Print

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

[Bobby5280]

I think the best chance Midland has of getting another Interstate route is via the Ports to Plains Corridor. And I think that's an outside chance. The main line of the P2P corridor goes thru Big Spring. Midland getting in on that depends on a I-27W and I-27E combo being funded and built.

If Midland gets connected via the P2P corridor I think it's more likely the route would be in the form of an I-27 spur running from Lamesa down to Midland and ending there. Midland would depend on the I-14 effort to get the Southern half from Midland to Sterling City built.

I don't expect I-14 to get built from Midland thru Huntsville and into Louisiana without the Federal government getting back to offering a 90/10 funding split. If TX DOT ends up having to foot much of the bill the I-14 corridor will see very little development past the Killeen area. TX DOT has so many other highways to maintain. They'll likely concentrate of spending any extra money to improve highways in highly populated areas. Right now the state government has adopted a stance against new toll roads. But I don't think that's going to last very long.

[longhorn]

TxDOT is expanding 36/190 from Temple to Rogers into a freeway, making its way to Cameron.

https://www.google.com/maps/@30.9349273,-97.2345457,6585m/data=!3m1!1e3

[Bobby5280]

They are building a 4-lane bypass around the town of Rogers. But this sort of thing has grown somewhat common in parts of Texas. The US-277 corridor between Wichita Falls and Abilene has a few town bypasses that are Interstate quality or can be upgraded to it. Everything in between is regular 4-lane highway. The proposal in Wichita Falls to extend Kell Freeway to the Holliday bypass was down-graded to a very modest project adding a center turn lane to the existing 4-lane non-divided street.

The bypass in Rogers would become a portion of I-14 if/when TX DOT builds it from Temple down to the College Station area. It doesn't look like TX DOT is addressing the non-freeway segments of US-190 between Temple, Heidenheimer, Rogers, Buckholts and Cameron -at least not for now. And then there is still a big question over what path I-14 would take once it reaches the Milano area. Will it go direct (on a new terrain path) to Bryan and/or College Station?

[longhorn]

It is freeway capable from I -35 to Heidenheimer, except for a small portion by the Temple college that can easily have an interchange built in that area. The latest TxDot plans had ramps planned for the I-35/360 interchange. It will be the route of I-14 going east out of Temple. Kind of disappointing but it saves money.  Due to other priorities, TxDot is slow walking this freeway expansion. There is a lot of traffic from Cameron to Temple so expanding that section is a no brainer and will be MUUUUUUCH safer and everyone gets to dodge the speed trap called Rogers.

My guess at Cameron the route shoots over south of Hearne and stops. It gives CenTex a safer and faster route to Houston. No way do I ever seeing I-14 making it to the eastern state line.

[Bobby5280]

The segment of US-190 from the 1st Street intersection in Temple to the start of the freeway-ish bypass of Heidenheimer is a mess. After 1st Street the existing US-190 road is reduced to a 5-lane street on what looks like about 200' of ROW. There are significant properties on either side of the street. There is a freeway exit with HK Dodgen Loop, then it turns into a standard 4-lane divided highway for a mile. It looks like TX DOT will have no choice but to use the existing alignment for I-14 upgrades. But it's going to come at the cost of some property removals.

Google Earth imagery dated 8/2022 shows some work being done to existing US-190 between Heidenheimer and Rogers, but it only looks like they're adding a second pair of lanes to an otherwise standard 4-lane divided road. The ROW width is varying from 240' to 270', which will be a tight squeeze since continuous frontage roads look necessary to maintain local access.

US-190 from Rogers to Cameron is just a 2-lane road. A lot of completely new construction, maybe even on a new alignment, will be necessary. That would give way to whatever new alignment TX DOT might choose going to Bryan. Obviously a route as direct as possible from Cameron would be preferable.

[J N Winkler]

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=19223.0

This will fit here nicely.

If any state can & will create a new interstate, split into 2 halves, and 9 loops & spurs all ready to go all at once.....it's Texas.

Topics now merged.  --J N Winkler

[armadillo speedbump]

It is freeway capable from I -35 to Heidenheimer, except for a small portion by the Temple college that can easily have an interchange built in that area. The latest TxDot plans had ramps planned for the I-35/360 interchange. It will be the route of I-14 going east out of Temple. Kind of disappointing but it saves money.  Due to other priorities, TxDot is slow walking this freeway expansion. There is a lot of traffic from Cameron to Temple so expanding that section is a no brainer and will be MUUUUUUCH safer and everyone gets to dodge the speed trap called Rogers.

My guess at Cameron the route shoots over south of Hearne and stops. It gives CenTex a safer and faster route to Houston. No way do I ever seeing I-14 making it to the eastern state line.

Yep.

It would only take about 23 miles of new ROW and less than 16 miles of 4-laning or upgrades for TXDOT to finish a south of Rogers to south of Hearne cutoff for Temple to Houston traffic.  Start with a bypass around the south side of Cameron, shares the US 77/190 bridge over the Little River, run straight east from the 190 curve south of the 77 intersection to US 79 west of the Brazos, 5 miles of upgraded 79 to south of the airport and then less than 2 miles of bypass to Hwy 6 just south of Hearne.  Add 2-3 miles of bypass around Buckholts, about 8 total miles on either side to 4-lane, plus 1.5 miles of upgrade in east Temple and you'd have at least 4 lanes of free flow all the way from Houston to Temple, Killeen, and Copperas Cove.  A huge improvement and good enough. 

The far east end could also double for part of a Hwy 6 and US 79 bypass of Hearne.  Would just need 4 more miles of new ROW to run east of the airport north then east to the 6/79 split.  Combine with about a 3 mile Calvert bypass, an overpass and 1 mile of lane shift west at Riesel, and direct connectors in Waco to I-35, and you get at least 4 lanes of free flow from Fort Worth to Houston.  Again, good enough.  Far cheaper and thus could be finished at least a decade before a true freeway total upgrade would get built in either corridor.  Probably multiple decades.

We really need a separate national designation similar to the "Interstate" system for 4-lane free flowing (no stoplights or stop signs) highways. "Expressway System" would work.  E-14 instead of I-14 for such segments. That would help with selling cost effective solutions to satisfy the chamber of commerce/politicians who want the interstate type labels that help with economic development/bragging rights.

[-- US 175 --]

We really need a separate national designation similar to the "Interstate" system for 4-lane free flowing (no stoplights or stop signs) highways. "Expressway System" would work.  E-14 instead of I-14 for such segments. That would help with selling cost effective solutions to satisfy the chamber of commerce/politicians who want the interstate type labels that help with economic development/bragging rights.

Sounds like it could be an eventually good idea (much of US 175 has gotten to this condition since its widenings), but would there ever be any kind of national/federal backing behind it?

[Bobby5280]

I think adding another highway designation type would only add confusion and not yield any of the desired marketing benefits.

For one thing, there is no "ceiling" on how good or big a section of state highway or US highway can be built. There are plenty of examples across the country of super highways matching Interstate standards but are signed as US highways or state highways instead. Some new expressway standard of highway network would fall somewhere in the middle of that.

It's a hard enough challenge to keep lawmakers from goofing up the standards of Interstate highways. There are numerous locations around the country where segments of Interstate highways aren't really living up to that standard: at-grade intersections, driveway access or absurd configurations like Breezewood. A "free flowing" but not limited access highway network would be even more prone to compromises. "Does the 4-lane highway really need to be divided? Does it really need to be four lanes? Can't we get away with having stop lights every now and then?" Basically they'll want to erect the fancy new signs on anything, just to save a buck.

As to helping with economic development, I don't see how an expressway designation is going to help. Ordinary people understand the differences between limited access super highways and the lesser types of highways. Interstates have their own "brand." I strongly doubt the public is going to see a new expressway standard as somehow being equal in stature to Interstates, even if various DOTs erect big green signs and other window dressing on regular highways without controlled access. Interstates have enough of their own branding value that we see people in forums like this wishing for freeways and toll roads carrying state or US highway designations would be re-named as Interstates.

[longhorn]

This article came out in February. Expansion between Killeen and Belton is almost done and TxDot is about to rebuild the Belton to Temple section of I-35. That would be the time to add at least two ramps at the Loop 360/I-35 interchange.

https://kdhnews.com/harker_heights_herald/local/continuing-expansion-of-i-14-through-temple-may-begin-by-2027/article_65ae89a8-a35e-11ed-991b-cf3a19dbbee5.html

[Bobby5280]

I wonder when TX DOT is going to bother building that missing flyover ramp at the I-14/I-35 interchange in Belton. The NB I-35 to WB I-14 ramp was completed ten years ago. The EB I-14 to SB I-35 flyover ramp is still missing.

It looks like some improvement work is being done to the older ramps in the interchange and portions of the US-190 main lanes. I don't see any clues that any sort of work is being done for that EB I-14 to SB I-35 ramp. A few properties were cleared off the SW corner of the interchange's frontage roads. But that was done for the existing NB I-35 to WB I-14 flyover. Will TX DOT have to buy the Wild Card Bingo property and demolish it to make room for the missing flyover ramp?

[silverback1065]

we will all be dead when or even if 14 makes it out of texas 

[Bobby5280]

Another probable scenario: a few short stub spurs of I-14 in other states (connected to other Interstates routes, but not to other segments of I-14).

[sprjus4]

Georgia I-14 would be a useful interstate route that would provide a bypass of Atlanta for I-20 to I-85 South traffic.

However, I can understand the little demand or need for such a corridor on its own. The entire route was just recently expanded to a four lane 65 mph divided highway in most areas, dubbed the GA-540 “Fall Line Freeway” (despite not being a freeway).

Bypasses of Macon, full continuity, and elimination of all traffic signals would make it a far more viable route, eliminating those remaining 45-55 mph zones. A 65 mph continuous route would make it far more attractive, and provide better relief / better alternative to I-20 and I-85 via Atlanta.

[silverback1065]

is this the same interstate proposed as I-3 but with a new number? i remember seeing this proposal in georgia, the number had a special meaning. 

[jlam]

is this the same interstate proposed as I-3 but with a new number? i remember seeing this proposal in georgia, the number had a special meaning. 

Not quite. I think that I-3 was proposed to run kinda parallel to the Savannah River. It was named after the 3rd Infantry Division IIRC

[The Ghostbuster]

Interstate 3 was likely to always be a pipe dream, even more than Interstate 14 outside of Texas. I don't think it should have ever been proposed.

[longhorn]

I wonder when TX DOT is going to bother building that missing flyover ramp at the I-14/I-35 interchange in Belton. The NB I-35 to WB I-14 ramp was completed ten years ago. The EB I-14 to SB I-35 flyover ramp is still missing.

It looks like some improvement work is being done to the older ramps in the interchange and portions of the US-190 main lanes. I don't see any clues that any sort of work is being done for that EB I-14 to SB I-35 ramp. A few properties were cleared off the SW corner of the interchange's frontage roads. But that was done for the existing NB I-35 to WB I-14 flyover. Will TX DOT have to buy the Wild Card Bingo property and demolish it to make room for the missing flyover ramp?

It gets mentioned from time to time, but with 14 going through Temple will take even less urgency now. The I-14 to NB I-35 ramp needs to be replaced. Its old and the turning radius before merging with I-35 is too sharp. TxDot will no doubt smooth out turn when they rebuild I-35 between Belton and Temple.

190/36 is getting expanded to four lane divided hwy between Temple and Rogers with the hope of it going to Cameron which is long overdue for the traffic that travels it.

[Mapmikey]

is this the same interstate proposed as I-3 but with a new number? i remember seeing this proposal in georgia, the number had a special meaning. 

Not quite. I think that I-3 was proposed to run kinda parallel to the Savannah River. It was named after the 3rd Infantry Division IIRC

Synopsis here with a link to the detailed study - http://www.vahighways.com/ncannex/route-log/ih003.html

[Henry]

Interstate 3 was likely to always be a pipe dream, even more than Interstate 14 outside of Texas. I don't think it should have ever been proposed.

I was thinking the same thing! If anything, that number would be better used in CA, specifically for a certain freeway directly linking Los Angeles to San Francisco.

[sprjus4]

I think it’s important to not focus on the “I-3” numbering… but on the need for the physical freeway itself. The same with “I-99”, where people focus too much on the numbering vs. the freeway itself.

[The Ghostbuster]

I highly doubt there is a physical need for the freeway corridor along the 2005-proposed Interstate 3: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_3. With all the other barriers mentioned on the Wikipedia page, I would say any attempt to construct even a portion of proposed Interstate 3 would be doomed from the start.

[debragga]

The far east end could also double for part of a Hwy 6 and US 79 bypass of Hearne.  Would just need 4 more miles of new ROW to run east of the airport north then east to the 6/79 split.  Combine with about a 3 mile Calvert bypass, an overpass and 1 mile of lane shift west at Riesel, and direct connectors in Waco to I-35, and you get at least 4 lanes of free flow from Fort Worth to Houston.

That essentially exists already with US-287 to I-45. The only spots with just one lane are on 287 just before traffic from TX-360 merges in and the exit ramp at I-45.

[longhorn]

All 6 lanes of I-14 are open from the I-35 merger in Belton to the top of Nolanville Hill

https://kdhnews.com/news/traffic/all-6-lanes-of-i-14-are-open-from-the-i-35-merger-in-belton/article_e50850d4-0156-11ee-9a3d-47e6e052fc5d.html

All of I-14 is six lanes now. Next up for TxDot to fix the merge and rebuild I-35 from 6 to 8 lanes from the merge to Temple's 8 lane section.

[MaxConcrete]

TxDOT has scheduled a meeting to extend the freeway 2.3 miles west of Copperas Cove.
https://www.txdot.gov/projects/hearings-meetings/brownwood/061523-us190.html

Map
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/bwd/us-190-at-big-divide/052423-project-location-map-w-logo.pdf

The Copperas Cove bypass is a super-2, so presumably it will be upgraded to freeway standards before or at the same time as the new extension.

Separately, preliminary study is underway to determine the alignment of a freeway loop around Lampasas, 14 miles to the west. It seems logical to eventually extend the US 190 (I-14) freeway to the Lampasas loop.
https://www.txdot.gov/projects/hearings-meetings/brownwood/lampasas-relief-route-111722.html