Jump to content

All Interstates In Texas


Recommended Posts

It would be nice to have more "spokes". 290 to Austin is sh**.

529 has been discussed on this forum recently as an alternate spoke, and it would be very nice to have a freeway going at least to Belville, and ideally around it and from there to about Buscher State Park along 71. If nothing else, it'd be a good evacuation route.

But when it comes down to it, I think that we've got perfectly good corridors in most places (Giddings not withstanding). What we need are good roads to fill those corridors with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 78
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • 1 month later...
THere was a proposal to extend 27 into San Angelo, but it was voted down. Also to Take 44 down to Abilene, also nixed.

THe best bet for Houston to Austin at the moment would be to make 71 a spur interstate, IH-110 or IH-310 depending on whether folks thought one was possible in El Paso or San Antonio (the numbers go West to East).

Ciao, and Hook 'em Horns,

Capt-AWACS, I post, You decide

I think I-310 is taken for the future Loop 310 Intrastate around Beaumont.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interstate 44 It can be proposed two ways

1. Wichita Falls to I-20 in Abliene

I-44 is supposed to follow Kell Freeway in Wichita Falls to Abilene. They are already working on widening US 277 from Seymour to Wichita Falls from two lanes to four. The eventual plan is to make that I-44. After Abilene I can't tell you???

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/wfs/projects/us277/project.htm

Interstate 32 Could be possible

Ft Worth, Wichita Falls, Amarillo, I-45 Ennis Texas.

The path for this is clear from Fort Worth to Chillicothe where you hit the first red light. Thereafter there are stop lights in every town you until you hit Amarillo. I'd also be willing to bet work would have to be done in Decatur to construct access roads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No its not, it's actully experiencing the 3rd spindletop boom.

Not really. According to tracer2.com, the Texas Workforce Commission's labor statistics indicate the following annualized historical employment levels in the Beaumont-Port Arthur MSA:

1995 | 150,800

1996 | 151,200

1997 | 157,400

1998 | 160,700

1999 | 160,300

2000 | 161,800

2001 | 159,200

2002 | 157,700

2003 | 156,200

2004 | 153,600

2005 | 154,600

July 2006 | 153,100 (not seasonally-adjusted)

I wouldn't consider Beaumont to be a very strong labor market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you made 71 an interstate, you'd lose some pretty highway east of Bastrop, and wouldn't really gain much in terms of speed. Making 290 an interstate west of Austin would really diminish the experience of driving out there. I'm not for having interstates for the sake of having them. I enjoy a pretty landscape more than a pretty map.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you made 71 an interstate, you'd lose some pretty highway east of Bastrop, and wouldn't really gain much in terms of speed. Making 290 an interstate west of Austin would really diminish the experience of driving out there. I'm not for having interstates for the sake of having them. I enjoy a pretty landscape more than a pretty map.

I agree with you, except that improvements do need to be made out toward Dripping Springs. That congestion in Oak Hill has just gotten unbearable. They also need to build an overpass along 71 at the intersection with 95.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really. According to tracer2.com, the Texas Workforce Commission's labor statistics indicate the following annualized historical employment levels in the Beaumont-Port Arthur MSA:

1995 | 150,800

1996 | 151,200

1997 | 157,400

1998 | 160,700

1999 | 160,300

2000 | 161,800

2001 | 159,200

2002 | 157,700

2003 | 156,200

2004 | 153,600

2005 | 154,600

July 2006 | 153,100 (not seasonally-adjusted)

I wouldn't consider Beaumont to be a very strong labor market.

Terrible indicator of areas economty. I suggest reading Texas market reports.

http://recenter.tamu.edu/econ/

great reading and it is updated everyday except weekends.

What your stats does not mention is the quality of jobs. In 1995 the average median income in that area was

$22,000. That is only $2,000 more than the poverty line. Today the median income is $46,000. And if you eliminate Port Arthur from the figures, Beaumont would median income would be $57,000. I don't know how well you know the area, but it's night and day in Beaumont in the last 10 years. Port Arthur has been the anchor draining the area. Currently 99% apartments full, 20,000 high paying jobs over the next 2 years, and a majore housing crisis. Those numbers does not count the spin-off jobs created from the 20,000. It does not count the reconstruction of all 4 freeways. According to the market report, 10,000 weldiers will be hired. I woulsd consider that area a very strong labor market. I think the numbers you posted was the calm before the storm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something else I want to point out. My understanding is TX-DOT bought all the land west of Katy to put a stop

to Houston's westward growth. The area most likely to experience explosive growth similar to the Katy corridor

will be along the Crosby freeway and 1960 area west of Lake Houston. I can already see condo's and high rises along the banks of Lake Houston. I also predict Beaumont will gobble up China Tx within the next 10 years. I remember when Amelia was it's own city and China was a country drive from Beaumont. Not anymore. I see a freeway, maybe an interstate 10-15 years from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok, I have to ask... I-310??? I've never heard anything about this before. How would they route it?

Don't hold your breath, it's a long way off. Between Lumberton and Beaumont direct to Rose City then over the Neches direct to North of Nederland then Ford Park area around Beaumont west side to Between Lumberton and Beaumont. It is suppose to also eliminate South County needs to hurricane evacuate through Beaumont's heavy traffic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Terrible indicator of areas economty. I suggest reading Texas market reports.

http://recenter.tamu.edu/econ/

great reading and it is updated everyday except weekends.

What your stats does not mention is the quality of jobs. In 1995 the average median income in that area was

$22,000. That is only $2,000 more than the poverty line. Today the median income is $46,000. And if you eliminate Port Arthur from the figures, Beaumont would median income would be $57,000. I don't know how well you know the area, but it's night and day in Beaumont in the last 10 years. Port Arthur has been the anchor draining the area. Currently 99% apartments full, 20,000 high paying jobs over the next 2 years, and a majore housing crisis. Those numbers does not count the spin-off jobs created from the 20,000. It does not count the reconstruction of all 4 freeways. According to the market report, 10,000 weldiers will be hired. I woulsd consider that area a very strong labor market. I think the numbers you posted was the calm before the storm.

I scrolled down through the website and the first item that broke out data by MSA stated the following:

Employment growth rates from June 2005 to June 2006 were positive in all metro areas except Beaumont-Port Arthur (Table 4). Laredo ranked first in job creation followed by Midland and Odessa.
Also, there is a table near the bottom that shows that Beaumont has the highest unemployment rate in the state except for Brownsville, McAllen, and El Paso (i.e. everything on the border). The only big difference between Beaumont and the border towns seems to be that their employment growth rates are among the highest in the state.

So wages may be rising (not anything special if you discount for inflation over the last decade) and the housing market may be tight, a matter related to Hurricane Rita, which permanently removed 600 apartment units from the market and provided an influx of FEMA money to those who lost houses. But certainly that unemployment rate counts against the wage growth. And Beaumont is still in the bottom third of Texas metropolitan areas in terms of retail sales per capita.

It may be that there is strong growth among Beaumont's white collar businesses that I'm just not seeing in these broad measures, but judged as a whole, it is a pretty pitiful excuse for a metro area.

Btw, the "poverty line" is dependent upon more than just wages. You also have to look at how the demographics break down with respect to household size as well as the cost of living.

Something else I want to point out. My understanding is TX-DOT bought all the land west of Katy to put a stop to Houston's westward growth.

Nope, they sure aren't. It simply wouldn't be possible for them to acquire enough land to prevent westward growth. Eminent domain wouldn't work legally and the financial implications would be mindboggling. Most landowners probably wouldn't be willing to sell without a big price premium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't hold your breath, it's a long way off. Between Lumberton and Beaumont direct to Rose City then over the Neches direct to North of Nederland then Ford Park area around Beaumont west side to Between Lumberton and Beaumont. It is suppose to also eliminate South County needs to hurricane evacuate through Beaumont's heavy traffic.

Is this just rumor, or can you post something from TxDOT that confirms such a plan exists?

Also, if such a route was ever built, it would most definitely not be numbered 310. An interstate loop route would have to begin with an even number, not an odd. The only possible route number would be 810, as each successive interstate loop in a state uses a higher first digit, working from west to east and south to north.

Anyway, I have a very hard time seeing any such route being planned and built in the next three decades. TxDOT still hasn't really started with the upgrades to US 69/287 heading north from the split with US 96 in Lumberton, and that project has been in the works for close to 15 years now. The 69 freeway from Lumberton to northern Tyler County would be a much higher priority for regional traffic relief and hurricane evacuation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I scrolled down through the website and the first item that broke out data by MSA stated the following:

Also, there is a table near the bottom that shows that Beaumont has the highest unemployment rate in the state except for Brownsville, McAllen, and El Paso (i.e. everything on the border). The only big difference between Beaumont and the border towns seems to be that their employment growth rates are among the highest in the state.

So wages may be rising (not anything special if you discount for inflation over the last decade) and the housing market may be tight, a matter related to Hurricane Rita, which permanently removed 600 apartment units from the market and provided an influx of FEMA money to those who lost houses. But certainly that unemployment rate counts against the wage growth. And Beaumont is still in the bottom third of Texas metropolitan areas in terms of retail sales per capita.

It may be that there is strong growth among Beaumont's white collar businesses that I'm just not seeing in these broad measures, but judged as a whole, it is a pretty pitiful excuse for a metro area.

Btw, the "poverty line" is dependent upon more than just wages. You also have to look at how the demographics break down with respect to household size as well as the cost of living.

Nope, they sure aren't. It simply wouldn't be possible for them to acquire enough land to prevent westward growth. Eminent domain wouldn't work legally and the financial implications would be mindboggling. Most landowners probably wouldn't be willing to sell without a big price premium.

I don't know where you get your facts from, but the unemployment is the only thing you said right. 600 apartments in an area of nearly 400,000 will not cause apartment shortage. Speaking of Rita, many of the poor in that area moved to Houston to take advantage of FEMA's free rent and housing. Those people are not going back. As a result, the county and Beaumont has gave back huge tax breaks because of fewer people using social services. My job is in market reports and economic growth. The hottest area per population will be the Beaumont MSA area within the next 5 years. 15,000 new jobs in 2 years, not counting jobs created as a result of the 15,000. 7-9 Billion in construction projects, not even Houston can match that.

Finally, believe me or not, but TX-dot will not build any feeder roads along I-10 west past Katy. The reason is to stop the growth of that area. I don't remember exactly where I got the information, but I dont go around making stuff up. Take it or leave it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this just rumor, or can you post something from TxDOT that confirms such a plan exists?

Also, if such a route was ever built, it would most definitely not be numbered 310. An interstate loop route would have to begin with an even number, not an odd. The only possible route number would be 810, as each successive interstate loop in a state uses a higher first digit, working from west to east and south to north.

Anyway, I have a very hard time seeing any such route being planned and built in the next three decades. TxDOT still hasn't really started with the upgrades to US 69/287 heading north from the split with US 96 in Lumberton, and that project has been in the works for close to 15 years now. The 69 freeway from Lumberton to northern Tyler County would be a much higher priority for regional traffic relief and hurricane evacuation.

Ya know what, you might be right, I could have been 810. But it was a concept only, no plans. However Rita may put it back on the table.

The reason roads are delayed years in that area is because of the epa. The epa stopped all federal dollars to be

used to build or increase road capacity until that area cleaned up it's air.

TX-dot has already started to build a divide high between Beaumont and Lufkin along 69. Lufkin to Zavalla is already finish. The next phase is along the old Southern Pacific line. The Lumberton area is still in the right-of-way and enviromental study phase.

Now that Beaumont is no longer under the epa iron fist, expect an explosion of road projects start in 07.

I'm looking at Tx-dot now...Washington rebuilt, Calder rebuilt, East-tex frwy rebuilt, Cardinal rebuilt, Dowlen extented to Walden, I-10 to Winnie rebult, both I-10 to 69 interchanges rebuilt, Lucus rebuilt, 11th rebuilt,...I could go on, but you get the picture. All within next 5 years. Traffic nightmare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TX-dot has already started to build a divide high between Beaumont and Lufkin along 69. Lufkin to Zavalla is already finish.

No, it isn't. There has been no construction north of Lumberton on this project. US 69 has been four lanes, undivided between Huntington and Lufkin for at least 30 years. South of Huntington, it is two lanes until you get into Tyler County, where there are short three- and four-lane sections. The only four-lane divided sections of 69 in the corridor are in Hardin County, just north and south of Kountze. No construction has happened in those areas since the mid-1990s.

Now that Beaumont is no longer under the epa iron fist, expect an explosion of road projects start in 07.

I'm looking at Tx-dot now...Washington rebuilt, Calder rebuilt, East-tex frwy rebuilt, Cardinal rebuilt, Dowlen extented to Walden, I-10 to Winnie rebult, both I-10 to 69 interchanges rebuilt, Lucus rebuilt, 11th rebuilt,...I could go on, but you get the picture. All within next 5 years. Traffic nightmare.

The Eastex Freeway does need to be widened. However, I can't see TxDOT rebuilding the I-10/69 interchange between Delaware, 11th, and Calder Streets considering that the current interchange was almost completely rebuilt in the early 1990s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know where you get your facts from, but the unemployment is the only thing you said right.

All my facts came from the website that you directed me to. The only one that didn't come from there is the 600-unit destruction total.

600 apartments in an area of nearly 400,000 will not cause apartment shortage. Speaking of Rita, many of the poor in that area moved to Houston to take advantage of FEMA's free rent and housing. Those people are not going back. As a result, the county and Beaumont has gave back huge tax breaks because of fewer people using social services.

The population was 383,530 in 2005 and has only risen by 0.1% over the last decade according to the Real Estate Center at A&M.

But the population matters less to the level of apartment occupancy than does the amount of losses divided by the market inventory. Also, my figure of 600 units permanently removed does not account for those that were temporarily removed from the market for repairs. I'm not sure of how many units were temporarily removed.

My understanding is that FEMA assistance is available in more locations than just Houston, TX. I'm sure that a number of folks came this direction, but then that makes a lot of sense considering how many people lost their homes and were displaced.

My job is in market reports and economic growth. The hottest area per population will be the Beaumont MSA area within the next 5 years. 15,000 new jobs in 2 years, not counting jobs created as a result of the 15,000. 7-9 Billion in construction projects, not even Houston can match that.

The "hottest area per population" is not a very precise measurement. Are you talking about year-over-year perecentage growth rate or sheer numbers? Or are you talking about some form of positive statistical deviation from the long-term average growth rate? "Hot" connotes a comparative measure. To what are you comparing Beaumont? If you're using percentage growth rates, they you'd be well-advised not to compare it to larger cities that grow at slower and more steady rates. Comparisons to Abilene, Lubbock, Amarillo, Tyler, Waco, Laredo, Brownsville, etc. would be more fair. Corpus Christi, Lake Charles, and southern Brazoria County are probably the best comparisons.

Finally, believe me or not, but TX-dot will not build any feeder roads along I-10 west past Katy. The reason is to stop the growth of that area. I don't remember exactly where I got the information, but I dont go around making stuff up. Take it or leave it.

Earlier you claimed that TXDoT was buying up land west of Katy. Now you're talking about them not building feeder roads. You are correct about the feeder roads...but that is not the same issue as buying land. Also, the lack of feeder roads will only affect commercial development patterns, but as long as access to I-10 is still permitted at onramps (not being disputed except near the Brazos River), there will be development west of Katy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am perfectly fine with no feeders west of Katy. Plant some nice pine trees where the feeders would have been. They in 30 years, we will have something that looks close to the Hardy Tollway. The houses can go behind the trees. I think it is actually a good idea. It is also a good idea to start expanding Pederson Road, because it is going to be clogged soon with new development coming online now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it isn't. There has been no construction north of Lumberton on this project. US 69 has been four lanes, undivided between Huntington and Lufkin for at least 30 years. South of Huntington, it is two lanes until you get into Tyler County, where there are short three- and four-lane sections. The only four-lane divided sections of 69 in the corridor are in Hardin County, just north and south of Kountze. No construction has happened in those areas since the mid-1990s.

Your right, I said Zavalla I meant Huntington. They reconstructed between Lufkin and Huntington. I was witness that construction. The next phase will be to Zavalla and along that old railroad line.

Lumberton area will see a 4 lane road with center left turn. The remaing 69 will go divide highway. I should be more clear in the future.

The Eastex Freeway does need to be widened. However, I can't see TxDOT rebuilding the I-10/69 interchange between Delaware, 11th, and Calder Streets considering that the current interchange was almost completely rebuilt in the early 1990s.

Well it's not my call, but East-tex and the interchange will be rebuilt. This is posted on the TX-DOT site.

BTW, I-10 and beltway west interchange was built in 1989.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can take a break please. There is already so much traffic going on east of Beaumont and West of Orange. More construction will be even worse.

Couldn't come close to when they were building the new bridge on the Texas-Louisiana border though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did NOT say buying up all the land, I said bought the land. I didn't think anyone would nit-pick my exact words then make a mountain out of it. I'll be clear, TX-dot bought some specific land west of Katy to stop growth. What gps land cordinates, I don't know. TX-DOT also will not build feeder roads to prevent growth. Is that clear?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can take a break please. There is already so much traffic going on east of Beaumont and West of Orange. More construction will be even worse.

Couldn't come close to when they were building the new bridge on the Texas-Louisiana border though.

Just wait, I think they're bidding out the Neches River bridge replacement in December. I wouldn't know where to show you that, but I saw it mentioned on the news one of the times earlier this year when it got reduced to oen lane for "emergency repairs"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They can take a break please. There is already so much traffic going on east of Beaumont and West of Orange. More construction will be even worse.

Couldn't come close to when they were building the new bridge on the Texas-Louisiana border though.

Once they finish, a smooth ride to the casino. They have started rebuilding I-10 at Wallisville and the Trinity river bridge. They are about 40% finish with I-10 from 146 to Lost river. However Winnie to College st will be a nightmare. They are adding 2 overpasses at Smith road and Brooks road and rebuilding Washington over pass to 8 lanes and rebuilding the interchange at 69. Can anyone say highway 90.

All this is posted on tx-dot site for the nay-sayers.

Just wait, I think they're bidding out the Neches River bridge replacement in December. I wouldn't know where to show you that, but I saw it mentioned on the news one of the times earlier this year when it got reduced to oen lane for "emergency repairs"

Yep, I know about that. There is a plan in the very very early stages of extenting College st over the Neches river. Too bad it would not happen in time for the replacement of the I-10 bridge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did NOT say buying up all the land, I said bought the land. I didn't think anyone would nit-pick my exact words then make a mountain out of it. I'll be clear, TX-dot bought some specific land west of Katy to stop growth. What gps land cordinates, I don't know. TX-DOT also will not build feeder roads to prevent growth. Is that clear?

As I stated earlier, the lack of feeder roads will only displace growth to areas away from the highway; relatively little growth if any will be prevented. Case in point: Pearland. They're only now adding feeder roads in SOME places.

Even if you do not know the precise location of land being bought up by TXDoT, perhaps you could enlighten us as to the extent of the land purchases. Even several thousand acres purchased in any configuration would do nothing to prevent further westward growth. What is their strategy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...