Print

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

[-- US 175 --]

Even though a decent number of upgrades have taken place on Loop 287 in Lufkin isn't TX DOT still looking at building I-69 as a new terrain bypass to the East of Lufkin? Or are they actually trying to bring at least one half of 287 loop up to Interstate standards?

I also thought Nacogdoches was going to get a new terrain bypass as well.

Originally, the movement was toward new east-of-Lufkin and west-of-Nacogdoches I-69 alignments, but now it appears the east part of Loop 287 and the west part of Loop 224 will be included in the I-69 path.  I'm not sure that was the best option, especially Loop 287 down by Lufkin Mall.  It's going to be such a tight squeeze to put anything more along there that resembles interstate standards.

[bwana39]

I think a bigger issue is getting past Angelina College and the Church Retreat further south.  The mall area will just get flyovers stacked up.It may require the loop to lose some of its direct connection, but it can be fit in there pretty neatly.

A better idea would have had it stay west of the tracks all the way from Diboll and connect with Loop 287 farther south.  They committed against that over a decade ago though.

[dariusb]

Has future 69 been constructed through Lufkin and Nacogdoches yet?

Here in Nacogdoches they're building the flyovers to bypass the horrible bottleneck of an intersection of LP 224 and US 59. Nothing has been upgraded to interstate standards. Lufkin is the closest, however there's driveways all along the "freeway" section. Sharp curves, lack of true shoulders.

Wow, I'm sure they'll replace some of those driveways with caps or frontage roads.

[capt.ron]

^ Right now, I think the main goal is creating an expressway-type road between Houston and Texarkana. A mix of limited-access and non-limited-access segments, a mix of intersections and interchanges - but with one prevailing feature - zero traffic signals.

Houston to Refugio is an expressway-type road, at 117 miles long from Refugio to the southern end of I-69 (in Kendleton), then seamlessly continuing north into Houston as urban interstate highway.

From Refugio, set the cruise at 80 mph, and never stop until you reach Houston or beyond (if you continue onto I-10 East).

The rural segments IMO should be the least priority as they're already rural expressway-type roads. Completion of town bypasses and selective interchanges will complete a continuous expressway-type road, then you can go back and upgrade the non-limited-access segments to rural interstate highway.

Also, the goal should include ZERO speed zones. In other words, limited access bypasses around each and every town / village along US 59 (I-369 & I-69).

[sprjus4]

^ Right now, I think the main goal is creating an expressway-type road between Houston and Texarkana. A mix of limited-access and non-limited-access segments, a mix of intersections and interchanges - but with one prevailing feature - zero traffic signals.

Houston to Refugio is an expressway-type road, at 117 miles long from Refugio to the southern end of I-69 (in Kendleton), then seamlessly continuing north into Houston as urban interstate highway.

From Refugio, set the cruise at 80 mph, and never stop until you reach Houston or beyond (if you continue onto I-10 East).

The rural segments IMO should be the least priority as they're already rural expressway-type roads. Completion of town bypasses and selective interchanges will complete a continuous expressway-type road, then you can go back and upgrade the non-limited-access segments to rural interstate highway.

Also, the goal should include ZERO speed zones. In other words, limited access bypasses around each and every town / village along US 59 (I-369 & I-69).

Agreed. In the case of Texas, a blanket 75 mph speed limit with a road designed to handle that speed throughout with no slowdowns. No random 60, 65 mph or 70 mph zones that pop out of nowhere. If there's a problematic area, construct grade separations, frontage roads, etc.

[bwana39]

The loop segment around Diboll and Burke is going fairly quickly. In just a matter of months they went from clearing thickets to pouring bridge posts. They are on-task on this one at least right now!

[abqtraveler]

The loop segment around Diboll and Burke is going fairly quickly. In just a matter of months they went from clearing thickets to pouring bridge posts. They are on-task on this one at least right now!

Does anyone have a map and/or pics of the Diboll Bypass? From what I recall from previous news articles, it was being routed around the east side of Diboll. Is that still the case?

[bwana39]

The loop segment around Diboll and Burke is going fairly quickly. In just a matter of months they went from clearing thickets to pouring bridge posts. They are on-task on this one at least right now!

Does anyone have a map and/or pics of the Diboll Bypass? From what I recall from previous news articles, it was being routed around the east side of Diboll. Is that still the case?

I have driven down the existing US-59 in recent weeks and it is indeed to the east.   I don't have any pictures, but here is the schematic https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot-info/i69/committees/angelina_nacogdoches/approved-schematic.pdf

[abqtraveler]

The loop segment around Diboll and Burke is going fairly quickly. In just a matter of months they went from clearing thickets to pouring bridge posts. They are on-task on this one at least right now!

Does anyone have a map and/or pics of the Diboll Bypass? From what I recall from previous news articles, it was being routed around the east side of Diboll. Is that still the case?

I have driven down the existing US-59 in recent weeks and it is indeed to the east.   I don't have any pictures, but here is the schematic https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot-info/i69/committees/angelina_nacogdoches/approved-schematic.pdf

Great, thanks. No updates to Google Maps or GSV in the Diboll area to show construction yet.