AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Proposed I-X10 in Houston  (Read 16928 times)

FreewayDan

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 204
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Woodforest, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 04:13:41 PM
    • FreewayDan's Flickr Channel
Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« on: May 27, 2012, 03:56:35 PM »

Two Texas congressmen (U.S. Rep. Michael T. McCaul, R-Austin and U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston) are proposing to make U.S. 290 (Northwest Freeway) into an Interstate highway.  This effort is to get more federal funds for its expansion.

 http://www.chron.com/neighborhood/cyfair-news/article/Officials-favoring-upgrade-by-TXDOT-2180292.php
Logged
LEFT ON GREEN
 ARROW ONLY

austrini

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 210
  • Collin County GIS admin

  • Location: Dallas
  • Last Login: September 15, 2019, 11:33:21 AM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2012, 06:07:10 PM »

"the federal government is too big" ... "the federal government should give us money"
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1329
  • Age: 55
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: Today at 02:17:05 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2012, 06:21:11 PM »

Plus, where exactly will this designation go to?? The rules state that a spur of an Interstate highway must terminate at a NHS or US highway. Unless they plan on upgrading 290 clear to Austin or combining it with an upgrade of SH 6 to Waco, this isn't going to fly for long.

Plus, what are they going to do with the plans to build the SH 249 tolll road??

I figured that when they started to drop I-69 shields on US 77, that others would want to get in on this sham.


Anthony
Logged

OCGuy81

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 773
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Bend, OR
  • Last Login: March 28, 2019, 12:36:25 AM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2012, 09:15:30 PM »

What would it be?  It's "parent" would technically be I-610.  An odd number 3-di is what I'd assume unless it did actually connect to 35 in Austin.

I-310?
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 13867
  • fuck

  • Age: 11
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: Today at 12:40:57 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2012, 09:34:38 PM »

Plus, where exactly will this designation go to?? The rules state that a spur of an Interstate highway must terminate at a NHS or US highway.
US 290 is not ony NHS but (partly) STRAHNET: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/nhs/maps/tx_east/tx_texaseast.pdf

Anyway, Interstate designation doesn't mean more funding.
Logged
Florida route log | pre-1945
I will do my best to not make America hate again.
Global warming denial is barely worse than white privilege denial.

Perfxion

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 316
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 09:28:38 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #5 on: May 28, 2012, 06:14:55 AM »

I love Texas, it doesn't want "dirty federal money" unless its highway funding. They want to turn US290 from Houston to Austin into an interstate. It would be an interstate because it will A: connect with a "child" route of I-10, B: would directly connect with its parent due to the new construction, C: end at either a US or interstate route in Austin.

BTW: the toll road expansion of SH259 is just from Spring Cypress to FM1774. They aren't going any further at the moment.
Logged
5/10/20/30/15/35/37/40/44/45/70/76/78/80/85/87/95/
(CA)405,(NJ)195/295(NY)295/495/278/678(CT)395(MD/VA)195/495/695/895

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10760
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 07:16:36 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #6 on: May 28, 2012, 10:45:46 AM »

Quote
US 290 is not ony NHS but (partly) STRAHNET:

I don't think he was asking about US 290 proper being NHS or STRAHNET.  He was asking what the western terminus of any such Interstate designation would be.  That western terminus, per FHWA policy, would have to be at a logical termini...which in practice usually means an intersecting NHS or STRAHNET route.  That means it'd have to end either at the proposed Grand Parkway (TX 99), or the freeway proper would have to be extended past Hempstead to Brenham (and TX 36).  FHWA wouldn't approve an Interstate until either the Grand Parkway gets built to US 290 or the freeway is extended to Brenham.
Logged

Anthony_JK

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1329
  • Age: 55
  • Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
  • Last Login: Today at 02:17:05 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2012, 02:38:26 PM »

Quote
US 290 is not ony NHS but (partly) STRAHNET:

I don't think he was asking about US 290 proper being NHS or STRAHNET.  He was asking what the western terminus of any such Interstate designation would be.  That western terminus, per FHWA policy, would have to be at a logical termini...which in practice usually means an intersecting NHS or STRAHNET route.  That means it'd have to end either at the proposed Grand Parkway (TX 99), or the freeway proper would have to be extended past Hempstead to Brenham (and TX 36).  FHWA wouldn't approve an Interstate until either the Grand Parkway gets built to US 290 or the freeway is extended to Brenham.


Exactly....Froggie got what I was trying to say.

But, I didn't know that SH 36 was a freeway, or that US 290 had a freeway gap between Hempstead and Brenham. I may need to reacquaint myself with Google Maps more.


Anthony
Logged

InterstateNG

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 518
  • Last Login: January 03, 2014, 01:12:36 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #8 on: May 28, 2012, 03:04:32 PM »

36 shares pavement with 290 on a freeway bypass of Brenham.

Continuing the freeway past Brenham is problematic.  Currently westbound traffic has to cloverleaf off the bypass to continue on 290.  Giddings has to be bypassed entirely and the final few miles in Austin would be part of the Manor Expresseay, which is going to be a tolled.
Logged
I demand an apology.

froggie

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 10760
  • Location: Greensboro, VT
  • Last Login: Today at 07:16:36 PM
    • Froggie's Place
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #9 on: May 28, 2012, 04:55:53 PM »

SH 36 isn't a freeway, but it's on the NHS and as such could be considered a "logical termini" for any I-x10 designation along US 290.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2494
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 07:19:29 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #10 on: May 28, 2012, 04:59:54 PM »

36 shares pavement with 290 on a freeway bypass of Brenham.

Continuing the freeway past Brenham is problematic.  Currently westbound traffic has to cloverleaf off the bypass to continue on 290.  Giddings has to be bypassed entirely and the final few miles in Austin would be part of the Manor Expresseay, which is going to be a tolled.

Nothing that can't be changed. Won't be too many years before 290 is a freeway anyway, too much traffic heading that way. 
Logged

InterstateNG

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 518
  • Last Login: January 03, 2014, 01:12:36 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #11 on: May 28, 2012, 07:45:58 PM »

Hey if it takes more Houston-bound traffic off of 71, that works for me.
Logged
I demand an apology.

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2494
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 07:19:29 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #12 on: May 29, 2012, 10:27:02 AM »

Hey if it takes more Houston-bound traffic off of 71, that works for me.

Depends which side of Austin you live on.  I"m on the NW side so its 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.  We usually go out 290 & come back on 71.
Logged

txstateends

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1081
  • Location: north TX, not far from an interstate interchange and a US terminus
  • Last Login: June 05, 2019, 11:30:28 AM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #13 on: May 29, 2012, 12:40:36 PM »

Two Texas congressmen (U.S. Rep. Michael T. McCaul, R-Austin and U.S. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston)

Why would a Congress-person from Austin care about a possible Interstate that only involves/serves the Houston area, unless there was the possibility of (and his desire for) the Interstate reaching all the way to Austin?
Logged
\/ \/ click for a bigger image \/ \/

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: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #14 on: May 29, 2012, 12:41:40 PM »


Why would a Congress-person from Austin care about a possible Interstate that only involves/serves the Houston area, unless there was the possibility of (and his desire for) the Interstate reaching all the way to Austin?

economic development in Texas in general would benefit the Austin area.
Logged

Perfxion

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 316
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 09:28:38 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #15 on: May 29, 2012, 06:41:47 PM »

They want to make 290 into a full freeway from Houston to Austin. They also want to make a full freeway from Houston to College Station. The billion dollar question(pun intended) is what money? Isn't this state already going broke with all these road projects? Upgrading US59, Upgrading US277, upgrading US281, upgrading US290, upgrading SH249, building the grand parkway, thats not even touching DFW area. So where is this money coming from? Is it growing on trees? And if so, where is this tree? I might need to make a visit.
Logged
5/10/20/30/15/35/37/40/44/45/70/76/78/80/85/87/95/
(CA)405,(NJ)195/295(NY)295/495/278/678(CT)395(MD/VA)195/495/695/895

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2494
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 07:19:29 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #16 on: May 30, 2012, 08:28:55 AM »

Who would want to go to College Station?
Logged

Chris

  • *
  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2258
  • International road enthusiast

  • Age: 32
  • Location: the Netherlands
  • Last Login: Today at 04:47:11 PM
    • Flickr
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #17 on: May 30, 2012, 03:36:37 PM »

It's quite obvious most new projects in Texas will be toll roads. The gas tax hardly covers minimum maintenance and other projects you can't toll.

If Austin would've been a major city in the 1950's I'm sure there would have been some kind of Interstate Highway running from Austin to Houston. However Austin was only a small regional city at the time, like various other state capitals.

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2494
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 07:19:29 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #18 on: May 30, 2012, 04:06:17 PM »

It's quite obvious most new projects in Texas will be toll roads. The gas tax hardly covers minimum maintenance and other projects you can't toll.

If Austin would've been a major city in the 1950's I'm sure there would have been some kind of Interstate Highway running from Austin to Houston. However Austin was only a small regional city at the time, like various other state capitals.

I would build up 290 then the mainline from points west to east would run thru austin, though really would have made more sense to run the freeway along 71 heading east
Logged

TXtoNJ

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 527
  • Last Login: Today at 09:38:23 AM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #19 on: June 12, 2012, 11:37:08 PM »

If they wanted to troll, they'd number it I-14.
If they really wanted to troll, they'd number it I-27
Logged

InterstateNG

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 518
  • Last Login: January 03, 2014, 01:12:36 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2012, 09:04:57 AM »

Good to know.
Logged
I demand an apology.

Cam4rd98

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 28
  • Last Login: March 09, 2015, 07:59:33 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #21 on: September 22, 2013, 05:18:59 PM »

36 shares pavement with 290 on a freeway bypass of Brenham.

Continuing the freeway past Brenham is problematic.  Currently westbound traffic has to cloverleaf off the bypass to continue on 290.  Giddings has to be bypassed entirely and the final few miles in Austin would be part of the Manor Expresseay, which is going to be a tolled.


36 shares pavement with 290 on a freeway bypass of Brenham.

Continuing the freeway past Brenham is problematic.  Currently westbound traffic has to cloverleaf off the bypass to continue on 290.  Giddings has to be bypassed entirely and the final few miles in Austin would be part of the Manor Expresseay, which is going to be a tolled.



I got an idea that would work
Texas 36-US.290 Tie in Brenham


Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Online Online

  • Posts: 1791
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: Today at 11:32:47 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #22 on: September 24, 2013, 01:00:44 PM »

I don't see a problem adding an Interstate I-x10 spur designation to US-290. But the Interstate designation at this point could only travel to the split with TX-6 at Hempstead.

The 18 mile stretch between Hempstead and Brenham is mostly 4-lane divided highway with at grade intersections. Obviously the freeway in Brenham wouldn't be able to carry any Interstate designation at this point.

It looks like the long term plan is to have College Station linked to the Houston area with superhighway all the way. It might be another matter for TX-6 to carry an Interstate route designation. I sure wouldn't want to see the I-x10 route number being proposed to US-290 hang a hard right turn North to College Station.

Long term (perhaps a decade or two), I can see US-290 eventually being upgraded to full Interstate highway standards from Houston to Austin. If the upgrading progress eventually goes that far it might be alright to rename it with a 2 digit number (I-12 or I-14). There are 3 digit Interstates that do travel significant distances though.
Logged

texaskdog

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2494
  • Age: 50
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: Today at 07:19:29 PM
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #23 on: September 24, 2013, 01:16:23 PM »

36 shares pavement with 290 on a freeway bypass of Brenham.

Continuing the freeway past Brenham is problematic.  Currently westbound traffic has to cloverleaf off the bypass to continue on 290.  Giddings has to be bypassed entirely and the final few miles in Austin would be part of the Manor Expresseay, which is going to be a tolled.


36 shares pavement with 290 on a freeway bypass of Brenham.

Continuing the freeway past Brenham is problematic.  Currently westbound traffic has to cloverleaf off the bypass to continue on 290.  Giddings has to be bypassed entirely and the final few miles in Austin would be part of the Manor Expresseay, which is going to be a tolled.



I got an idea that would work
Texas 36-US.290 Tie in Brenham




Generally we don't do cloverleafs in Texas...except in San Antonio
Logged

Henry

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5025
  • Age: 49
  • Location: Chicago, IL/Seattle, WA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:48:29 AM
    • Henry Watson's Online Freeway
Re: Proposed I-X10 in Houston
« Reply #24 on: September 24, 2013, 01:42:43 PM »

What would it be?  It's "parent" would technically be I-610.  An odd number 3-di is what I'd assume unless it did actually connect to 35 in Austin.

I-310?
I could see that, unless they pulled a Texarkana/NWA and renumbered that spur to I-14, a western I-16, I-18 or even I-12!
Logged
Go Cubs Go! Go Cubs Go! Hey Chicago, what do you say? The Cubs are gonna win today!

 


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.