AARoads Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

New rules for political content in signatures and user profiles. See this thread for details.

Author Topic: I-69 in TX  (Read 593105 times)

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2228
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1625 on: January 05, 2020, 01:10:05 PM »

My point still stands that the US-69 corridor North of Durant to up past Muskogee is losing population. The forces obstructing improvements to the US-69 corridor (residents of Atoka, Stringtown, etc) are not going to live forever. Eventually there will be too few interested parties left to continue the fight to block improvements to US-69.

In all likelihood, if the exodus of youth continues I could see those communities developing a sudden about-face in their attitudes to the US-69 corridor. They could become desperate for anything that could spark economic growth locally. Having an new Interstate, such as an extension of I-45, come through the area would do more to make their towns more visible on a large, national map.

The US-69 corridor is a major trucking route, one even more busy as an Interstate route. McAlester and Muskogee might become more attractive to businesses scouting for distribution center locations if they are along a completed Interstate corridor. Both of those small cities are currently losing population, just like Lawton. It's going to take the addition of good paying jobs, improvements to public schools among other things to attract young working families to those areas or at least retain locals who grow up there. Some of that requires tax dollars to happen. Unfortunately too many in the older set see any taxes as socialism or communism. There are rural towns here where residents have voted against tax measures to help the local school despite the roof at the school leaking and the walls growing black mold. Yet the same no-tax voters get angry when their kids or grandkids move away to the big city. It's hypocrisy.

Residents of many smaller cities and towns just don't realize the uphill battle they're facing at attracting talent. The state can do only so much via tax incentives like mapping out TIF districts in sections of the town. Major employers are just not going to locate there if they feel there is not enough of a workforce there to fill all the job positions.

I think US-69 is eventually going to be converted into a limited access super highway from the Red River to Big Cabin. It's only a question of how many years or decades will pass before then. And then there is also a question as to what form such a finished super highway will take. Will it be a freeway the entire length? Or will it be a mix of long toll roads with short freeway segments (like I-44)?

If the people in Atoka and Stringtown were fighting this battle smarter they might be able to lobby ODOT to convert this corridor into a "free I-45" without toll gates. That would attract more commerce and jobs to the corridor and help prevent those towns from drying up. But if they want to stay the course and let their towns wither, that eventual I-45 (or whatever it is) will bypass their towns in the form of a turnpike with few exits. The only free sections between Durant and Big Cabin will be segments in McAlester and Muskogee.
Logged

rte66man

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 1369
  • Location: Warr Acres, OK
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 04:07:52 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1626 on: January 08, 2020, 06:28:34 PM »

See this thread:
https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=20467.175

for reasons why that won't happen IF the state has to be the driving force for improvements
Logged
When you come to a fork in the road... TAKE IT.

                                                               -Yogi Berra

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 645
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 01:28:20 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1627 on: January 10, 2020, 07:08:54 PM »

Bids were opened today for 8.29 miles of upgrade southwest of Houston. This is the first section in Wharton County, from the Fort Bend County Line to the north end of the city of Wharton. (Fort Bend county is the first county southwest of Houston, and work is in progress from the Grand Parkway to the Wharton/Fort Bend county line).

The existing facility is mostly 2x2 4-lane divided and generally lacks frontage roads. Frontage roads will be added for most of the length.

The bid works out to $23 million per mile. Looking at the plans, it is 3x3 with 12-foot-wide inner and outer shoulders (122 foot concrete width), built to TxDOT's standard design using a center barrier and no median.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/01103201.htm

County:   WHARTON   Let Date:   01/10/20
Type:   UPGRADE TO RURAL FREEWAY   Seq No:   3201
Time:   0 X   Project ID:   NH 2020(496)
Highway:   US 59   Contract #:   01203201
Length:   0.000   CCSJ:   0089-08-098
Limits:   
From:   FORT BEND C/L   Check:   $100,000
To:   0.83 MILES SOUTH OF SH 60   Misc Cost:   $1222527.00
Estimate   $195,525,805.90   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $191,395,295.32   -2.11%   WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2   $198,029,850.12   +1.28%   JAMES CONSTRUCTION GROUP, L.L.C.
Bidder 3   $205,280,801.49   +4.99%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 4   $210,039,775.48   +7.42%   WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 5   $230,462,130.37   +17.87%   JOHNSON BROS. CORPORATION, A SOUTHLAND COMPANY
« Last Edit: January 10, 2020, 07:27:06 PM by MaxConcrete »
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1628 on: January 10, 2020, 08:01:59 PM »

Bids were opened today for 8.29 miles of upgrade southwest of Houston. This is the first section in Wharton County, from the Fort Bend County Line to the north end of the city of Wharton. (Fort Bend county is the first county southwest of Houston, and work is in progress from the Grand Parkway to the Wharton/Fort Bend county line).

The existing facility is mostly 2x2 4-lane divided and generally lacks frontage roads. Frontage roads will be added for most of the length.

The bid works out to $23 million per mile. Looking at the plans, it is 3x3 with 12-foot-wide inner and outer shoulders (122 foot concrete width), built to TxDOT's standard design using a center barrier and no median.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/01103201.htm

County:   WHARTON   Let Date:   01/10/20
Type:   UPGRADE TO RURAL FREEWAY   Seq No:   3201
Time:   0 X   Project ID:   NH 2020(496)
Highway:   US 59   Contract #:   01203201
Length:   0.000   CCSJ:   0089-08-098
Limits:   
From:   FORT BEND C/L   Check:   $100,000
To:   0.83 MILES SOUTH OF SH 60   Misc Cost:   $1222527.00
Estimate   $195,525,805.90   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $191,395,295.32   -2.11%   WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2   $198,029,850.12   +1.28%   JAMES CONSTRUCTION GROUP, L.L.C.
Bidder 3   $205,280,801.49   +4.99%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 4   $210,039,775.48   +7.42%   WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 5   $230,462,130.37   +17.87%   JOHNSON BROS. CORPORATION, A SOUTHLAND COMPANY

Nice to see more work continuing to progress on the Houston <-> Corpus Christi segment. Drove through the current segment down to Kendleton currently under construction this past summer, and work was coming along nicely.

I imagine the next piece will be the 14 mile segment from Wharton to the El Campo bypass, which is currently being upgraded to interstate standards. At some point between Wharton and El Campo, the freeway will reduce from 6 lanes to 4 lanes.

Once this segment to Wharton is completed, about 100 miles of continuous I-69 roadway will be completed from Wharton to Cleveland. An additional 147 mile gap will remain from Wharton to I-37 to be completed in the future, though currently exists as a 75 mph expressway without interruption, with the exception of Refugio and Odem on the southern end.
« Last Edit: January 10, 2020, 08:06:06 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

O Tamandua

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 390
  • Location: Bella Vista, AR
  • Last Login: Today at 10:52:48 AM
    • A-B-P Ministries - An evangelical Christian ministry serving Angola, Brazil, Portugal.
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1629 on: May 08, 2020, 10:58:43 PM »

The Nacogdoches flyover (and other things related to it) continue to take shape:

Quote



Crews rescheduled to remove overhead power lines as part of U.S. 59 flyover project

NACOGDOCHES, Texas (KTRE) - Drivers on U.S. 59 near Loop 224 in Nacogdoches County will soon experience a round of rolling stops related to the ongoing U.S. 59 flyover construction project.

Crews will remove overhead electric lines that cross U.S. 59 South and the southwest area of Loop 224. There are nine locations where lines will be removed, and delays should last about 15 minutes each time, said Rhonda Oaks, a spokesperson for Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) Lufkin.

https://www.ktre.com/2020/05/06/crews-rescheduled-remove-overhead-power-lines-part-us-flyover-project/

Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 645
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 01:28:20 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1630 on: May 09, 2020, 05:13:28 PM »

Bids were opened yesterday for upgrading 3 miles of US 77 (IH 69E) on the south side of Kingsville. Looking at the plans, most of the work is adding frontage roads. It looks like some of the existing main lanes will be replaced, and some will get a fresh topping of asphalt.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/05083202.htm

County:   KLEBERG   Let Date:   05/08/20
Type:   CONSTRUCT MAINLANES, FRONTAGE ROADS AND STRUCTURE   Seq No:   3202
Time:   660 WORKING DAYS   Project ID:   NH 2020(871)
Highway:   US 77   Contract #:   05203202
Length:   3.390   CCSJ:   0102-04-099
Limits:   
From:   FM 1356   Check:   $100,000
To:   CR 2130   Misc Cost:   
Estimate   $48,109,866.82   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $55,237,175.26   +14.81%   BAY LTD.
Bidder 2   $63,707,812.88   +32.42%   ANDERSON COLUMBIA CO., INC.
Bidder 3   $64,999,726.21   +35.11%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 4   $73,104,113.56   +51.95%   HAAS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION, LTD.

« Last Edit: May 09, 2020, 05:16:26 PM by MaxConcrete »
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1631 on: May 10, 2020, 12:26:29 AM »

Bids were opened yesterday for upgrading 3 miles of US 77 (IH 69E) on the south side of Kingsville. Looking at the plans, most of the work is adding frontage roads. It looks like some of the existing main lanes will be replaced, and some will get a fresh topping of asphalt.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/05083202.htm

County:   KLEBERG   Let Date:   05/08/20
Type:   CONSTRUCT MAINLANES, FRONTAGE ROADS AND STRUCTURE   Seq No:   3202
Time:   660 WORKING DAYS   Project ID:   NH 2020(871)
Highway:   US 77   Contract #:   05203202
Length:   3.390   CCSJ:   0102-04-099
Limits:   
From:   FM 1356   Check:   $100,000
To:   CR 2130   Misc Cost:   
Estimate   $48,109,866.82   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $55,237,175.26   +14.81%   BAY LTD.
Bidder 2   $63,707,812.88   +32.42%   ANDERSON COLUMBIA CO., INC.
Bidder 3   $64,999,726.21   +35.11%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 4   $73,104,113.56   +51.95%   HAAS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION, LTD.
Where do you go to access project plans?
Logged

MaxConcrete

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 645
  • Location: Houston, TX
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 01:28:20 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1632 on: May 10, 2020, 08:37:06 AM »

Where do you go to access project plans?

First you identify the county and project ID number on the monthly project lists
Main page https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/general-services/letting/letting-schedule.html
May 2020 list https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2020/letmay.htm

Then you go to the plans online page
https://www.txdot.gov/business/letting-bids/plans-online.html

Proceed through a few disclaimer screens, then drill down to the month and find the project among the list, which is by county.

Plans for larger projects are usually several hundred MB, you'll usually want to right click the link, download and open in Adobe Reader for better viewing performance.

The illustrations in plans vary, but there is usually something similar to a schematic, often with the desription "proposed section" or "horizontal alignment", which are usually at the top of the document but not always.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2020, 08:41:35 AM by MaxConcrete »
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1633 on: May 10, 2020, 01:16:40 PM »

Where do you go to access project plans?

First you identify the county and project ID number on the monthly project lists
Main page https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/general-services/letting/letting-schedule.html
May 2020 list https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2020/letmay.htm

Then you go to the plans online page
https://www.txdot.gov/business/letting-bids/plans-online.html

Proceed through a few disclaimer screens, then drill down to the month and find the project among the list, which is by county.

Plans for larger projects are usually several hundred MB, you'll usually want to right click the link, download and open in Adobe Reader for better viewing performance.

The illustrations in plans vary, but there is usually something similar to a schematic, often with the desription "proposed section" or "horizontal alignment", which are usually at the top of the document but not always.
Thank you the information! Very useful.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1634 on: May 10, 2020, 01:21:13 PM »

Bids were opened yesterday for upgrading 3 miles of US 77 (IH 69E) on the south side of Kingsville. Looking at the plans, most of the work is adding frontage roads. It looks like some of the existing main lanes will be replaced, and some will get a fresh topping of asphalt.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/05083202.htm

County:   KLEBERG   Let Date:   05/08/20
Type:   CONSTRUCT MAINLANES, FRONTAGE ROADS AND STRUCTURE   Seq No:   3202
Time:   660 WORKING DAYS   Project ID:   NH 2020(871)
Highway:   US 77   Contract #:   05203202
Length:   3.390   CCSJ:   0102-04-099
Limits:   
From:   FM 1356   Check:   $100,000
To:   CR 2130   Misc Cost:   
Estimate   $48,109,866.82   % Over/Under   Company
Bidder 1   $55,237,175.26   +14.81%   BAY LTD.
Bidder 2   $63,707,812.88   +32.42%   ANDERSON COLUMBIA CO., INC.
Bidder 3   $64,999,726.21   +35.11%   ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 4   $73,104,113.56   +51.95%   HAAS-ANDERSON CONSTRUCTION, LTD.
So looking at the project plans, it appears as you said the work is mostly adding frontage roads and overpasses. The existing 74 foot median will be maintained similar to recent projects north of there up to I-37 (except near Bishop and Robstown that reduced the median to a concrete barrier).

IIRC, south of this project, future projects will reduce the concrete barrier though. Having a 10 foot shoulder certainly helps to make it less cramped on longer stretches, like near Bishop.
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2228
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1635 on: May 11, 2020, 10:07:13 PM »

Google Earth has new imagery (dated 1/31/2020) for the Corpus Christi area. More of the on-going progress with the Harbor Bridge project is visible. More work is happening on the TX-44 freeway West of Corpus Christi. Across the harbor in Gregory, TX there's an interchange improvement happening at the US-181/TX-35 split. Finally, more work on I-69E is visible, such as the bypasses around Driscoll and Bishop.

Once I-69E is complete down past Kingsville further upgrades should be relatively simple. A bypass is being planned for Riviera. But the rest of US-77 between Kingsville and Raymondville will be upgraded to Interstate standards along the existing ROW.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1636 on: May 11, 2020, 10:22:35 PM »

More work is happening on the TX-44 freeway West of Corpus Christi.
IIRC, that project will complete the freeway from SH-358 to the point it narrows to undivided highway immediately outside Robstown.

Across the harbor in Gregory, TX there's an interchange improvement happening at the US-181/TX-35 split.
Never knew about this project... it was not under construction when I drove past the area this past summer.

http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/get-involved/crp/us-181/041718-schematic.pdf

This will construct Phase 2 of the interchange project, building about 1 mile of new freeway mainlines bypassing two intersections, tying into another overpass at SH-2986. Ultimately, about 2 miles of US-181 will be freeway approaching the SH-35 interchange.

Further north on US-181, a new interchange on the southern end of the Sinton Bypass is also under construction.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2020, 10:25:54 PM by sprjus4 »
Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2228
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1637 on: May 11, 2020, 11:13:51 PM »

Does TX DOT have any plans to connect the TX-44 freeway with I-69E in the Robstown area? Currently it looks like there is a work-able path where the TX-44 could dovetail into I-69E on the South side of Robstown where I-69E bends through that curve just South of the Industrial Blvd exit.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1638 on: May 11, 2020, 11:22:02 PM »

Does TX DOT have any plans to connect the TX-44 freeway with I-69E in the Robstown area? Currently it looks like there is a work-able path where the TX-44 could dovetail into I-69E on the South side of Robstown where I-69E bends through that curve just South of the Industrial Blvd exit.
TxDOT owns that southern path's right of way, however a larger study was completed in 2017 for a full SH-44 Robstown Bypass, and the preferred alternative includes a southern alignment that will connect to I-69E with a system interchange further south near SH-36.

Interestingly enough, looking at the preferred alternative map, it shows that TxDOT plans to construct both the bypass and that currently owned TxDOT R/W corridor for the northern ramps. Seems pointless rather than one system interchange - considering those northern movements carry less traffic - but who knows.


https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/projects/studies/corpus-christi/sh-44-robstown.html

Logged

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2228
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1639 on: May 11, 2020, 11:35:10 PM »

I think they need to take a compromise approach with that bypass. It's going to be less expensive to build that short extension of the TX-44 freeway to I-69E than the longer East half of that bypass. The shorter freeway extension will give Robstown more of a direct benefit. I'm not opposed to building the West half of that loop. A pair of T interchanges along I-69E in two different locations is probably going to be less expensive than building a full interchange between two crossing freeways (especially if the interchange is a directional stack).
Logged

sparker

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 7336
  • Location: Bay Area, CA
  • Last Login: Today at 06:07:58 AM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1640 on: May 12, 2020, 03:18:40 AM »

I think they need to take a compromise approach with that bypass. It's going to be less expensive to build that short extension of the TX-44 freeway to I-69E than the longer East half of that bypass. The shorter freeway extension will give Robstown more of a direct benefit. I'm not opposed to building the West half of that loop. A pair of T interchanges along I-69E in two different locations is probably going to be less expensive than building a full interchange between two crossing freeways (especially if the interchange is a directional stack).

Two semi-directional-T interchanges for the TX 44 (eventually I-whatever) freeway would work as long as there are slip lanes between so unnecessary merging is kept to a minimum.  And since it's so close to the I-37/69E interchange, multiple ramp lanes on the SB>EB and WB>NB connectors wouldn't be necessary at the northern junction point.   In fact, TxDOT could even configure that northern junction as a trumpet and save a few bucks in the process. 
Logged

bwana39

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 288
  • Location: Near Texarkana TX
  • Last Login: Today at 12:02:00 PM
Reason for renumbering US69 in Texas
« Reply #1641 on: May 12, 2020, 11:58:15 AM »

While many threads on here get intermingled, this one has lots of discussion of what amounts to US-69 (primarily in Oklahoma.) While we Texans would doubtfully confuse an INTERSTATE with as US Highway. People from other places might. People who call the interstate "Route" (often said ROOT) or Highway. In Texas it is "Interstate XX" or "Highway XX" (meaning US or SH). FM. RM, Loop, Spur etc having their unique colloquilism.

Texas doesn't renumber highways. They rarely make significant reroutes beyond a loop or a minimal straightening.  I-69 / I-369  is planned to follow US -59.  No significant deviation except loops around towns. Not even a real deviation going through Lufkin.

Renumbering US-69 is an issue.

While there some esoteric ideas like assigning part of it with a completely NEW Number or some sort of funky US-287 reroute, the concensus seems to leave it be. Convention and AASHTO standards and  precedent be damned. 

To me there are for are a handful of options that work and work well. These go from least involved to most.

1) Truncate US69 in Jacksonville TX and extend US-175 to SE Texas
2) Truncate US69 in Tyler and extend US-271 to SE Texas
3) Truncate US69 in Denison and reroute US75 along its route. (This requires renumbering US-75 to Dallas, possibly / probably as I-45). This one MIGHT be confusing to the people in Denison.
4) Truncate US69 in Jacksonville. Delete US-175. Renumber all of US175 & the current US-69 south of Jacksonville as US-75.
Logged

NE2

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 14025
  • fuck

  • Age: 12
  • Location: central Florida
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 08:04:00 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1642 on: May 12, 2020, 03:34:52 PM »

Texas doesn't renumber highways.
Quote from: http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/hwy/sh/sh0069.htm
Adm. Auth., dated 09/14/1992; Adm. Ltr. 003-1992, dated 09/14/1992

Cancelled.  (Eastland County)  As requested by District, this mileage transferred to SH 112.  (This is due to numerous thefts of the popular SH 69 signs.)
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.

Bobby5280

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 2228
  • Location: Lawton, OK
  • Last Login: October 28, 2020, 07:12:00 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1643 on: May 16, 2020, 03:21:11 PM »

Quote from: sparker
Two semi-directional-T interchanges for the TX 44 (eventually I-whatever) freeway would work as long as there are slip lanes between so unnecessary merging is kept to a minimum.

There appears to be an adequate enough distance between the two possible T-interchange locations that criss-crossing traffic movements would not be much of a problem. The bigger challenge for the Northern TX-44/I-69E interchange option is being pretty close to the existing TX-44 interchange. Some ramp braiding may be necessary there.
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1644 on: May 16, 2020, 03:29:31 PM »

I would be curious to see a schematic of the proposed design.
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 744
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: October 23, 2020, 12:38:14 PM
Re: Reason for renumbering US69 in Texas
« Reply #1645 on: August 06, 2020, 02:49:40 PM »

While many threads on here get intermingled, this one has lots of discussion of what amounts to US-69 (primarily in Oklahoma.) While we Texans would doubtfully confuse an INTERSTATE with as US Highway. People from other places might. People who call the interstate "Route" (often said ROOT) or Highway. In Texas it is "Interstate XX" or "Highway XX" (meaning US or SH). FM. RM, Loop, Spur etc having their unique colloquilism.

Texas doesn't renumber highways. They rarely make significant reroutes beyond a loop or a minimal straightening.  I-69 / I-369  is planned to follow US -59.  No significant deviation except loops around towns. Not even a real deviation going through Lufkin.

Renumbering US-69 is an issue.

While there some esoteric ideas like assigning part of it with a completely NEW Number or some sort of funky US-287 reroute, the concensus seems to leave it be. Convention and AASHTO standards and  precedent be damned. 

To me there are for are a handful of options that work and work well. These go from least involved to most.

1) Truncate US69 in Jacksonville TX and extend US-175 to SE Texas
2) Truncate US69 in Tyler and extend US-271 to SE Texas
3) Truncate US69 in Denison and reroute US75 along its route. (This requires renumbering US-75 to Dallas, possibly / probably as I-45). This one MIGHT be confusing to the people in Denison.
4) Truncate US69 in Jacksonville. Delete US-175. Renumber all of US175 & the current US-69 south of Jacksonville as US-75.

I have the same thoughts about this as I do people wanting to renumber long stretches of highway just to make another highway conform to the grid:

Let it go.

The interstate grid is beautiful.  Like natural beauty, one of the things that make it beautiful is the few exceptions to the rules.  Do I hate that I-180 in Wyoming should be a Business Spur and not a full interstate?  Yes I do, but I am also fascinated with it being an oddity.  Renumbering hundreds of miles of US 69 just to make I-69 not violate a rule is impractical.  Changing addresses of every house, business and farm that have had that address for decades just so that I-69, an interstate that's already in violation once it gets west of Indianapolis, is just dumb.  I do like your what if scenarios, yes, but it seems a lot of people get so serious about these violations.

So no, we are not going to renumber all of I-17 to an extension of I-19, having it cosigned with I-10, just so we can number the future I-11 as I-17.  It's okay it's out of the grid. 
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 744
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: October 23, 2020, 12:38:14 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1646 on: August 06, 2020, 02:54:44 PM »

I now the I-69C subject has come up numerous times, but I don't think anyone has really analyzed this part until I was thinking about it today.  The current alignment crosses I-69W at George West, but it continues north to I-37 north of Three Rivers.  I never really thought much of it before, but shouldn't that part not be signed as I-69C.  I mean, I-69C should be spawned from I-69W if we are going to be technical about it, so shouldn't the segment from George West to the current intersection of US 281 and I-37 north of Three Rivers have a separate number?
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1647 on: August 06, 2020, 05:22:43 PM »

Assuming I-69W isn't actually built, the easiest thing would be to bypass George West around the southeastern side, follow US-59 to I-37, then tie into I-37 and terminate.

About 7 miles of construction saved going that way vs. following US-281 all the way up to I-37.
Logged

ethanhopkin14

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 744
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Austin, TX
  • Last Login: October 23, 2020, 12:38:14 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1648 on: August 06, 2020, 05:27:00 PM »

Assuming I-69W isn't actually built, the easiest thing would be to bypass George West around the southeastern side, follow US-59 to I-37, then tie into I-37 and terminate.

About 7 miles of construction saved going that way vs. following US-281 all the way up to I-37.

As far as I can remember, all the legs have to be built. 
Logged

sprjus4

  • *
  • Offline Offline

  • Posts: 5031
  • Location: Hampton Roads, VA
  • Last Login: Today at 12:28:01 PM
Re: I-69 in TX
« Reply #1649 on: August 06, 2020, 05:28:16 PM »

Assuming I-69W isn't actually built, the easiest thing would be to bypass George West around the southeastern side, follow US-59 to I-37, then tie into I-37 and terminate.

About 7 miles of construction saved going that way vs. following US-281 all the way up to I-37.

As far as I can remember, all the legs have to be built.
In reality, I cannot see any segments of I-69W northeast of Freer actually getting funding. Maybe in 50 years it'll be segmented together, but it's certain a low priority compared to I-69C and I-69E which are due for major construction activities in the next decade, notably completing I-69E between Corpus Christi and Brownsville, and completing I-69C between McAllen and Falfurrias. Laredo to Freer, and Freer to Corpus Christi may also be slow-paced, but might eventually happen. Nothing earmarked for I-69W.

Between Freer and Victoria, I-69W provides a shortcut to taking I-69E and "I-6", but the real question is, is shaving off 20 miles off the trip worth over a hundred miles of new construction, in today's funding environment, along a present-day 2 lane 75 mph road? This would mostly benefit long distance Houston to Laredo traffic, which is already primarily served by I-10 and I-35. Aside from that, only small traffic volumes from small towns that are already adequately served by 2-lane US-59 or can utilize the I-69E to "I-6" routing.

I'm not necessarily against that segment of I-69W, but I don't think it's a high priority. If funding can be one day found to complete all of the I-69 legs, I'm all for having that segment built. But with limited funding available, let's finish I-69E and I-69C first, then Freer to Corpus Christi, then maybe Freer to Victoria.
« Last Edit: August 06, 2020, 05:36:43 PM by sprjus4 »
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.