a mile east of the interchange.

[DJStephens]

I can confirm that sections A-1 and A-2 will be a bonafide freeway, 2 lanes each way with 2-3 lane frontage roads.  I will be going up to Amarillo soon enough and look forward to checking out the progress.

No desire to slap a "3di" on the thing.   Amarillo is certainly large enough to warrant it.  Lubbock's ring road also could be one.   

[Phone_Harold]

Question -- is Interstate 27 the only (if not the few) Interstate(s) that do not connect to an Interstate on either end?

[sparker]

Question -- is Interstate 27 the only (if not the few) Interstate(s) that do not connect to an Interstate on either end?

The north terminus of I-27 is at I-40 south of downtown Amarillo; the freeway extends for a block or two north, but as US 87/287.  It's only the southern terminus that is "left hanging" at the southern intechange with Loop 289 south of central Lubbock.  Over the years, plans have been forwarded to extend I-27 south to I-20 or even I-10 via San Angelo but such haven't as of yet come to fruition; but there are current studies under way toward this end -- this is a "stay tuned -- but don't hold your breath" type of situation.

[Bobby5280]

No desire to slap a "3di" on the thing.   Amarillo is certainly large enough to warrant it.  Lubbock's ring road also could be one.

I have lost track of how many freeways in Texas are signed only as state highways or US highways. If I had my way I would call the Amarillo loop "I-427." It would be a logical combination of I-40 and I-27. Plus the 427 is a great big block engine. The loop down in Lubbock could be "I-227."

With Texas adding population the way it is, drawing a lot of transplant residents from the coasts and colder climates, it will get ever more important to upgrade more of US-87 and the Ports to Plains corridor to Interstate quality. But you gotta have funding to do it.

[sparker]

No desire to slap a "3di" on the thing.   Amarillo is certainly large enough to warrant it.  Lubbock's ring road also could be one.

I have lost track of how many freeways in Texas are signed only as state highways or US highways. If I had my way I would call the Amarillo loop "I-427." It would be a logical combination of I-40 and I-27. Plus the 427 is a great big block engine. The loop down in Lubbock could be "I-227."

With Texas adding population the way it is, drawing a lot of transplant residents from the coasts and colder climates, it will get ever more important to upgrade more of US-87 and the Ports to Plains corridor to Interstate quality. But you gotta have funding to do it.

The one issue with converting many of the TX loops into Interstates is the TXDOT love for volleyball interchanges (obviously as a money-saving stopgap); the north I-27/Loop 289 interchange is one of these.  The problem is most of these attract development on the frontage/transition roads, making later deployment of "real" freeway-to-freeway interchanges problematic (for another example, see the I-35/US 190 interchange in Temple). 

[Bobby5280]

Yeah, Texas has allowed developers to encroach volleyball interchanges in many locations. The US-82/US-75 interchange in Sherman is a problematic example since it has quite a bit of development on all four corners, yet it's clear this interchange will probably have to be upgraded into a 4-level stack direct-connect interchange within the next few years.

The TX-114/I-35W interchange North of Fort Worth is threatening to be stuck as being no better than a volleyball interchange. It's either going to be that outcome or the direct connect fly-over ramps will have to span over the parking lots and fuel pump canopies of convenience stores hugging 3 of the 4 corners of this interchange.

In the case of the I-27/Loop 289 interchange on the North side of Lubbock there is plenty of open space for flyover ramps to span. The Pharr RV store is the only thing close enough to cause problems. I think a flyover ramp could span over part of the parking lot and not go directly over the building. Still, the ramp would need plenty of fencing to block debris from falling on the dealership parking lot.

Realistically, the only way I can see Interstate shields going up on some of these Texas state highway signed freeways and toll roads is if the federal government pitches in a whole lot of funding to aid various improvement projects. That sure isn't going to happen with the current philosophy in place at the federal level.

[txstateends]

More about the Loop 335 project, plus Amarillo's MPO wants to expand to include nearby Canyon so they can be included in projects like widening I-27.

http://www.newschannel10.com/story/38000566/making-loop-335-shovel-ready

[Aquatarkus]

Hi. I'm new here and an Amarillo native and just wanted to share my thoughts on this project with some others who actually care about this stuff.

When they announced the new loop redesign, I was sure they would build a free flowing interchange at 335-I27 to facilitate north bound thru traffic to bypass the most congested parts of I-27 in the city, and not have to go through downtown to get across town, but they didn't. It perplexes me that this decision was made, as the upgrades to the loop are only going to create more traffic through the area. Txdot kinda dropped the ball with this I think.

There exist plans for a huge 4 level stack interchange with the western end of I-40 and the future Hope Rd loop, and there has been talk (no plans yet afaik) of an even bigger 5 level(!) stack with frontage direct connectors at Lakeside and I-40. Why did the I 27 junction get the sort end of the stick.

Diverting all the semi truck traffic around town would greatly help to reduce traffic on the highways in town, it's only going to get worse as time goes on. A failure of planning for the future is why we have the gimped loop to begin with, it'll be a shame if we're in the same place come 30 years down the line and we have to rebuild everything again.

[Bobby5280]

I think the game plan from TX DOT is to upgrade the main lanes of Loop 335 first -the "easy part." The freeway to freeway interchanges are the harder part.

Obviously there are hazards of putting off the freeway to freeway interchanges to later phases. Construction costs keep rising as the years roll on, making it ever more difficult to fund these projects. And then there is lack of discipline with lawmakers and other connected "deciders." The real estate and retail deals they make along transporation corridors are routinely made without any thought of how the project could screw up bigger picture things for a city, like its highway network. Oklahoma is flat out infected with these kinds of greedy, goofball idiots.

I can't tell for sure what is happening at the intersection of I-27 and Loop 335 on the South side of Amarillo. Google Earth imagery dated August 5, 2018 shows a good bit of construction work happening on all four corners of the interchange. But I don't know if that is related to the widening projects of both I-27 and Loop 335. It could be some local jerks signed some sweetheart deals with developers to put a bunch of new stores right there on the corners, effectively making it impossible to build a directional, stack interchange in that spot.

The East side interchange with I-40 and Loop 335/Lakeside has plenty of room on the NW and SE corners. The property is pretty much vacant. There is a building on the NE corner of the intersection that has a "for sale or lease" message on a billboard next to it for years. I don't know if the Super 8 next door would have to be cleared. The biggest issue is the SW corner. There is a big Petro truck stop and Valero store there.

[txstateends]

Hi. I'm new here and an Amarillo native and just wanted to share my thoughts on this project with some others who actually care about this stuff.

Welcome Aquatarkus.  It does seem that planning for the Loop upgrades isn't what it should be in spots, including the I-27 interchange.  Hopefully the local bigwigs and TxDOT are serious about making Loop 335 better all the way around and don't get cold feet later on, financially and otherwise.

[Chef]

December Update: The Bell to Western portion of the freeway along with the bridge has been officially been opened to the public. There is still work on the 335-I-27 interchange. The first portion of the bridge is near completion then they will have to demolish the second bridge. TXDOT projects that the entire bridge will not be completed until 2021. Frontage roads are beginning to be made west of I-27 to accomodate the future bridge above Coulter.

[txstateends]

A bit of a half*** TV report and article, but basically the Loop project is coming along.

http://www.newschannel10.com/2019/02/12/txdot-project-roundup-southbound-loop/

[txstateends]

Earlier today, ground was broken to officially get the westward relocation of Loop 335 underway.

https://www.newschannel10.com/2019/06/03/txdot-breaks-ground-project-relocate-loop
https://www.myhighplains.com/news/txdot-and-partners-hosting-a-groundbreaking-ceremony-for-relocating-sl-335-westward-to-helium-road/2048672757

[-- US 175 --]

The third phase of Loop 335 work will start this summer, mainly consisting of frontage road construction along Helium Road (the site of the relocated section west of Soncy Road, the current alignment), which will reach as far north as SW 9th Ave./Soncy (the northern extent of the Loop realignment).  No timeline was given in the linked report for that phase.

https://www.newschannel10.com/2020/03/05/next-phase-state-loop-set-begin-this-summer/

[Plutonic Panda]

When can we expect the stack interchanges at I-40 to get underway?