AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules to ensure post quality. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: US-96 to become an Interstate?  (Read 10220 times)

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #25 on: April 10, 2020, 06:32:50 PM »

The 69 / 75 reversal actually would have been my choice all along without expense being a major criteria. That said, I would pick 175 or 271 to reduce the number of signs needing changed.  US-75 in Texas is probably going away in the next five or so years anyway.

As to SH75, Texas does not worry about SH duplicating a US Highway or Interstate unless they intersect. FM's duplication is not worried about at all.



Would US 75 become TX 75? If you're going to that, kill US 75 at Atoka / US 69

In this case, US 75 would simply subsume US 69 -- and remain signed as a US highway --  from the split near Denison all the way south to Port Arthur.  US 69 would then take the current US 75 freeway straight into Dallas, where it would terminate at the I-345/TX 366 junction like US 75 does today.  If, of course, I-45 is ever extended up to the TX/OK line with a unilateral TX action, US 69 would either (a) terminate at the state line or (b) at ODOT option, be itself cut back to Atoka. 
Logged

bwana39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1371
  • Location: Near Texarkana TX
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 09:24:57 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #26 on: April 11, 2020, 04:10:58 PM »

The 69 / 75 reversal actually would have been my choice all along without expense being a major criteria. That said, I would pick 175 or 271 to reduce the number of signs needing changed.  US-75 in Texas is probably going away in the next five or so years anyway.

As to SH75, Texas does not worry about SH duplicating a US Highway or Interstate unless they intersect. FM's duplication is not worried about at all.



Would US 75 become TX 75? If you're going to that, kill US 75 at Atoka / US 69


No, it is expected US 75 from Dallas to the state line would become I-45.

I will add one thing to this discussion. Texas has not had a major renumber or significant rerouting of a US Highway except for  replacement by an interstate  since the sixties.  Renumbering US 69 is a BIG deal. It has not happened
Logged
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #27 on: April 11, 2020, 07:33:32 PM »

The 69 / 75 reversal actually would have been my choice all along without expense being a major criteria. That said, I would pick 175 or 271 to reduce the number of signs needing changed.  US-75 in Texas is probably going away in the next five or so years anyway.

As to SH75, Texas does not worry about SH duplicating a US Highway or Interstate unless they intersect. FM's duplication is not worried about at all.



Would US 75 become TX 75? If you're going to that, kill US 75 at Atoka / US 69


No, it is expected US 75 from Dallas to the state line would become I-45.

I will add one thing to this discussion. Texas has not had a major renumber or significant rerouting of a US Highway except for  replacement by an interstate  since the sixties.  Renumbering US 69 is a BIG deal. It has not happened

Nevertheless, there is one thing TxDOT doesn't mind doing -- truncating US highways that have been effectively subsumed by Interstates, particularly when much of the freeway alignment sits atop or immediately adjacent to the original road.  US 80 west of DFW, US 81, US 75, US 290 -- all cut back significantly.  Of course, US 90 is the exception, with its western independent section intact along with the portion following I-10 east of San Antonio (the other shorter independent segment between Houston and Beaumont notwithstanding).  And US 190 was extended west in the '80's (gratuitiously, IMO!); the oddity was the 1970 addition of US 57 (as a connector to the like-numbered Mexico federal highway).  But since those additions, the only activity has been the truncations.   Otherwise, I would have expected Alternate US 90 to be redesignated as mainline US 90 in order to avoid I-10 duplication, but that has never occurred.   
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1895
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 05:16:09 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #28 on: July 27, 2021, 02:51:39 PM »

Not bumping.  Wikipedia says US-96 is considered being upgraded to an interstate on it's entire route so it can connect to I-10, I-14 and I-69.  I like the idea.  It may seem unnecessary, but I think I-14's existence takes unnecessary off the table forever. 
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24183
  • My 2 Achilles' heels: sarcasm & snark

  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 23, 2022, 09:37:02 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #29 on: July 27, 2021, 03:00:43 PM »

Not bumping.  Wikipedia says US-96 is considered being upgraded to an interstate on it's entire route so it can connect to I-10, I-14 and I-69.  I like the idea.  It may seem unnecessary, but I think I-14's existence takes unnecessary off the table forever. 

Such was added to the Wikipedia article on 17-JUN-2019, and that user cited no sources.

Is this actually a thing?
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. Dick
If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

CoreySamson

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2136
  • Buc-ee's Fanboy

  • Age: 19
  • Location: Houston, TX/Tulsa, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:32:44 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #30 on: July 27, 2021, 03:04:10 PM »

Not bumping.  Wikipedia says US-96 is considered being upgraded to an interstate on it's entire route so it can connect to I-10, I-14 and I-69.  I like the idea.  It may seem unnecessary, but I think I-14's existence takes unnecessary off the table forever. 

Such was added to the Wikipedia article on 17-JUN-2019, and that user cited no sources.

Is this actually a thing?
Hence why I started the thread in the first place. It makes no sense why anyone would want this with I-49 and I-69 in close proximity. I-14 to Beaumont is something I would push for, but any other enhancements of the US 96 corridor are IMO completely, utterly pointless.

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24183
  • My 2 Achilles' heels: sarcasm & snark

  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 23, 2022, 09:37:02 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #31 on: July 27, 2021, 03:06:19 PM »

If nobody here knows of any actual agency considering the upgrade, then the edit on Wikipedia should probably be disputed.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. Dick
If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1895
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 05:16:09 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #32 on: July 27, 2021, 03:38:09 PM »

Not bumping.  Wikipedia says US-96 is considered being upgraded to an interstate on it's entire route so it can connect to I-10, I-14 and I-69.  I like the idea.  It may seem unnecessary, but I think I-14's existence takes unnecessary off the table forever. 

Such was added to the Wikipedia article on 17-JUN-2019, and that user cited no sources.

Is this actually a thing?

Maybe my reference to Wikipedia was in jest.  The greatest source in the world. 
Logged

US71

  • Road Scholar , Master of Snark
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 11808
  • Mad man with a camera

  • Age: 62
  • Location: On the road again
  • Last Login: Today at 01:16:52 AM
    • The Road Less Taken
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #33 on: July 27, 2021, 04:04:12 PM »

Not bumping.  Wikipedia says US-96 is considered being upgraded to an interstate on it's entire route so it can connect to I-10, I-14 and I-69.  I like the idea.  It may seem unnecessary, but I think I-14's existence takes unnecessary off the table forever. 

I disagree.  I can't see justifying an unnecessary highway because there's another unnecessary highway.  Where does one draw the line?
Logged
Like Alice I Try To Believe Three Impossible Things Before Breakfast

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24183
  • My 2 Achilles' heels: sarcasm & snark

  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 23, 2022, 09:37:02 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #34 on: July 27, 2021, 04:07:04 PM »

Where does one draw the line?

It's a straight line, between Lake Unerie and and Lewis/Gerry/Havery tripoint.
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. Dick
If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #35 on: July 27, 2021, 04:13:15 PM »

Not bumping.  Wikipedia says US-96 is considered being upgraded to an interstate on it's entire route so it can connect to I-10, I-14 and I-69.  I like the idea.  It may seem unnecessary, but I think I-14's existence takes unnecessary off the table forever. 

Such was added to the Wikipedia article on 17-JUN-2019, and that user cited no sources.

Is this actually a thing?

Maybe my reference to Wikipedia was in jest.  The greatest source in the world. 

IIRC, somewhere along the line in the process of planning (and marketing!) I-14, a number of branches both in west and east TX were proposed.  One of them, IIRC, did follow US 96, ostensibly to draw traffic from the area of the I-69/369 junction; the other veered southeast from the US 190-based trunk several miles east of Livingston, joining the US 96 "branch" near Lumberton; the combined routes then headed south to Beaumont and Port Arthur. 

While the following comment is more suited for the I-14 thread than this one -- as long as we're on the subject -- and the chances of I-14 leaving TX in our lifetimes (or maybe even our kids' lifetimes!) being slim & none, if I-14 sees in-state development, following the east Livingston branch down to Beaumont and Port Arthur makes eminently more sense than building something that would end in the middle of nowhere on the banks of the Sabine!  At least it'd make a decent bypass/cutoff from I-10 to the central part of the state, avoiding Houston in the process.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3434
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 11:46:33 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #36 on: July 27, 2021, 10:55:10 PM »

I think the idea is pretty much DOA due to some difficult problems.

The first problem is the split of US-69/287 and US-96 on the South side of Lumberton. Immediately North of where the existing freeway ends at that "Y" both highways drop down to undivided streets closely bracketed with development. Any Interstate upgrade of US-96 would have to divert off the existing freeway North of Beaumont well South of the Lumberton Y. Going on North much of the road would have to be new terrain highway. That wouldn't be an easy path. If it isn't towns like Silsbee in the way it's a hell of a lot of swamp land.

TX DOT has too many other super highway projects as irons in the fire. US-96 should be way way down on the list of priorities.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #37 on: July 28, 2021, 03:20:19 AM »

I think the idea is pretty much DOA due to some difficult problems.

The first problem is the split of US-69/287 and US-96 on the South side of Lumberton. Immediately North of where the existing freeway ends at that "Y" both highways drop down to undivided streets closely bracketed with development. Any Interstate upgrade of US-96 would have to divert off the existing freeway North of Beaumont well South of the Lumberton Y. Going on North much of the road would have to be new terrain highway. That wouldn't be an easy path. If it isn't towns like Silsbee in the way it's a hell of a lot of swamp land.

TX DOT has too many other super highway projects as irons in the fire. US-96 should be way way down on the list of priorities.

It's just not going to happen.  It's only ancillary to anything in the I-14 pathway, and has no formal connection to the I-69 effort; without a support base, it's just someone's pipedream, even if it found its way to being a highlighted portion of a map somewhere.  There's just no Beaumont-Texarkana traffic base to speak of, so even by TX's often overblown rationales, US 96, already a multilane facility for most of its length, is more than adequate for regional purposes. 
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7699
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:08:58 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #38 on: July 28, 2021, 10:32:37 AM »

^ US-96 is one of those important regional arterial highways that should at least be upgraded to free-flow. Four lane non-limited-access in rural areas, and controlled access bypasses at towns. Interchanges where needed in rural areas to eliminate all traffic signals. A blanket 75 mph speed limit throughout.
Logged

bwana39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1371
  • Location: Near Texarkana TX
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 09:24:57 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #39 on: July 28, 2021, 02:13:06 PM »

This one is a non-starter. US-96 (and US-287, and US-69) leave Beaumont together. They split soon after they leave. The farther north US-96 goes, the less important it becomes. US-69 and US-287 seemingly are seemingly more important.

You have to realize everyone WANTS an INTERSTATE. No one wants to pay for one and in Texas even most of the freeways may not be one.  This corridor is way down the line. Like seventeenth (a random number picked out of the air).

Outside the Golden Triangle (the Beaumont area) no one even even has thought about it.
« Last Edit: July 28, 2021, 10:41:59 PM by bwana39 »
Logged
Let's build what we need as economically as possible.

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #40 on: July 28, 2021, 04:43:17 PM »

This one is a non-starter. US-96 (and US-287, and US-69) are leave Beaumont together. They split soon after they leave. The farther north US-96 goes, the less important it becomes. US-69 and US-287 seemingly are seemingly more important.

You have to realize everyone WANTS an INTERSTATE. No one wants to pay for one and in Texas even most of the freeways may not be one.  This corridor is way down the line. Like seventeenth (a random number picked out of the air).

Outside the Golden Triangle (the Beaumont area) no one even even has thought about it.

The only portion of US 96 that stands even a snowball's chance in hell of ever being part of an Interstate corridor is that already multiplexed with US 69 and US 287 -- and that as a branch of the I-14 project -- a corridor segment that's likely to be at least a couple of decades out if selected for development.  Just little or no demand for a full freeway north of there, although it looks like US 96 is gradually being 4-laned. 
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3683
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 09:26:26 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #41 on: July 29, 2021, 03:46:02 PM »

The closest I could see to an Interstate along the US 96 corridor is a Beaumount-to-Port Aurthur 3di spur, and even that seems very unlikely.
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 8495
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: September 12, 2021, 12:44:33 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #42 on: July 29, 2021, 05:35:27 PM »

The closest I could see to an Interstate along the US 96 corridor is a Beaumount-to-Port Aurthur 3di spur, and even that seems very unlikely.

It's been mostly a freeway for decades, and if such an action hasn't taken place by now, it won't down the line.  It would take being considered a part of a longer corridor project to provoke any official Interstate-related activity here.  TxDOT's track record of "one major city, one 3di Interstate loop" speaks for itself.
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1895
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 05:16:09 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #43 on: July 29, 2021, 05:43:43 PM »

The closest I could see to an Interstate along the US 96 corridor is a Beaumount-to-Port Aurthur 3di spur, and even that seems very unlikely.

It's been mostly a freeway for decades, and if such an action hasn't taken place by now, it won't down the line.  It would take being considered a part of a longer corridor project to provoke any official Interstate-related activity here.  TxDOT's track record of "one major city, one 3di Interstate loop" speaks for itself.

I would agree, but I-14 exists.  The US-190 freeway has been a freeway for years before it was I-14, then it got knighted. 
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7699
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 02:08:58 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #44 on: July 29, 2021, 06:23:10 PM »

^

The closest I could see to an Interstate along the US 96 corridor is a Beaumount-to-Port Aurthur 3di spur, and even that seems very unlikely.

It's been mostly a freeway for decades, and if such an action hasn't taken place by now, it won't down the line.  It would take being considered a part of a longer corridor project to provoke any official Interstate-related activity here.  TxDOT's track record of "one major city, one 3di Interstate loop" speaks for itself.
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 337
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: November 27, 2022, 03:07:13 AM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #45 on: July 29, 2021, 07:13:34 PM »

The interstate portion of the WP page has been removed for unsourced info.
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1895
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 05:16:09 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #46 on: July 30, 2021, 10:56:14 AM »

^

The closest I could see to an Interstate along the US 96 corridor is a Beaumount-to-Port Aurthur 3di spur, and even that seems very unlikely.

It's been mostly a freeway for decades, and if such an action hasn't taken place by now, it won't down the line.  It would take being considered a part of a longer corridor project to provoke any official Interstate-related activity here.  TxDOT's track record of "one major city, one 3di Interstate loop" speaks for itself.

My point.  US-96 would get the Interstate treatment right now if it were part of a larger plan.  Just because it had been a freeway for a long time without an I designation doesn't mean it can't get it. 
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1604
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 09:29:57 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #47 on: July 30, 2021, 12:05:43 PM »

Thanks, but I fail to see the need for any Interstate, or even a freeway, on US 96 north of the US 69 split. Four-laning TX 105 from Lumberton to Cleveland where it meets US 59/Future I-69 would be a good enough connection.
Logged

kphoger

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 24183
  • My 2 Achilles' heels: sarcasm & snark

  • Location: Wichita, KS
  • Last Login: November 23, 2022, 09:37:02 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #48 on: July 30, 2021, 01:44:37 PM »

If nobody here knows of any actual agency considering the upgrade, then the edit on Wikipedia should probably be disputed.

Thank you, whoever that was.

03:08, 28 July 2021‎
WindowsOSXLinuxBSD
21,683 bytes −594‎
Unsourced information
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Visual edit
Logged
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

Quote from: Philip K. Dick
If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use them.

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1895
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: November 28, 2022, 05:16:09 PM
Re: US-96 to become an Interstate?
« Reply #49 on: July 30, 2021, 01:59:59 PM »

Thanks, but I fail to see the need for any Interstate, or even a freeway, on US 96 north of the US 69 split. Four-laning TX 105 from Lumberton to Cleveland where it meets US 59/Future I-69 would be a good enough connection.

Oh no!  Not the "good enough" argument again.
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.