JLWM8609 Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 (edited) 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 Pagehttp://www.txdot.gov/public_involvement/committees/i69/default.htmSegment 2 Reportftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/pub_inv/committees/i69/seg2_report.pdfSegment 3 Reportftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/pub_inv/committees/i69/segd_report.pdf Edited January 21, 2011 by JLWM8609 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 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. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigereye Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 (edited) 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 January 22, 2011 by tigereye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subdude Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV2EBoogaloo Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 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-Plainshttp://www.portstoplains.com/Our_Maps.aspxhere 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Houston19514 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 there is already a plan for I-27 called Ports-to-Plainshttp://www.portstoplains.com/Our_Maps.aspxhere 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 farOdd that a highway tagged "ports-to-plains" doesn't go to a single port. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TV2EBoogaloo Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 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 portsand 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 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLWM8609 Posted January 24, 2011 Author Share Posted January 24, 2011 (edited) 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! Edited January 24, 2011 by JLWM8609 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Specwriter Posted January 26, 2011 Share Posted January 26, 2011 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trae Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 http://www.portstopl...s_2009_8x11.pdf Did anyone else catch I-45's new identity on the map? That's great proofreading! Speaking of I-45, when is it going to be extended north to Kansas City? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
editor Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 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). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLWM8609 Posted July 31, 2012 Author Share Posted July 31, 2012 US 59 from the North Loop to Cleveland is about to get resigned as I-69. US 59 will not be decommissioned along this stretch though, it'll be a concurrent route, I-69/US 59. Signs should be popping up soon.http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Part-of-U-S-59-being-renamed-Interstate-69-3747886.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfastx Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Pretty cool. It'll be interesting to see the development of this "superhighway." A lot of work needs to be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyM Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 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? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyM Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Now... what is the point of resigning (aka renaming) a highway that everyone already knows as US 59?The freeway is being reclassified as an Interstate as opposed to a Highway. Federal funding and all . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fringe Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 So now we have to call it the Southwest Interstate instead of the Southwest Freeway? That's really going to confuse Lanny Griffith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister X Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 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. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyM Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) 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 FreewayHighway 59Interstate 69All 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 July 31, 2012 by TonyM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTAWACS Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 So now we have to call it the Southwest Interstate instead of the Southwest Freeway? That's really going to confuse Lanny Griffith.Is that drunk bloke still around??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Specwriter Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 US 59 from the North Loop to Cleveland is about to get resigned as I-69. US 59 will not be decommissioned along this stretch though, it'll be a concurrent route, I-69/US 59. Signs should be popping up soon. http://www.chron.com...-69-3747886.php So for now it is just an Inter-county highway. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.