AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: I-69 in TX  (Read 516310 times)

Molandfreak

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1752
  • Age: 24
  • Last Login: March 27, 2019, 10:51:58 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #375 on: May 11, 2013, 07:54:26 PM »

U.S. 57 should stay as is even in the event of a freeway upgrade. The entire logic of it having an out of place number is because it connects to MEX-57. An unsigned interstate I wouldn't mind.
Logged

abaurgooasdusx

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6
  • Last Login: June 29, 2013, 06:46:33 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #376 on: May 14, 2013, 07:45:54 PM »

I'm going to enjoy driving on the new Interstates since they're within a day's drive from me.

Y'all can let your OCD keep you riveted to your chairs with rage.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2444
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 12:04:11 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #377 on: May 15, 2013, 08:27:20 AM »

I'm going to enjoy driving on the new Interstates since they're within a day's drive from me.

Y'all can let your OCD keep you riveted to your chairs with rage.

Me too. 
Logged

formulanone

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6739
  • Age: 45
  • Location: HSV
  • Last Login: Today at 02:44:56 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #378 on: May 15, 2013, 09:22:29 AM »

Y'all can let your OCD keep you riveted to your chairs with rage.

I was kind of curious what a C-suffixed Interstate Shield would look like, what with Texas opting for letters under the numerals on their state highway signs.

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #379 on: May 15, 2013, 09:29:51 AM »


I was kind of curious what a C-suffixed Interstate Shield would look like, what with Texas opting for letters under the numerals on their state highway signs.

probably similar to 35E and 35W.

Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

formulanone

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 6739
  • Age: 45
  • Location: HSV
  • Last Login: Today at 02:44:56 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #380 on: May 15, 2013, 09:38:20 AM »

Yeah, that was kind of what I imagined.

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2444
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 12:04:11 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #381 on: May 15, 2013, 10:21:51 AM »

Yeah, that was kind of what I imagined.

I bet it's the small letter underneath.
Logged

lordsutch

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1054
  • Last Login: March 28, 2019, 10:31:40 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #382 on: May 16, 2013, 12:44:38 AM »

I bet it's the small letter underneath.

The signage plans from TxDOT that have been previously posted suggest it will be a I-35E/W style suffix, not the "tiny letter" design used for business routes.
Logged

Molandfreak

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1752
  • Age: 24
  • Last Login: March 27, 2019, 10:51:58 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #383 on: May 16, 2013, 12:51:47 AM »

I bet it's the small letter underneath.

The signage plans from TxDOT that have been previously posted suggest it will be a I-35E/W style suffix, not the "tiny letter" design used for business routes.
I hope it's that way.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2444
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 12:04:11 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #384 on: May 16, 2013, 08:31:15 AM »

I bet it's the small letter underneath.

The signage plans from TxDOT that have been previously posted suggest it will be a I-35E/W style suffix, not the "tiny letter" design used for business routes.

Yeah, the average plebian driver wouldn't figure that out anyway.
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 4813
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 03:31:19 PM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #385 on: May 16, 2013, 10:29:55 AM »

I think most of us will agree that I-69C is a dumb idea, especially when you consider the fact that most suffixed Interstate routes (of course, with the exception of the two I-35 splits in TX and MN) were renumbered over 30 years ago. I wouldn't mind duplicating an odd-numbered route, as there are currently none in the system. I-39, I-41 or even I-43 would be a good fit for the spur to McAllen/Brownsville.
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3420
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: June 14, 2019, 03:05:17 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #386 on: May 24, 2013, 12:26:59 PM »

The final formality needs to be approval by the Texas Transportation Commission.
I would assume that they're the ones who requested it, no?
They provided the authority for TxDOT to submit the application.  Now that it has been approved, they need to rubberstamp AASHTO's decision.  It seems like an inefficient way to do things.  They have followed this procedure with prior I-69 Corridor designations.
(above quote from AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications thread)

The Texas Transportation Commission ("TTC") May 30, 2013 Agenda suggests that the TTC may slightly alter their past practice and grant approval to several interstate designations that will be contingent upon later FHWA approval:

Quote
8. Transportation Planning
Various Counties - Designate various Interstate Highways concurrent with existing US Highways (MO)
The commission will consider the designation of new Interstates on the state highway system concurrent with existing US Highways. Once designated, these highways will operate as part of the Interstate System in Texas. Action is subject to approval of these designations by the Federal Highway Administration.

I'm guessing that the TTC will approve the designations for Interstates 2, 69C, 69E, and 369.  Then, it will be a matter of waiting for FHWA to approve each of these sections as meeting current interstate grade standards.
Logged

ski-man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 27
  • Location: Wyoming
  • Last Login: June 16, 2019, 10:26:24 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #387 on: May 25, 2013, 01:21:33 AM »

Has there ever been an explanation on why they feel it is better to use the I-69C & 69E instead of another interstate number?
Logged

lordsutch

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1054
  • Last Login: March 28, 2019, 10:31:40 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #388 on: May 25, 2013, 03:09:03 AM »

Has there ever been an explanation on why they feel it is better to use the I-69C & 69E instead of another interstate number?

As I mentioned up thread, it's Rio Grande Valley politics, essentially the same reason why Dallas & Fort Worth and Minneapolis & St. Paul split I-35 between them ~60 years ago.  Or why I-81 goes between Kingsport and Johnson City, rather than going through either.

Case in point: Texas is going to build a new medical school in the Valley (assuming Gov. Perry doesn't veto the bill).  Rather than McAllen get it or Brownsville get it, instead each will get half of the med school.  This, I expect, may only work out slightly better than splitting the baby would've.
Logged

Road Hog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1138
  • Location: Collin County, TX
  • Last Login: June 18, 2019, 11:03:55 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #389 on: May 25, 2013, 05:11:32 AM »

Has there ever been an explanation on why they feel it is better to use the I-69C & 69E instead of another interstate number?

As I mentioned up thread, it's Rio Grande Valley politics, essentially the same reason why Dallas & Fort Worth and Minneapolis & St. Paul split I-35 between them ~60 years ago.  Or why I-81 goes between Kingsport and Johnson City, rather than going through either.

Case in point: Texas is going to build a new medical school in the Valley (assuming Gov. Perry doesn't veto the bill).  Rather than McAllen get it or Brownsville get it, instead each will get half of the med school.  This, I expect, may only work out slightly better than splitting the baby would've.

So Harlingen gets the whole thing?
Logged

lordsutch

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1054
  • Last Login: March 28, 2019, 10:31:40 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #390 on: May 25, 2013, 05:32:57 PM »

So Harlingen gets the whole thing?

Harlingen is much closer to Brownsville than McAllen (same county).  (Literally, the doctors will spend the first two years in Hidalgo County and the final two years in Cameron County, so there will be two separate facilities.  But we're getting off-topic.)

Literally putting the med school in the middle would put it somewhere like Mercedes or Weslaco.
Logged

Sykotyk

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 874
  • Last Login: February 03, 2019, 02:49:05 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #391 on: May 25, 2013, 08:22:34 PM »

Why can't we just use a few of the unused numbers: I-31 and I-33 are just ripe for this type of routing. I know it's not a continuous I-69, but it is a 2di, and I-31 would work good for what will be I-69C. It might be out of position for I-35 angling southwest, but it is a 2di that's yet to be used.
Logged

thefro

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 368
  • Location: Indiana
  • Last Login: June 18, 2019, 01:22:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #392 on: May 30, 2013, 06:16:38 AM »

FHWA has approved designating US 77 as I-69E from Raymondville to Brownsville.

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_3baf5bf6-c8d4-11e2-bafc-0019bb30f31a.html

Quote
More big news came in the form of a surprise announcement by Victor Mendez, administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, invited to the event by U.S. Rep. Filemon Vela, D-Brownsville, as part of a tour of his district’s transportation projects.

Mendez said that the FHWA has authorized redesignating U.S. 77 from University Boulevard in Brownsville all the way to Raymondville to Interstate 69 East.

“That’s the full 53 miles,” he said. “The importance of that from an economic development standpoint is just having an interstate shield on a highway is really important, positive thing in terms of future development.”

It’ll also mean a much safer road in light of the FHWA’s strict standards, Mendez said.

The redesignation puts the Lower Rio Grande Valley a major stride closer to being connected to the rest of the nation by an interstate route.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2444
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 12:04:11 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #393 on: May 30, 2013, 08:42:04 AM »

U.S. 57 should stay as is even in the event of a freeway upgrade. The entire logic of it having an out of place number is because it connects to MEX-57. An unsigned interstate I wouldn't mind.

Now there's a road that should be a state highway
Logged

agentsteel53

  • invisible hand
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 15374
  • long live button copy!

  • Age: 38
  • Location: San Diego, CA
  • Last Login: November 21, 2016, 09:58:39 AM
    • AARoads Shield Gallery
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #394 on: May 30, 2013, 01:01:04 PM »

U.S. 57 should stay as is even in the event of a freeway upgrade. The entire logic of it having an out of place number is because it connects to MEX-57. An unsigned interstate I wouldn't mind.

Now there's a road that should be a state highway

you can sign it I-57 and pretend you have a coherent plan to connect it to the other I-57 by 2045.  in fact, you can sign a portion both as I-57 and US-57.  also multiplex part of it with I-56 for no discernible reason.
Logged
live from sunny San Diego.

http://shields.aaroads.com

jake@aaroads.com

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1222
  • Last Login: June 14, 2019, 02:29:58 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #395 on: May 30, 2013, 01:22:22 PM »

FHWA has approved designating US 77 as I-69E from Raymondville to Brownsville.

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/local/article_3baf5bf6-c8d4-11e2-bafc-0019bb30f31a.html

Quote
More big news came in the form of a surprise announcement by Victor Mendez, administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, invited to the event by U.S. Rep. Filemon Vela, D-Brownsville, as part of a tour of his district’s transportation projects.

Mendez said that the FHWA has authorized redesignating U.S. 77 from University Boulevard in Brownsville all the way to Raymondville to Interstate 69 East.

“That’s the full 53 miles,” he said. “The importance of that from an economic development standpoint is just having an interstate shield on a highway is really important, positive thing in terms of future development.”

It’ll also mean a much safer road in light of the FHWA’s strict standards, Mendez said.

The redesignation puts the Lower Rio Grande Valley a major stride closer to being connected to the rest of the nation by an interstate route.

So does that mean a change is needed for the I-69/US 77 section in Chorpus?  Or does that mean 69 will cut over on TX 44 vs. a split in Victoria?
Logged

Grzrd

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 3420
  • Interested Observer

  • Location: Atlanta, GA
  • Last Login: June 14, 2019, 03:05:17 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #396 on: May 30, 2013, 01:38:51 PM »

List of applications:
....
TX I-69E (Robstown, renumbering I-69)
(above quote from AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications thread) ....
Approved by AASHTO
So does that mean a change is needed for the I-69/US 77 section in Chorpus?  Or does that mean 69 will cut over on TX 44 vs. a split in Victoria?

AASHTO has already approved the change to I-69E for the section near Corpus (FHWA already approved it as interstate grade for the initial I-69 signage) and the Texas Transportation Commission probably approved the change at its meeting earlier today (the transcript should be posted in a couple of days).
Since SH 44 is not part of the statutorily defined I-69 Corridor, I'm guessing it may eventually be designated as I-6, and that the I-69/I-69 E split will remain in Victoria.
« Last Edit: May 30, 2013, 01:41:32 PM by Grzrd »
Logged

CanesFan27

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1222
  • Last Login: June 14, 2019, 02:29:58 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #397 on: May 30, 2013, 01:45:42 PM »

List of applications:
....
TX I-69E (Robstown, renumbering I-69)
(above quote from AASHTO May 5, 2013 Route Numbering Actions and Applications thread) ....
Approved by AASHTO
So does that mean a change is needed for the I-69/US 77 section in Chorpus?  Or does that mean 69 will cut over on TX 44 vs. a split in Victoria?

AASHTO has already approved the change to I-69E for the section near Corpus (FHWA already approved it as interstate grade for the initial I-69 signage) and the Texas Transportation Commission probably approved the change at its meeting earlier today (the transcript should be posted in a couple of days).
Since SH 44 is not part of the statutorily defined I-69 Corridor, I'm guessing it may eventually be designated as I-6, and that the I-69/I-69 E split will remain in Victoria.

Great thanks, I must have overlooked the change in Corpus.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2444
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: June 19, 2019, 12:04:11 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #398 on: May 30, 2013, 03:21:52 PM »

I'm going down there next weekend, will look to see if the 69 has become 69e yet
Logged

Alex

  • Webmaster
  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 4778
  • Location: Tampa, FL
  • Last Login: June 10, 2019, 07:57:51 PM
    • AARoads
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #399 on: May 30, 2013, 04:24:15 PM »


AASHTO has already approved the change to I-69E for the section near Corpus (FHWA already approved it as interstate grade for the initial I-69 signage) and the Texas Transportation Commission probably approved the change at its meeting earlier today (the transcript should be posted in a couple of days).
Since SH 44 is not part of the statutorily defined I-69 Corridor, I'm guessing it may eventually be designated as I-6, and that the I-69/I-69 E split will remain in Victoria.

Jeff emailed us the commission notes, which includes the redesignation of I-69 in Corpus Christi as I-69E. The notes also involve I-2, I-69C and I-369:

 


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.