Jump to content

TxDOT Committees Suggest Immediately Resigning US 59 As I-69 through Houston


JLWM8609

Recommended Posts

Back in November, TxDOT released some reports from the I-69 Corridor Segment Committees. Houston lies in segments 2 and 3, and one of the recommendations from the segment 2 and 3 committees is to immediately resign US 59 from Rosenberg to Cleveland as I-69.

I-69 Corridor Segment Committees Main Page

http://www.txdot.gov/public_involvement/committees/i69/default.htm

Segment 2 Report

ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/pub_inv/committees/i69/seg2_report.pdf

Segment 3 Report

ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/pub_inv/committees/i69/segd_report.pdf

Edited by JLWM8609
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will the new I-69 signs be going up. I first heard about this proposal 16 years ago in 1995. I think 290 to Austin should be upgraded to an Interstate too. They could call it I-12 or I-14.

I first heard about it in 1999. At that time, TXDOT was waiting until all of the intersections north of Houston to the state line, and south to about Rosenberg were turned into proper interchanges meeting federal freeway standards. I don't know if that's all been completed yet or not.

70px-I-69_%28Future%29.svg.png

According to El Wiko, it's still just in pieces, in Michigan, Indiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Mississippi. It looks like only Michigan has completed its portion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When will the new I-69 signs be going up. I first heard about this proposal 16 years ago in 1995. I think 290 to Austin should be upgraded to an Interstate too. They could call it I-12 or I-14.

How about we think bigger, so it has a larger impact to justify making it an interstate.

How about expanding Interstate 27 south of Lubbock into Austin (where it would connect to 290) via US 84 and US 183. Then expand I-27 north of Amarillo into Denver via 287. The new Interstate would connect the Rocky Mountain region (and using I-90, the Pacific Northwest) with the Port of Houston and the Gulf of Mexico.

How about that?

As for I-69, Im all for it ...resign now!

Edited by tigereye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about we think bigger, so it has a larger impact to justify making it an interstate.

How about expanding Interstate 27 south of Lubbock into Austin (where it would connect to 290) via US 84 and US 183. Then expand I-27 north of Amarillo into Denver via 287. The new Interstate would connect the Rocky Mountain region (and using I-90, the Pacific Northwest) with the Port of Houston and the Gulf of Mexico.

How about that?

As for I-69, Im all for it ...resign now!

I like this idea. Would especially be good when the Panama Canal expansion is complete in a couple of years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How about we think bigger, so it has a larger impact to justify making it an interstate.

How about expanding Interstate 27 south of Lubbock into Austin (where it would connect to 290) via US 84 and US 183. Then expand I-27 north of Amarillo into Denver via 287. The new Interstate would connect the Rocky Mountain region (and using I-90, the Pacific Northwest) with the Port of Houston and the Gulf of Mexico.

How about that?

As for I-69, Im all for it ...resign now!

there is already a plan for I-27 called Ports-to-Plains

http://www.portstoplains.com/Our_Maps.aspx

here are some proposed maps of it.....Denver will be on the route, but Austin and Houston will not be the plan is to make it easier to move goods back and forth to Mexico more so than the coastal ports so far

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is already a plan for I-27 called Ports-to-Plains

http://www.portstoplains.com/Our_Maps.aspx

here are some proposed maps of it.....Denver will be on the route, but Austin and Houston will not be the plan is to make it easier to move goods back and forth to Mexico more so than the coastal ports so far

Odd that a highway tagged "ports-to-plains" doesn't go to a single port.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Odd that a highway tagged "ports-to-plains" doesn't go to a single port.

they are ports as in ports of entry they are just not sea ports

and there is some talk of them hitting Laredo and being able to go to some of the new proposed ports on the western side of Mexico

Mexico is a major buyer of US grain production and a large amount of cattle move back and forth as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is already a plan for I-27 called Ports-to-Plains

http://www.portstoplains.com/Our_Maps.aspx

here are some proposed maps of it.....Denver will be on the route, but Austin and Houston will not be the plan is to make it easier to move goods back and forth to Mexico more so than the coastal ports so far

http://www.portstoplains.com/maps/P2P_Status_2009_8x11.pdf

Did anyone else catch I-45's new identity on the map? That's great proofreading! :rolleyes:

Edited by JLWM8609
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure I see the point of immediate re-signing.

Or why not follow the trend with every other renaming and call it a parkway?

Dammit, Subdude, I was out of town when this thread was started and you beat me to the punch. :) The driveway at my house is 80 feet long and 16 feet wide. I am renaming it Specwriter Parkway since there is a tree at the edge of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of I-45, when is it going to be extended north to Kansas City?

When Oklahoma upgrades US-69. It's supposed to become an extension of the Oklahoma Turnpike.

From ISTEA Sec.1074: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, upon the request of the Oklahoma State highway agency, the Secretary shall designate the portion of United States Route 69 from the Oklahoma-Texas State line to Checotah in the State of Oklahoma as a part of the Interstate System pursuant to section 139 of title 23, United States Code."

Also, here's a cool bit of trivia: I-45 is America's shortest primary interstate (285 miles).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

According to El Wiko, it's still just in pieces, in Michigan, Indiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Mississippi. It looks like only Michigan has completed its portion.

True on the Michigan portion, runs from Port Huron (port of entry w/ Sarnia, Ontario, Canada) west towards Lansing then turns south to Indianapolis and ends there. I went to school in Flint, MI and utilized I-69 quite a bit. I occasionally drive back to Michigan and when I heard about the NAFTA Super Highway concept I always thought it would be neat to take one freeway from Houston to Michigan. Glad to see it's moving forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now... what is the point of resigning (aka renaming) a highway that everyone already knows as US 59?

For what reason are they willing to spend money on this sort of silly nonsense?

Would it make it easier for the human traffickers to get to their destination?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Houston was shortchanged in the Interstate Highway department. This is the first step ever to make up for it, and it only took 60 years. I hope they finish it.

Next, I would love to see an Interstate connecting Houston and Austin. We would look much more impressive on a map with 4 interstates converging in Houston.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So now we have to call it the Southwest Interstate instead of the Southwest Freeway? That's really going to confuse Lanny Griffith.

No, can still call it a freeway. And by the sound of it, you can still call it 59 as it appears it'll maintain dual signage.

Southwest Freeway/East Tex Freeway

Highway 59

Interstate 69

All valid names for the same stretch of pavement. Just adding the Interstate part so it qualifies for federal funding and must be built to the interstate standards (interchanges, on ramps/exit ramps, etc).

Edited by TonyM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • The title was changed to TxDOT Committees Suggest Immediately Resigning US 59 As I-69 through Houston

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...