I-69 in TX

[Grzrd]

This article reports that the I-69W shield was unveiled today

This August 26, 2014 Alliance for I-69 Texas article reports that, in addition to the large ceremonial I-69W sign, signage is currently being installed along the newly designated I-69W section, I-35, and other roadways:

The newly designated interstate section  begins near the busy World Trade Bridge on the west side of Laredo and extends east to an interchange with Interstate 35.  New Interstate 69W signs are going up on this section and on I-35 and other roadways approaching 69W. The Alliance for I-69 Texas was instrumental in working with Laredo community leaders to push for early designation of the new 69W section.

This Alliance for I-69 Texas article

That still leaves the question of what the route from George West to Victoria will be named.  I'm in favor of that being I-69W.

The article indicates that you will get your wish:

The 69W section will eventually run on US 59 from Laredo to Victoria.

The August 26, 2014 Alliance for I-69 Texas article regarding the I-69W unveiling ceremony also reports that I-69W will run from Laredo to Victoria:

The 69W section will eventually run on US 59 from Laredo to Victoria. In South Texas I69 is being created by updating US 59 (69 West), US 281 (69 Central) and US 77 (69 East).

[Anthony_JK]

One more question, Grzz......what's going to happen with TX 44 between Freer and Robstown? That was recently added into the "I-69" system as a possible freeway upgrade in order to provide direct access between Laredo and Corpus Christi. Is it still scheduled to be included in the mix (possibly as an "I-x69")??

[Grzrd]

One more question, Grzz......what's going to happen with TX 44 between Freer and Robstown? That was recently added into the "I-69" system as a possible freeway upgrade in order to provide direct access between Laredo and Corpus Christi. Is it still scheduled to be included in the mix (possibly as an "I-x69")??

The most recent action was a May 1, 2014 referral to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.  Mercifully, a specific numerical designation is currently not included in the text of the bill.  I suspect that the bill will eventually be part of the next large multi-year highway reauthorization (which will hopefully occur in May, 2015; however, I'm not holding my breath .........).  I think an I-x69 designation is a distinct possibility, with an I-6 designation as a darkhorse (which would in turn put a nail in the coffin for I-49 South to somehow be redesignated as I-6.  )

Here is the current Corridor 18 statutory language, which will help to interpret the language in the 44-to-69 bill.

[oscar]

This August 26, 2014 Alliance for I-69 Texas article reports that, in addition to the large ceremonial I-69W sign, signage is currently being installed along the newly designated I-69W section, I-35, and other roadways:

Not addressed by the Alliance article (maybe it doesn't care about lowly sub-Interstate routes), but anything on US 59 signs going up on the new I-69W segment and the northeastern part of Loop 20, and the bypassed part of US 59 being re-signed as Business US 59?

[bugo]

I think I read that 59 was going to be rerouted as well.

[oscar]

I think I read that 59 was going to be rerouted as well.

That's in the bag.  My question is whether the signage is up, as it is (ceremonially, with real signage to follow) for I-69W.

Since part of the rerouted US 59 is concurrent with I-69W, I would hope TxDOT would put up signs for both at the same time.

[MikeSantNY78]

Now all we need is the approval for I-69 within the I-610 loop in Houston.  Any word on when that might come down? 

[MikeTheActuary]

The most recent action was a May 1, 2014 referral to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.  Mercifully, a specific numerical designation is currently not included in the text of the bill.  I suspect that the bill will eventually be part of the next large multi-year highway reauthorization (which will hopefully occur in May, 2015; however, I'm not holding my breath .........).  I think an I-x69 designation is a distinct possibility, with an I-6 designation as a darkhorse (which would in turn put a nail in the coffin for I-49 South to somehow be redesignated as I-6.  )

The way they're going, I'd think that I-69S would (sadly) be a possibility.

[RBBrittain]

This shows the recommended alignment in Lufkin. The Diboll bypass and a section southeast of Lufkin is the only part on a new alignment. Based on my exposure to the area, the Diboll bypass is by far the most urgent need. A pdf is available at http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/i69/projects/59/angelina-county-map.pdf
http://www.oscarmail.net/photos/20140726_ih-69-lufkin/20140726_lufkin.jpg

If I'm reading this correctly, does this mean an I-69/US 69 concurrency in Lufkin is now almost certain (assuming TxDOT doesn't renumber US 69)?

[25or6to4]

FYI, I noticed that the exit numbers have recently been painted in the exit medians on I-69E between Harlingen and Brownsville.  For example, the Price Road exit in Brownsville will be exit 3, and the Loop 499 exit in Harlingen is exit 23A.  Haven't been on I-2 recently to see if they're labeled yet.

[Grzrd]

this January 2013 map ... (pp. 7-8/122 of pdf) ....
the tiny, easternmost "fourth prong", SIU 32, is SH 550 from the Port of Brownsville to I-69E/US 77 ....
Another I-69 Corridor Section of Independent Utility ("SIU") nearing completion ......

This article reports that the SH 550 entrance to the Port of Brownsville recently opened and that the entire SH 550 project should be completed by the end of the year:

The remaining SH 550 connector could wrap up at the end of the year and would be 10 miles with four tolled, general purpose main lanes – two in each direction – and direct connectors at I-69.
"It's my understanding that it would probably be toward the end of the year,"  Campirano said of the final piece of the project. "And when that happens, it will be a really nice connection."

This article reports that SH 550 is on track to be completed in early December:

The placement of massive steel girders as part of the SH 550 Direct Connector Project will entail shutting down northbound and southbound lanes of I-69 East (U.S. 77) beginning Sept. 16 and extending into October.
The affected stretch is between Rancho Viejo and the Brownsville Sports Park where SH 550 will soon link with I-69 at the old FM 511 intersection. Motorists will be forced to detour along the frontage road ....
In July, lanes of I-69 were closed for construction of the SH 550 "center bent"  between the northbound and southbound lanes. The work commencing this month will involve the placement of steel girders over the interstate, Sepulveda said.
"That's the last segment that's needed,"  he said. "Once we do that then all the columns will be in place."
After it's complete, probably in early December, the SH 550 toll way will connect I-69 to the Port of Brownsville.

[Grzrd]

How will the south to north increasing numbers get assigned with I-69 E/C/W taking up the southern portion? I assume each leg will be numbered S-N and then I-69 will start from 0 at some point after the separate legs merge.

I recently received an email clarification from TxDOT:

This is where mile zero will be for the various legs of the I-69 Texas system:
I-69W in Laredo: Just east of the World Trade Bridge
I-69C in McAllen: Intersection of I-2/US 83
I-69E in Brownsville: Intersection of University Blvd/US 77, just north of the Veterans International Bridge
I-69 in Victoria: Intersection of US 59 and US 77

[Scott5114]

So mainline I-69 will start at zero at the merger, and not carry forward one of the legs' numbering?

[nolia_boi504]

Thanks for finding that!

[codyg1985]

So mainline I-69 will start at zero at the merger, and not carry forward one of the legs' numbering?

Following the exit numbers from the north, you will think that you are getting close to the end when all of a sudden whichever leg you take, you are still a long way from the end. Talk about a mind bender!

[Scott5114]

Not only that, but you pass Exit 1 twice. I'd carry forward the numbering from whichever leg ends up being longest to avoid this problem.

[US81]

Not only that, but you pass Exit 1 twice. I'd carry forward the numbering from whichever leg ends up being longest to avoid this problem.

I agree. It seems like that would be somewhat similar to what was done in DFW where I-35 carries its numbering through the longer branch - I-35E - and I-35W carries its own numbering.  Granted it's not exactly analogous but it seems the most comparable situation I can think of.

[RBBrittain]

Not only that, but you pass Exit 1 twice. I'd carry forward the numbering from whichever leg ends up being longest to avoid this problem.

I agree. It seems like that would be somewhat similar to what was done in DFW where I-35 carries its numbering through the longer branch - I-35E - and I-35W carries its own numbering.  Granted it's not exactly analogous but it seems the most comparable situation I can think of.

It's as analogous as you can get, since the two I-35 splits (DFW and Minneapolis-St. Paul) are the only other remaining interstate directional splits. But then I still wonder why I-69C is even needed at all, except to keep some RGV politician happy; I understand I-69E as RGV interstate access and I-69W as I-35 relief, but not I-69C...

[NE2]

It's as analogous as you can get, since the two I-35 splits (DFW and Minneapolis-St. Paul) are the only other remaining interstate directional splits. But then I still wonder why I-69C is even needed at all, except to keep some RGV politician happy; I understand I-69E as RGV interstate access and I-69W as I-35 relief, but not I-69C...

I-69C is for RGV access from San Antonio and west. I've tried but have been unable to find a way to build only one route into the RGV without significantly adding to the Houston-Brownsville or San Antonio-McAllen distance.

Of course neither US 77 nor US 281 needs to be a full freeway to the RGV. Little-used farm access roads are just quacky.

[MikeSantNY78]

So mainline I-69 will start at zero at the merger, and not carry forward one of the legs' numbering?

Following the exit numbers from the north, you will think that you are getting close to the end when all of a sudden whichever leg you take, you are still a long way from the end. Talk about a mind bender!

That, or prefix the E/C/W legs' mileposts with the corresponding tag, so the east end of I-2 would join at milepost E-26.9 (or Exit 27) of I-69E...

[Grzrd]

The Alliance for I-69 Texas website reports that the TTC made the I-69 designation official today:

The Texas Transportation Commission has given final approval to designation of an additional 28.4 miles of US 59 as part of Interstate 69.
The existing section of US 59 from the south side of Rosenberg in Fort Bend County north to Loop 610 in southwest Houston is now part of the Interstate Highway System and will soon be signed as both I-69 and US 59 .... There were five design issues identified and exceptions were approved by FHWA.

Now all we need is the approval for I-69 within the I-610 loop in Houston.  Any word on when that might come down? 

As far as I know, FHWA has not yet given any sort of approval for I-69 within the I-610 loop. A recent TxDOT study (data through August 31, 2014) may help explain the delay: US 59 from I-610 to SH 288 and US 59 from SH 288 to I-10 are the third and sixth most congested roadways in Texas, respectively (US 59 from I-10 to I-610 is 92nd). FHWA and TxDOT may be haggling over a proper ratio of design exceptions to TxDOT commitments to upgrade US 59 that would relieve the congestion. Simply my guess.

[KG909]

I'm just wondering why they wanted I-69, do they want signs stolen?

[thefro]

I'm just wondering why they wanted I-69, do they want signs stolen?

Extending I-69 all the way down to Texas was the scheme that people in Southwest Indiana came up with to get their road from Indianapolis to Evansville, since the Federal government wasn't interested in funding an I-69 extension in just Indiana.

[MikeSantNY78]

I'm just wondering why they wanted I-69, do they want signs stolen?

Extending I-69 all the way down to Texas was the scheme that people in Southwest Indiana came up with to get their road from Indianapolis to Evansville, since the Federal government wasn't interested in funding an I-69 extension in just Indiana.

Originally planned to go to Memphis, but the project was combined with the US 59 development in TX, so HPCs 18 & 20 (respectively) will become I-69, maybe in our children's lifetime...

[Grzrd]

The November 20, 2014 Texas Transportation Commission ("TTC") Agenda indicates that the TTC will approve a 1.6 mile addition to I-69E and a 4.5 mile addition to I-69C (pp. 3-4/13 of pdf; pp. 3-4 of document):

I-69E:

Nueces County - Designate a segment of the state highway system as I-69E, concurrent with US 77 from existing I-69E terminus in Robstown to south of FM 892 (MO) (Map)
The commission will consider the designation of a segment of the state highway system as I-69E, concurrent with US 77 from the existing I-69E terminus in Robstown to south of FM 892, a total distance of approximately 1.6 miles. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the Federal Highway Administration have approved the designation of this segment.

I-69C:

Hidalgo County - Designate a segment of the state highway system as I-69C, concurrent with US 281 from the junction of FM 490 to the existing I-69C terminus in Edinburg (MO) (Map)
The commission will consider the designation of a segment of the state highway system as I-69C, concurrent with US 281 from the junction of FM 490 to the existing I-69C terminus in Edinburg, a total distance of approximately 4.5 miles. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and the Federal Highway Administration have approved the designation of this segment.

edit

Here's a map of the two additions from the Agenda: