DOCSLIB.ORG

I-69 Segment Four & Five Committee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
I-69 Segment Four & Five Committee I-69 Segment Four & Five Committee Report and Recommendations The Interstate-69 (I-69) Segment Four and Segment Five Committee’s Report and Recommendations contains the ideas and recommendations of the segment committee members and does not contain proposals by the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). As motorists travel the I-69 Texas route, the work of the I-69 Segment Four and Five Committees is displayed in I-69 signs in South Texas. The Segment Committee members should be proud to see the fruits of their labor in these interstate shields that designate the first portion of I-69 in Texas. When the I-69 Segment Committee process first started, committee members in Segments Four and Five recognized the common needs and goals of our two committees and decide to work and meet essentially as one committee. Identification of shared needs for US 77, US 281, US 59 and State Highway 44 are testament to the value of cooperative partnerships for mutual benefits. We wish to extend our sincere thanks to both Committees for working together to accomplish our common goals. As we reach the conclusion of this stage of the initial planning process, we want to thank the Segment Four and Five committee members for your hard work and diligence in working with your communities and legislators to identify needs and solutions, and to realize the significance of I-69 for economic growth to our regions and throughout Texas. It has been our personal pleasure to work with all of you and the public on this worthwhile endeavor, and we look forward to working with you in the near future promoting economic growth for all of South Texas. Pat Liston Judge Terry Simpson Segment Four Committee Chair Segment Five Committee Chair This page left intentionally blank I-69 Segments Four and Five Committee Report and Recommendations Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 3 A Citizens’ Plan for I-69 ...................................................................................................................................... 5 I-69 Advisory Committee ....................................................................................................................... 5 I-69 Segment Committees ..................................................................................................................... 6 I-69 Segment Four Committee ........................................................................................................... 8 I-69 Segment Five Committee .......................................................................................................... 10 Transportation Needs and Challenges .......................................................................................................13 I-69 Planning Considerations .........................................................................................................................14 Identification of Local Planning and Environmental Features ............................................................ 14 Recommended I-69 Routes and Connecting Facilities ......................................................................... 16 Current and Projected Traffic Data ...................................................................................................... 20 Crash Data and Information ................................................................................................................. 24 Development of Conceptual Interstate Layout and Costs ..................................................................27 Interstate Highway Requirements ....................................................................................................... 27 Conceptual Interstate Layout Maps ..................................................................................................... 27 Conceptual Cost Estimates................................................................................................................... 28 Funding I-69 Development ................................................................................................................... 29 Public Outreach ....................................................................................................................................................31 Public Outreach Goals as Defined by I-69 Segment Committees ........................................................ 31 Public Outreach Implementation by the Segment Committee ........................................................... 32 Public Feedback Gathered by the Segment Committee ................................................................... 33 Committees’ Recommendations for I-69 ..................................................................................................34 Redesignation of Highways that Meet Interstate Standards ............................................................... 35 Segment Four and Segment Five Priority Sections .............................................................................. 36 Segment Four Priorities .................................................................................................................... 36 Segment Five Priorities ..................................................................................................................... 40 Initial Implementation Goals ............................................................................................................... 42 Construct Currently Funded Projects ................................................................................................ 42 Future Spot Safety and Capacity Improvements .............................................................................. 44 Future Environmental/ Route Location and Planning Studies ......................................................... 44 Conclusion and Next Steps ................................................................................................................... 45 i I-69 Segments Four and Five Committee Report and Recommendations List of Figures Figure 1. Status of I-69 System .................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2. I-69 Segment Committee Boundaries ........................................................................................ 7 Figure 3a. I-69 Segment Four Committee Boundaries .............................................................................. 9 Figure 3b. I-69 Segment Five Committee Boundaries ............................................................................. 11 Figure 4. I-69 Citizen Committee Process ................................................................................................ 12 Figure 5. Example of Local Planning and Environmental Map ................................................................ 15 Figure 6a. Transportation Facilities to Consider in Developing I-69 – Segment Four ............................. 17 Figure 6b. Transportation Facilities to Consider in Developing I-69 – Segment Five .............................. 18 Figure 7a. 2009 Average Daily Traffic – Segment Four ........................................................................... 20 Figure 7b. 2009 Average Daily Traffic – Segment Five ............................................................................ 21 Figure 8a. Forecasted 2035 Average Daily Traffic – Segment Four ......................................................... 22 Figure 8b. Forecasted 2035 Average Daily Traffic – Segment Five ......................................................... 23 Figure 9a. 2005-2009 Average Crash Rates – Segment Four .................................................................. 25 Figure 9b. 2005-2009 Average Crash Rates – Segment Five ................................................................... 26 Figure 10. Project Development Process for Highways .......................................................................... 30 Figure 11. Public Outreach Activities Statewide ..................................................................................... 32 Figure 12a. I-69 Segment Four Recommendations and Priority Sections ............................................... 39 Figure 12b. I-69 Segment Five Recommendations and Priority Sections ............................................... 41 Figure 13. Major Construction Funding for I-69 ...................................................................................... 43 List of Tables Table 1. I-69 Segment Committees ........................................................................................................... 6 Table 2a. I-69 Segment Four Committee Members and Appointing Entities (as of January 2012) .......... 8 Table 2b. I-69 Segment Five Committee Members and Appointing Entities (as of January 2012) ......... 10 Table 3. Public Outreach Activity Reports and Comments Received ...................................................... 32 List of Appendices Appendix A. Summary of Public Outreach Efforts, Citizen Comments, Responses to Citizen Questions and Resolutions for All Segment Committees ii I-69 Segments Four and Five Committee Report and Recommendations Executive Summary The I-69 Advisory Committee and
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Latest Annual Report
    Annual Report 2017 3461 Carmen Ave. Rancho Viejo, TX 78575 (956) 621-5571 ON THE COVER Freight truck passing through State Highway 550 (I-169), Port Spur Table of Contents Message from Chairman ..................................................................1 Message from Executive Director ......................................................2 Why the RGV ...................................................................................3 Overview ...........................................................................................5 Projects State Highway 550/Interstate 169 .....................................................7 Toll Processing Services ....................................................................9 South Padre Island Second Access ................................................. 11 State Highway 32 .............................................................................13 Highlights Financials .........................................................................................15 Community Outreach .................................................................... 17 Message From The Chairman Since our creation in 2004, objectives that focus on strategic the Cameron County Regional corridor development, which help Mobility Authority (CCRMA) achieve quality transportation has made signifcant progress to within our county and region. fnd new and innovative tools to The CCRMA will continue reduce the problems of congestion to be recognized as a leader in and connectivity while facilitating Texas
    [Show full text]
  • Texas U.S. Ports of Entry
    Texas U.S. Ports of Entry www.BusinessInTexas.com TEXAS PORTS OF ENTRY Overview U.S. Ports of Entry Ports of Entry are officially designated areas at U.S. For current or further information on U.S. and Texas land borders, seaports, and airports which are ports, check the CBP website at approved by U.S. Customs and Border Protection www.cbp.gov/border-security/ports-entry or contact (CBP). There are 328 official ports of entry in the the CBP at: U.S. and 13 preclearance offices in Canada and the Caribbean. 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20229 Port personnel are the face at the border for most Inquiries (877) 227-5511 cargo and visitors entering the United States. At International Callers (202)325-8000 Ports, CBP officers or Port employees accept entries of merchandise, clear passengers, collect duties, Texas Ports of Entry enforce the import and export laws and regulations of the U.S. federal government, and conduct Texas currently has 29 official U.S. ports of entry, immigration policy and programs. Ports also perform more than any other state, according to the CBP agriculture inspections to protect the nation from website. The map below provides details. potential carriers of animal and plant pests or diseases that could cause serious damage to the Information on the Texas ports of entry follows, in nation's crops, livestock, pets, and the environment. alphabetical order, in the next section. U.S. Ports of Entry In Texas 1 TEXAS PORTS OF ENTRY Texas Ports of Entry P ort of Entry: Addison Airport Port Information Port Code: 5584 Port Type: User Fee Airport Location Address: 4300 Westgrove Addison, TX 75001 General Phone: (469) 737-6913 General Fax: (469) 737-5246 Operational Hours: 8:30 AM-5:00 PM (Central) Weekdays (Monday-Friday) Brokers: View List Directions to Port Office DFW Airport: Take hwy 114 to Addison Airport Press Office Field Office Name: Houston Location Houston, TX Address: 2323 S.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019-2022 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program INTRODUCTION
    2019-2022 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS STIP Self-Certification ....................................................................................................................... Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... Transportation Planning Process – Overview ................................................................................. Transportation Conformity Process ................................................................................................. Transportation Plans, Programs, and the NEPA Process ............................................................... Importance of Consistency in Plans and Programs ........................................................................ STIP Content……………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………….. TIP/STIP Page Information ............................................................................................................... STIP Funding ..................................................................................................................................... STIP Financial Plan ........................................................................................................................... Public Involvement ......................................................................................... …………………………….. Acronyms/Glossary ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 Departmental Map
    TRAVEL INFORMATION Dial 1-800-452-9292 for travel assistance from a professional Texas travel counselor, including routing in Texas, emergency road condition information, and other travel services; or to register a comment or Departmental Map 2014complaint about department operations.° 107°W 106°W 105°W 104°W 103°W 102°W 101°W 100°W 99°W 98°W 97°W 96°W 95°W 94°W 93°W To Boise City OKLAHOMA To Boise City To Guymon To Guymon To Liberal To Beaver 2586QR NORTH CENTRAL TEXAS Texhoma 296 287 2248 1454 To Clayton OP m 1262 /(83 Booker QR QR l QR 15 2741 1290QR 1261 43 QR To Shattuck 815 O981P 896 2677 QR 1267 Darrouzett 15 1655 2450 35 B377 1192 OP OP Texline QR /(54 2349 QR 23 Follett 43 QR QR Ray QR 3356 3133 296 QR 143 43 Pilot 289 QR QR 78 Leonard OP 119 BA PERRYTON 1455 sr mlE 65 5 43 OP 3214 377 QR 455 /(77 Roberts Point 21 /( DALLAM 20765 QR OP 2172 2741 OP 1190 455 2862 69 807 143 QR QR QR Lake OP B289 QR OP 1290 2535 BA /(87 1879 STRATFORD QR QR 455 65C E 78 QR 192 455 2164 OP Weston a Anna 43 15 BA 305 OP Sanger QR s 455 43 136 65 1204QR 51 455 t OP 385 1262 65 1261 ef 377 OP F 981 QR QR 2450 o 455 OP ml 2232 3004 QR B35 ml r OP 296 QR 3045 QR 2153 Celina k OP 2387 15 QR 2711 sr QR /(75 121 278 r 2862 /(54 2014 15 OP QR 43 QR WISE X 2478 T 65 QR LIPSCOMB e QR r QR 43 Gruver i 981 376 iv 3524 n Blue Ridge 1562 NORTH CENTRAL QR i OP QR 1573 760 OP R t 3110 3213 287 QR OP 1385 y QR QR m @84 70 LIPSCOMB 188 2164 QR 545 B78 l SHERMAN ? 43 BA 730 QR 428 R Melissa OP 65 2018 ( OP y Aubrey 428 / i 2899 SPEARMAN 81 3163 t OP 543 v D QR 1454
    [Show full text]
  • Bonds Are a Backup Plan for Texas Port's Ship Channel
    Bonds are a Backup Plan for Texas Port's Ship Channel By Richard Williamson Published August 31 2018, 11:28am EDT DALLAS – The Port of Brownsville, Texas, may use revenue bonds to finance dredging operations to accommodate larger vessels but is keeping the option in reserve for now, officials said. “Revenue bonds are on the table only as a means of last resort,” said Steve Tyndal, senior director of marketing and business development at the port. The Port of Brownsville wants to deepen its ship channel to 52 feet from the current 42 feet to accommodate larger vessels. Like other ports around the nation, Brownsville -- managed by the Brownsville Navigation District -- wants to deepen its 17-mile ship channel to 52 feet from its current 42 feet to handle the larger ships coming through the expanded Panama Canal and deeper-draft tankers carrying U.S. energy exports. But like the other ports, Brownsville must wait for federal funding and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers before the $200 million project can begin. “The cost is challenging, especially for an emerging port like Brownsville,” said BND board secretary Sergio Tito Lopez. The larger Port of Corpus Christi, 150 miles up the Gulf Coast, is issuing its own bonds to finance the dredging in anticipation of eventual federal funding. In March, the commission that governs the nation’s fourth-largest port by tonnage voted to issue up to $400 million of bonds to dredge the Corpus Christi Ship Channel. The port has been seeking the promised federal funds for 28 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Port Authority Transportation Reinvestment Zone Development and Implementation Guidebook
    TTI: 0-6890 Port Authority Transportation Reinvestment Zone Development and Implementation Guidebook Technical Report 0-6890-P1 Cooperative Research Program TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration and the Texas Department of Transportation http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6890-P1.pdf PORT AUTHORITY TRANSPORTATION REINVESTMENT ZONE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION GUIDEBOOK by: Rafael M. Aldrete Abhisek Mudgal Senior Research Scientist Assistant Research Scientist Texas A&M Transportation Institute Texas A&M Transportation Institute Sharada Vadali Juan Carlos Villa Associate Research Scientist Research Scientist Texas A&M Transportation Institute Texas A&M Transportation Institute Carl James Kruse Lorenzo Cornejo Research Scientist Assistant Transportation Researcher Texas A&M Transportation Institute Texas A&M Transportation Institute David Salgado Deog Sang Bae Associate Transportation Researcher Graduate Assistant Texas A&M Transportation Institute Texas A&M Transportation Institute Product 0-6890-P1 Project 0-6890 Project Title: Tools for Port TRZs and TRZs for Multimodal Applications Performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation Published: March 2017 TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER The contents of this product reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies
    [Show full text]
  • Texas Ports and Courts Update
    Texas Ports and Courts Update March 2021 1. COVID-19 Ports Update We have collected and summarized these items to In response to decreasing COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations, the help keep you apprised of the latest news and Governor of Texas recently rescinded statewide public occupancy developments from the ports and courts on the restrictions and mask mandates. Businesses are free to enforce their Texas coast. own restrictions, and many have kept their previous requirements in place. Texas port/terminal facilities nearly uniformly continue to require the same preventative measures (e.g., masks, temperature checks, physical distancing, etc.) despite the Governor’s recent announcement. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Coast Guard, and many vessel agents continue to board vessels and conduct activities in person. Vessels still need to advise CBP and Coast Guard boarding teams of any In this Update: crew illnesses prior to embarkation. Vessels are also required to notify the Coast Guard Captain of the Port of any crewmember showing symptoms consistent with COVID-19. 1. COVID-19 Ports Update Rapid COVID-19 testing is generally available, and test administrations can be scheduled and completed in relatively short timeframes. 2. Recent Port Activity & Shore leave remains allowed. Crew changes/repatriation requests are Development Projects permitted on a case-by-case basis. Off-signing crewmembers are generally required to proceed directly to 3. News from the Courts the airport for their flights, and overnight hotel stays are typically not permitted. CBP is generally requiring the following items in relation to a crewmember’s repatriation requests: (1) passport bio page; (2) C1/D visa; (3) I-95 landing permit; and (4) e-tickets with direct flights departing the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • HOFMOKEL, Frederick W Aug,1942
    FORM N Nl•l$9 ORIGINATOR SUBJE:CT C.14026 DIO 8ND 1. H0J:i'M0KE~, Frederick Wilhelm vk 2. DATE OF I.ETTER ORIGINATOR'S FII..E NUMEIER 0. N, I, Fll..E NUMEIERS iil aCL 2/14/42 A8•5(l6-dlp) 3 @ 1. O. N. I. ROUTING SLIP - - - FINISHED FILE COPY• - - DO NOT DETACH '' ;a IN REPLY ADDRESS NOT TIIR ~ SlONER OF TIIIS LETTER, nuT ) OOMMANDANT, EIOH'l'll NA'VAL a0. C DIS'l'RXOT, NEW' l!~EDERAL BUILD"' 1il ING 1 NEW . ORLEANS, LA, 0. REFFJR TO No, HEADQUARTERS EIGHTH NAVAL A8-5 NEW FEDERAL BUILDING (16-dlp) 0 (D 0 [ :31 (D 0. :r: MEMOHANDUM 0 a: s· (Q (/J ~ 5' (D z District Intelligence Of fie er, 8ND. ~ 0 ::, Director of Naval Intelligence. ~ )> cl Subject: HOFMOKfEL, Frederick Wilhelm. I Reference: (a) Various 8ND Cards, same subject. Enclosure: (A) Copy of original report on sub~ject made by MID Officer, F'ort Brown, Texas. 1<) Enclosure (A), 1.n the preparation of which the Officer in Charge, Brownsville Branch, airnistE"Jd., is forwarded for inforri1ation, and contains all avallable material on subject .:ln the Brownsville Office and the MID Office at Fort Brown. 2. 'I'he P.D.I. advises that they have subject under sur- veillance. ;;a (D "Oa CONFJP,~\)lJIJ\t 0.. C ~ ONI MAIL FWOM 0.. =1' 0 3 l:K FEB 16 AM 11 : ?2 S' (D C Subject: Suspected Activities of F'reder:Lck W. Ho.fmokel. ::, O·-- i=1i (D 0.. -0 ~ [ l. Pursuant to the verbal request of Major John W.
    [Show full text]
  • Lone Star State Ports Setting Records, Enhancing Diverse Cargo Infrastructure
    Lone Star State ports setting records, enhancing diverse cargo infrastructure by Paul Scott Abbott 5 hours ago | Published in Issue 704 Page 1: Port Houston Page 2: Port of Port Arthur Page 3: Port of Beaumont Page 4: Port of Galveston Page 5: Port Freeport Page 6: Calhoun Port Authority Page 7: Port of Corpus Christi Page 8: Port of Brownsville With record cargo volumes seemingly becoming commonplace, ports throughout Texas are assertively forging ahead with a multitude of infrastructure enhancements to handle even more activity in the future. Recent developments include not only expansions of on-terminal capabilities but also, in a number of cases, the advancement of deeper, wider ship channels. Beginning with Port Houston, the longtime No. 1 U.S. foreign tonnage port, then heading east to the Sabine-Neches Waterway facilities of Port Arthur and Beaumont before taking a southwestward jaunt along the Texas Gulf Coast to just north of the Mexico border, here’s the latest going on at key ports of the Lone Star State: Port Houston Marking a fourth consecutive year of double-digit growth in containerized cargo volume, Port Houston handled a record 2,987,291 twenty-foot-equivalent units in 2019 while adding three new container services and two general cargo liner services. Loaded container exports, buoyed by shipments of polyethylene resins, led the way with a 17 percent year-over-year increase. Overall tonnage moving through Port Houston public facilities also reached an all-time high last year, rising 5 percent over the preceding 12-month period, to 37.8 million tons.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Bypass Highways on Small and Medium Size Cities in Florida
    Impacts of Bypass Highways on Small and Medium Size Cities in Florida: Knowledge Search and Evaluation of Past Studies December 2010 Prepared for Florida Department of Transportation Prepared by Karen E. Seggerman, AICP Kristine M. Williams, AICP Alexander Bond, AICP Vergil Stover, Ph.D., P.E. Sisinnio Concas, Ph.D. Jillian Penrod-Krause, MPHc Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida Disclaimer: Funding for this study was provided by the Florida Department Transportation. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Florida Department of Transportation TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................... 5 A. Methodology .................................................................................................................................................... 5 B. Background and Definitions ............................................................................................................................. 6 II. Bypass Plans and Policy in Florida ......................................................................................................................... 7 A. Florida Bypasses ............................................................................................................................................... 7 B. Plans and Policies ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Arkansas State Hichway Commission
    ARKANSAS STATE HICHWAY COMMISSION THOMAS B. SCHUECK PHILIPTALDO CHAIRMAN SPRINGDALE LITTLE ROCK ROBERT S. I|OORE, JR. KEITH CIBSO\ VICE CHAIRMAN FORT SMITH ARKANSAs CITY PO. Box 2261 . Little Rock, Arkansas722A3-2261 DALTO\ Phone (501) 569-2000. Voice/TW 71 1 . Fax (501) 569-2400 A. FARtltER, JR. SCOTT E, BE}-\ETT, P.E. JONESBORO www.AnDOT. gov . www.l D riveArkansas.com DIRECTOR April 23, 2019 Mr. Jim McDonnell AASHTO Program Director for Engineering 444 North Capitol Street NW, Suite 249 Wash n, D.C. 20001 IA Dear M nnell Reference is made to the solicitation for applications for U.S. Route Numbering changes. Enclosed you will find an application requesting approval to eliminate U.S. Highway 63 between U,S Highway 49 in the City of Brinkley, Arkansas running concurrenfly with lnterstate 40, lnterstate 55, and lnterstate 555 to the junction of U.S. Highway 49 in the bity of Jonesboro, Arkansas. A request to relocate U.S. Highway 63 to run concurrenfly with U.S. Highway 49 from the junction of lnterstate 40 in the City of Brinkley, Arkanias to lnterstate 555 in the City of Jonesboro, Arkansas has been submitted in a sepaiate application. This change only affects routes in the State of Arkansas. This application has been electronically submitted to [email protected]. lf additional information is needed, please advise. S E. Bennett, P.E Director Enclosure c: Senator Tom Cotton Senator John Boozman Congressman Rick CraMord Highway Commission Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer Deputy Director and Chief Engineer Assistant Chief Engineer - Planning Federal Highway Administration American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials An Application from the State Highway or Transportation Department of Arkansas for: Elimination of a U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Mn Mutcd-2D 2014.Qxd
    PART 2. SIGNS Chapter 2D. Guide Signs - Conventional Roads TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 2D. GUIDE SIGNS - CONVENTIONAL ROADS Page Section 2D.1 Scope of Conventional Road Guide Sign Standards . 2D-1 2D.2 Application . 2D-1 2D.3 Color, Retroreflection, and Illumination . 2D-1 2D.4 Size of Signs . 2D-1 2D.5 Lettering Style . 2D-3 2D.6 Size of Lettering . 2D-4 2D.7 Amount of Legend . 2D-5 2D.8 Arrows . 2D-5 2D.9 Numbered Highway Systems . 2D-6 2D.10 Route Signs and Auxiliary Signs . 2D-7 2D.11 Design of Route Signs . 2D-7 2D.12 Design of Route Sign Auxiliaries . 2D-8 2D.13 Junction Auxiliary Sign (M2-1) . 2D-9 2D.14 Combination Junction Sign (M2-2) . 2D-9 2D.15 Cardinal Direction Auxiliary Signs (M3-1 through M3-4) . 2D-9 2D.16 Auxiliary Signs for Alternative Routes (M4 Series) . 2D-10 2D.17 ALTERNATE Auxiliary Signs (M4-1, M4-1a) . 2D-10 2D.18 BY-PASS Auxiliary Sign (M4-2a) . 2D-10 2D.19 BUSINESS Auxiliary Sign (M4-3) . 2D-10 2D.20 TRUCK Auxiliary Sign (M4-4) . 2D-10 2D.21 TO Auxiliary Sign (M4-5, M4-5a) . 2D-10 2D.22 END Auxiliary Sign (M4-6, M4-6a) . 2D-11 2D.23 BEGIN Auxiliary Sign (M4-14, M4-14a) . 2D-11 2D.24 TEMPORARY Auxiliary Sign (M4-7, M4-7a) . 2D-11 2D.25 Temporary Detour and Auxiliary Signs . 2D-11 2D.26 Advance Turn Arrow Auxiliary Signs (M5-1, M5-2, M5-3) . 2D-11 2D.27 Lane Designation Auxiliary Signs (M5-4, M5-5, M5-6) .
    [Show full text]