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: I-69 in TX  (Read 790803 times)

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2300 on: February 24, 2022, 10:11:18 PM »

XD, didn’t even notice the “grammatical error” effect! Why is that sign chopped off on the top though.
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2301 on: February 24, 2022, 10:15:57 PM »

In other news, GSV on the new lanes of SH 44: https://goo.gl/maps/E4R6H8KEaNTUtMff8
Logged

1

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 11868
  • Age: 23
  • Location: London (temporarily)
  • Last Login: Today at 02:44:58 PM
    • Flickr account
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2302 on: February 24, 2022, 10:19:47 PM »

I'm still not seeing the actual error that requires replacing.
Logged
New routes traveled:
🇫🇷A1/E19, A3(clinched)/E15, A86, N104, D316
🇬🇧M3,M4
A3,A4,A40,A46
A100,A200,A302,A303,A308,A322,A330,A332,A345,A350,A355,A360,A361,A400,A473
A3039,A3200,A3211,A3212,A3213,A3214,A3217,A4119,A4222
E30

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2303 on: February 24, 2022, 10:22:25 PM »

I'm still not seeing the actual error that requires replacing.
The link that I posted contained a glitch by Google on one of the signs, and it looked like a misspelling of “Laredo” and “Solitary”.
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7611
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:48:19 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2304 on: February 25, 2022, 12:11:56 AM »

I'm still not seeing the actual error that requires replacing.

There is indeed a StreetView stitching error that goes away when you advance or retreat one step.  But the underlying legend is incorrect.  The sign says "Laredo Columbia Solitary Bridge"; the actual name of the facility is Laredo-Colombia Solidarity Bridge.
Logged
"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

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2305 on: February 25, 2022, 12:32:11 AM »

I'm still not seeing the actual error that requires replacing.

There is indeed a StreetView stitching error that goes away when you advance or retreat one step.  But the underlying legend is incorrect.  The sign says "Laredo Columbia Solitary Bridge"; the actual name of the facility is Laredo-Colombia Solidarity Bridge.
Oops. Big Google Translate moment.
Logged

Rick Powell

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 659
  • Last Login: June 28, 2022, 02:33:20 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2306 on: February 25, 2022, 12:37:18 PM »

There is indeed a StreetView stitching error that goes away when you advance or retreat one step.  But the underlying legend is incorrect.  The sign says "Laredo Columbia Solitary Bridge"; the actual name of the facility is Laredo-Colombia Solidarity Bridge.

Well, there is only one of them, amirite?

[Fixed quote attribution. -S.]
« Last Edit: February 27, 2022, 01:37:17 AM by Scott5114 »
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2307 on: February 25, 2022, 10:40:37 PM »

Updates on US 59 (El Campo to Fort Bend county):
El Campo: The mainlanes for US 59 at FM 1162 are open. Work is being done on the SB frontage road (which is closed), possibly the ground level of the FM 1162 interchange itself. (I couldn’t remember if I was able to see it)
Hungerford: The NB traffic is shifted onto the NB frontage road via a new exit ramp. Frontage roads are still under construction. The SB BUS-59/SH 60 exit is replaced. The future NB side of an overpass at CR 212 is under construction.
Fort Bend county: the NB exit is closed and replaced by a temporary exit ramp, shifting traffic to the unfinished future NB bridge. All exits are open except the SB Loop 540 and NB Spur 529 exits.
« Last Edit: February 25, 2022, 10:46:29 PM by Thegeet »
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 867
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: June 28, 2022, 11:53:02 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2308 on: March 03, 2022, 11:08:04 PM »

Bids were opened today for upgrading an 8-mile section of US 77 (I-69E) from south of the Kingsville bypass to south of road 628 (north of Riviera). Looking at the plans, the full length will have continuous frontage roads in both directions, and the existing 300-foot-wide right-of-way is mostly kept as-is without widening the corridor.

Unfortunately bids are well over budget (23.6%) in spite of 6 bidders. A project on I-10 in Beaumont came at $307 million, 11% over budget. I think inflation has arrived. http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/03033001.htm

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/03033002.htm

County:   KLEBERG   Let Date:   03/03/22
Type:   CONVERT NON-FREEWAY   Seq No:   3002
Time:   1184 WORKING DAYS   Project ID:   C 102-4-97
Highway:   US 77   Contract #:   03223002
Length:   8.648   CCSJ:   0102-04-097
Limits:   
From:   CR 2130   Check:   $100,000
To:   1.5 MI. N. OF SH 285   Misc Cost:   
Estimate   $142,982,383.44   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $176,703,809.06   +23.58%   ANDERSON COLUMBIA CO., INC.
Bidder 2   $178,477,111.34   +24.82%   POSILLICO CIVIL, INC.
Bidder 3   $180,874,386.05   +26.50%   JAMES CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC
Bidder 4   $182,953,594.08   +27.96%   WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 5   $199,965,468.73   +39.85%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 6   $203,692,480.95   +42.46%   SOUTHLAND CONTRACTING, INC.

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 10:54:54 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2309 on: March 06, 2022, 10:54:15 AM »

Bids were opened today for upgrading an 8-mile section of US 77 (I-69E) from south of the Kingsville bypass to south of road 628 (north of Riviera). Looking at the plans, the full length will have continuous frontage roads in both directions, and the existing 300-foot-wide right-of-way is mostly kept as-is without widening the corridor.

Unfortunately bids are well over budget (23.6%) in spite of 6 bidders. A project on I-10 in Beaumont came at $307 million, 11% over budget. I think inflation has arrived. http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/03033001.htm

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/03033002.htm

County:   KLEBERG   Let Date:   03/03/22
Type:   CONVERT NON-FREEWAY   Seq No:   3002
Time:   1184 WORKING DAYS   Project ID:   C 102-4-97
Highway:   US 77   Contract #:   03223002
Length:   8.648   CCSJ:   0102-04-097
Limits:   
From:   CR 2130   Check:   $100,000
To:   1.5 MI. N. OF SH 285   Misc Cost:   
Estimate   $142,982,383.44   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $176,703,809.06   +23.58%   ANDERSON COLUMBIA CO., INC.
Bidder 2   $178,477,111.34   +24.82%   POSILLICO CIVIL, INC.
Bidder 3   $180,874,386.05   +26.50%   JAMES CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC
Bidder 4   $182,953,594.08   +27.96%   WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 5   $199,965,468.73   +39.85%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 6   $203,692,480.95   +42.46%   SOUTHLAND CONTRACTING, INC.

Is TxDOT going to award a contract based on the overpriced bids, or are they going to re-bid the project to see if they can get something lower?
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3150
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 12:22:25 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2310 on: March 06, 2022, 12:00:08 PM »

They'll have to invent a time machine and go back a few years if they want to get lower bid prices.

It shouldn't be surprising that many of these bids are coming in well above forecasts because the administrative process with these projects moves glacier-slow, taking years. The actual construction plans take a lot of time and effort to develop on their own. Add a mountain of legal red tape into the mix. In a traditional design-bid-build arrangement the construction plans could be years old before they're sent out to bid.

Considering current events (the war in Ukraine, the price of oil and fuel, some covid restrictions are still in place), March of 2022 would be a pretty lousy time to get an updated bid on a highway project. I work in a sign company and it's a real pain for us to price out jobs. We can't just use our estimating software as is because none of the materials prices are stable. We're having to call materials suppliers daily for price updates. And that's just for a project like a lighted street sign. A super highway project is a hell of a lot more complex and complicated to bid.

Actually, with gasoline prices spiking lately I can't help but wonder if some pending projects could be suspended temporarily.
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7611
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:48:19 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2311 on: March 06, 2022, 12:57:10 PM »

Is TxDOT going to award a contract based on the overpriced bids, or are they going to re-bid the project to see if they can get something lower?

This is just speculation on my part, but I think not, because six prime bids translates into a competitive bidding process and there have been significant cost increases in underlying inputs such as labor, petroleum products, construction materials, etc.  While TxDOT could in theory re-scope the project to bring the headline cost down, like they did with I-10 just northwest of El Paso, I don't see any obvious ways to do that for this project while increasing output per dollar.
Logged
"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

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2312 on: March 12, 2022, 08:27:52 PM »

Breaking News: The US 59 “County Rd/Hill St” interchange in Victoria is complete and the overpass has opened. Happened to pass by on my way to Olive Garden.
Logged

abqtraveler

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 841
  • US-85 runs thru Albuquerque, but only on paper

  • Location: Albuquerque, NM
  • Last Login: Today at 10:54:54 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2313 on: March 13, 2022, 08:57:17 PM »

Is TxDOT going to award a contract based on the overpriced bids, or are they going to re-bid the project to see if they can get something lower?

This is just speculation on my part, but I think not, because six prime bids translates into a competitive bidding process and there have been significant cost increases in underlying inputs such as labor, petroleum products, construction materials, etc.  While TxDOT could in theory re-scope the project to bring the headline cost down, like they did with I-10 just northwest of El Paso, I don't see any obvious ways to do that for this project while increasing output per dollar.
I was thinking they might reject the bids and reduce the scope of the project to fit the available funds they have in hand. Maybe break it out into multiple phases: the first phase paid for by whatever funds they have in hand now, and contracts to cover later phases of work when additional funding becomes available.
Logged
2-d Interstates traveled:  4, 5, 8, 10, 15, 20, 24, 25, 27, 29, 35, 37, 39, 40, 41, 43, 45, 49, 55, 57, 64, 65, 66, 69, 70, 71, 74, 75, 76(E), 77, 78, 81, 83, 85, 87(N), 89, 90, 91, 93, 94, 95

2-d Interstates Clinched:  12, 22, 30, 44, 59, 80, 84(E), 86(E), 238, H1, H2, H3, H201

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2315 on: March 20, 2022, 08:26:18 PM »

Is TxDOT going to award a contract based on the overpriced bids, or are they going to re-bid the project to see if they can get something lower?

This is just speculation on my part, but I think not, because six prime bids translates into a competitive bidding process and there have been significant cost increases in underlying inputs such as labor, petroleum products, construction materials, etc.  While TxDOT could in theory re-scope the project to bring the headline cost down, like they did with I-10 just northwest of El Paso, I don't see any obvious ways to do that for this project while increasing output per dollar.
I was thinking they might reject the bids and reduce the scope of the project to fit the available funds they have in hand. Maybe break it out into multiple phases: the first phase paid for by whatever funds they have in hand now, and contracts to cover later phases of work when additional funding becomes available.
Can’t they redirect funds to other projects if I-69?
Logged

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7611
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:48:19 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2316 on: March 20, 2022, 08:59:22 PM »

We may have clarity as to what TxDOT proposes to do in a couple of days when an agenda appears for the March 31 Texas Transportation Commission meeting.
Logged
"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

J N Winkler

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7611
  • Location: Wichita, Kansas
  • Last Login: Today at 01:48:19 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2317 on: March 24, 2022, 02:26:39 PM »

I have looked at the agenda for the Texas Transportation Commission's March 31 meeting.  The I-69 contract in Kleberg County that has come in almost 24% over engineer's estimate (CCSJ 0102-04-097) is listed among the construction contracts that are up for approval.  I think that if the Commission approves all of the construction awards on a single motion, it will be included, and thus TxDOT will effectively swallow the cost increase.  But this is only a prediction:  we will have to see what happens in a week.
Logged
"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

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2318 on: March 25, 2022, 08:29:24 PM »

Actually, with gasoline prices spiking lately I can't help but wonder if some pending projects could be suspended temporarily.
Gas prices in South Texas (where I live) have dropped slightly recently.
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 867
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: June 28, 2022, 11:53:02 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2319 on: March 31, 2022, 12:11:41 PM »

Bids were opened today for upgrading an 8-mile section of US 77 (I-69E) from south of the Kingsville bypass to south of road 628 (north of Riviera). Looking at the plans, the full length will have continuous frontage roads in both directions, and the existing 300-foot-wide right-of-way is mostly kept as-is without widening the corridor.

Unfortunately bids are well over budget (23.6%) in spite of 6 bidders. A project on I-10 in Beaumont came at $307 million, 11% over budget. I think inflation has arrived. http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/03033001.htm

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/03033002.htm


The bid for US 77 (I-69E) was approved by the commission today. The overall overrun for all bids was 12.9%. There was a discussion about inflation and TxDOT's efforts to manage it. Only two small projects had their bids rejected.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2022, 12:14:12 PM by MaxConcrete »
Logged

The Ghostbuster

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3494
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison, WI
  • Last Login: Today at 01:48:13 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2320 on: March 31, 2022, 02:06:11 PM »

Will any of the existing business routes be converted into Interstate 69 Business Routes? Especially if the US Highways the existing and future Interstate 69s parallel are truncated?
Logged

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2321 on: March 31, 2022, 02:32:00 PM »

Will any of the existing business routes be converted into Interstate 69 Business Routes? Especially if the US Highways the existing and future Interstate 69s parallel are truncated?
Either that or maybe new state “Loop” routes are designated or brought back. (i.e., Loop 525 in El Campo, Loop 183 in Wharton and Hungerford)
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1694
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 11:50:08 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2322 on: April 01, 2022, 10:48:06 AM »

Will any of the existing business routes be converted into Interstate 69 Business Routes? Especially if the US Highways the existing and future Interstate 69s parallel are truncated?
Either that or maybe new state “Loop” routes are designated or brought back. (i.e., Loop 525 in El Campo, Loop 183 in Wharton and Hungerford)

That has always fascinated me.  How Texas decides when to use a business route and when to use a loop designation to serve the same purpose.  There is zero constancy. 
Logged

roadman65

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 12506
  • Location: Lakeland, Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 01:32:53 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2323 on: April 01, 2022, 11:08:37 AM »

If or when I-69 get completed in Texas, US 59 will be truncated altogether in the Lone Star State except on the US 71 concurrency north of Texarkana.


BTW does anyone know what highest milepost will be for I-69 and which one of the three branches will host its zero milepost?
Logged
Every day is a winding road, you just got to get used to it.

Sheryl Crowe

Thegeet

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 326
  • Location: Port Lavaca, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 01:27:11 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #2324 on: April 01, 2022, 11:42:49 AM »

Will any of the existing business routes be converted into Interstate 69 Business Routes? Especially if the US Highways the existing and future Interstate 69s parallel are truncated?
Either that or maybe new state “Loop” routes are designated or brought back. (i.e., Loop 525 in El Campo, Loop 183 in Wharton and Hungerford)

That has always fascinated me.  How Texas decides when to use a business route and when to use a loop designation to serve the same purpose.  There is zero constancy.
I think it has to be a certain long enough length. The Victoria El Campo and Wharton routes are long enough I believe. If anything, why was Loop 175 the designation for the southern Victoria loop?
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.