News:

Thanks to everyone for the feedback on what errors you encountered from the forum database changes made in Fall 2023. Let us know if you discover anymore.

Main Menu

I-69 in TX

Started by Grzrd, October 09, 2010, 01:18:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Bobby5280

#1775
Quote from: GreenLanternCorpsDon't know if this has been referenced before, but while playing around on Google Maps I found some September 2019 photos of construction for Ranch access on I-69E just North of Raymondville...
https://www.google.com/maps/@26.5979191,-97.7669605,3a,75y,16.57h,79.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5RnSs6JQPluYTtfWWLdfww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That Street View image is from the existing Northbound US-77 lanes. They're building the main lanes of I-69E in the median of existing US-77. That particular location is going to be a standard exit with slip ramps. The existing US-77 main lanes will effectively become frontage roads. At some point far enough North of Raymondville the existing US-77 main lanes will become the main lanes for I-69E. And those ranch access ramps will become necessary. They're much cheaper to build than continuous frontage roads.

The ranch access exits will look similar to the on/off ramps for a rest area, but on a smaller scale. The ramps will be just long enough to comply with current ramp geometry standards. They won't be like those grandfathered hard-turn ramps on I-25 in Colorado near Raton Pass. But the ramps aren't going to be all that long either. And there likely will not be any way to cross over to the opposing main lanes of the Interstate (no expensive bridge to build).


J N Winkler

Quote from: sparker on February 19, 2021, 06:44:35 PMActually, the interchange shown in the picture looks to be conventional -- no question about its utility.  What I was looking for was any picture of the "ranch access" accommodations planned for I-69E through the King Ranch area between Raymondville and Serita.  Additionally, it appears that the carriageways of existing US 77 are wide enough apart to accommodate a full-width freeway in the median; the bridge bents pictured are oriented to carry lanes over a E-W surface road, presumably the Thomas Ranch Road cited in the accompanying map.  It would be useful to see the actual freeway plans for this stretch -- whether it will be simple upgrades of the current facility or, like with I-69C/US 281 to the west, "filling in" a freeway within the existing facility's footprint, with the existing lanes ostensibly repurposed as frontage roads.

I dug up the plans for this project, which is CCSJ 0327-10-057 in Willacy County, let in August 2017.  They are not currently available on the TxDOT plans FTP server since indefinite archiving of advertised projects began only in 2019.  If anyone is interested in seeing them, I'll upload them to my Google Drive and post a link here.

The project is about four miles in length and runs from just north of Conley Road in Raymondville to a point about a mile south of the Kenedy County line.  TxDOT is not fitting the new I-69E mainlanes entirely within the existing US 77 carriageways.  Instead, existing southbound US 77 is becoming the southbound frontage road (generally with an asphalt overlay), new southbound I-69E mainlanes are being built in the current US 77 median, existing northbound US 77 is becoming the northbound mainlanes (generally with an asphalt overlay), and a non-continuous northbound frontage road is being built on new alignments in the vicinity of interchanges.

Two interchanges are being provided, neither with an exit number--La Esperanza and Yturria County Road.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

sparker

Quote from: J N Winkler on February 20, 2021, 12:16:54 AM
Quote from: sparker on February 19, 2021, 06:44:35 PMActually, the interchange shown in the picture looks to be conventional -- no question about its utility.  What I was looking for was any picture of the "ranch access" accommodations planned for I-69E through the King Ranch area between Raymondville and Serita.  Additionally, it appears that the carriageways of existing US 77 are wide enough apart to accommodate a full-width freeway in the median; the bridge bents pictured are oriented to carry lanes over a E-W surface road, presumably the Thomas Ranch Road cited in the accompanying map.  It would be useful to see the actual freeway plans for this stretch -- whether it will be simple upgrades of the current facility or, like with I-69C/US 281 to the west, "filling in" a freeway within the existing facility's footprint, with the existing lanes ostensibly repurposed as frontage roads.

I dug up the plans for this project, which is CCSJ 0327-10-057 in Willacy County, let in August 2017.  They are not currently available on the TxDOT plans FTP server since indefinite archiving of advertised projects began only in 2019.  If anyone is interested in seeing them, I'll upload them to my Google Drive and post a link here.

The project is about four miles in length and runs from just north of Conley Road in Raymondville to a point about a mile south of the Kenedy County line.  TxDOT is not fitting the new I-69E mainlanes entirely within the existing US 77 carriageways.  Instead, existing southbound US 77 is becoming the southbound frontage road (generally with an asphalt overlay), new southbound I-69E mainlanes are being built in the current US 77 median, existing northbound US 77 is becoming the northbound mainlanes (generally with an asphalt overlay), and a non-continuous northbound frontage road is being built on new alignments in the vicinity of interchanges.

Two interchanges are being provided, neither with an exit number--La Esperanza and Yturria County Road.

Thanks for the updated info; looks like TxDOT's simply saving money by reusing the NB 77 lanes as the same for I-69E.  Since there won't be much need for double frontage roads within the private ranch lands, the one on the west side should be more than sufficient to deal with local movements without impinging on through Interstate traffic.  Still, even with Bobby's detailed description, I'd sure like to see a schematic of one of the ranch-access facilities (with an eye toward "portability" of the concept to other rural Interstates in lieu of full interchanges or the need for at-grade intersections).  Might have some utility regardiing outlying areas of the P-to-P corridor or even I-11 in AZ and NV! 

GreenLanternCorps

#1778
To summarize I-69E from Corpus Christi to Brownsville...

I-37 to FM 2826  Completed to Interstate Standards signed as I-69  (not I-69E)

FM 2826 to just North of County Road 10 (Bishop, TX)  Under Construction, Driscoll Bypass.

County Road 10 to County Road E 2130 (Kingsville, TX) Completed to Interstate Standards, signed as US 77

County Road E 2130 to County Road 2340 (Riviera, TX) Divided Highway not to interstate standards, will need interchanges and probably a bypass around Riviera.

County Road 2340 to just north of Serita TX, Divided Highway

Serita Texas, Interstate Standard Frontage Road and Interchange already completed about a mile or two of interstate standard highway signed as US 77

Serita, Texas  to just North of Raymondville - approx. 40 miles of ranch land

Just North of Raymondville  4 mile of interchange Construction to Interstate standards

Raymondville to Brownsville at border with Mexico, signed as I-69E




Edit, embarrassing mistake fixed...


ethanhopkin14

Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 22, 2021, 11:07:40 AM
To summarize I-69E from Corpus Christi to Brownsville...

I-37 to FM 2826  Completed to Interstate Standards signed as I-69  (not I-69E)

FM 2826 to just North of County Road 10 (Bishop, TX)  Under Construction, Driscoll Bypass.

County Road 10 to County Road E 2130 (Kingsville, TX) Completed to Interstate Standards, signed as US 77

County Road E 2130 to County Road 2340 (Riviera, TX) Divided Highway not to interstate standards, will need interchanges and probably a bypass around Riviera.

County Road 2340 to just north of Serita TX, Divided Highway

Serita Texas, Interstate Standard Frontage Road and Interchange already completed about a mile or two of instate standard highway signed as US 77

Serita, Texas  to just North of Raymondville - approx. 40 miles of ranch land

Just North of Raymondville  4 mile of interchange Construction to Interstate standards

Raymondville to Brownsville at border with Mexico, signed as I-69E

FTFY

GreenLanternCorps

Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 22, 2021, 11:14:06 AM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 22, 2021, 11:07:40 AM
To summarize I-69E from Corpus Christi to Brownsville...

I-37 to FM 2826  Completed to Interstate Standards signed as I-69  (not I-69E)

FM 2826 to just North of County Road 10 (Bishop, TX)  Under Construction, Driscoll Bypass.

County Road 10 to County Road E 2130 (Kingsville, TX) Completed to Interstate Standards, signed as US 77

County Road E 2130 to County Road 2340 (Riviera, TX) Divided Highway not to interstate standards, will need interchanges and probably a bypass around Riviera.

County Road 2340 to just north of Serita TX, Divided Highway

Serita Texas, Interstate Standard Frontage Road and Interchange already completed about a mile or two of instate standard highway signed as US 77

Serita, Texas  to just North of Raymondville - approx. 40 miles of ranch land

Just North of Raymondville  4 mile of interchange Construction to Interstate standards

Raymondville to Brownsville at border with Mexico, signed as I-69E

FTFY


abqtraveler

Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 22, 2021, 02:21:25 PM
Quote from: ethanhopkin14 on February 22, 2021, 11:14:06 AM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorps on February 22, 2021, 11:07:40 AM
To summarize I-69E from Corpus Christi to Brownsville...

I-37 to FM 2826  Completed to Interstate Standards signed as I-69  (not I-69E)

FM 2826 to just North of County Road 10 (Bishop, TX)  Under Construction, Driscoll Bypass.

County Road 10 to County Road E 2130 (Kingsville, TX) Completed to Interstate Standards, signed as US 77

County Road E 2130 to County Road 2340 (Riviera, TX) Divided Highway not to interstate standards, will need interchanges and probably a bypass around Riviera.

County Road 2340 to just north of Serita TX, Divided Highway

Serita Texas, Interstate Standard Frontage Road and Interchange already completed about a mile or two of instate standard highway signed as US 77

Serita, Texas  to just North of Raymondville - approx. 40 miles of ranch land

Just North of Raymondville  4 mile of interchange Construction to Interstate standards

Raymondville to Brownsville at border with Mexico, signed as I-69E

FTFY



So maybe by the end of this decade we might see I-69E completed between I-37 and the Mexican border at Brownsville.
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 84(W), 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 37, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

TheBox

Can someone give me photos of the state of I-69/US-59 construction from Richmond-Rosenburg to Beasley-Kendleton?
Wake me up when they upgrade US-290 between the state's largest city and growing capital into expressway standards if it interstate standards.

Giddings bypass, Elgin bypass, and Elgin-Manor freeway/tollway when?

edwaleni

#1783
HOUSTON, Texas (KTRK) -- All mainlanes of the Southwest Freeway are set to reopen Monday morning, after crews worked to tear down two old interchange ramps.

Drivers experienced major delays around the US-59/I-610 interchange in the Galleria area this weekend.

The freeway will remain shut down until 5 a.m. Monday in both directions between the West Loop and South Rice.

On Sunday evening, crews were re-striping the mainlanes of I-69.

TxDOT had opened the brand new West Loop northbound connector to US-59 Southbound, so now the old one is coming down.

Until then, take Richmond or other surface streets as an alternate route.

Drivers also experienced slowdowns on the Katy Freeway this weekend. Three lanes of I-10 were closed inbound just outside of downtown, between Studemont and Houston Avenue.

Take Memorial as an alternate route.

Thegeet

Hey guys, I've been on Us 59 this past week from Ganado to i-10. In Richmond/Rosenberg, new signs with exit numbers were installed up to I believe Spur 10, I think Exit 94. Everything south is under construction. I noticed that they were reconstructing Spur 10 exit. The Spur 529 exit is complete. In Beasley/Kendelton, there was a black trash bag taped on three overhead green exit signs for either Grunwald rd or Spur 541. They're doing some kind of bridge construction for a frontage rd north of hungerford. In el campo,the north portion of the freeeway has been detoured onto the frontage roads until after I believe fm 1163. In Victoria, they are still working between loop 463 and fm 1686, but haven't begun on the sh 185 interchange. In Houston, they used the regular exit sign format, but they switched to the stacked version where the arrow is below the number, and in from Richmond down south, the signs read "97 exit >" . I hope this helps in getting a bigger picture. It's my first post, btw. I'll provide updates on us 59 from Victoria to Houston as I capture them. Thanks.

OCGuy81

Out of curiosity, are the mileage numbers reflective of US 59? If 69 is ever finished in Texas, will it use mileage from the merging of 69W, 69C, and 69E going north?

Thegeet

Quote from: OCGuy81 on March 21, 2021, 11:35:57 PM
Out of curiosity, are the mileage numbers reflective of US 59? If 69 is ever finished in Texas, will it use mileage from the merging of 69W, 69C, and 69E going north?
I'm not even sure how mileage marks work because on US 59/77 near Victoria it says some number, either something like 431A or 735B, although it is less than 200 mi from the border.  I can't remember. But I assume I 69 would start at 0 in Victoria since it has started at that point.

Thegeet

So how's the construction going north of Raymondville and Driscoll on us 77?

Avalanchez71

Quote from: Bobby5280 on February 19, 2021, 08:49:46 PM
Quote from: GreenLanternCorpsDon't know if this has been referenced before, but while playing around on Google Maps I found some September 2019 photos of construction for Ranch access on I-69E just North of Raymondville...
https://www.google.com/maps/@26.5979191,-97.7669605,3a,75y,16.57h,79.13t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s5RnSs6JQPluYTtfWWLdfww!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

That Street View image is from the existing Northbound US-77 lanes. They're building the main lanes of I-69E in the median of existing US-77. That particular location is going to be a standard exit with slip ramps. The existing US-77 main lanes will effectively become frontage roads. At some point far enough North of Raymondville the existing US-77 main lanes will become the main lanes for I-69E. And those ranch access ramps will become necessary. They're much cheaper to build than continuous frontage roads.

The ranch access exits will look similar to the on/off ramps for a rest area, but on a smaller scale. The ramps will be just long enough to comply with current ramp geometry standards. They won't be like those grandfathered hard-turn ramps on I-25 in Colorado near Raton Pass. But the ramps aren't going to be all that long either. And there likely will not be any way to cross over to the opposing main lanes of the Interstate (no expensive bridge to build).

That just looks like a colossal waste of taxpayer money.  What is wrong with the current US 77 configuration?  Doesn't the I-40 panhandle concept also work out there as well?

sprjus4

The current US-77 configuration is non-limited-access with private driveways and crossovers which are prohibited on controlled access interstate highways. I-40 is certainly not the norm, and shouldn't be considered a standard that's accepted everywhere.

Bobby5280

I think TX DOT should remedy those crossovers on I-40 in the Texas Panhandle. The crossovers need to be removed and then the hard right turns need to be replaced with limited frontage roads and ramps. If it was up to me I-40 would not be signed as an Interstate on that segment. Post signs would have a "TO" thingie stuck above I-40.

sprjus4

Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 22, 2021, 11:20:17 AM
I think TX DOT should remedy those crossovers on I-40 in the Texas Panhandle. The crossovers need to be removed and then the hard right turns need to be replaced with limited frontage roads and ramps. If it was up to me I-40 would not be signed as an Interstate on that segment. Post signs would have a "TO" thingie stuck above I-40.
Could be similar to I-26 in North Carolina with "Future" designation. Provides continuity for drivers but not official designated until upgrades are complete.

CoreySamson

Quote from: OCGuy81 on March 21, 2021, 11:35:57 PM
Out of curiosity, are the mileage numbers reflective of US 59? If 69 is ever finished in Texas, will it use mileage from the merging of 69W, 69C, and 69E going north?
Quote from: Thegeet on March 21, 2021, 11:20:04 PM
I think Exit 94.
Thegeet already basically answered your question. I-69 will use mileage from the merging of the spurs going north. From the Spur 10 exit it's about 94 miles to the US59/77 interchange south of Victoria, where I-69W and I-69E are supposed to merge.
Buc-ee's and QuikTrip fanboy. Clincher of FM roads. Proponent of the TX U-turn.

My Route Log
My Clinches

Now on mobrule and Travel Mapping!

sprjus4

Effectively, they're going to be separate routes with separate mileage from each other. I-69 will exist from Victoria to Louisiana, I-69E will exist from Brownsville to Victoria, I-69W will exist from Laredo to Victoria, and I-69C will exist from McAllen to Three Rivers. MM 1 will exist at the southern end of each route and increase as it moves north.

kernals12

How do they plan on keeping people from stealing the signs? :bigass:

Avalanchez71

Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 22, 2021, 11:20:17 AM
I think TX DOT should remedy those crossovers on I-40 in the Texas Panhandle. The crossovers need to be removed and then the hard right turns need to be replaced with limited frontage roads and ramps. If it was up to me I-40 would not be signed as an Interstate on that segment. Post signs would have a "TO" thingie stuck above I-40.

Do you have statistics showing the dangers of these very slightly used turns?  The same approach could be used on US 77 in Kenedy County.  TX could save a boat load of bucks by leaving US 77 in Kenedy County nearly has in and petitioning wavering in I-69E signage.

OCGuy81

Quote from: CoreySamson on March 22, 2021, 12:20:08 PM
Quote from: OCGuy81 on March 21, 2021, 11:35:57 PM
Out of curiosity, are the mileage numbers reflective of US 59? If 69 is ever finished in Texas, will it use mileage from the merging of 69W, 69C, and 69E going north?
Quote from: Thegeet on March 21, 2021, 11:20:04 PM
I think Exit 94.
Thegeet already basically answered your question. I-69 will use mileage from the merging of the spurs going north. From the Spur 10 exit it's about 94 miles to the US59/77 interchange south of Victoria, where I-69W and I-69E are supposed to merge.

Thank you! It's been a long time since I inquired and I know there's been changes in the alignment since.

Great information

Thegeet

For those ranch access crossovers and roads, they should just put a "Authorized Vehicles Only"  sign.

Bobby5280

#1798
Quote from: Avalanchez71Do you have statistics showing the dangers of these very slightly used turns?  The same approach could be used on US 77 in Kenedy County.  TX could save a boat load of bucks by leaving US 77 in Kenedy County nearly has in and petitioning wavering in I-69E signage.

I don't have any crash stats for that part of I-40. I do have a lot of driving experience in Texas, including out there in the Panhandle region. People out there drive fast and faster still on the Interstates. Even if grisly collisions aren't happening there on a frequent basis the hazard still exists.

Drivers nationwide have the expectation that an Interstate highway means limited access. No driveways. No crossovers. No at-grade left turns. Drivers are not anticipating the possibility some rancher in a pickup truck is going to suddenly whip out in front of them into the main lanes of the highway from a dead stop. God forbid if the rancher is hauling a trailer. That's even more of a sudden, dangerous road block obstacle. In a perfect world the ranchers would only be out there using those crossovers in bright daylight, perhaps early in the morning. But we don't live in a perfect world. Visibility along the highway is not always great. And many drivers aren't always paying perfect attention to the road either.

4-lane "expressways" with at-grade intersections often have dedicated acceleration and deceleration lanes at intersections. Or they at least have dedicated left turn lanes. These crossovers on I-40 don't even have any of that stuff. So they actually make that stretch of I-40 even worse than regular non-Interstate 4-lane highways.

Thegeet

Btw, notice the signs in Houston have Clearview font exit number plaques on top of highway gothic exit info signs. They need to be updated soon.



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.