News:

Thank you for your patience during the Forum downtime while we upgraded the software. Welcome back and see this thread for some new features and other changes to the forum.

Main Menu

I-69 in TX

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

Previous topic - Next topic

Grzrd

#975
Quote from: Grzrd on January 30, 2012, 09:51:02 PM
TxDOT also has a US 77 Upgrade page with pdfs of the Draft Environmental Assessment.
Quote from: agentsteel53 on January 31, 2012, 12:01:25 PM
Quote from: Anthony_JK on January 31, 2012, 11:50:46 AM
I find it fascinating how they use off ramps to handle the many ranch "gate crossings" along the route, as well as the strategic cattle crossings they would have. In Louisiana, they probably would have used frontage roads with intermediate interchanges and grade-seperated "crossunders" for that purpose.
the frontage road design is something they use in west Texas a lot.  what about the crossunders - do they have those out there?  I've never noticed.
also, in west Texas, they have the occasional at-grade crossing! 
Quote from: NE2 on July 14, 2012, 09:09:08 PM
they could pull an I-10 in west Texas and keep the at-grades. Why were those allowed to be grandfathered there but not here?

It may not be too late for them to keep the at-grades in Kenedy County. This article reports on a recent trip to Washington by Texas representatives urging federal officials to continue and accelerate the ongoing development of Interstate 69.  Included in their wish list is "greater flexibility in interstate designations in rural area":

Quote
More than 20 representatives of Texas communities and two members of the Texas Transportation Commission are on Capitol Hill this week urging federal officials to continue and accelerate the ongoing development of Interstate 69.
The Texas delegation is leading a larger group of representatives from states on the I-69 national route including Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana and Michigan ....
Participants provided a state-by-state progress update to the I-69 Congressional Caucus which includes Members of Congress from all of the eight states along the I-69 corridor. During their visit the delegation is also meeting with individual members of Congress and with U.S. Department of Transportation officials ....
The I-69 delegation presented a set of priorities they would like to be considered in a new highway bill. These include protecting gains made in the last bill — called MAP-21 — such as environmental streamlining provisions and increased flexibility for states in how they allocate funding.
They are also seeking expansion of innovative financing options that are now part of the law. Priorities for Texas include providing greater flexibility in interstate designations in rural area and the designation of State Highway 44 from Freer to Corpus Christi as a future I-69 system connector.

They may be trying to save some money in Kenedy County.  I suppose greater flexibility would be useful for sections of Future I-69W, too.


Alex

Jeff R shared this article with me this morning touting the possibility of an branch of I-69 serving Corpus Christi.

I-69 supporters urge passage of federal highway bill

QuoteThey are also seeking expansion of innovative financing options that are now part of the law. Priorities for Texas include providing greater flexibility in interstate designations in rural area and the designation of State Highway 44 from Freer to Corpus Christi as a future I-69 system connector.

Anthony_JK

Quote from: Alex on April 24, 2015, 02:30:11 PM
Jeff R shared this article with me this morning touting the possibility of an branch of I-69 serving Corpus Christi.

I-69 supporters urge passage of federal highway bill

QuoteThey are also seeking expansion of innovative financing options that are now part of the law. Priorities for Texas include providing greater flexibility in interstate designations in rural area and the designation of State Highway 44 from Freer to Corpus Christi as a future I-69 system connector.

I-69E already serves Corpus Christi via US 77 and I-37. The SH 44 addition to the I-69 system is to provide a more direct connection between Laredo and Corpus, which would be bypassed originally by I-69W.

Grzrd

#978
Quote from: Anthony_JK on April 24, 2015, 08:51:11 PM
Quote from: Alex on April 24, 2015, 02:30:11 PM
Jeff R shared this article with me this morning touting the possibility of an branch of I-69 serving Corpus Christi.
I-69 supporters urge passage of federal highway bill
The SH 44 addition to the I-69 system is to provide a more direct connection between Laredo and Corpus, which would be bypassed originally by I-69W.

This post provides a link to a press release from Congressman Blake Farenthold regarding how Corpus Christi, its port, and airport would benefit from passage of his bill designating SH 44 as Future I-69, a link to the text of the bill, and a link to an April, 2015 report touting the importance of upgrading SH 44 to an interstate between I-69C and I-69E.

Grzrd

Quote from: thefro on March 25, 2015, 10:59:01 AM
Do we have an idea of what SIUs are actually under construction or scheduled in Texas?
I'd like to update the Wikipedia article on I-69, which says there's only 2 SIUs under construction nationally now.
Quote from: Grzrd on March 25, 2015, 11:51:19 AM
This map summarizing the status of Texas I-69 projects is current as of September 1, 2014.

The Alliance for I-69 Texas has updated its Resource Center page to include links to an I-69 System Funding Program as of April 1, 2015 map and an April 22, 2015 Status of Texas Projects by Congressional District presentation.

Also included on the Resource Center page is an April 1, 2015 I-69 National Status map.

Grzrd

#980
Quote from: Grzrd on April 24, 2015, 09:17:02 PM
This post provides a link to a press release from Congressman Blake Farenthold regarding how Corpus Christi, its port, and airport would benefit from passage of his bill designating SH 44 as Future I-69, a link to the text of the bill, and a link to an April, 2015 report touting the importance of upgrading SH 44 to an interstate between I-69C and I-69E.
Quote from: Grzrd on April 26, 2015, 08:51:14 PM
The Alliance for I-69 Texas has updated its Resource Center page to include links to an I-69 System Funding Program as of April 1, 2015 map

Perhaps reflecting optimism regarding potential passage of the bill designating part of SH 44 as part of the I-69 Corridor, the above-linked I-69 System Funding Program as of April 1, 2015 map includes a Prop 1 SH 44 "Proposed as Potential I-69" overpass project at FM 3386 (McKinzie Road):


Grzrd

#981
Quote from: Grzrd on June 02, 2013, 10:39:40 AM
Quote from: thefro on May 30, 2013, 06:16:38 AM
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_3baf5bf6-c8d4-11e2-bafc-0019bb30f31a.html
the SH 550 article reports that the ribbon-cutting was for the completion of the second of three phases of SH 550 construction:
Quote
The third phase, which will provide the connectors to U.S. 77/83, should be done in about a year, according to David Garcia, deputy county administrator and assistant coordinator for the Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority.

This TV video provides a SH 550 update from a Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority spokesperson, who states that the third phase, weather permitting, should be completed in two weeks.  She also refers to SH 550 as "the future I-169".

Since I-169 will not be co-designated with a U.S. highway, I'm wondering whether TxDOT will even submit an application to AASHTO for approval of the designation. I assume that they would only need FHWA approval for the numerical designation.  Something to look for in the next round of AASHTO designations ........

Henry

Quote from: Grzrd on May 06, 2015, 10:21:41 PM
Quote from: Grzrd on June 02, 2013, 10:39:40 AM
Quote from: thefro on May 30, 2013, 06:16:38 AM
http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_3baf5bf6-c8d4-11e2-bafc-0019bb30f31a.html
the SH 550 article reports that the ribbon-cutting was for the completion of the second of three phases of SH 550 construction:
Quote
The third phase, which will provide the connectors to U.S. 77/83, should be done in about a year, according to David Garcia, deputy county administrator and assistant coordinator for the Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority.

This TV video provides a SH 550 update from a Cameron County Regional Mobility Authority spokesperson, who states that the third phase, weather permitting, should be completed in two weeks.  She also refers to SH 550 as "the future I-169".

Since I-169 will not be co-designated with a U.S. highway, I'm wondering whether TxDOT will even submit an application to AASHTO for approval of the designation. I assume that they would only need FHWA approval for the numerical designation.  Something to look for in the next round of AASHTO designations ........
Well, well, well...another I-x69 coming soon; I'll bet no one is surprised by that.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

bugo

Shouldn't it be I-169E?

Molandfreak

Just make it a stub end of I-2
Quote from: Max Rockatansky on December 05, 2023, 08:24:57 PM
AASHTO attributes 28.5% of highway inventory shrink to bad road fan social media posts.

Scott5114

Quote from: bugo on May 07, 2015, 04:04:24 PM
Shouldn't it be I-169E?

Not necessarily. The only case of this was Idaho's I-180N. Other 3dis from suffixed routes dropped the suffix letter.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

Grzrd

#986
Quote from: Grzrd on January 03, 2015, 12:42:26 PM
This article reports that SH 550's direct connection with I-69E should be completed in January, 2015; after that, work will begin on a new section to just east of the new overpass on Old Alice Road, the completion of which will be necessary for an I-169 designation:
Quote
"The next step after that is to work with TxDOT (Texas Department of Transportation) to design the portion that connects 550 with I-69 East to just east of the new overpass on Old Alice Road,"  Sepulveda said. "That will be designated as Interstate-169. It'll be about three miles long."
In all, two more segments of the project have to be finished before the 550 connector can be designated as interstate along its entire length, he said. That construction will start the first quarter of this month.

AASHTO has approved the I-169 designation:

http://route.transportation.org/Documents/05%2014%202015%20Cheyenne,%20WY%20Report/SM%202015%20USRN%20SCOH%20REPORT.pdf



I guess TxDOT wants to install shields on the first 1.5 miles as soon as possible.

Henry

It was only a matter of time before I-169 would open a new chapter in the madness that is I-69 in TX! But for a state that loves to think big, 1.5 miles doesn't seem to cut it. I'd expect it to reach the port eventually, but this is definitely a start.
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

triplemultiplex

Weird that with all the interstate-grade freeways built in Texas in recent decades, they only seem to be pursuing interstate spurs for I-69.
"That's just like... your opinion, man."

english si

TX130 was proposed as I-35E.

The US190 freeway to Killeen was proposed at I-14.

I'm not sure what other ones there are (especially free) that aren't in the I-69 corridor.

texaskdog

I don't know why I-169 couldn't have been an extension of I-2

Grzrd

#991
Quote from: texaskdog on June 04, 2015, 08:54:06 AM
I don't know why I-169 couldn't have been an extension of I-2

I think it could have been an extension of I-2, but the March 23 TxDOT designation application reflects their belief that an I-169 designation was more appropriate because I-169 is SIU 32 of the Congressionally designated I-69 Corridor:



FHWA also approved the I-169 designation on May 14:



It looks like we might have a Texas Transportation Commission formality later this month.

Grzrd

Quote from: Molandfreak on June 04, 2015, 06:58:34 PM
I-2 is supposed to be an "I-69 connector" so why can't it include another freeway that's part of the I-69 system?

The Arkansas I-69 Connector is SIU 28 of the I-69 Corridor and it is destined to be an extension of I-530 (if Arkansas ever builds it to interstate standards).  I don't think FHWA (or AASHTO) would have objected to an I-2 designation for SH 550.  The locals may have preferred a 2di designation, as well.

Scott5114

Quote from: Molandfreak on June 04, 2015, 06:58:34 PM
That really isn't a good argument. I-2 is supposed to be an "I-69 connector" so why can't it include another freeway that's part of the I-69 system? If it must be a 3DI, it should have been I-169E because it has nothing to do with the rest of the spurs.

Back in the day when letter suffixed interstates were common nationwide, the suffix letter was almost always dropped on the 3dis. This is the case with the sole non-69 suffixed interstate 3di, I-635 in Dallas, which connects to I-35E. I-169 follows the established pattern.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

TheStranger

Quote from: Molandfreak on June 05, 2015, 11:20:18 AM

So? It's a stupid pattern. I-635 should be renumbered or extended to I-35W, because it suggests that it connects with both branches.

In another thread, I noted that the only suffixed 3di ever was I-180N (from I-80N in Idaho).  Certainly the non-suffixed x80 routes in Philadelphia when I-80S existed didn't suggest a connection with regular I-80 further north, but simply connecting to one of the 80 branches at the time.

Chris Sampang

Scott5114

Why is it a stupid pattern?

Good luck fitting 4 digits in an Interstate shield, by the way. 169E might barely fit, but 635E wouldn't. H201 does it but only by horizontally stretching the sign and using Series B. Poor aesthetics of distorted graphics aside, it's much easier to read the wider fonts.
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

noelbotevera

Quote from: Scott5114 on June 05, 2015, 09:00:47 PM
Why is it a stupid pattern?

Good luck fitting 4 digits in an Interstate shield, by the way. 169E might barely fit, but 635E wouldn't. H201 does it but only by horizontally stretching the sign and using Series B. Poor aesthetics of distorted graphics aside, it's much easier to read the wider fonts.
Or just make each reassurance shield be overhead signs with all text  :-D

Yeah, 4 digits is hard, but simply create a 4 digit shield rather than stretching the 3-digit one. Dimensions would be 60x48.

Grzrd

Quote from: Grzrd on June 01, 2015, 10:32:12 AM
AASHTO has approved the I-169 designation:
http://route.transportation.org/Documents/05%2014%202015%20Cheyenne,%20WY%20Report/SM%202015%20USRN%20SCOH%20REPORT.pdf

I guess TxDOT wants to install shields on the first 1.5 miles as soon as possible.

The 1.5 miles does not have any I-169 shields yet, but this article reports that it is open to traffic and can be clinched for free through July 4:

Quote
To encourage people to try out the newly opened S.H. 550 "direct connector"  between I-69E and S.H. 48, the county is waiving tolls until July 4.
The new road opened for traffic on June 4, later than originally planned due to construction delays caused mostly by rain ....
The 550 connector makes it possible to travel the approximately seven miles from I-69E to the port without any stops.
Two segments remain to be completed before the connector is interstate-quality along the entire stretch ...

roadman65

I was noticing that now with I-69W to terminate at the World Trade International Bridge, that US 59 has been rerouted (anyway on paper by FHWA) as AASHTO did approve the change.  They probably did that maneuver to get folks used to I-69W coming, however GSV and ushighwayends.com say that signs yet have not been installed to show the change.

Also, if I-69W is to be along Loop 20 in Laredo, will it dog leg or will TexDOT get it to cut straight east from Loop 20's Northeastern turn as the shortest distance between two points is a straight line?

Another thing I found most interesting is that from George West to Victoria that the branch of I-69 is to be I-69W even though it carries traffic as well for the I-69C branch.  To me that should remain I-69 all the way to George West then I-69 should end branching into C and W.  The I-69E would just be a spur of I-69 instead of I-69 dividing into E and W and then have W split into W and C.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

lordsutch

Quote from: roadman65 on June 14, 2015, 09:15:13 PM
Also, if I-69W is to be along Loop 20 in Laredo, will it dog leg or will TexDOT get it to cut straight east from Loop 20's Northeastern turn as the shortest distance between two points is a straight line?

Pretty sure we already talked about this a few pages ago. The answer for now is: who knows? TxDOT hasn't done any environmental study for Laredo-to-Freer that I'm aware of.

That said an in-place upgrade of US 59 east of Loop 20 would be a pain (moreso than upgrading Loop 20 itself), so some sort of tangent routing makes sense. Laredo's long-range planning documents show an "expressway" running east from Loop 20 at International Blvd to the proposed Laredo Outer Loop, but that's all pie-in-the-sky thinking; they don't even have half of the proposed local streets built inside the loop yet, despite continuing population growth.



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.