News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

Texas

Started by roadman65, October 03, 2013, 08:59:18 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

J N Winkler

Quote from: kphoger on June 12, 2019, 06:12:06 PMYeah, I wasn't sure what Texas' official stance on that was, having seen Spur US Routes signed similarly.

TxDOT appears not to have a highway designation category for spur US routes, although it does for each of mainline US routes (US), business US routes (BU), and alternate US routes (UA).  I suspect the State Loop/Spur (SL/SS) category covers loops and spurs for all flavors of primary state highway.

Quote from: kphoger on June 12, 2019, 06:12:06 PMHere's a better one.

Yes--that installation is totally in line with the current (2012) edition of SHSD.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini


kphoger

Quote from: J N Winkler on June 13, 2019, 11:27:18 AM

Quote from: kphoger on June 12, 2019, 06:12:06 PM
Yeah, I wasn't sure what Texas' official stance on that was, having seen Spur US Routes signed similarly.

TxDOT appears not to have a highway designation category for spur US routes, although it does for each of mainline US routes (US), business US routes (BU), and alternate US routes (UA).  I suspect the State Loop/Spur (SL/SS) category covers loops and spurs for all flavors of primary state highway.

In the specific case of US-277 Spur, it is included inside the highway destination file for US-277.

Quote from: Minute Order 029126
... with a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Del Rio and a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Eagle Pass.  Route extended from Del Rio to a junction with US 83 at Carrizo Springs, with a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Eagle Pass.  Old section from US 277 to the International Border at Del Rio to be identified as SS 239 connection.

Quote from: Minute Order 081499
... with a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Del Rio.  SS 277, from SL 431 (old US 277) to the International Border at Eagle Pass, to be designated as Eagle Pass SS 240 only.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

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

J N Winkler

Quote from: kphoger on June 13, 2019, 02:01:44 PMIn the specific case of US-277 Spur, it is included inside the highway destination file for US-277.

Quote from: Minute Order 029126... with a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Del Rio and a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Eagle Pass.  Route extended from Del Rio to a junction with US 83 at Carrizo Springs, with a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Eagle Pass.  Old section from US 277 to the International Border at Del Rio to be identified as SS 239 connection.

Quote from: Minute Order 081499... with a spur connection from US 277 to the International Border at Del Rio.  SS 277, from SL 431 (old US 277) to the International Border at Eagle Pass, to be designated as Eagle Pass SS 240 only.

Yup.  These all look like instances where routes that are functionally spurs of US 277 have SL/SS designations.  There isn't actually an out-of-the-box option in SHSD for explicitly signing spur US routes because there is no "Spur" tab.  AASHTO does list multiple US 277 Spur designations in the vicinity of Eagle Pass and Del Rio, but I will be very surprised if any of them are actually signed as US 277 Spurs and not under their SL/SS designations.

Search by state for AASHTO US route database (will require selection of state and then route to drill down to a particular route)
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

roadman65

https://www.flickr.com/photos/54480415@N08/48067733582/in/dateposted-public/

Some signs of the east terminus of I-14 at I-35 which has a Breezewood connection to I-35 SB via service roads.  Obviously the connection with I-35 has some work to do to make it a full connection between the two.  If you notice the ramp goes up to an intersection before it goes down to another one to meet the SB I-35 Frontage Road where you make a turn to follow the next freeway before a slip ramp leads you to it.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Bobby5280

Quote from: wxfreeThat bill is introduced in every session.  It never goes anywhere.  I like the idea of it, but I think it's a little too enthusiastic.  I think a more realistic alternative would be to limit the toll rates to what is needed cover the debt and upkeep costs.  Current law allows for excess revenues that can be spent on unrelated transportation projects.  I'd like to see that stop.  If you have to pay extra to drive on a certain road, you shouldn't have to pay even more extra to cover the cost of other roads.

This is a popular topic here in Oklahoma, given the 600 or so miles of turnpikes we have here. Lots of Okies have demanded the toll gates be removed over the years. "The roads are paid for already!" Technically, they're not. The OTA is allowed to cross-pledge the debt over to new turnpike segments or major maintenance and expansion projects.

Here is the BIG downside to removing the toll gates here in Oklahoma: 600+ miles of super highways are immediately added to what the state's gasoline taxes are supposed to maintain. Even with the recent, modest 3¢ per gallon rate increase Oklahoma's fuel taxes are among the lowest in the nation. If those 600+ miles of turnpikes were added to the gas tax burden drivers in Oklahoma would see a major increase in gasoline taxes. Gotta pay for those roads one way or the other.

Toll rates in some areas of the country are ridiculous. I think Oklahoma's are a bargain by comparison. An act of removing the toll gates on some of these turnpikes (or toll bridges) along the East coast or other high toll rate zones might result in some hefty fuel tax hikes. The agencies will want to make up that revenue from somewhere.

In_Correct

While it is unpleasant to drive on Toll Roads, Indeed feels like driving through somebody's property, I am not bothered by the cost. If there were no Toll Roads, gas prices would be even higher. Also, the quality of most gas is getting lower. This also increases my loyalty to toll roads and public transport.

Roads are never free. They can be honest about it and charge up front, or they can sneak the cost into the cost of (generally low quality) fuel. Even if  the roads are "paid for" in other words the main construction is finished, they will wear out and need maintenance.

600 miles is not long enough. There needs to be more toll roads. If people do not like toll roads, they can Shun Pike them with 4 Wheelers.
Drive Safely. :sombrero: Ride Safely. And Build More Roads, Rails, And Bridges. :coffee: ... Boulevards Wear Faster Than Interstates.

roadman65

I noticed that SH 99 has a weird set up between I-69 and I-10 on the west side.  The tolls are just for through movements through the various diamond interchanges.  Everything between the interchanges is free.  To shunpike the tolls you are just basically exiting the facility and re-entering the facility after waiting for the ramp signals.  Unlike the Sam Houston where SH 8 is the free frontage road and to shunpike you do not have to exit, enter, exit, enter, etc like the Grand Parkway.  Only the Ship Channel is fully tolled with no direct way to bypass it without traveling several miles out of the way.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

TravelingBethelite

Wasn't sure where else to put this.

I was out for a drive on Saturday and was in the general area, and the US 190 bridge over the Neches River is closed and seems to have been for a while. The most recent repair work seems to have been in 2017. The current closure is due to $250,000 worth of damage by a vehicle. I'd like to drive it sometime, seems very historic. As an aside, my detour via RE 255 and Tyler County 3725 was very intriguing. Tyler County 3725 is the longest stretch of paved county road (not including the equivalent (?) - not sure if they're equivalents - Missouri lettered routes) I've ever seen, and it was a one-laner, for its entire length from RE 255 to where it becomes FM 92. Very interesting drive.

https://www.12newsnow.com/article/traffic/190-closed-at-steinhagen-lake-due-to-damage-for-number-of-weeks/502-68619df6-478a-4cbc-90dd-24d529356559
"Imprisoned by the freedom of the road!" - Ronnie Milsap
See my photos at: http://bit.ly/1Qi81ws

Now I decide where I go...

2018 Ford Fusion SE - proud new owner!

davmillar

Very late to the party, but regarding OP's topic of one-digit farm roads: I recently drove FM 4 north from I-20 at the suggestion of a local redditor and it was a very nice little scenic route. I turned off onto FM 3137 to go over the Palo Pinto Creek Reservoir so I'll have to go back and finish the trip up FM 4 into Palo Pinto itself. They're both near TX-16 and US 180, the former of which has a really cool bridge just a bit north of there and the latter of which has several bits of offshoots and old bridges nearby due to its history as part of the Bankhead Highway.
Try out my puzzle game Interst8 at https://interst8.us

roadman65

Why is the new I-69W bridge numbered as International Bridge IV?  There are only three bridges which Number One is the original bridge linking former US 81 to Federal Route 85 between the two downtowns and Number Two connects US 83 with the unnumbered boulevard arterial along the Rio Grande to connect to Federal Route 85 south of Zona Centro where Route 85 is and expressway. 

So is there another bridge not built yet between Laredo and Nuevo Laredo?

Also I see the Mexican department uses Lincoln as a control city for the bridge into Laredo from their side.  Lincoln is a small city in Texas near Houston, so it does not make sense that it should be used over Laredo or even Houston (via US 59) for that matter.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

kphoger

Quote from: roadman65 on August 18, 2020, 01:57:08 PM
Why is the new I-69W bridge numbered as International Bridge IV?  There are only three bridges which Number One is the original bridge linking former US 81 to Federal Route 85 between the two downtowns and Number Two connects US 83 with the unnumbered boulevard arterial along the Rio Grande to connect to Federal Route 85 south of Zona Centro where Route 85 is and expressway. 

So is there another bridge not built yet between Laredo and Nuevo Laredo?

Also I see the Mexican department uses Lincoln as a control city for the bridge into Laredo from their side.  Lincoln is a small city in Texas near Houston, so it does not make sense that it should be used over Laredo or even Houston (via US 59) for that matter.

Bridge 1 = Gateway to the Americas International Bridge
Bridge 2 = Juárez—Lincoln International Bridge
Bridge 3 = Laredo—Colombia Solidarity International Bridge
Bridge 4 = World Trade Bridge
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

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

roadman65

Oh that would explain why the Juarez- Lincoln control city as its the name of the bridge.  Puenta is bridge in Spanish and is used ahead of the name like Rio Grande which translates to River Grand in English as we use adjectives and adverbs post modification of the noun or verb.
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

kphoger

#112
Quote from: roadman65 on August 18, 2020, 03:28:29 PM
Puenta is bridge in Spanish

Rio Grande which translates to River Grand in English

PUENTE = BRIDGE

RÍO GRANDE = GREAT RIVER

So, for example, the translation of this sign is:

JUÁREZ LINCOLN BRIDGE  ↑

←  INTERNATIONAL BRIDGE
     DOWNTOWN





Also, that river is not called the Río Grande in Mexico.  That's the American name for it.

*  Edited to add:  Here is the official SCT highway map for the state of Chihuahua.  You can see the US name (Río Grande) labeled on the north side of the river and the Mexican name (Río Bravo) labeled on the south side.

Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

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

J N Winkler

It's worth noting too that Abraham Lincoln's and Benito Juárez's terms as presidents of their respective countries overlapped--Lincoln from 1861 to 1865, Juárez from 1858 to 1872.  This, I think, has much to do with why the bridge received its name.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

kphoger

The road in Ciudad Juárez that leads to the Bridge of the Americas (I-110) is Avenida Abraham Lincoln.

I've personally stayed at the Holiday Inn that used to exist there, which was called "Holiday Inn Lincoln".  That's a statue of Abraham Lincoln in the median.
Keep right except to pass.  Yes.  You.
Visit scenic Orleans County, NY!
Male pronouns, please.

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

Great Lakes Roads

Here is a proposed animation of the US 96 (not US 69)/TX SH 73 interchange improvement (more like reconstruction) in Port Arthur... Normally, Texas is king at stack interchanges, but they will be replacing this cloverleaf interchange with a turbine interchange which will be the second one in the state... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnsWMHvqxn8

longhorn

Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2020, 03:29:10 PM
Here is a proposed animation of the US 96 (not US 69)/TX SH 73 interchange improvement (more like reconstruction) in Port Arthur... Normally, Texas is king at stack interchanges, but they will be replacing this cloverleaf interchange with a turbine interchange which will be the second one in the state... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnsWMHvqxn8

That is so cool, wander why not in use more.

sparker

Quote from: longhorn on September 10, 2020, 04:52:42 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2020, 03:29:10 PM
Here is a proposed animation of the US 96 (not US 69)/TX SH 73 interchange improvement (more like reconstruction) in Port Arthur... Normally, Texas is king at stack interchanges, but they will be replacing this cloverleaf interchange with a turbine interchange which will be the second one in the state... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnsWMHvqxn8

That is so cool, wander why not in use more.

Noticed that there's a missing movement from NB 69/96/287 to EB 73.  Wonder if the presence of the canal made that an issue, or has TxDOT determined that the need just isn't there. 

bassoon1986

Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2020, 03:29:10 PM
Here is a proposed animation of the US 96 (not US 69)/TX SH 73 interchange improvement (more like reconstruction) in Port Arthur... Normally, Texas is king at stack interchanges, but they will be replacing this cloverleaf interchange with a turbine interchange which will be the second one in the state... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnsWMHvqxn8
Is the existing turbine 27/40 in Amarillo?


iPhone

sprjus4

Quote from: sparker on September 10, 2020, 09:19:56 PM
Quote from: longhorn on September 10, 2020, 04:52:42 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2020, 03:29:10 PM
Here is a proposed animation of the US 96 (not US 69)/TX SH 73 interchange improvement (more like reconstruction) in Port Arthur... Normally, Texas is king at stack interchanges, but they will be replacing this cloverleaf interchange with a turbine interchange which will be the second one in the state... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnsWMHvqxn8

That is so cool, wander why not in use more.

Noticed that there's a missing movement from NB 69/96/287 to EB 73.  Wonder if the presence of the canal made that an issue, or has TxDOT determined that the need just isn't there.
Odd, given the opposite movement would exist. Both movements are present with today's full cloverleaf interchange. Seems like there could be traffic generators in that area that would warrant a single lane ramp where they don't have one.

sparker

Quote from: sprjus4 on September 10, 2020, 10:17:07 PM
Quote from: sparker on September 10, 2020, 09:19:56 PM
Quote from: longhorn on September 10, 2020, 04:52:42 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2020, 03:29:10 PM
Here is a proposed animation of the US 96 (not US 69)/TX SH 73 interchange improvement (more like reconstruction) in Port Arthur... Normally, Texas is king at stack interchanges, but they will be replacing this cloverleaf interchange with a turbine interchange which will be the second one in the state... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnsWMHvqxn8

That is so cool, wander why not in use more.

Noticed that there's a missing movement from NB 69/96/287 to EB 73.  Wonder if the presence of the canal made that an issue, or has TxDOT determined that the need just isn't there.
Odd, given the opposite movement would exist. Both movements are present with today's full cloverleaf interchange. Seems like there could be traffic generators in that area that would warrant a single lane ramp where they don't have one.

It is quite odd; I'd take a guess that the way the canal/waterway shifts alignment more or less where the missing ramp would be is a factor.  Nevertheless, it's one of the best turbine designs I've seen to date; unless overall projected traffic is exceptionally heavy, I would prefer it to most stacks. 

-- US 175 --

Quote from: bassoon1986 on September 10, 2020, 10:15:00 PM
Quote from: Great Lakes Roads on September 10, 2020, 03:29:10 PM
Here is a proposed animation of the US 96 (not US 69)/TX SH 73 interchange improvement (more like reconstruction) in Port Arthur... Normally, Texas is king at stack interchanges, but they will be replacing this cloverleaf interchange with a turbine interchange which will be the second one in the state... 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnsWMHvqxn8
Is the existing turbine 27/40 in Amarillo?


iPhone

The I-27/I-40 interchange is the only one I know of.  I don't remember seeing or hearing about others in TX.

J N Winkler

Quote from: sparker on September 10, 2020, 09:19:56 PMNoticed that there's a missing movement from NB 69/96/287 to EB 73.  Wonder if the presence of the canal made that an issue, or has TxDOT determined that the need just isn't there.

I am not sure that movement is in fact missing.  I watched part of the YouTube clip and about two-thirds of the way through there appeared to be a link ramp serving the northbound-to-eastbound movement.  I'm guessing it is not visible in the cover image because it is further back to accommodate a bend in the canal.

As for why a turban/turbine is being used in this location, I suspect the reason has to do with high organic matter content in the soil.  There are only two levels (ground and overhead) at any point in the interchange complex, and the embankments are vestigial with long runs of deck on low piers, as is typical in the parts of Louisiana where the ground is swampy (roughly speaking, everywhere south of the US 84 corridor).
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

sparker

Quote from: J N Winkler on September 11, 2020, 03:33:29 PM
Quote from: sparker on September 10, 2020, 09:19:56 PMNoticed that there's a missing movement from NB 69/96/287 to EB 73.  Wonder if the presence of the canal made that an issue, or has TxDOT determined that the need just isn't there.

I am not sure that movement is in fact missing.  I watched part of the YouTube clip and about two-thirds of the way through there appeared to be a link ramp serving the northbound-to-eastbound movement.  I'm guessing it is not visible in the cover image because it is further back to accommodate a bend in the canal.

As for why a turban/turbine is being used in this location, I suspect the reason has to do with high organic matter content in the soil.  There are only two levels (ground and overhead) at any point in the interchange complex, and the embankments are vestigial with long runs of deck on low piers, as is typical in the parts of Louisiana where the ground is swampy (roughly speaking, everywhere south of the US 84 corridor).

Looked at the video twice; no sign of a direct NB>EB connector, possibly since if one were to be configured as a "split" from the turbine ramps per the other three direct ramps, it would require either (a) a separate crossing of the canal south of the main SH 73 crossing before merging with that facility or (b) a very sharp set of curves, first left then right, to enable the ramp to merge with EB 73 before the canal bridge.  I'm guessing TxDOT didn't want to do (b) for safety reasons, and (a) would have been a cost overrun for the project.  Since NB traffic is a surface street prior to just before the interchange, making a right at the last signal NB and then "grid-patterning" to the next EB entrance on 73 was considered adequate provision of movement.   

And thanks for the very plausible explanation as to the turbine choice -- swampy areas do, more often than not, require mitigation for their characteristics.

J N Winkler

Quote from: sparker on September 11, 2020, 04:46:30 PMLooked at the video twice; no sign of a direct NB>EB connector, possibly since if one were to be configured as a "split" from the turbine ramps per the other three direct ramps, it would require either (a) a separate crossing of the canal south of the main SH 73 crossing before merging with that facility or (b) a very sharp set of curves, first left then right, to enable the ramp to merge with EB 73 before the canal bridge.  I'm guessing TxDOT didn't want to do (b) for safety reasons, and (a) would have been a cost overrun for the project.  Since NB traffic is a surface street prior to just before the interchange, making a right at the last signal NB and then "grid-patterning" to the next EB entrance on 73 was considered adequate provision of movement.

Thanks for the elucidation (sorry to make you watch the clip twice!)--I think I must have been looking southbound when I thought I was looking northbound.  I can certainly see motorists being directed to make the missing movement by surface streets if the existing ramp already attracts low demand.  It looks like there is a subdivision and an additional drainage channel (shown as a thin blue line in Google Maps) in the SE quadrant that would be in the way of a fourth link ramp matching the generous geometry of the other three, so the potential for high cost is clearly there.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini



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.