I-69 in TX

[NE2]

The more I look at the system - what exactly is the point of I-69W, specifically the route between Victoria and Freer? Is it just to save 20 minutes between Laredo and Houston?

It'll probably save more than that if built, but then you'll end up right in Houston. All this nafter traffic might end up taking US 77 to SH 21 or something to bypass Houston.

[TXtoNJ]

The more I look at the system - what exactly is the point of I-69W, specifically the route between Victoria and Freer? Is it just to save 20 minutes between Laredo and Houston?

It'll probably save more than that if built, but then you'll end up right in Houston. All this nafter traffic might end up taking US 77 to SH 21 or something to bypass Houston.

This is true. If 69W doesn't get built, the Port of Houston will undoubtedly disappear overnight, but my commute on the Katy Freeway will get only half the current traffic.

Hmm, decisions...

[Grzrd]

The only new alignment in the area is south of Lufkin for the Diboll bypass, which is by far the most urgently needed project.

TxDOT will have a January 22 Open House for the Diboll Relief Route in order to display the proposed alignment to the public and explain where TxDOT is in the project development process.  Here is a snip of the Diboll Relief Route:

[dariusb]

When is this project slated to start construction?

[Grzrd]

TxDOT will have a January 22 Open House for the Diboll Relief Route

When is this project slated to start construction?

Not any time soon.  The I-69 Driven by Texans website indicates that the project is currently undergoing an environmental re-evaluation due to the passage of time and that it currently does not have any design or construction funding:

Complete the Diboll Relief Route – The number one priority of Angelina County committee members is advancing the development of the Diboll Relief Route. TxDOT completed the environmental process and had approved schematic design plans in 1999 for this project, but because of the elapsed time an environmental re-evaluation will be required. TxDOT is proceeding with preparing a re-evaluation of the environmental assessment (environmental document) and with right-of-way map updates. The Lufkin District will be hosting an upcoming public meeting on January 22, 2015 to display the proposed alignment to the public, explain where TxDOT is in the project development process, answer questions, and gather local citizen input.
It should be noted that design and construction funding has not been identified for any of the projects above.

[Grzrd]

One more question, Grzz......what's going to happen with TX 44 between Freer and Robstown? That was recently added into the "I-69" system as a possible freeway upgrade in order to provide direct access between Laredo and Corpus Christi. Is it still scheduled to be included in the mix (possibly as an "I-x69")??

The most recent action was a May 1, 2014 referral to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.  Mercifully, a specific numerical designation is currently not included in the text of the bill.  I suspect that the bill will eventually be part of the next large multi-year highway reauthorization (which will hopefully occur in May, 2015; however, I'm not holding my breath .........). ... Here is the current Corridor 18 statutory language, which will help to interpret the language in the 44-to-69 bill.

Texas Congressman Blake Farenthold's office announced in a January 14, 2015 press release that Farenthold has reintroduced the "44-to-69" legislation for this year:

Yesterday, January 13, 2015, Congressman Blake Farenthold (TX-27) re-introduced legislation that would expand Interstate 69 to include Texas State Highway 44. This bill would designate State Highway 44 as a future segment of I-69, known as the "44 to 69 Act."  Under the Congressman's legislation, both the city of Corpus Christi and Corpus Christi International Airport would be included in the I-69 interstate highway system.
Congressman Farenthold offered the following statement on his introduction of the "44 to 69 Act" :
"The '44 to 69 Act' better connects Corpus Christi's airport and port to the rest of the country. As Texas' economy continues to grow, so does the need for surface transportation and modern infrastructure to move freight and people. Extending and completing I-69 now will better position Texas' ports to enjoy the economic benefits coming with the expansion of the Panama Canal.  I am proud to author this piece of legislation."

[bassoon1986]

I feel like I've seen plenty of maps showing the parts of the I-69 corridor. But y'all help me clear this up.

I-69 never splits into all 3 legs (69W, 69C, 69E) at once correct?

I-69 splits into 69E and 69W at Victoria. E follows the US 77 corridor all the way to Brownsville and W follows US 59 corridor from Victoria all the way to Laredo.

So I-69C's northern terminus will be at George West where US 281 meets US 59 now?

I think I was under the impression for a while that 69C would branch from 69E using TX 44

[ajlynch91]

I don't see the point of duplicate numbers, especially when an I-x69 designation would work perfectly fine. I'd rather have the (stupid) suffixes than duplicate numbers.

[Rover_0]

One more question, Grzz......what's going to happen with TX 44 between Freer and Robstown? That was recently added into the "I-69" system as a possible freeway upgrade in order to provide direct access between Laredo and Corpus Christi. Is it still scheduled to be included in the mix (possibly as an "I-x69")??

The most recent action was a May 1, 2014 referral to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit.  Mercifully, a specific numerical designation is currently not included in the text of the bill.  I suspect that the bill will eventually be part of the next large multi-year highway reauthorization (which will hopefully occur in May, 2015; however, I'm not holding my breath .........). ... Here is the current Corridor 18 statutory language, which will help to interpret the language in the 44-to-69 bill.

Texas Congressman Blake Farenthold's office announced in a January 14, 2015 press release that Farenthold has reintroduced the "44-to-69" legislation for this year:

Yesterday, January 13, 2015, Congressman Blake Farenthold (TX-27) re-introduced legislation that would expand Interstate 69 to include Texas State Highway 44. This bill would designate State Highway 44 as a future segment of I-69, known as the "44 to 69 Act."  Under the Congressman's legislation, both the city of Corpus Christi and Corpus Christi International Airport would be included in the I-69 interstate highway system.
Congressman Farenthold offered the following statement on his introduction of the "44 to 69 Act" :
"The '44 to 69 Act' better connects Corpus Christi's airport and port to the rest of the country. As Texas' economy continues to grow, so does the need for surface transportation and modern infrastructure to move freight and people. Extending and completing I-69 now will better position Texas' ports to enjoy the economic benefits coming with the expansion of the Panama Canal.  I am proud to author this piece of legislation."

I really hope TX-44 ends up as something other than I-69/I-69(insert suffix letter here), but I fear my hope is in vain.

[Bobby5280]

Why would an I-69 spur using TX-44 have a suffix in the route number? I-635 in Dallas only intersections I-35E in Dallas. It's not I-635E.

I expect the TX-44 freeway to have a normal I-x69 number, like maybe I-969 for instance.

[Anthony_JK]

How about making the Laredo-Freer-Robstown-Corpus Christi-Victoria segments of US 59/TX 44/US 77 into I-69, and the Freer-George West-Victoria segment an I-269? Then, US 77 south of Corpus to Brownsville can become an I-37 extension, and US 281 can stay as it is. Problem solved, without any suffixes.

But, since the suffixes are now official, probably convert TX 44 into an even I-x69 or a western I-4.

[erik_ram2005]

How about making the Laredo-Freer-Robstown-Corpus Christi-Victoria segments of US 59/TX 44/US 77 into I-69, and the Freer-George West-Victoria segment an I-269? Then, US 77 south of Corpus to Brownsville can become an I-37 extension, and US 281 can stay as it is. Problem solved, without any suffixes.

But, since the suffixes are now official, probably convert TX 44 into an even I-x69 or a western I-4.

Actually US 281 NEEDS to be part of the interstate 69 system. 281 serves as the primary route out of the RGV for the people of Hidalgo County (about 800,000) in the RGV which has a larger population than Cameron and Willacy Counties (about 400,000 and 22,000) which US 77 serves as the primary route to out of the RGV for. People in Hidalgo County wont drive roughly 40 minutes east to I-69E (US 77) when driving up to SA, for example. I-69C (US 281) would be more direct and easier to access. I-69E, though, can be built a lot faster though and would be easier to build first.

[NE2]

Neither route NEEDS to be built. The only reason for the overpasses in Kenedy County is FHWA anality.

[Anthony_JK]

Neither route NEEDS to be built. The only reason for the overpasses in Kenedy County is FHWA anality.

And full control of access standards for Interstate-grade highways. Personally I'd prefer FHWA "anality" to 65 mph crashes.

[bugo]

Neither route NEEDS to be built. The only reason for the overpasses in Kenedy County is FHWA anality.

And full control of access standards for Interstate-grade highways. Personally I'd prefer FHWA "anality" to 65 mph crashes.

Do you have stats on how many crashes have happened on this road?

[Anthony_JK]

Neither route NEEDS to be built. The only reason for the overpasses in Kenedy County is FHWA anality.

And full control of access standards for Interstate-grade highways. Personally I'd prefer FHWA "anality" to 65 mph crashes.

Do you have stats on how many crashes have happened on this road?

No...but the very definition of Interstate is full control of access (I-70 Breezwood, I-180 in WY, and a few at-grade farm roads intersecting I-10, I-20, and I-40 in TX excepted). If you are going to say that US 77 should be part of I-69 yet retain at-grades, then you should do the same for all other less-traveled Interstate highways.

[Grzrd]

Texas Congressman Blake Farenthold's office announced in a January 14, 2015 press release that Farenthold has reintroduced the "44-to-69" legislation for this year

If anyone cares to follow the progress of the bill, it is also known as H.R.301 – 114th Congress (2015-2016).

[NE2]

No...but the very definition of Interstate is full control of access (I-70 Breezwood, I-180 in WY, and a few at-grade farm roads intersecting I-10, I-20, and I-40 in TX excepted). If you are going to say that US 77 should be part of I-69 yet retain at-grades, then you should do the same for all other less-traveled Interstate highways.

US 77 in Kenedy County is a few at-grade farm roads (really driveways)...

[bugo]

Neither route NEEDS to be built. The only reason for the overpasses in Kenedy County is FHWA anality.

And full control of access standards for Interstate-grade highways. Personally I'd prefer FHWA "anality" to 65 mph crashes.

Do you have stats on how many crashes have happened on this road?

No...but the very definition of Interstate is full control of access (I-70 Breezwood, I-180 in WY, and a few at-grade farm roads intersecting I-10, I-20, and I-40 in TX excepted). If you are going to say that US 77 should be part of I-69 yet retain at-grades, then you should do the same for all other less-traveled Interstate highways.

I don't think US 77 should be a part of the I-69 clusterfuck. There is very little along the highway other than a couple of small towns that should be bypassed. A 4 lane divided highway is good enough. Converting it into a freeway (basically building new freeway lanes in the median of the current expressway) is a colossal waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.

[Perfxion]

US77 and US281 to I-69 is more pork than a BBQ cookoff. Neither of them are needed from a traffic stand point. If they must build one, 281 over 77.

[texaskdog]

Neither route NEEDS to be built. The only reason for the overpasses in Kenedy County is FHWA anality.

And full control of access standards for Interstate-grade highways. Personally I'd prefer FHWA "anality" to 65 mph crashes.

Do you have stats on how many crashes have happened on this road?

No...but the very definition of Interstate is full control of access (I-70 Breezwood, I-180 in WY, and a few at-grade farm roads intersecting I-10, I-20, and I-40 in TX excepted). If you are going to say that US 77 should be part of I-69 yet retain at-grades, then you should do the same for all other less-traveled Interstate highways.

I don't think US 77 should be a part of the I-69 clusterfuck. There is very little along the highway other than a couple of small towns that should be bypassed. A 4 lane divided highway is good enough. Converting it into a freeway (basically building new freeway lanes in the median of the current expressway) is a colossal waste of money that could be better spent elsewhere.

N A F T A

[NE2]

can S U C K I T

Not that there's any fucking benefit to building farm driveway overpasses in the middle of nowhere.

[dfwmapper]

Neuces and Kleberg counties have enough development that it's probably worth full access control at some point. Kenedy, still a long way away from needing anything, just slap up some TEMPORARY or FUTURE I-69E signs and call it good enough.

[Grzrd]

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?

US 77 in Kenedy County is a few at-grade farm roads (really driveways)...

Do you have stats on how many crashes have happened on this road?

The Environmental Assessment Volume 1 includes a table based on crash statistics; interestingly, Kenedy County was excluded due to lack of crash records or intersections (page 19/271 of pdf; page 11 of document):



If anyone is interested, more information may be found at the Index of US 77 Upgrade EA and FONSI Documents.

[Grzrd]

this I-69 Funding Program as of March 27, 2014 map

(above quote from Interstate 369 thread)

The Alliance for I-69 Texas has posted an updated I-69 System Funding Program as of September 1, 2014 map, along with several other materials from a January 14, 2015 I-69 Texas Status Update Briefing.

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

One of the materials from the January 14 presentation is a Status of National I-69 System map that includes SH 550, as of July 1, 2014, as a "Potential I-69":