Once they’re done with Amarillo, what’s comes next for I-27? North or South?

[TheBox]

the west Amarillo loop is the main focus right now, but once that's done, then what?

[Henry]

More likely, they'll start the expansion south of Lubbock to at least San Angelo. If they can somehow get it to Laredo, good for them.

[TheBox]

More likely, they'll start the expansion south of Lubbock to at least San Angelo. If they can somehow get it to Laredo, good for them.

or Sonora where it connects with I-10, that could work too

[Bobby5280]

The only thing I can see happening at all anytime soon on the Dumas segment is a new bypass getting built around the West side of town. And that may only be a friggin' Super 2 with at-grade intersections -just the bare minimum effort in order to secure the ROW for the eventual freeway. Meanwhile more of the Future I-27 activity will happen in the Lubbock area and farther South.

I think it will take a lot of extra federal help in order to boost the Amarillo to Dumas segment into a faster construction time line. Meanwhile I'll just be happy when TX DOT finally finishes that last damned segment of not-4-lane highway between Dumas and Hartley. I drive on that every time I go up to Colorado to visit family. Right now it's a mix of 2-lane road and 3-lane/passing lane stuff. Maybe whenever they finally do the 4-lane project they'll build it with Interstate upgrade potential in mind.

[Rothman]

If someone wants to sift through this, they're welcome to:

https://www.portstoplains.com/future-interstate-highway/

[The Ghostbuster]

I think we'll see a lot more upgrades south of Lubbock than north of Amarillo. I think the Interstate 27N (should have remained Interstate 327) extension may be unnecessary. Expand the corridor to four lanes to the state line or maybe Boise City, OK and call it a day. Maybe the most the US 87/287 corridors north of Amarillo needs are bypasses around the various towns along the routes. Since New Mexico isn't interested in upgrades to its segment of US 87 (I'm not sure about the Oklahoma or Colorado's stance on upgrading their US 287 corridors), bypasses may be sufficient.

[Bobby5280]

I just can't see TX DOT and Texas lawmakers doing any serious extension work of I-27 any farther North than Dumas. The branch to Raton very much hinges on New Mexico doing its part, which seems very unlikely. The branch going North depends on Colorado and that also seems very unlikely.

I doubt ODOT would be all that thrilled pouring money into a short I-27 segment going thru Boise City. ODOT really does need to 4-lane and divide US-287 in that border area with Colorado though. But they can do that without making the highway a full freeway.

[TXtoNJ]

Down to San Angelo is a no-brainer from a political standpoint. I'd also guess this might be the only segment of I-27 that ever gets extended.

[Bobby5280]

It's possible the I-27 extension could dead end in San Angelo at least initially. However, I think if Texas gets serious enough to extend I-27 to San Angelo we'll also see other signed segments pop up elsewhere before the highway is completed. For instance, if the Loop 79/US-90 loop outside Del Rio gets upgraded to Interstate standards it's possible TX DOT could sign that as a place-holder stub for I-27 -kind of like what they've done in the far South end of Texas. The same goes for that new half loop around the West side of Big Spring.

I think most of the I-27 work in the near term will involve extending the Interstate farther South of Lubbock down to Tahoka. Then they have to figure out a bypass for Lamesa. After that they fill in the gaps to complete I-27 down to Big Spring. Maybe they also work on the I-27W branch from Lamesa to Midland.

It will be interesting to see how they proceed on these different projects. As far as San Angelo goes, its best hope is TX DOT working on US-87 going NW out of town while other I-27 projects happen elsewhere. It will probably be a long time before new Interstate highway extending from San Angelo gets connected to I-20.

[TheBox]

So both I-27E and I-27W probably come with bypasses to Lamesa and Sterling City.

The difference is I-27E doesn't require much work beyond those (and Big Spring direct connector ramps) whereas I-27W on the under hand does, cause it basically has to be built from a 2-4 lane undivided road and two of them that, complete with 8 direct connector ramps (4 of them each) with I-20 in Midland. And if they did do I-27W all the way to the other I-20 intersection in Midland, they still have to make a Garden City bypass after that.

I think the only way I-27W will take priority first is if both Midland and Odessa advocate it loud enough to get it done sooner than later.
Even when TxDOT has bigger fish to fry rather it's around the Texas Triangle or something to do with I-69 (US 59/US 77/US 281), I-14 to BCS and Huntsville, and soon maybe US-287 from Ennis to Dectuar if not Wichita Falls too.

But then again, they both come with bypasses to Lamesa and Sterling City either way.

[monty]

US 87
Projects overview
The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Amarillo District is proposing improvements to US 87 in Hartley and Moore counties, from east of the US 385 Interchange to FM 2589 west of Dumas. The proposed improvements consist of adding capacity to a truck freight corridor. The project is approximately 19.8 miles in length...

The project will make this section a four lane divided highway. It's the last piece of US 87 that isn't four lanes in Texas (north of Amarillo). Certainly a key improvement for the Ports to Plains I 27 corridor. It appears construction may begin in 2025. https://www.amarillo.com/story/news/2024/05/08/txdot-taking-feedback-on-rural-transportation-improvement-plan/73547555007/ 

[Thegeet]

Will they route I-27 around Amarillo? If so, will they make downtown I-27 a spur?

[Bobby5280]

I-27 would definitely be re-routed on the West half of Loop 335. There is absolutely no practical way for I-27 to be extended through downtown Amarillo. The existing segment of I-27 inside the loop would probably be re-named a business "loop" for I-27, similar to how BL-40 in Amarillo operates now.

Shifting I-27 to Loop 335 won't happen for a long time though. Probably US-87 would have to be upgraded to Interstate standards to at least Dumas to make the signing shift possible. The 4-lane upgrade of US-87 between Dumas and Hartley could attract more vehicles to the corridor. I'm skeptical whether it will be enough of a bump to make the Amarillo-Dumas segment of Future I-27 a higher priority and I-27 projects farther South.

[BJ59]

I-27 would definitely be re-routed on the West half of Loop 335. There is absolutely no practical way for I-27 to be extended through downtown Amarillo. The existing segment of I-27 inside the loop would probably be re-named a business "loop" for I-27, similar to how BL-40 in Amarillo operates now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it make more sense for the existing part of I-27 inside the loop to get a 3di designation? I thought business loops were smaller roadways with traffic light intersections. Since I-27 from the southern loop to I-40 is a freeway, I would think it would be made into a 3di interstate.

[vdeane]

I-27 would definitely be re-routed on the West half of Loop 335. There is absolutely no practical way for I-27 to be extended through downtown Amarillo. The existing segment of I-27 inside the loop would probably be re-named a business "loop" for I-27, similar to how BL-40 in Amarillo operates now.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't it make more sense for the existing part of I-27 inside the loop to get a 3di designation? I thought business loops were smaller roadways with traffic light intersections. Since I-27 from the southern loop to I-40 is a freeway, I would think it would be made into a 3di interstate.

It's apparently a thing to do now (see: future BL 81 in Syracuse).

[Bobby5280]

There are old examples of it: notice BL-80 in Sacramento. That one is a freeway its entire length.

[-- US 175 --]

It could just be US 60/US 87 inside Loop 335 (like US 87/US 287 are inside the north side of Loop 335 to just north of US 60-Amarillo Blvd.).

[Bobby5280]

Yeah, it's possible TX DOT could merely sign the orphaned former segment of I-27 as US-60/87. However, in order to have some follow-thru continuity from the South to North side of Amarillo I would almost bet on them applying a BL-27 designation. The green route marker signs could be applied to the entire length within the 335 loop, unlike 3-digit Interstate spur routes.

[DJStephens]

I think most of the I-27 work in the near term will involve extending the Interstate farther South of Lubbock down to Tahoka. Then they have to figure out a bypass for Lamesa. After that they fill in the gaps to complete I-27 down to Big Spring. Maybe they also work on the I-27W branch from Lamesa to Midland. 

Lamesa is a fairly rough fringe of the oil field town.   It would certainly help them economically to have a true I-route serving them.   Would attempt to bring it as close as possible, on a new N-S alignment to the east.  Of course the obligatory truck stops, fast food joints and chain hotels would spring up at the new exits.    There is an escarpment to the E, so trying to build way out the the east, would have a bunch of terrain issues.   

[Bobby5280]

In overhead Google Earth imagery the edge of the caprock is pretty visible East of Lamesa. It looks like TX DOT has about 4 miles worth of wiggle room to build a new I-27 alignment.

There are obstacles on the East edge of Lamesa. The municipal airport is about 2 miles East of the current US-87 alignment thru town. There is a prison about a mile South of the airport. A large solar energy plant sits between the town and the prison. Another solar energy plant runs a couple miles East from the US-87/US-180 interchange. I-27 needs to go East to avoid all of that. The potential I-27W leg will obviously have to run East-West just to the South of the existing US-87/US-180 interchange.

[jgb191]

I would say find a way to connect an interstate from Amarillo to someplace along I-25 near the CO/NM border for easier driving access between Texas and Colorado.  US-287 from Ft. Worth to Amarillo seems like a good route for an interstate (perhaps I-34) and then extend from Amarillo farther northwest in the direction of I-25.

I also agree with those who say to extend I-27 to the south from Lubbock to Midland-Odessa, two of the more sizable metro areas in West Texas, before considering direct northward into OK/KS.  And also as I pointed out before, an Interstate through Amarillo from El Paso to Wichita.  Amarillo currently has three interstate spokes, I would like to believe that the city could logically have seven interstate routes sprouting from there.

[DJStephens]

I would say find a way to connect an interstate from Amarillo to someplace along I-25 near the CO/NM border for easier driving access between Texas and Colorado.  US-287 from Ft. Worth to Amarillo seems like a good route for an interstate (perhaps I-34) and then extend from Amarillo farther northwest in the direction of I-25.

I also agree with those who say to extend I-27 to the south from Lubbock to Midland-Odessa, two of the more sizable metro areas in West Texas, before considering direct northward into OK/KS.  And also as I pointed out before, an Interstate through Amarillo from El Paso to Wichita.  Amarillo currently has three interstate spokes, I would like to believe that the city could logically have seven interstate routes sprouting from there.

Routing another interstate to Raton Pass makes no sense whatsoever.  Altitude, inclines, winter weather, poor condition and obsolesence of 25 on the Colorado side, and poor pavement condition on the NM side means that this "branch" of 27 should be withdrawn.   Attracting even more Class A trucking to the Raton Pass is a recipe for disaster.   
The El Paso or rather Las Cruces to Amarillo route is another idea whose time came and went very quickly.  It was one of the submissions for additional mileage in the '68 legislation.    Ironically this subsmisson was by the NM department, Texas at that time didn't want to go along.   There are vestiges of what could have been, along US 70 in New Mexico.  Some decent alignments E of Tularosa, and W of Roswell.   It would have been a very useful diagonal to have today.   But everything built on US 70 since the early - mid eighties has been of poor design and execution.  Regressive in nature, and locking in obsolesence into perpetuity.   

[Bobby5280]

Amarillo currently has three interstate spokes, I would like to believe that the city could logically have seven interstate routes sprouting from there.

While Amarillo is a hub city in the highway network, it's not important enough to warrant that many Interstate routes. I think I-40, I-27 and an additional Interstate from Amarillo to Fort Worth would be good enough. US-60 could be 4-laned farther Northeast thru Pampa and up to Canadian, but that would be about it. That's more of a major freight rail corridor (the Southern Transcon) than a highway corridor.

Lubbock could have a shot at seeing some of its highway "spokes" improved. It's a given I-27 should be extended South. US-84 from Lubbock to Roscoe/I-20 carries a lot of truck traffic. It has a few segments of limited access freeway. The rest is standard 4-lane highway. I can imagine the US-62 corridor going Southwest out of Lubbock being upgraded to a freeway past the current end in Wolfforth. But an extension would probably go no farther than Brownfield (if an extension even made it that far). A lot of traffic splits up at Brownfield, either going West to places like Roswell or farther South to Hobbs or even Odessa (via US-385).

Any new Interstates out in West Texas would need a lot of continuous frontage roads to maintain access to ranch land and oil fields. A lot of the existing 4-lane highways out there will probably not get much better than their current configurations. Towns like Brownfield could get freeway style bypasses unless the local residents block such a thing.

[MikieTimT]

Any new Interstates out in West Texas would need a lot of continuous frontage roads to maintain access to ranch land and oil fields. A lot of the existing 4-lane highways out there will probably not get much better than their current configurations. Towns like Brownfield could get freeway style bypasses unless the local residents block such a thing.

We'd sooner see lots of continuous frontage roads on I-40 west of Adrian than any new build interstates in Texas requiring long stretches of service roads to serve a sparse population. Decades after being accepted as an Interstate, I-40 still has Texits like this crap: https://maps.app.goo.gl/X1v4VEpW85bhVC9CA

[Bobby5280]

Yeah, I don't like that first 15 miles of I-40 in the Texas panhandle. All those at-grade intersections (complete with the Yield, One Way and Do Not Enter signs at the crossovers) make it NOT look like an Interstate highway at all. It's just a segment of standard 4-lane highway.

I-10 has a few of those things in West Texas as well. Plus it has dozens of improvised dirt road driveways accessing it directly too.

The 4-lane highways in the Permian Basin "oil patch" carry a lot of service vehicle traffic. That traffic is spread out over a lot of different roads. There probably isn't enough thru traffic between Lubbock and Odessa to make building continuous frontage roads all along US-385 worth it. Freeway bypasses of towns like Brownfield, Seminole and Andrews could still be worthwhile.