AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Interstate 2  (Read 95999 times)

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 946
  • Location: Area Code 207
  • Last Login: Today at 02:10:13 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #300 on: January 18, 2017, 12:06:57 PM »

Can anyone confirm whether exit numbers are posted along I-2's entire length?
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

JotheC11

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5
  • Age: 24
  • Location: Mission, Tx
  • Last Login: July 09, 2017, 04:24:47 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #301 on: January 19, 2017, 09:05:09 AM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx
« Last Edit: January 19, 2017, 09:08:17 AM by JotheC11 »
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5859
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: May 23, 2017, 08:34:22 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #302 on: January 19, 2017, 11:24:30 AM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx it was intended to reach Laredo when the plans were drawn.

FTFY.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 946
  • Location: Area Code 207
  • Last Login: Today at 02:10:13 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #303 on: January 20, 2017, 12:38:57 AM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx
Are exit numbers posted along I-69C & I-69E as well?
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3424
  • Age: 47
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 01:45:43 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #304 on: January 20, 2017, 09:50:02 AM »

I think it will be decades before the three I-69s actually connect, and I-2 actually reaches Laredo. Then again, I-27 may not go there either. Three may be a crowd, but four is just too much.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 885
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 09:21:40 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #305 on: January 20, 2017, 02:01:34 PM »

If current political attitudes and policies keep going on their current path, I agree it will take decades for these routes to be fully completed.

The United States hasn't been always been so deficient at building infrastructure. Much of the original Interstate highway system was built from the late 1950's through 1970's. The aggressive pace of construction back then makes today's pace of road building look laughably pathetic by comparison. Additionally much more direct, efficient routes were being built rather than the pointless, crooked crap we have with current routes in development, like I-69.

If the federal and state governments really want it bad enough they could build out routes like the I-69 variants and I-2 in far South Texas and complete it in a relatively short amount of time.

The rapid rate of population growth in South Texas might force the I-69 and I-2 corridors to be built out sooner than our conservative predictions.
Logged

JotheC11

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5
  • Age: 24
  • Location: Mission, Tx
  • Last Login: July 09, 2017, 04:24:47 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #306 on: January 21, 2017, 09:08:06 AM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx
Are exit numbers posted along I-69C & I-69E as well?
on I-69C yes they are, ive seen exit 1c, 1b, 1a,  exit 2, etc
as for 69E ive yet to travel there
and i believe I-169 is not signed up yet near brownsville on the TX state hwy 550 tollway
Logged

JotheC11

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5
  • Age: 24
  • Location: Mission, Tx
  • Last Login: July 09, 2017, 04:24:47 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #307 on: January 21, 2017, 09:13:39 AM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx it was intended to reach Laredo when the plans were drawn.

FTFY.
thanks for the correction, didnt know they were drawn.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2120
  • Age: 48
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 03:57:21 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #308 on: January 21, 2017, 10:27:00 AM »

If current political attitudes and policies keep going on their current path, I agree it will take decades for these routes to be fully completed.

The United States hasn't been always been so deficient at building infrastructure. Much of the original Interstate highway system was built from the late 1950's through 1970's. The aggressive pace of construction back then makes today's pace of road building look laughably pathetic by comparison. Additionally much more direct, efficient routes were being built rather than the pointless, crooked crap we have with current routes in development, like I-69.

If the federal and state governments really want it bad enough they could build out routes like the I-69 variants and I-2 in far South Texas and complete it in a relatively short amount of time.

The rapid rate of population growth in South Texas might force the I-69 and I-2 corridors to be built out sooner than our conservative predictions.

The cities may not look that big but there are well over a million people in the valley, and that may be just counting the legals.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5859
  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: May 23, 2017, 08:34:22 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #309 on: January 21, 2017, 03:28:43 PM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx it was intended to reach Laredo when the plans were drawn.

FTFY.
thanks for the correction, didnt know they were drawn.

I wasn't referring to actual design sheets. What I meant is that exit numbers in no way predict the fulfillment of the dream. They only describe the dream.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.

Quillz

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2386
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Last Login: April 21, 2017, 08:12:44 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #310 on: January 21, 2017, 06:23:49 PM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx it was intended to reach Laredo when the plans were drawn.

FTFY.
thanks for the correction, didnt know they were drawn.

I wasn't referring to actual design sheets. What I meant is that exit numbers in no way predict the fulfillment of the dream. They only describe the dream.
Exactly. Here in California, many state highways have mile markers that don't line up with the actual mileage of the route (such as CA-14 starting with a mile marker in the teens, reflecting the never-built extension to the ocean).
Logged
US Highways: 1 / 2 / 6 / 12 / 14 / 16 / 18 / 20 / 26 / 30 / 50 / 64 / 66 / 84 / 85 / 87 / 91 / 93 / 95 / 97 / 99 / 101 / 189 / 191 / 201 / 285 / 287 / 385 / 395
Interstate Highways: 5 / 10 / 15 / 17 / 25 / 40 / 45 / 70 / 80 / 84 / 89 / 90 / 93 / 95

yakra

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 946
  • Location: Area Code 207
  • Last Login: Today at 02:10:13 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #311 on: January 30, 2017, 12:27:03 AM »

No exit numbers posted for I-69C's FM 162 & FM 490 interchanges?
Logged
"Officer, I'm always careful to drive the speed limit no matter where I am and that's what I was doin'." Said "No, you weren't," she said, "Yes, I was." He said, "Madam, I just clocked you at 22 MPH," and she said "That's the speed limit," he said "No ma'am, that's the route numbah!"  - Gary Crocker

Duke87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4691
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Queens, NY
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 11:54:29 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #312 on: February 04, 2017, 07:16:19 PM »

Since it wasn't explicitly answered yet, I can confirm that I-69E's exit numbers are posted in the field.. at least between I-2 and northern end of that segment past exit 51. The Robstown segment does not have exit numbers.

Logged
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3333
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 03:01:50 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #313 on: February 22, 2017, 02:04:38 PM »

This could become part of I-2: http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/adm/2013/documents/minute_orders/0926/6.pdf
Here is a snip from the map accompanying the above Loop 195 Minute Order:

This September 6 article reports that that approximately $13 million has been earmarked for improvements to FM 755, but that there is currently no funding for the estimated $159 million cost to build Loop 195

TxDOT recently held publlc meetings in Roma and Rio Grande City about Loop 195. From the Notice of Public Meeting:

Quote
The proposed project will be constructed in three phases as traffic volumes increase and funding becomes available. This project involves constructing a four-lane divided rural highway with a grass median within a proposed right of way (ROW) width that varies between 300-450 feet ....
The proposed project would require approximately 700 acres of additional roadway ROW. It is anticipated that the proposed project would require one business and eleven residential relocations. Relocation assistance is available for those displaced through TxDOTs Relocation Assistance Program. The relocation process would be conducted according to the Title II and Title III of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. Information about the benefits, services and Right of Way Acquisition schedule can be obtained at the TxDOT District Office, located at 600 W. U.S. 83, Pharr Texas.
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3333
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 03:01:50 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #314 on: February 28, 2017, 10:37:49 AM »

TxDOT recently held publlc meetings in Roma and Rio Grande City about Loop 195.

TxDOT has added the materials from the meeting. Here is a snip of the map of the Project Area from the Presentation (p. 6/18 of pdf):



Here is a Video conceptualization of the project:


It won't be I-2 upon completion of this project, but I suppose it could be upgraded in the future. Construction is projected to begin in 2021,
« Last Edit: February 28, 2017, 01:13:26 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

Duke87

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4691
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Queens, NY
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 11:54:29 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #315 on: February 28, 2017, 10:53:29 PM »

It won't be I-2 upon completion of this project, but I suppose it could be upgraded in the future.

Judging from the configuration I'd say it looks more like future I-2 frontage roads than anything else (except the overpass at US 83, which would be usable for the interstate itself).
Logged
If you always take the same road, you will never see anything new.

halork

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 61
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 04:03:08 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #316 on: April 07, 2017, 03:18:09 AM »

I was recently down in South Texas and managed to clinch all the signed portions of I-69E,C,W, and I-2 while I was there (at least as much as I could drive without going into Mexico). One question: there were almost no reassurance markers for I-2 along its entire length. Is this usual for urban freeways in Texas?
Logged

JotheC11

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5
  • Age: 24
  • Location: Mission, Tx
  • Last Login: July 09, 2017, 04:24:47 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #317 on: April 20, 2017, 10:48:30 AM »

I was recently down in South Texas and managed to clinch all the signed portions of I-69E,C,W, and I-2 while I was there (at least as much as I could drive without going into Mexico). One question: there were almost no reassurance markers for I-2 along its entire length. Is this usual for urban freeways in Texas?
there is reassurance markers on every entrance ramps, frontage roads, and as well on overhead signs.
Logged

Scott5114

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6730
  • Age: 27
  • Location: Norman, OK
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 02:01:43 PM
    • Denexa 100% Plastic Playing Cards
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #318 on: April 20, 2017, 05:38:03 PM »

I was recently down in South Texas and managed to clinch all the signed portions of I-69E,C,W, and I-2 while I was there (at least as much as I could drive without going into Mexico). One question: there were almost no reassurance markers for I-2 along its entire length. Is this usual for urban freeways in Texas?
there is reassurance markers on every entrance ramps, frontage roads, and as well on overhead signs.

A reassurance marker is the marker posted on the mainline immediately after an interchange, to "reassure" you that you have successfully made it onto the mainline. By definition they cannot be on an entrance ramp or frontage road.
Logged

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7451
  • Location: Orlando, fl
  • Last Login: July 19, 2017, 11:40:15 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #319 on: April 20, 2017, 05:57:55 PM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx
I-515 in Nevada uses US 95's mile markers, but a planned freeway to extend that down is never going to happen, but still Nevada use them.  In fact with I-11 in the works they all will have to be renumbered to reflect it entering the state at the new bridge over the Colorado along US 93.

So that being said means that I-2 is not in concrete to go to Laredo even though it would be logical.
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 06:44:47 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #320 on: April 20, 2017, 07:39:24 PM »

i live in mission tx. yes there are mile markers and mile exits, my exit is exit 139.
From mile 130 (from penitas tx) to i wanna say to mile 180 or 190-ish (Harlingen Tx) is the current full length.
being that mile marker starts at 130 from penitas, clearly soon I-2 will expand to Laredo, Tx
I-515 in Nevada uses US 95's mile markers, but a planned freeway to extend that down is never going to happen, but still Nevada use them.  In fact with I-11 in the works they all will have to be renumbered to reflect it entering the state at the new bridge over the Colorado along US 93.

So that being said means that I-2 is not in concrete to go to Laredo even though it would be logical.

Nevertheless, the new I-2-related mile markers specifically do not reference the existing route, US 83 -- those would increase as US 83 continued north from its southern terminus.  There would be no reason for TxDOT to deploy those markers unless there were plans, regardless of how long-term they were, to designate a specific corridor from Laredo (the zero-point of the calculated mileage) to Harlingen -- ostensibly I-2.  Extrapolating from this, TxDOT is likely to, at some point, set forth plans for the full corridor.  When that will occur -- or the time frame required to construct the corridor -- is, for the time being, anyone's guess! 
Logged

lordsutch

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 964
  • Last Login: June 25, 2017, 03:36:56 AM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #321 on: April 21, 2017, 12:04:22 AM »

Nevertheless, the new I-2-related mile markers specifically do not reference the existing route, US 83 -- those would increase as US 83 continued north from its southern terminus.  There would be no reason for TxDOT to deploy those markers unless there were plans, regardless of how long-term they were, to designate a specific corridor from Laredo (the zero-point of the calculated mileage) to Harlingen -- ostensibly I-2.  Extrapolating from this, TxDOT is likely to, at some point, set forth plans for the full corridor.  When that will occur -- or the time frame required to construct the corridor -- is, for the time being, anyone's guess! 

You're forgetting FHWA rules - I-2 is an east-west route and not a loop, and so mile and exit numbering must start in the west, and since I-2 is expected to creep west in the future, the zero point needs to be somewhere west of the current terminus.

So it's possible I-2 could be designated starting in Laredo at some point (the US 83/I-35 interchange, however, is an extremely unlikely terminus). As a matter of future-proofing it's the longest logical extent it will ever have, so that makes sense as a zero point.

But as a practical matter, absent a large influx of federal funding and huge growth in the upper RGV, or a policy decision that a direct freeway link wholly within the CBP border zone is needed to facilitate trade, there's little likelihood it will ever extend past Roma.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 06:44:47 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #322 on: April 21, 2017, 04:09:15 AM »

Nevertheless, the new I-2-related mile markers specifically do not reference the existing route, US 83 -- those would increase as US 83 continued north from its southern terminus.  There would be no reason for TxDOT to deploy those markers unless there were plans, regardless of how long-term they were, to designate a specific corridor from Laredo (the zero-point of the calculated mileage) to Harlingen -- ostensibly I-2.  Extrapolating from this, TxDOT is likely to, at some point, set forth plans for the full corridor.  When that will occur -- or the time frame required to construct the corridor -- is, for the time being, anyone's guess! 

You're forgetting FHWA rules - I-2 is an east-west route and not a loop, and so mile and exit numbering must start in the west, and since I-2 is expected to creep west in the future, the zero point needs to be somewhere west of the current terminus.

So it's possible I-2 could be designated starting in Laredo at some point (the US 83/I-35 interchange, however, is an extremely unlikely terminus). As a matter of future-proofing it's the longest logical extent it will ever have, so that makes sense as a zero point.

But as a practical matter, absent a large influx of federal funding and huge growth in the upper RGV, or a policy decision that a direct freeway link wholly within the CBP border zone is needed to facilitate trade, there's little likelihood it will ever extend past Roma.

I'm fully familiar with the rules -- just making the point that there's little chance that the mileposts refer to anything else but a projected I-2 corridor with its west terminus in or around Laredo -- and since it will utilize or closely parallel US 83 for most if not all of its length, mileposts that increase NW to SE (the actual basic alignment of the corridor) will in fact refer to an E-W route with I-2 the logical candidate.  And since this is Texas, where pure political will often has its way, there's a decent chance that the route will indeed be fully developed -- likely in the longer term.  That being said, I'm not holding my breath!
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 885
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 09:21:40 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #323 on: April 21, 2017, 11:21:50 AM »

I think an I-2 extension to Laredo is indeed a very possible and justifiable thing. Just look at the population numbers in far South Texas. The Rio Grande Valley MSA, which includes Brownsville, McAllen, Harlingen, Mission, Edinburgh, Pharr, Weslaco, Rio Grande City and Hidalgo has over 1.3 million people. South Padre Island is growing in popularity as a tourist destination.

236,000 people live within Laredo's city limits, which is very close to the 249,000 population level of Lubbock -and that city was apparently big enough to warrant I-27 being built from Amarillo. Laredo is an important border crossing for US/Mexican commerce.

There are other border communities growing along the US-83 corridor South of Laredo, like Zapata, Roma, Escobares, etc. Regardless of what happens with I-2, the US-83 highway will have to be improved more and more as population grows in that region.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1893
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: July 21, 2017, 06:44:47 PM
Re: Interstate 2
« Reply #324 on: April 21, 2017, 03:07:16 PM »

I think an I-2 extension to Laredo is indeed a very possible and justifiable thing. Just look at the population numbers in far South Texas. The Rio Grande Valley MSA, which includes Brownsville, McAllen, Harlingen, Mission, Edinburgh, Pharr, Weslaco, Rio Grande City and Hidalgo has over 1.3 million people. South Padre Island is growing in popularity as a tourist destination.

236,000 people live within Laredo's city limits, which is very close to the 249,000 population level of Lubbock -and that city was apparently big enough to warrant I-27 being built from Amarillo. Laredo is an important border crossing for US/Mexican commerce.

There are other border communities growing along the US-83 corridor South of Laredo, like Zapata, Roma, Escobares, etc. Regardless of what happens with I-2, the US-83 highway will have to be improved more and more as population grows in that region.

Fully concur.  Given past TX practice, what I'd expect would be a step-by-step continuation of the freeway NW from Mission (frontage roads first, freeway lanes later) with a similar progression SE from the western end (presuming it'll be along the Laredo loop and likely tie in to I-69W), at first to serve the growing Laredo 'burbs but later marching right down US 83.  Likely the last part to be completed will be a bridge over the reservoir SE of Zapata -- that might even be the "golden spike", so to speak, of I-2.
Logged

 


Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.