I-69 in TX

[sprjus4]

It's because they added new exit number tabs on top of existing signage, without replacing the entire sign.

[TXtoNJ]

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.

Literally the most pointless expenditure of money imaginable. Something that only a small proportion of roadgeeks would care about.

[J N Winkler]

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.

On US 59, which did not become part of I-69 (with zero point fixed at Victoria) until over a decade after a massive reconstruction in the early noughties, many of these sign panels are now almost 20 years old.  I suspect they'll be replaced in the next few years due to life-expired sheeting.

[edwaleni]

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.

Literally the most pointless expenditure of money imaginable. Something that only a small proportion of roadgeeks would care about.

What exactly do you think AARoads caters too?

[TXtoNJ]

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.

Literally the most pointless expenditure of money imaginable. Something that only a small proportion of roadgeeks would care about.

What exactly do you think AARoads caters too?

Sometime y'all need a dose of reality

[bwana39]

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.

Literally the most pointless expenditure of money imaginable. Something that only a small proportion of roadgeeks would care about.

While I agree with the sentiment on the expenditure, I get the reason why the mismatched font chaps some people's hide. That said, it can either be like someone else's (benign) mole, IT BOTHERS YOU, but so what... or IT IS SO PATENTLY WRONG that it must go. Like the mole, it may continue to bother you, but it is primarily an aesthetic issue and spending money on rectifying it is not a great choice of how to spend the money.

The real issue here is TXDOT with rare exceptions uses Clearview exclusively. Do I think the new numbers' fonts should have matched the original sign's font? Yes I do. Here is where the rub comes in.  The options are / were 1) DO exactly what they did. Make each of the mile marker tags in Clearview without consideration to what the original font was. 2) Spend engineering time to make sure the fonts match and production costs to  make up the individual signs in the resident font.  or in an even more macabre scenario. 3) Remove the ENTIRE sign if it is not in Clearview and replace the whole thing so it will match.

As everyone here has surely noticed, I am a penny pincher. They renumbered the exit numbers in the most economical way feasible to complete the job.  I look at them and they look as awkward to me as they do to many of you.

We all have pet peeves....My big beef is the unfaded voids when they change shields on gantry signs. I want the things ripped down and shot with a quick coat of paint (not really that easy with the high performance coatings on the signs, but......)   I get the economics. In the scheme of things, if I had to choose between more miles  (or even feet) of good quality highway miles or Frankenstein signs, I would choose the roads.

[Thegeet]

BTW, my phone won't let me upload an image, but for the SH 288 interchange on southbound I-69/US-59, the sign that's supposed to read "SOUTH 69 59 VICTORIA"  is completely messed up, it would look like a camera glitch. It reads "SOUTH VICTORIA"  with the middle having a covered up but slightly visible "SOUTH" . Now that is even worse than the exit mileage tabs. The tags can stay until there's a budget for new signs. However, this other thing is confusing to some people.

[Thegeet]

Another question: if it was decided to convert Loop 463 US-77 to US-59/BUS-59T into an auxiliary route of I-69, and it only reached I-69W would it be a spur route (I.e., I-569) or a bypass route (I.E., I-269), would it be something completely new like I-1069?

[O Tamandua]

Not quite off-topic: it was announced this week that the Canadian Pacific and the Kansas City Southern will merge.  Fascinating how closely (save for the "bow" in the current CP lines around Davenport and the Twin Cities) the future I-49/Texas I-69 corridors parallel each other.

[Revive 755]

Another question: if it was decided to convert Loop 463 US-77 to US-59/BUS-59T into an auxiliary route of I-69, and it only reached I-69W would it be a spur route (I.e., I-569) or a bypass route (I.E., I-269), would it be something completely new like I-1069?

Precedent is most 3di's off a suffixed interstate behave as if the parent route was not suffixed, with former I-180N in Idaho being the lone exception.  I-635 around Dallas is the only example still in existence with the removal of I-80S in Ohio and Pennsylvania plus the cancellation of I-335 around Minneapolis.

At the moment I think there will be more anomalies/children without parents such as I-238 prior to a ten digit interstate number being used - guessing North Carolina may be the state that tests this.

[GreenLanternCorps]

Another question: if it was decided to convert Loop 463 US-77 to US-59/BUS-59T into an auxiliary route of I-69, and it only reached I-69W would it be a spur route (I.e., I-569) or a bypass route (I.E., I-269), would it be something completely new like I-1069?

Precedent is most 3di's off a suffixed interstate behave as if the parent route was not suffixed, with former I-180N in Idaho being the lone exception.  I-635 around Dallas is the only example still in existence with the removal of I-80S in Ohio and Pennsylvania plus the cancellation of I-335 around Minneapolis.

At the moment I think there will be more anomalies/children without parents such as I-238 prior to a ten digit interstate number being used - guessing North Carolina may be the state that tests this.

“There is another.” -Yoda

I-169 branches off of I-69E

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_169_(Texas)

[rickmastfan67]

GreenLanternCorps, be careful with URLs that have a ')' at the end.  SMF's software likes to omit it and give you a broken link unless you use the 'URL' code around it.  So, I've fixed it for ya.

[sparker]

Not quite off-topic: it was announced this week that the Canadian Pacific and the Kansas City Southern will merge.  Fascinating how closely (save for the "bow" in the current CP lines around Davenport and the Twin Cities) the future I-49/Texas I-69 corridors parallel each other.

Aside from the trackage-rights situation between Chicago and Ontario, the "weak link" of the system is between KC and Chicago, which uses old Milwaukee Road (CMStP&P) rail, which is mostly single-track (their main line was Chicago-Twin Cities and then to points beyond including Seattle); the KC line received little use until CP took it over back in 1985.  Parent CP will have to sink quite a bit of upgrade money into this line if it to reach its potential (longer passing tracks, strengthened bridges, etc.).  But between the capital resources of CP and KCS, they should be able to do this without breaking the bank!  KCS's N-S tracks between KC and Port Arthur, TX have always been kept in exemplary condition -- one of the best-run RR's around!

[Revive 755]

^ [starts a reply about KCS fitting better with CN and having the option for two north-south lines, thinks better of it]

[Anthony_JK]

^ [starts a reply about KCS fitting better with CN and having the option for two north-south lines, thinks better of it]

Didn't CN buy out Illinois Central for that very purpose (access to NOLA and the South)??

[sparker]

^ [starts a reply about KCS fitting better with CN and having the option for two north-south lines, thinks better of it]

Didn't CN buy out Illinois Central for that very purpose (access to NOLA and the South)??

Absolutely.  If one looks at the present CN network, the former IC line from Chicago to NOLA (and its equally important branch to the Port of Mobile) is the stem of a "funnel", fed by CN lines coming in from the NW (Winnipeg) via Duluth and central WI and from the NE via Lansing and Port Huron, MI.  It's a really efficient system, and CN owns all the tracks (so to avoid the dispatching problems that often occur with trackage-rights arrangements).  Wouldn't be surprised to see the CP/KCS combo look to purchase or lease underutilized lines north out of KC for a more direct way to reach CP' western hub in Calgary from the main KCS stem.

[GreenLanternCorps]

GreenLanternCorps, be careful with URLs that have a ')' at the end.  SMF's software likes to omit it and give you a broken link unless you use the 'URL' code around it.  So, I've fixed it for ya.

Thanks

[The Ghostbuster]

Once 69/69E/69C/69W, 369, and extensions of Interstates 14 and 27 are constructed, does anyone believe Texas's "Interstate fever" will finally subside?

[bwana39]

Once 69/69E/69C/69W, 369, and extensions of Interstates 14 and 27 are constructed, does anyone believe Texas's "Interstate fever" will finally subside?

You have to actually believe I-14 and I-27 will be built out to even get there. Frankly, I don't.

[aboges26]

Once 69/69E/69C/69W, 369, and extensions of Interstates 14 and 27 are constructed, does anyone believe Texas's "Interstate fever" will finally subside?

Not a chance, by that time they will need I-33 running from San Antonio to Wichita Falls to replace US 281 as a bypass of Austin and DFW, maybe I-47 running from Beaumont to DFW, I-34 to replace US 287 running from DFW to Amarillo, and possibly even I-32 running from Lubbock to Austin and possibly on to Houston.  If I-69, I-14, and I-27 extensions are signs of things to come, there will surely continue to be a need to expand the system due to all the people and jobs moving into the state.  Of course if the state turns "blue" like may people predict, that could stymie this growth akin to California, but the need appears to be there if the trajectory continues.

[Revive 755]

Wouldn't be surprised to see the CP/KCS combo look to purchase or lease underutilized lines north out of KC for a more direct way to reach CP' western hub in Calgary from the main KCS stem.

I'm not sure there are that many underutilized lines going north from KC.  Maybe part of the BNSF line up to Council Bluffs, but I usually see a train along I-29 in Iowa.

[ethanhopkin14]

Once 69/69E/69C/69W, 369, and extensions of Interstates 14 and 27 are constructed, does anyone believe Texas's "Interstate fever" will finally subside?

Not a chance, by that time they will need I-33 running from San Antonio to Wichita Falls to replace US 281 as a bypass of Austin and DFW, maybe I-47 running from Beaumont to DFW, I-34 to replace US 287 running from DFW to Amarillo, and possibly even I-32 running from Lubbock to Austin and possibly on to Houston.  If I-69, I-14, and I-27 extensions are signs of things to come, there will surely continue to be a need to expand the system due to all the people and jobs moving into the state.  Of course if the state turns "blue" like may people predict, that could stymie this growth akin to California, but the need appears to be there if the trajectory continues.

SH-71 & US-290 from Columbus to Junction through Austin as an Interstate. 

[sparker]

Once 69/69E/69C/69W, 369, and extensions of Interstates 14 and 27 are constructed, does anyone believe Texas's "Interstate fever" will finally subside?

Not a chance, by that time they will need I-33 running from San Antonio to Wichita Falls to replace US 281 as a bypass of Austin and DFW, maybe I-47 running from Beaumont to DFW, I-34 to replace US 287 running from DFW to Amarillo, and possibly even I-32 running from Lubbock to Austin and possibly on to Houston.  If I-69, I-14, and I-27 extensions are signs of things to come, there will surely continue to be a need to expand the system due to all the people and jobs moving into the state.  Of course if the state turns "blue" like may people predict, that could stymie this growth akin to California, but the need appears to be there if the trajectory continues.

SH-71 & US-290 from Columbus to Junction through Austin as an Interstate. 

First, get some Austin folks with clout to get behind such a proposal (state legislators and county officials generally qualify in that sense), add as many local congressmen as possible to the list of backers (at least one of your senators would help!), come up with a concise brief as to what the corridor would accomplish, and get it inserted in the next USDOT round of yearly funding as a dedicated High Priority Corridor, with a "future Interstate" codicil attached.  That's how corridors get on the books these days.  That's the relatively easy part; once that's done, then you tackle funding -- which is another ball of wax altogether.  That's something that will likely be a continuous battle until the corridor is under way.   Good luck!   

[Thegeet]

Anyone know what number SH-44 will be named when it becomes an interstate?

[sparker]

Anyone know what number SH-44 will be named when it becomes an interstate?

Bandied about so far:  I-469, I-569, even I-6 (after I-2 was designated).  Submitted to AASHTO or, alternately, added to authorizing legislation to date:  nada!  I'm guessing that this corridor branch will be addressed after I-69E is functionally completed south of I-37; that seems to be the present developmental focus -- so nobody has prioritized a decision regarding designation of that E-W branch.