Interstate 69 Extension: Your Thoughts

[roadgeek]

How do you feel about the I-69 extension from Indy southward? I for one look forward to its completion. It's amazing this project is going forward inspite of a lot of opposition.

[Alex]

Some sections will be useful, especially in Texas.

[agentsteel53]

just what we need, 69 ending west of 35.

[Alex]

just what we need, 69 ending west of 35.

I didn't say I liked the number! But thats what we do nowadays, extend existing numbers rather than come up with new ones. Interstate 22 is the only exception.

Extend I-26
Extend I-74
Extend I-69
Extend I-57
Extend I-30
Extend I-49

You get the idea. 

[agentsteel53]

goodness, don't get me started on I-74.  Why do we need an I-74 in NC again?  *and* an I-73???

then again, a lot of US routes got extended in the 1930s and 40s well past their original intents, like US-82 made it all the way to New Mexico, ending up well north of US-80.  And US-64 and US-84 somehow ended up intersecting in NM as well.

there's also always US-62, because we all know we need a single route to connect Buffalo to El Paso!

[Alex]

goodness, don't get me started on I-74.  Why do we need an I-74 in NC again?  *and* an I-73???

then again, a lot of US routes got extended in the 1930s and 40s well past their original intents, like US-82 made it all the way to New Mexico, ending up well north of US-80.  And US-64 and US-84 somehow ended up intersecting in NM as well.

there's also always US-62, because we all know we need a single route to connect Buffalo to El Paso!

I thought U.S. 62 was a consolitation prize to Kentucky over U.S. 60 originally? Something like that anyway...

[John]

Yeah the I-69 numbering is dumb, but some of it makes sense, like the parts in Indiana and some in Texas.

[Urban Prairie Schooner]

The only section that make sense is the Rio Grande Valley-Houston-Shreveport section. Instead of having three forks at the south end, though, complete only the east fork (to Brownsville) via US 77 and make the US 83 freeway to McAllen an Interstate spur. Houston and Laredo already have an Interstate connection in I-10 and I-35. And number the whole thing I-47, too. I-69 conflicts with US 69 in east Texas.

I might be convinced into embracing the Memphis to Indianapolis section if the numbers make sense. Far as I can tell, Memphis and Indianapolis are already connected reasonably well by Interstate mileage. It would seem that there are already adequate four lane corridors feeding Evansville from the north and south. I see no purpose in blowing scarce capital on a transcontinental freeway just to serve Evansville, Indiana.

For the Shreveport-Memphis segment, the I-49 extension that will tie into I-30 at Texarkana, along with existing I-30, I-440, and I-40, will provide a decent link between the two cities. Just can't see how a city the size of Greenville deserves an Interstate when it already has or will have all dual carriageway connections in at least three directions. Sorry, Mississippi, but that spur you built through the cotton fields of Desoto County will have to be contented with serving the suckers who travel to Tunica to get lucky.

I still can't believe that MS was given permission to sign that road as "I-69". Need to make a trip and see it for myself...

[Scott5114]

How many normal people come across this and snigger at the number of an "I-69"?

[Darkchylde]

"Normal", as in people who can actually find relationships? 

[agentsteel53]

fudge, I'm normal now?

and every time I see "I-69" I grimace at the horrible violation of numbering.

[un1]

I remember traveling in Texas and I saw a sign saying "Future I-69 Corridor", I was amazed at it, at first I though it was a joke. Later that day I looked it up on the Internet, and there it was, the extension all the way through Texas! 

[njroadhorse]

Personally, I think I-69 should be extended to Memphis and that's it.  Most of the route, barring the urban areas, is largely underdeveloped and not in any real need of a highway like this.  It would be a waste of the government's money to extend it through those areas in AR, MS, and LA.  But that route in TX does sound appealing for I-47. 

[DrZoidberg]

Overall, I like the idea of I-69, and think it would make sense through Texas, even though the numbering may need to be revised.  I think I-69 would alleviate a lot of NAFTA traffic that clogs I-35 so horribly, especially through Austin.  (They may have improved this, last time I was in Austin was 2004, and I recall seeing construction on 35) What about making the section from Houston to the southwest an extension of I-45? It'd give the overall route sort of a "J" shape to it, but why not?  The existing US 59 north of Houston could be the proposed I-47 I saw mentioned on here.

The existing I-45 from Houston to Galveston could be I-310, I-145, etc. 

I-45 COULD also be extended north to Oklahoma along US 75, IMO.

Nick
Portland, OR

[lamsalfl]

I-57 is being extended??  Why not extend I-39 due south to I-57?

[roadgeek]

Does anyone here have photos of any I-69 signage where the freeway is being built?

Linking I-57 with I-39? It could duplex with I-74 to I-57. Take it a step further and extend I-39 northeasterly to Marquette, MI.

[haljackey]

Wait, perhaps I am mistaken, but isn't this the highway in question?



I-69 heads from Indianapolis to Port Huron, and then directly becomes Highway 402 in Canada as it heads from Sarina to London, Ontario.


If so, how is it going to head to Texas?  Is there a route planned?  Even Wikipedia doesn't say much!

Best,
-Haljackey

[catofdar]

Yup...planned to be extended southwest of Indianapolis to Memphis via Evansville and some parkways in Kentucky.  And then southwest of there to Shreveport, LA via Mississippi and Arkansas.  And then southwest of there to Houston and then to Mexico probably via Brownsville...

Overall, I agree with the project.  Might be nice to be able to avoid the mess of Nashville to get from Indianapolis to Memphis...(seriously, the traffic in Nashville is horrible...)

[agentsteel53]

I've got a Future I-69 Corridor sign on US-82 in Arkansas that I'll get to soon ... for now, here's a photo from Mississippi.



note state-named shields.  In Mississippi, these were very rare for several years, but now it looks like they are bringing them back.  Most of the shields on I-69 have the state name, and new shields have popped up on the 55/69 multiplex, and also on some new green guide signs on I-59.  Since there are some old I-20 signs left, the only two-digit interstate with no state-named shields known is I-10.  Here's hoping they fix that soon!

Edited to fix img tag error

[Anthony_JK]

Yeah, it's not only planned, but more than likely a cinch (just awaiting funding) from Texas to Indiana. The proposed corridors, from north to south:

-- IN 37 from Indianapolis to Bloomington
-- "new terrain" alignment from Bloomington to I-64, then overlay I-164 through Evansville
-- new bridge across Ohio River into Kentucky, then new bypass through Hendersonville
-- existing Breathitt (formerly Pennyrile) Parkway S of Hendersonville to Wendell Ford (W. Kentucky) Parkway near Eddyville
-- Wendell Ford Parkway to I-24, then brief multiplex w/ I-24 to Julian H. Carroll (Purchase) Parkway
-- JHC Parkway to Fulton, then overlay existing US 51 freeway to Dyersburg
-- brief overlay of I- 255 freeway at Dyersburg, then new route W of US 51 to just N of Memphis
-- Overlay TN 300 connector to I-40, then multiplex with I-40, I-240, and I-55 through central/south Memphis, into
    Mississippi
    (Also, Memphis Outer Loop using portions of TN 385, MS 304 and proposed I-22 will be built as compliment
    to I-69 through   route)
-- Leave I-55 multiplex near Hernando (@ existing MS 304/Future I-22/I-269 junction), then overlay new MS 304
    freeway to DeSoto/Tunica counties (Robinsonville)
-- New alignment along US 61 corridor through Clarksville to around Shaw, then new alignment SW'ard to cross
    Mississippi River at Eutaw Landing into Arkansas (Connection with I-530 extension just W of Monticello)
-- New alignment through Southern AR generally crossing Monticello, Warren, and El Dorado, before crossing into
    Louisiana north of Haynesville in NCent'l LA
-- Diagonal alignment across LA just SE of the Shereveport/Bossier City metro area, crossing I-20 near Haughton and
    I-49 just east of Stonewall
-- Generally follows US 84 corridor to Carthage, TX, where it would meet proposed US 59 freeway (with proposed
    extension to Texarkana
-- Generally upgrades US 59 through Lufkin/Nacagoches area, then direct overlay/upgrade of US 59 to Houston
-- Three alternatives still under study through Houston:
       1) Use existing US 59 (Eastex Freeway/Allen Viaduct/Southwest Freeway) through downtown, then upgrade US 59
           south through Wharton
       2) Use Sam Houston Tollway/Beltway 8, then upgrade US 59 southwest of there
       3) Build Grand Parkway (TX 99) and use that as I-69 routing (or possible I-x69 bypass if Option 1) is selected)
-- Upgrade and overlay US 59 to Laredo (for main route)
-- Upgrade US 77 to freeway standards from Corpus Christi/George West area south to Brownsville
-- Upgrade US 281 to freeway standards from George West to McAllen
-- Build a connector to US 181 in Corpus Christi to connect proposed I-69 with that port city


I have some thoughts about some portions of that corridor not being as needed or neccessary. but overall, I do support the main idea of the proposal.


Anthony

[geoking111]

I generally agree with extending I-69 south to Texas. I usually like for an interstate number to have half of its mileage fit into the grid, obviously in this case, most of I-69 will be out of place. I think I-69 should go to Brownsville. Also, there should be an interstate spur from I-69 to McAllen. I would not construct a freeway from I-69 to Laredo; there is already access from Houston to Laredo via I-10 & i-35.

By the way, do you think it is better to have I-69 routed through Indianapolis or on existing I-465? If I-69 is routed on I-465, should I-465 be eliminated where it is multiplexed with I-69 and I-74?

[mightyace]

By the way, do you think it is better to have I-69 routed through Indianapolis or on existing I-465? If I-69 is routed on I-465, should I-465 be eliminated where it is multiplexed with I-69 and I-74?

I'm just throwing in my $0.02 here.  I think that I-465 should remain on the entire beltway, just like I-495 around Washington, D.C. although half of it is duplexed with its parent I-95.  In another thread, someone said that in DC area, it was less confusion to have 495 there.  Similarly, while it might be cleaner to eliminate 465 on those sections, leaving it there would be less confusion to people especially those using the beltway as a local highway and not a through route.

[Marc]

I live very close to TX-99 (Grand Parkway) near the Katy/Cinco Ranch area. I can say for a fact that routing I-69 along the TX-99 corridor would not come without enormous controversy. Especially here in the Cinco area. For those of you who don't know, Cinco Ranch is what's called a "master planned community" or in laymen's terms: a neighborhood so big it might as well be considered its own town. Other examples of a master planned community would be The Woodlands, Kingwood, or First Colony. There are at least 10,000 homes inside Cinco Ranch and they are still building. Currently, TX-99 divides Cinco Ranch in half; into an older east section and a newer west section. The portion of 99 that goes through Cinco Ranch was the first portion to be built with limited access (there are no Frontage Roads unlike other portions of the Grand).
That said, knowing how Cinco Ranch is and how 'prestigious' they try to act, they would definitely put up a fight. Cinco will write you a nasty letter if you have grass growing in the concrete joins of your sidewalk. I just don't see them being okay with the decision to route I-69 along the Grand.

Needless to say, I'm against routing on TX-99, but not necessarily because of the aforementioned reason. I just don't really see the point to routing it around Houston. To cut down on traffic I understand, but I don't see the average Joe being smart enough to take the effort of exiting and partially looping the city when he could just go straight through. It just seems more confusing that way to me. Memphis is setup the same way and I absolutely hate how I-40 doesn't go straight through the city. You have to make several exits (through old outdated interchanges) just to go through Memphis and to be able to stay on 40. Same thing on 40 through downtown Nashville and I-10 in downtown San Antonio. For me, I just hate having to 'exit' to stay on the road I'm traveling on. Seems like it causes unnecessary confusion and traffic problems.

Just my take.

[DrZoidberg]

Is TX-99 being built to Interstate standards?  I hear it's planned to be the 3rd loop around Houston, but wasn't sure if it's Interstate standard or not.  I think if they do want to bypass Houston, the Sam Houston Tollway would be a more viable option.  Just my opinion.

[Anthony_JK]

Is TX-99 being built to Interstate standards?  I hear it's planned to be the 3rd loop around Houston, but wasn't sure if it's Interstate standard or not.  I think if they do want to bypass Houston, the Sam Houston Tollway would be a more viable option.  Just my opinion.

From everything I've heard from TxDOT, the Grand Parkway will be ultimately Interstate-grade limited access. The original construction was at-grade only as a stopgap internim measure.

The Sam Houston could be a viable alternative....but they have to complete the northeast segment between US 90 and US 59 and add some direct connectors to the US 59, Hardy Toll Road, and proposed US 90 freeway interchanges.


Anthony