There's a lot of growth going on in the area between San Antonio and Austin, so I figure it deserves it's own project thread.
First one, which I wasn't even aware of:
I was traveling through San Marcos last night and on my Waze GPS I though I noticed a set of access roads and a grade separated intersection on the map to the south, sure enough I look it up and there is a limited access bypass they are building around southeastern San Marcos:
https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/TxDOT-Hill-County-project-16974867.php
The FM-110 project has possibilities for being an Interstate quality partial loop for San Marcos. But it is getting started with pretty humble beginnings. And it's going to be hella-tricky for TX DOT (or whoever) to acquire and keep enough ROW preserved for the project to get completed as desired. Otherwise the finished "loop" is going to be a mix of limited access exits and surface streets with traffic signals. The South segment already looks like it's on the way to be reduced to a surface street past the limited access exit with TX-123.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 03, 2022, 05:11:44 PM
The FM-110 project has possibilities for being an Interstate quality partial loop for San Marcos. But it is getting started with pretty humble beginnings. And it's going to be hella-tricky for TX DOT (or whoever) to acquire and keep enough ROW preserved for the project to get completed as desired. Otherwise the finished "loop" is going to be a mix of limited access exits and surface streets with traffic signals. The South segment already looks like it's on the way to be reduced to a surface street past the limited access exit with TX-123.
West of 123, looks like there is one business and a few houses that are in the ROW, so yeah as long as they don't build more they should be fine. East of 123 it's fairly clear.
What this region also needs (in addition to fully limited access loops around NB, SM and Kyle) are a few freeway connections between I-35 and the 130 toll.
Diving into fictional, but one toll road connecting I-35 and SH-130 intersecting in between San Marcos and New Braunfels would seem sufficient to connect those cities to I-10 East.
Quote from: sprjus4 on April 03, 2022, 08:43:40 PM
Diving into fictional, but one toll road connecting I-35 and SH-130 intersecting in between San Marcos and New Braunfels would seem sufficient to connect those cities to I-10 East.
Agreed. Something going from Hunter to the first turn south on 130:
(https://i.ibb.co/MZXx9kS/B11767-DB-03-DD-4-D83-BAE6-66845-CD13-B75.jpg) (https://ibb.co/jbpPHkf)
Quote from: thisdj78 on April 03, 2022, 08:37:06 PM
What this region also needs (in addition to fully limited access loops around NB, SM and Kyle)
Not realistic and not necessary, other than an east freeway bypass of San Marcos. That would be good for San Antonio to 21, Austin to Seguin, Austin to 80 relief. I don't know if TXDOT and Hays County have that in their long range plans.
$$$$ doesn't grow on trees and NIMBYism is just going to increase west of I-35.
Quote from: armadillo speedbump on April 03, 2022, 11:51:59 PM
Quote from: thisdj78 on April 03, 2022, 08:37:06 PM
What this region also needs (in addition to fully limited access loops around NB, SM and Kyle)
Not realistic and not necessary, other than an east freeway bypass of San Marcos. That would be good for San Antonio to 21, Austin to Seguin, Austin to 80 relief. I don't know if TXDOT and Hays County have that in their long range plans.
$$$$ doesn't grow on trees and NIMBYism is just going to increase west of I-35.
New Braunfels already has a loop with ROW it just needs to be fully converted to limited access.
Kyle does have long range plans for a loop, but I didn't see whether it would be limited access or not:
(https://i.ibb.co/g45qd5j/3765-A974-EFBA-4-B02-823-E-85-A5-EC7-D4-AAA.jpg) (https://ibb.co/tL7jz7m)
In the zone between Austin and San Antonio, I think what's more urgently needed are limited access links for New Braunfels and San Marcos down to I-10. Basically the TX-46 corridor from New Braunfels to Seguin needs to be upgraded. Same goes for the TX-80 corridor from San Marcos to Luling. Those projects would provide limited access links from New Braunfels and San Marcos direct to/from Houston.
Quote from: thisdj78New Braunfels already has a loop with ROW it just needs to be fully converted to limited access.
Loop-337 in New Braunfels is kind of a mess. They're trying to improve the North half of the loop to limited access, but both ends connecting to I-35 are getting over-grown with development. The North end looks like a particularly difficult problem to solve. Turning that into a full loop is going to be a painful process.
Much of the larger TX-46 corridor from Boerne (I-10) across to Bulverde (US-218) to New Braunfels (I-35) down to Seguin (I-10) is looking more like a missed opportunity. I think it's a regional bypass leg that still needs to be built somehow. The existing road will probably end up being no better than a mix of 4/5-lane undivided streets with limited access exits at some major intersections. That would force any new regional bypass onto mostly new terrain alignments.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 03, 2022, 05:11:44 PM
The FM-110 project has possibilities for being an Interstate quality partial loop for San Marcos. But it is getting started with pretty humble beginnings. And it's going to be hella-tricky for TX DOT (or whoever) to acquire and keep enough ROW preserved for the project to get completed as desired. Otherwise the finished "loop" is going to be a mix of limited access exits and surface streets with traffic signals. The South segment already looks like it's on the way to be reduced to a surface street past the limited access exit with TX-123.
So I worked on the FM-110 project in the mid 00s and there was a land owner on the route that was talking to me for a while and he kept repeating that he liked the road but didn't like the limited access aspect of it. I was being professional with him and just let him talk. His understanding of limited access was he couldn't have a driveway on to the road, totally not taking in to consideration Texas loves a frontage road and limited access doesn't mean it is limited to you having highway frontage. They are two fancy words that mean "freeway".
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 04, 2022, 10:45:46 AM
In the zone between Austin and San Antonio, I think what's more urgently needed are limited access links for New Braunfels and San Marcos down to I-10. Basically the TX-46 corridor from New Braunfels to Seguin needs to be upgraded. Same goes for the TX-80 corridor from San Marcos to Luling. Those projects would provide limited access links from New Braunfels and San Marcos direct to/from Houston.
I don't see a need for two separate limited access highways... as I suggested above, one tollway link located around halfway between the two cities linking I-35 to the final curve in SH-130 would be adequate.
Combined, that new link and the last 8 miles of SH-130 would provide a connection between the two cities and I-10 East.
Around 10 miles of new location highway vs. upgrading 20 miles of existing roadway.
Quote from: sprjus4 on April 07, 2022, 04:54:21 PM
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 04, 2022, 10:45:46 AM
In the zone between Austin and San Antonio, I think what's more urgently needed are limited access links for New Braunfels and San Marcos down to I-10. Basically the TX-46 corridor from New Braunfels to Seguin needs to be upgraded. Same goes for the TX-80 corridor from San Marcos to Luling. Those projects would provide limited access links from New Braunfels and San Marcos direct to/from Houston.
I don't see a need for two separate limited access highways... as I suggested above, one tollway link located around halfway between the two cities linking I-35 to the final curve in SH-130 would be adequate.
Combined, that new link and the last 8 miles of SH-130 would provide a connection between the two cities and I-10 East.
Around 10 miles of new location highway vs. upgrading 20 miles of existing roadway.
If it's ever to be built, they need to acquire the ROW like yesterday/ASAP. That land is pretty open now but I could see it filling up in the next 10 years, especially close to I-35.
Quote from: sprjus4I don't see a need for two separate limited access highways... as I suggested above, one tollway link located around halfway between the two cities linking I-35 to the final curve in SH-130 would be adequate.
I don't agree. For one thing, TX-130 serves as an I-35 bypass for Austin-San Antonio traffic. The South end of TX-130 runs very close to San Antonio. It is not pointing toward Houston at all. It points to San Antonio. Next, there is so much rapid growth happening in both New Braunfels and San Marcos, not to mention peripheral growth South of Austin and North of San Antonio. Both New Braunfels and San Marcos will soon be more than large enough to justify their own specific super highway links to I-10.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 07, 2022, 08:18:50 PM
Quote from: sprjus4I don't see a need for two separate limited access highways... as I suggested above, one tollway link located around halfway between the two cities linking I-35 to the final curve in SH-130 would be adequate.
I don't agree. For one thing, TX-130 serves as an I-35 bypass for Austin-San Antonio traffic. The South end of TX-130 runs very close to San Antonio. It is not pointing toward Houston at all. It points to San Antonio. Next, there is so much rapid growth happening in both New Braunfels and San Marcos, not to mention peripheral growth South of Austin and North of San Antonio. Both New Braunfels and San Marcos will soon be more than large enough to justify their own specific super highway links to I-10.
25 miles from San Marcos and 10 miles from New Braunfels.
35 miles of new highway construction vs. 10 miles on one new highway.
Unless both highways are going to be carrying 30,000 - 40,000 AADT each, there's zero need for two.
I-10 to the east carries around 30,000 AADT. The vast majority is coming from San Antonio. A combined highway from both San Marcos and New Braunfels to I-10 carrying maybe up to 20,000 AADT in the long term is more than adequate.
As for the southern end of SH-130, it's sort of perpendicular to I-10 at that point. You would travel south on SH-130 to I-10 then turn east. You're not really going west towards San Antonio.
What needs to happen is a fourth lane to I-35 each way between SAT and AUS. Convert the inside shoulder, or something else, I don't care but that freeway needwd some extra capacity between those two cities 10 years ago.
Quote from: longhorn on April 07, 2022, 11:58:04 PM
What needs to happen is a fourth lane to I-35 each way between SAT and AUS. Convert the inside shoulder, or something else, I don't care but that freeway needwd some extra capacity between those two cities 10 years ago.
Funny thing is, the 3 lane expansion in that area is only about 15-20 years old. I remember they were working on it when I left San Marcos in "˜99.
With all the bridge replacements being done, looks like they are preparing for future 4th lanes, but with the time, money and disruption it will take to complete that, it would be much easier to make toll 130 free and route semi truck traffic that way. I think even expanding 130 would be much easier than I-35 as well, at least in the near term.
Quote from: thisdj78 on April 08, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: longhorn on April 07, 2022, 11:58:04 PM
What needs to happen is a fourth lane to I-35 each way between SAT and AUS. Convert the inside shoulder, or something else, I don't care but that freeway needwd some extra capacity between those two cities 10 years ago.
Funny thing is, the 3 lane expansion in that area is only about 15-20 years old. I remember they were working on it when I left San Marcos in "˜99.
With all the bridge replacements being done, looks like they are preparing for future 4th lanes, but with the time, money and disruption it will take to complete that, it would be much easier to make toll 130 free and route semi truck traffic that way. I think even expanding 130 would be much easier than I-35 as well, at least in the near term.
I feel regardless of SH-130, I-35 ought to be expanded to 8 lanes anyways. It connects San Antonio and Austin traffic, and even if SH-130 took more traffic, there's still going to be 100,000+ AADT on I-35.
Quote from: thisdj78 on April 08, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: longhorn on April 07, 2022, 11:58:04 PM
What needs to happen is a fourth lane to I-35 each way between SAT and AUS. Convert the inside shoulder, or something else, I don't care but that freeway needwd some extra capacity between those two cities 10 years ago.
Funny thing is, the 3 lane expansion in that area is only about 15-20 years old. I remember they were working on it when I left San Marcos in "˜99.
With all the bridge replacements being done, looks like they are preparing for future 4th lanes, but with the time, money and disruption it will take to complete that, it would be much easier to make toll 130 free and route semi truck traffic that way. I think even expanding 130 would be much easier than I-35 as well, at least in the near term.
Yeah, I remember the I-35 rebuild between SAT and AUS. But other than the overpass at Buda (and I not sure why they replaced it), what other I-35 bridge has been rebuilt?
I always wondered why they made the freeway 8 lanes only in the New Braunfels area and not also along that whole route, knowing even back in the 90's how much that area was already starting to grow.
Quote from: longhorn on April 08, 2022, 10:41:31 AM
Quote from: thisdj78 on April 08, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: longhorn on April 07, 2022, 11:58:04 PM
What needs to happen is a fourth lane to I-35 each way between SAT and AUS. Convert the inside shoulder, or something else, I don't care but that freeway needwd some extra capacity between those two cities 10 years ago.
Funny thing is, the 3 lane expansion in that area is only about 15-20 years old. I remember they were working on it when I left San Marcos in "˜99.
With all the bridge replacements being done, looks like they are preparing for future 4th lanes, but with the time, money and disruption it will take to complete that, it would be much easier to make toll 130 free and route semi truck traffic that way. I think even expanding 130 would be much easier than I-35 as well, at least in the near term.
Yeah, I remember the I-35 rebuild between SAT and AUS. But other than the overpass at Buda (and I not sure why they replaced it), what other I-35 bridge has been rebuilt?
Several of the old two lane bridges over I-35 have been tore down between San Marcos and New Braunfels and replaced with bridges for those roads to go under I-35. This is the most recent example:
https://goo.gl/maps/YKhNbG5XfrySTPqRA
Quote from: ski-man on April 08, 2022, 02:11:39 PM
I always wondered why they made the freeway 8 lanes only in the New Braunfels area and not also along that whole route, knowing even back in the 90's how much that area was already starting to grow.
I've always wondered that too. With the University traffic in and around San Marcos, you'd think it would be the other way around (or both get 4 lanes).
Quote from: sprjus4I-10 to the east carries around 30,000 AADT. The vast majority is coming from San Antonio. A combined highway from both San Marcos and New Braunfels to I-10 carrying maybe up to 20,000 AADT in the long term is more than adequate.
You're under-estimating current AADT counts and just plain ignoring the future potential.
According to TX DOT's TCDS database the TX-46 corridor from New Braunfels to Seguin ranges from 37,828 at I-35, drops to 19,908 at I-10. TX-46 is mostly a 5-lane undivided road along that segment. Also, TX-46 doesn't intersect with the TX-130 toll road at all. Anyone in the New Braunfels area heading to Houston would be going out of their way to use TX-130 at all in their road trip.
TX-80 in San Marcos at I-35 has a 32,120 AADT. That number soon drops in half and then well below 10,000 AADT farther South where there is currently little commercial or residential development. Considering all the population growth in that region things can change dramatically.
Quote from: sprjus4As for the southern end of SH-130, it's sort of perpendicular to I-10 at that point.
The overall route, as crooked as it was built, is still a parallel route for I-35. No one in that region driving to Houston is going to stay on TX-130 all the way to its South terminus at I-10. People driving from the San Marcos area are going to use TX-80 & US-183 to get to I-10, not TX-130. US-183 will be the route of choice for people in Lockhart. Farther North they're going to be using TX-71 and US-290 to go to Houston.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on April 08, 2022, 03:41:36 PM
Quote from: sprjus4I-10 to the east carries around 30,000 AADT. The vast majority is coming from San Antonio. A combined highway from both San Marcos and New Braunfels to I-10 carrying maybe up to 20,000 AADT in the long term is more than adequate.
You're under-estimating current AADT counts and just plain ignoring the future potential.
According to TX DOT's TCDS database the TX-46 corridor from New Braunfels to Seguin ranges from 37,828 at I-35, drops to 19,908 at I-10. TX-46 is mostly a 5-lane undivided road along that segment. Also, TX-46 doesn't intersect with the TX-130 toll road at all. Anyone in the New Braunfels area heading to Houston would be going out of their way to use TX-130 at all in their road trip.
TX-80 in San Marcos at I-35 has a 32,120 AADT. That number soon drops in half and then well below 10,000 AADT farther South where there is currently little commercial or residential development. Considering all the population growth in that region things can change dramatically.
Quote from: sprjus4As for the southern end of SH-130, it's sort of perpendicular to I-10 at that point.
The overall route, as crooked as it was built, is still a parallel route for I-35. No one in that region driving to Houston is going to stay on TX-130 all the way to its South terminus at I-10. People driving from the San Marcos area are going to use TX-80 & US-183 to get to I-10, not TX-130. US-183 will be the route of choice for people in Lockhart. Farther North they're going to be using TX-71 and US-290 to go to Houston.
New Braunfels and San Marcos have grown so much that I think it would come down to what side of town folks are on. I could see people on the far eastern ends of NB using a freeway connection from I-35 to 130, same with people on the western end of SM. Especially if the speed limit is 75-80. Less direct but would still save time.
Quote from: thisdj78 on April 08, 2022, 02:41:58 PM
Quote from: longhorn on April 08, 2022, 10:41:31 AM
Quote from: thisdj78 on April 08, 2022, 09:30:36 AM
Quote from: longhorn on April 07, 2022, 11:58:04 PM
What needs to happen is a fourth lane to I-35 each way between SAT and AUS. Convert the inside shoulder, or something else, I don't care but that freeway needwd some extra capacity between those two cities 10 years ago.
Funny thing is, the 3 lane expansion in that area is only about 15-20 years old. I remember they were working on it when I left San Marcos in "˜99.
With all the bridge replacements being done, looks like they are preparing for future 4th lanes, but with the time, money and disruption it will take to complete that, it would be much easier to make toll 130 free and route semi truck traffic that way. I think even expanding 130 would be much easier than I-35 as well, at least in the near term.
Yeah, I remember the I-35 rebuild between SAT and AUS. But other than the overpass at Buda (and I not sure why they replaced it), what other I-35 bridge has been rebuilt?
Several of the old two lane bridges over I-35 have been tore down between San Marcos and New Braunfels and replaced with bridges for those roads to go under I-35. This is the most recent example:
https://goo.gl/maps/YKhNbG5XfrySTPqRA
Thanks, I see that now, I always take the 130 tollway to SAT, so I did not notice this last month.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7463472,-98.0578536,3a,75y,330.39h,92.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPMR5P1I5Bud_yfJPRUerEA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=en-US
1,900-acre Texas community breaks ground on 15 year housing project
The 6,000 residential units include single-family homes, duplexes, townhouses, and multi-family units throughout the 1,888-acre development in New Braunfels
Looks like a new overpass is being built to accommodate this project:
https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/article/Mayfair-New-Braunfels-groundbreaking-17078882.php
Google Earth has a 10/22 update for San Marcos. You can now see major construction progress on their outer loop north of Hwy 80 to near I-35, and ROW acquired the rest of the way.
I'm guessing that when complete, this will have a big impact on the congestion of several in town roads at I-35 and east.
Too many intersections remain on the full route, but it's much more important to use limited funds to complete the route ASAP. Grade separations can come later. Looks like the ROW for that has been preserved at 80, 621, and 245. 21 is getting an interesting interchange.
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8685223,-97.9390064,3a,75y,345.16h,94.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3lks_w2Q2AXIq20ggY0eSw!2e0!5s20220401T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Noticed this weekend this bridge is being replaced, the new one is going to be higher and the NB side has been demoed and new supports being built. Anyone know why, or is this the beginning to 8 lane I-35 through San Marcus?
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.7656253,-98.0451289,3a,75y,170.12h,87.26t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sF6t7prfgZsogT9hStmMqJA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Another raised new I-35 bridge, do not know for what road though. TxDot did not do this for some turnarounds.
Quote from: longhorn on January 03, 2023, 12:14:36 AM
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.8685223,-97.9390064,3a,75y,345.16h,94.54t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3lks_w2Q2AXIq20ggY0eSw!2e0!5s20220401T000000!7i16384!8i8192
Noticed this weekend this bridge is being replaced, the new one is going to be higher and the NB side has been demoed and new supports being built. Anyone know why, or is this the beginning to 8 lane I-35 through San Marcus?
I'd assume they are adding lanes which I'm surprised they didn't do that in the beginning like they did through New Braunfels (which is 8 lanes). San Marcos seems to have more local traffic using I-35 due to the TXST campus but I could be wrong. Ultimately, I wouldn't be surprised to see HOV or managed lanes from Austin to San Marcos one day or even all the way to San Antonio.
Long term plans call for SH-46 to be converted to 6 lanes, with grade separated intersections at major roads crossings (Page 24):
https://www.alamoareampo.org/Committees/TAC/archives/2022/5-May/08%20TAC%20May%202022%20Package.pdf
I guess that's a start?
:-/
City gets update on proposed new Seguin, New Braunfels connector route:
https://seguintoday.com/2023/02/20/city-gets-update-on-proposed-new-seguin-new-braunfels-connector-route/
It's an interesting concept, though I see two questionable things.
First is the routing - why does it need to use any part of SH-130 at all? Assuming the desired traffic connection is from I-10 to the east (Houston to New Braunfels), shouldn't it just parallel SH-46 between Seguin and New Braunfels?
This "Seguin - New Braunfels" connector wouldn't even link the two cities directly at all... one would need to take this new road east from New Braunfels to SH-130, then head south on SH-130, then back west on I-10, paying a toll on SH-130, when they could just simply take the much shorter and free SH-46.
Unless, the intended traffic load is traffic using SH-130 to bypass I-35 from the north, and connect over to New Braunfels, but that wouldn't seem like a lot to begin with...
and of course it only ties to SH-130 so they can build this as a "toll free" road, but still collecting the revenue for the existing toll SH-130 portion.
And to top it all off, the road will only be a 65 mph two to four lane road with no control of access - no different than the much more direct and free SH-46.
This seems like a waste ultimately, and would not even serve the intended purpose to connect the two cities.
Quote from: thisdj78 on March 19, 2023, 09:33:18 PM
City gets update on proposed new Seguin, New Braunfels connector route:
https://seguintoday.com/2023/02/20/city-gets-update-on-proposed-new-seguin-new-braunfels-connector-route/
That's interesting. Basically, the private owner of SH 130 (SH 130 Concession Company) wants to build this in exchange for being able to collect tolls on SH 130 longer than is currently allowed.
I see numerous problems. First, SH 130 Concession Company does not have eminent domain authority, so they would rely on willing sellers (or donated land) along the entire length. It seems highly unlikely they could get everyone on a path to agree to sell. Or, they may need to pay well above market price to get what they need.
Second, the length is 13 miles, so construction cost will be at least $150 million for a 2x2 divided road.
Third, as noted in the article, the connections at the west end, either to I-35 or SH 46, will be difficult.
Fourth, it's not clear to me how much environmental study will be needed. An EIS or assessment would take years. Anyway, to get local support they will probably need to have a formal alignment study process.
Fifth, SH 46 is already slated to become a freeway, but the planning process is just starting and would likely have work start in the 2030s. This will actually connect Seguin to New Braunfels. The need for the proposed road seems contingent on future growth.
So I think a more reasonable outcome for this proposal is for TxDOT to launch a formal corridor study to determine what type of facility is warranted, and where it should be aligned.
Yeah, anything dealing with TX-130 is way out of the way for any sort of New Braunfels to Seguin connector. With TX DOT trying to incorporate part of the TX-130 toll road it seems like they're trying to split the difference between what is really needed: two connector routes from I-35 to I-10.
New Braunfels to Seguin is an obvious future super highway corridor. Adding to that, the TX-46 corridor wrapping over the northern fringe of metro San Antonio represents a larger regional corridor. We're talking a potential super highway route from Boerne (NW of San Antonio) over to Bulverde (US-281 Jct) and then over to New Braunfels and Sequin.
San Marcos to Luling is another corridor in need of upgrading.
Both New Braunfels and San Marcos already have I-35 as a direct route into San Antonio. I don't think they need another super highway route pointing partially parallel to I-35. They need routes rotated 90 degrees, going to I-10 and providing more direct pathways toward Houston.
^ TxDOT is not trying to incorporate the toll road - this is a proposal by the group that operates SH-130.
I agree upgrades should commence along SH-46.
If they want to incorporate SH-130 into anything, a routing paralleling SH-123 about 3 miles to the east, then tying into SH-130, would be a viable connector between San Marcos and I-10 east.
That's what SH-130 should be pushing for, to be honest, not to New Braunfels.
San Marcos Bypass is open now:
https://www.kxan.com/traffic/hays-county-traffic/new-road-opens-in-east-san-marcos-providing-an-alternative-route-to-i-35/
The new bypass in San Marcos has some decent freeway upgrade potential between its North end at I-35 and the interchange with TX-123. The last couple of miles where it merges into McCarty Lane might be a little tricky to do any freeway upgrades. There is a good amount of vacant space, but there are a few properties in the way, such as the San Marcos Conference Center. They might have to do something creative to get around that and connect the bypass into I-35.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 30, 2023, 07:10:14 PM
The new bypass in San Marcos has some decent freeway upgrade potential between its North end at I-35 and the interchange with TX-123. The last couple of miles where it merges into McCarty Lane might be a little tricky to do any freeway upgrades. There is a good amount of vacant space, but there are a few properties in the way, such as the San Marcos Conference Center. They might have to do something creative to get around that and connect the bypass into I-35.
Yeah the long term plan is for it to be a full freeway from I-35N to 123. But seems like it would have made more sense for them to have the loop go past McCarty Ln/Rattler Rd and connect back with I-35 at Posey Ln.
It's too bad they couldn't make the FM-110 loop a complete one. More logistics warehouses are getting built on the South end. The Amazon fulfillment building is pretty big.
The FM-110 partial loop will be able to work as a staging point for a possible freeway/tollway connection parallel to TX-80 down to Luling and I-10. If such a thing was ever built it might apply more pressure to close that non-freeway gap along McCarty Lane.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on December 31, 2023, 11:37:14 AM
It's too bad they couldn't make the FM-110 loop a complete one. More logistics warehouses are getting built on the South end. The Amazon fulfillment building is pretty big.
The FM-110 partial loop will be able to work as a staging point for a possible freeway/tollway connection parallel to TX-80 down to Luling and I-10. If such a thing was ever built it might apply more pressure to close that non-freeway gap along McCarty Lane.
I know this is very old, but initial plans called for there to be a complete loop:
https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot-info/pub_inv/committees/segment3/workshops/17_csc3ps_sanmarcos_outerloop.pdf.pdf
TxDOT talks I-35 expansion between Austin, San Antonio
https://www.fox7austin.com/news/txdot-talks-i-35-expansion-between-austin-san-antonio
San Marcos is filling in a loop on the west side in the form of Centerpoint Road. They want to use the expansion of Kissing Tree and La Cima to eventually connect the roads. Of course it ends up being misaligned with McCarty
I think the city wants to try the same approach with SH-21. They've long talked a plan to serve as an arterial along the south side ending at Posey and 35.
Honestly Loop 110 as it stands doesn't really solve any traffic problems in the city. It does not improve access to SH-21 or 80 from the interstate especially from the south. It certainly does not relieve traffic in the weekly (if not more often) shutdowns of IH-35. Now the city is trying to throw incentives at Buc-Ee's to build at the Yarrington/35 exit which will likely negate any value the Loop had from the north direction.