I-69 in TX

[DNAguy]

I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but what are they going to do about the fact that in east Texas, I-69 is going to intersect with US69?  What are they going to do about the number duplicity?

All I-69 and US 69 do is intersect. In NC, we have I-74 and US 74 actually running concurrent, thanks to a Congressional fiat. It drives some of us Forum folks crazy, but nobody in southern NC seems at all concerned about it.

Any state that contains I-20, a SH 20 (El Paso area) and Loop 20 (Laredo) is clearly indicating that they aren't at all concerned with numerical duplication.

Not to mention Farm to Market Road 20 and Park Road 20.

As an interesting, or uninteresting, side note there are 20 highway designations numbered 20 in Texas, counting all of the Interstate business routes.

[txstateends]

I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but what are they going to do about the fact that in east Texas, I-69 is going to intersect with US69?  What are they going to do about the number duplicity?

All I-69 and US 69 do is intersect. In NC, we have I-74 and US 74 actually running concurrent, thanks to a Congressional fiat. It drives some of us Forum folks crazy, but nobody in southern NC seems at all concerned about it.

It'll be a local level which-one-are-you-talking-about for probably quite some time, but no one outside east TX seems concerned.

Matador, TX has the same issue (US 70 crossing TX 70 there) but there are no big calls for the state to re-label TX 70 to something else.

[Perfxion]

In Lufkin, they will just keep calling it 59. I really don't hear people calling it I-69. Houston people either calling it 59, Southwest freeway, or traffic hell. 

[Bobby5280]

Well, we'll see what the locals in Lufkin do after I-69 is completed through there, which might be at least 10-20 years from now, if not considerably farther off in the future.

[Chris]

The final environmental assessment for the Corrigan relief route has been published: http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/lufkin/0123180.html

[Henry]

I don't know if this has been discussed yet, but what are they going to do about the fact that in east Texas, I-69 is going to intersect with US69?  What are they going to do about the number duplicity?

All I-69 and US 69 do is intersect. In NC, we have I-74 and US 74 actually running concurrent, thanks to a Congressional fiat. It drives some of us Forum folks crazy, but nobody in southern NC seems at all concerned about it.

It'll be a local level which-one-are-you-talking-about for probably quite some time, but no one outside east TX seems concerned.

Matador, TX has the same issue (US 70 crossing TX 70 there) but there are no big calls for the state to re-label TX 70 to something else.

Don't forget about I-41/US 41 in WI; while we can analyze that to death like we do I-69/US 69 and I-74/US 74, no one up there cares about it, because it'll always be Highway 41 to them, no matter what the shield is.

[AMLNet49]

I-69C (George West to Pharr) - 150 miles approx.
I-69W (Victoria to Laredo) - 190 miles approx.
I-69E (Victoria to Brownsville) - 220 miles approx.
I-69 (Victoria to Logansport/LA Border) - 330 miles approx.
I-369 (Tenaha to I-30 near Texarkana) - 120 miles approx.

All of that is over 1000 miles of highway just within Texas. Add a few more miles for I-169 near Brownsville.

Regardless, it would still be the longest interstate highway that has a number not divisible by 5.

And IIRC, it would take that title away from I-94?

Only the longest branch counts. To determine the total length of I-35, we don't count both I-35W and I-35E for the total, so we shouldn't be counting each branch of I-69 separately.

In this case, since I-69C is the "center", shouldn't it count as the "mainline". And 69W before 69C branches off?

[RoadWarrior56]

I-69C seems like the most useless of the three I-69 branches since it parallels I-69E by barely 20 miles for over 100 miles in length.  I would had thought that I-69 could have only split up into I-69E and I-69W.  I presume the addition of I-69C was somehow related to politics. 

[Bobby5280]

I-69C exists primarily for the benefit of traffic moving directly between the San Antonio area and the Rio Grande Valley in far South Texas. The San Antonio-New Braunfels MSA has 2.45 million people. The city of San Antonio alone has 1.3 million people, 7th highest city limits population in the US. The McAllen-Edinburg-Mission MSA has over 500,000 people and Hidalgo county had 774,769 residents as of the 2010 census. This population count does not include the other Rio Grande Valley cities like Harlingen and Brownsville (connected via I-69E) or the population of Cameron County (406,200). At first glance it would seem like overkill to upgrade both the US-281 and US-77 corridors to Interstate quality. But the Rio Grande Valley is one of the fastest growing regions in the US. Around 1.5 million people live in the South tip of Texas.

[Alex]

Potential I-69 branch routes in the Rio Grande Valley?

Rodriguez: 102-mile Hidalgo County Loop will be a toll road

"This is a project being undertaken jointly by Cameron County RMA, Hidalgo County RMA, and the Texas Department of Transportation to create a connection between Interstate 69-East and Interstate 69-Central. It will also connect to a future section of the loop, State Highway 68."

The first part of the Loop to get built will be a section near to the Texas-Mexico Border. It is officially called the 365 Tollway. Rodriguez told MEDC that the 365 Tollway will be a 12.2-mile four-way lane from the Pharr International Bridge westward to the Anzalduas International Bridge. He said it will likely take 42 months to complete.

Phase Two of the 365 Tollway, Rodriguez said, will go from Military Highway at San Juan Road, north to the south levee at Cage Boulevard in Pharr, across to 23rd Street where it will cross over floodway at Ware Road and then parallels the north floodway levee until it gets to Anzalduas.

Phase 3, Rodriguez said, will see the 365 Tollway extended from FM 396/Anzalduas Highway to FM 1016/Conway Avenue in Mission, a 12.2 mile segment. He said Phase 3 has been cleared environmentally but no right of way has been purchased.

[MaxConcrete]

Map

https://i2.wp.com/riograndeguardian.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/180217-hidalgo_county_loop.png?fit=2048%2C1365

[GreenLanternCorps]

Potential I-69 branch routes in the Rio Grande Valley?

Rodriguez: 102-mile Hidalgo County Loop will be a toll road

"This is a project being undertaken jointly by Cameron County RMA, Hidalgo County RMA, and the Texas Department of Transportation to create a connection between Interstate 69-East and Interstate 69-Central. It will also connect to a future section of the loop, State Highway 68."

The first part of the Loop to get built will be a section near to the Texas-Mexico Border. It is officially called the 365 Tollway. Rodriguez told MEDC that the 365 Tollway will be a 12.2-mile four-way lane from the Pharr International Bridge westward to the Anzalduas International Bridge. He said it will likely take 42 months to complete.

Phase Two of the 365 Tollway, Rodriguez said, will go from Military Highway at San Juan Road, north to the south levee at Cage Boulevard in Pharr, across to 23rd Street where it will cross over floodway at Ware Road and then parallels the north floodway levee until it gets to Anzalduas.

Phase 3, Rodriguez said, will see the 365 Tollway extended from FM 396/Anzalduas Highway to FM 1016/Conway Avenue in Mission, a 12.2 mile segment. He said Phase 3 has been cleared environmentally but no right of way has been purchased.

Future I-202?

[sparker]

Potential I-69 branch routes in the Rio Grande Valley?

Rodriguez: 102-mile Hidalgo County Loop will be a toll road

"This is a project being undertaken jointly by Cameron County RMA, Hidalgo County RMA, and the Texas Department of Transportation to create a connection between Interstate 69-East and Interstate 69-Central. It will also connect to a future section of the loop, State Highway 68."

The first part of the Loop to get built will be a section near to the Texas-Mexico Border. It is officially called the 365 Tollway. Rodriguez told MEDC that the 365 Tollway will be a 12.2-mile four-way lane from the Pharr International Bridge westward to the Anzalduas International Bridge. He said it will likely take 42 months to complete.

Phase Two of the 365 Tollway, Rodriguez said, will go from Military Highway at San Juan Road, north to the south levee at Cage Boulevard in Pharr, across to 23rd Street where it will cross over floodway at Ware Road and then parallels the north floodway levee until it gets to Anzalduas.

Phase 3, Rodriguez said, will see the 365 Tollway extended from FM 396/Anzalduas Highway to FM 1016/Conway Avenue in Mission, a 12.2 mile segment. He said Phase 3 has been cleared environmentally but no right of way has been purchased.

Future I-202?

Not likely; TX hasn't shown any propensity to seek Interstate designations for toll facilities to date.  Otherwise, Loop 8 around Houston might have been something like I-245 by now. 

[Chris]

A 'PEL' study is being initiated for I-69 / Southwest Freeway, between Spur 527 and Beltway 8 in Houston: http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/032918.html

The I-69 PEL study is a high-level, early-planning process; the goal of a PEL study is to gather feedback during planning to inform the environmental review process.

What kind of solutions do you think are feasible for the Southwest Freeway? More reversible lanes? A non-reversible express lane facility? More general purpose lanes? Something elevated or below grade? Even larger interchanges?

The Southwest Freeway has the second-highest traffic count in Houston, it maxes out at 350,000 vehicles per day near I-610 according to the TxDOT planning map.

[MaxConcrete]

What kind of solutions do you think are feasible for the Southwest Freeway?

I live in the corridor and drive it just about daily. I'm going to prepare a long list of recommendations. Hopefully the study staff will be receptive to public comments. In addition to some expansion of regular capacity, it needs 2x2 MaX lanes as described here
http://houstonstrategies.blogspot.com/2017/05/max-lanes-next-generation-strategy-for.html

[longhorn]

What construction is being done at Rosenburg starting at hwy 10? The I-69 detour through the construction area is white knuckle type of driving.

https://www.google.com/maps/@29.5469224,-95.7458432,3a,75y,280.08h,83.33t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szi-BfsMgHeqkzdctcvBgxQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

What is this bridge? Are are they raising the freeway? For what reason instead of going under?

[MaxConcrete]

What construction is being done at Rosenburg starting at hwy 10? The I-69 detour through the construction area is white knuckle type of driving.

The construction is the widening project. The existing freeway goes under FM 762 and the adjacent railroad, but in the new design the main lanes and frontage roads go over the highway and railroad. The bridge structures are long and wide.

I don't know the reason for going over instead of under. The only possible reason I can think of is to eliminate flooding risk, since the current underpass is excavated below ground level. The bridges surely added a lot to the project cost.

[longhorn]

What construction is being done at Rosenburg starting at hwy 10? The I-69 detour through the construction area is white knuckle type of driving.

The construction is the widening project. The existing freeway goes under FM 762 and the adjacent railroad, but in the new design the main lanes and frontage roads go over the highway and railroad. The bridge structures are long and wide.

I don't know the reason for going over instead of under. The only possible reason I can think of is to eliminate flooding risk, since the current underpass is excavated below ground level. The bridges surely added a lot to the project cost.

Thank you, its a substantial project. Does the contruction stop at hwy 10? HWY 59/I-69 does not seem to be interstate grade past hwy 10 heading SW.

[O Tamandua]

Lufkin, Nacogdoches furthers I-69 extensions with TxDOT meeting



The acceptance of the Texas Department of Transportation's offer to buy a piece of land in front of the Angelina County Airport came at the same time as a meeting of the I-69 advisory committee.

"They've selected about $2 billion worth of projects a little over a year ago," said Lufkin district engineer Cheryl Flood. "The committee made some recommendations, and right now we got, I think, about 27 projects along the corridor funded."

The Diboll Relief Route and the Moffett Route back to 103 are a small part of the interstate that will one day run to Missouri.

"You know, it's real positive," said advisory committee member Wes Suiter. "The next couple years, we've got a lot going on here in the Lufkin district."

The purchase of the land in front of the airport is the first step to bringing the interstate through Diboll.

"A lot going on now, a lot going on here in the next couple of years," Suiter said. "It's going to be funded; the funding's already been approved. Just finishing up the position for the right of way."

The 2021 connection to a new flyover in Nacogdoches is another project already approved for funding.

"The work that the committee has done is going to pay off in a big way," said Nacogdoches City Manager Jim Jeffers.

Jeffers said that bids for the construction will begin in spring of 2019.

"It's a $75-million project, and it is a direct connect on the south side of town, which will help to relieve congestion," Jeffers said.

Members of the advisory committee also said the extensions will benefit the area.

"Anytime you have an interstate coming through your area, that's what big industry and big business look for is an interstate connectivity, where they can get their products up and down, on rail and on freight movement," Suiter said.

The I-69 plan calls for improving segments of existing highways along US 59. Those small segments will eventually be linked to form the interstate.

Copyright 2018 KTRE. All rights reserved.

http://www.ktre.com/story/38144140/lufkin-nacogdoches-i-69-extensions  (with video)

[sparker]

So -- there's a local TV station that thinks I-69 is going to Missouri?  I suppose if you lay a ruler down along that portion of US 59 on a map, it'll eventually extend to MO.  Nevertheless, while it's likely such mistakes are relatively common, a little basic research and a couple of phone calls could have corrected the conception.  But perhaps the consideration here -- possibly promoted by TX I-69 backers, is that, at least within the state, the primary goal is to get an Interstate-grade facility built to the Texarkana area -- despite the primary I-69 planned trunk leaving the state near US 84.  The I-369 extension north to Texarkana and, beyond that, a connection to the future I-49, is probably considered within state circles to be more vital than any part of the I-69 corridor through Shreveport and on to Memphis; that might be reflected in information supplied to the press. 

The reason the overall national I-69 project is broken up into discrete SIU's becomes apparent when things like this occur; besides being the more realistic way to "eat the elephant", so to speak, it enables sizeable chunks of the corridor to be marketed (for that's essentially what securing funds entails these days) as providing local or more constrained regional benefit.  Seeing as how TX, along with IN, was the area featuring many of the more vehement backers of the full corridor concept (and the site of the largest amount of mileage), it's not surprising that the PR surrounding the corridor emphasizes the TX benefits of the route portions within the state, including the I-369 branch -- while downplaying -- or not mentioning -- the out-of-state portions of the I-69 corridor with less perceived value to TX interests.  It's all understandable, seeing as how a corridor reaching Texarkana will also access I-30, taking advantage of its longstanding role as the major Interstate corridor heading NE from the state.  So once the I-69/369 continuum from Houston to Texarkana is completed, the in-state "Job #1" is fulfilled.   

[bugo]

So -- there's a local TV station that thinks I-69 is going to Missouri?  I suppose if you lay a ruler down along that portion of US 59 on a map, it'll eventually extend to MO.  Nevertheless, while it's likely such mistakes are relatively common, a little basic research and a couple of phone calls could have corrected the conception.  But perhaps the consideration here -- possibly promoted by TX I-69 backers, is that, at least within the state, the primary goal is to get an Interstate-grade facility built to the Texarkana area -- despite the primary I-69 planned trunk leaving the state near US 84.  The I-369 extension north to Texarkana and, beyond that, a connection to the future I-49, is probably considered within state circles to be more vital than any part of the I-69 corridor through Shreveport and on to Memphis; that might be reflected in information supplied to the press. 

The reason the overall national I-69 project is broken up into discrete SIU's becomes apparent when things like this occur; besides being the more realistic way to "eat the elephant", so to speak, it enables sizeable chunks of the corridor to be marketed (for that's essentially what securing funds entails these days) as providing local or more constrained regional benefit.  Seeing as how TX, along with IN, was the area featuring many of the more vehement backers of the full corridor concept (and the site of the largest amount of mileage), it's not surprising that the PR surrounding the corridor emphasizes the TX benefits of the route portions within the state, including the I-369 branch -- while downplaying -- or not mentioning -- the out-of-state portions of the I-69 corridor with less perceived value to TX interests.  It's all understandable, seeing as how a corridor reaching Texarkana will also access I-30, taking advantage of its longstanding role as the major Interstate corridor heading NE from the state.  So once the I-69/369 continuum from Houston to Texarkana is completed, the in-state "Job #1" is fulfilled.   

Are you an A Perfect Circle fan?

[txstateends]

So -- there's a local TV station that thinks I-69 is going to Missouri? 

The video says St. Louis.  It's like all the "I-49 will go all the way to Canada" stuff.  Obviously local officials and media aren't the roadfans in the room--they seem to care more that the highway through their town is an interstate, and not as much about the exact route.

[O Tamandua]

I've been shocked at the lack of knowledge of geography we see today, but that's not the only subject many today know little about.

That being said, (though this will be easier for me to say than to see done) according to that little map they/I linked, once you leave Nacogdoches County (and the adjacent northwest tip of Shelby County) there is only a county and a half worth of Texas I-69 to be built before the Marshall area is reached, then an I-20 hop over the state line to Shreveport and Caddo Parish, LA, an I-49 skip one county northward to Miller County, AR then three jumps to Little Rock, West Memphis and St. Louis respectively on 30, 40 and 55.  Wouldn't be surprised if the Houston-to-Marshall TX I-69 section is the first one to profoundly affect upstream (northeast of Texas) interstate traffic.

[Bobby5280]

I wouldn't be surprised if Texas chose to build I-369 up to Texarkana before completing I-69 to the Louisiana state line.

[yakra]

All interstates connect to Seattle, San Diego, Houlton, and Miami.
...And American Falls.