I-14 in Texas

[sprjus4]

Unless I missed something in the presentation, I didn't see any mention about improving the I-35/Loop-363 interchange on the South side of Temple. That really has to be turned into a directional stack, and a pretty big one at that since I-35 would have separate express and general purpose lanes. Come to think of it, they'll also have to improve the I-14/I-35 interchange too.

If this proposal gets approved a whole bunch of commercial properties next to I-35 will have to be bought and cleared.

https://www.txdot.gov/projects/hearings-meetings/waco/2024/i14-extension-i35-from-loop121-in-belton-to-loop363us-190sh-36-in-temple.html

The website linked above has proposed schematics, although not fully detailed. But they give us a general idea of what TxDOT is considering. For the mainline widening, there's an option to either acquire right of way to the east or to the west of the highway.

For either end of the I-14 overlap, interchanges improvements are proposed. The southern interchange would have a direct connector added from I-14 East to I-35 South, and the northern interchange would two flyovers added for the I-14 movements only, and would be to the southeast of the actual interchange area, allowing traffic to transition at full interstate speeds since it's apart of the mainline I-14. That will require significantly takes though.

[longhorn]

Thank you for the link, guess have to wait to see how I-35 goes through the Belton I-14 interchange.

[longhorn]

https://www.tdtnews.com/news/business/article_29956592-16ec-11ef-a86f-338b712cd5ab.html

TxDOT to spend at least $700 million on first phase of I-14, I-35 expansion

[splashflash]

Brezos Valley I-14 planning meetings (set 2 of 3): https://www.txdot.gov/projects/hearings-meetings/bryan/2024/i14-central-texas-corridor-study-062624.html


Six in-person open house meetings will be hosted in different locations throughout the Study area starting on Wednesday, June 26, 2024. All open house details and venue information are included below. In-person participants are invited to come and go any time from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. at each open house.

Wednesday, June 26, 2024
Hearne Elementary School
1210 Hackberry Street,
Hearne, TX 77859

Thursday, June 27, 2024
Yards of Cameron
301 Adams Avenue,
Cameron, TX 76520

Wednesday, July 10, 2024
Kimbro Center
111 W Trinity Street,
Madisonville, TX 77864

Thursday, July 11, 2024
Walker County Fair Grounds
3925 SH 30 W.
Huntsville, TX 77340

Wednesday, July 17, 2024
Legends Event Center
2533 Midtown Park Boulevard,
Bryan, TX 77801

Thursday, July 18, 2024
Grimes County Fair Grounds
5220 FM Rd 3455,
Navasota, TX 77868

The purpose of the open house is to introduce potential opportunity areas for the future I-14 corridor and gather feedback from local communities throughout the Study area This is the second round of public open houses for this study, and all six open houses will contain the same Study information and exhibits.

Interesting that Navasota will be included.

[Bobby5280]

The mention of Hearne and Madisonville in that list sure makes it look like they want to build that very stupid "W" shaped route between I-35 and I-45.

Navasota being in the list might open the possibility of a route spanning from that town to Conroe, Cleveland and even Beaumont. But significant parts of the existing TX-105 corridor are already getting pretty heavily developed. It might be pretty difficult building a new freeway through there.

I-14 should go down to Cameron and Milano and then go direct to Bryan and then go East to Huntsville. No need for the route to ping-pong in angles up to Hearne and Madisonville.

[longhorn]

They could split the difference between Milano and Hearne and that is why both are invited.

[MaxConcrete]

Here are my observations from the "opportunity areas" maps on pages 9 and 10 of the meeting presentation

• An inner loop around Bryan-College Station appears to be ruled out since it is not in the Opportunities Areas map, and is shown separately on the next page on the adjacent projects map. This means the study will probably recommend a very large diameter loop around B-CS.
• Using the north yellow option and middle green option would provide a very straight and direct route. It would use the north section of the B-CS outer loop.
• The north yellow route could also serve as part of a Hearn loop or bypass.
• A southern route would use the south yellow option and south green option. It would be much less efficient for traffic going east-west between Huntsville and Temple, especially due to the need to go around the south B-CS loop

[Echostatic]

Here is a screenshot of the map on slide 10 for easier viewing.

[vdeane]

Here is a screenshot of the map on slide 10 for easier viewing.

Thanks.  That PDF is absurdly large.

[sprjus4]

So what we're seeing... not the existing "crooked" US-190 route. As predicted.

[Bobby5280]

There is still potential for that "W" shaped route to get built. It's included in that "octopus" of route possibilities.

[Anthony_JK]

If they are going to use the outer loop for I-14 to bypass B-CS, then what happens to the existing Inner Loop bypass and the existing TX 6 freeway through B-CS? Does that become I-214 and the outer bypass gets another number designation or remains numbered as is? And, can I assume that they will still make TX 6 freeway standard in order to fully connect B-CS into I-14 in both directions?

[MaxConcrete]

If they are going to use the outer loop for I-14 to bypass B-CS, then what happens to the existing Inner Loop bypass and the existing TX 6 freeway through BC-S? Does that become I-214 and the outer bypass gets another number designation or remains numbered as is? And, can I assume that they will still make TX 6 freeway standard in order to fully connect B-CS into I-14 in both directions?

The B-CS "inner loop" is not currently a freeway and may never be a freeway. As noted in the meeting exhibit, it is the "thoroughfare plan inner loop". The west/south side consists of various roadways of various quality, little or none full freeway. The east/north side does not exist - it's just a line on a planning map.

If Loop I-214 is approved and moves forward, I think it will greatly reduce the likelihood of the inner loop ever being made into a freeway. The north/east side of the inner loop may never be built.

For Highway 6, I think nothing will change. A $454 million improvement project is scheduled to receive bids in December 2024. This project will rebuild and widen the existing freeway. In the distant future (say after 2050), there will probably be interchanges at I-214.

[armadillo speedbump]

I think it will likely be the northern options (other than perhaps bypassing Cameron) to Madisonville then shared with I-45 to Huntsville. That would finally provide a 4-lane option from A&M to the east side of DFW that avoids the increasingly crowded Hillsboro-Waco segment of I-35.  And once (if?) an eastern segment of an outer loop of BCS is completed then it would also add an alternative 4-lane free flow option to eastern DFW from Magnolia/Tomball, Hockley/Cypress, Katy, and Sugar Land.  No more slogging across Houston traffic to reach I-45.

The southern and center options really don't do much for Houston-BCS traffic south of Conroe, those are pretty well covered now by the aggy Toolway and 290.  The Caldwell option doesn't look like it would save any time or miles for Houston-Temple over the Hearne option and would require more miles built before being useful.  Seems better, with earlier benefits, to start with the segments southeast of Rogers-south of Hearne and Madisonville-7 miles east of Kurten, where the 4-lane divided starts.  Those would provide immediate time savings.  Benchley-east of Kurten could be set aside for a final phase.  That cutoff would only save about 5 or 6 minutes and through traffic from west of Temple to east of Huntsville is probably not going be a large percentage of traffic in this corridor, much more local BCS and various DFW/Houston, and Temple corridors.

[TheBox]

Another day, another article or two
https://www.itemonline.com/news/i-14-central-texas-corridor-study-open-house-meetings-in-madisonville-and-huntsville-postponed-due/article_645d818c-3e24-11ef-a177-3f94618f51ed.amp.html

https://www.itemonline.com/news/new-interstate-14-plans-includes-huntsville-loop-path-through-crabbs-prairie/article_81d44dd4-3949-11ef-bbb7-6f20843cde85.amp.html

[ski-man]

The southern and center options really don't do much for Houston-BCS traffic south of Conroe, those are pretty well covered now by the aggy Toolway and 290.

You sure do show your ineptness and lack of class with this sentence. Take your views of A&M to an athletics board. I guess making fun of a high class university makes you feel better for all your insecurities and lack of superiority to that school. You probably did not even go to UT, who uses those terms.

[Rothman]

Well, that escalated quickly.

[bwana39]

Madisonville. It only makes sense on a through freeway if they intend to make the freeway avoid Lake Livingston to the north.

BCS is already almost connected to Houston via freeway to the south. (Via SH 6 and SH105, and the 249 Tollway.)  Huntsville is actually redundant. Madisonville is the way most Aggies travel to Dallas and places northeast already. So while its utility to a cross country freeway that goes through Huntsville is AWFUL, as a local freeway for BCS, it makes perfect sense.

[splashflash]

If the northern Madisonville were the route, why dip South to Huntsville at all, but rather,cut nearly east to Trinity and along US 287 which is being studied as a protential interstate. Maybe stay north of 190 until well east of Woodville.

[longhorn]

I thought Txdot would be happy to get I-14 from Temple to Bryan College Station and call it quits for a while. But I see TxDot is trying to get I-14 at least to I-45.

[The Road Warrior]

I don't see the point of running the interstate southward towards BCS, then cutting back northward towards Madisonville. If they were going straight from Temple to Madisonville, then building a route around the northern end of the project area, past Calvert and Franklin would make more sense.

[sprjus4]

I don't see the point of running the interstate southward towards BCS, then cutting back northward towards Madisonville. If they were going straight from Temple to Madisonville, then building a route around the northern end of the project area, past Calvert and Franklin would make more sense.

The shift towards BCS is to provide an interstate highway connection between the BCS area and I-45 at Madisonville. A route avoiding BCS wouldn't make this connection.

[The Road Warrior]

I don't see the point of running the interstate southward towards BCS, then cutting back northward towards Madisonville. If they were going straight from Temple to Madisonville, then building a route around the northern end of the project area, past Calvert and Franklin would make more sense.

The shift towards BCS is to provide an interstate highway connection between the BCS area and I-45 at Madisonville. A route avoiding BCS wouldn't make this connection.

Is a direct interstate connection even necessary? US 190 already directly links Madisonville to BCS. Just upgrade that if its already not four lanes and call it a day. Its not even a particularly long distance.

[sprjus4]

I don't see the point of running the interstate southward towards BCS, then cutting back northward towards Madisonville. If they were going straight from Temple to Madisonville, then building a route around the northern end of the project area, past Calvert and Franklin would make more sense.

The shift towards BCS is to provide an interstate highway connection between the BCS area and I-45 at Madisonville. A route avoiding BCS wouldn't make this connection.

Is a direct interstate connection even necessary? US 190 already directly links Madisonville to BCS. Just upgrade that if its already not four lanes and call it a day. Its not even a particularly long distance.

You would need to widen 17 miles of two lane road to a four lane divided highway, and construct 3-4 miles of new highway around the north side of Madisonville to connect into I-45.

At $30 million per mile, and even that's being generous in today's economy, that's over $500 million.

A straight line between Rogers (where ongoing construction to upgrade / bypass US-190 to interstate standards currently ends) and Madisonville is 77 miles. That would intersect SH-6 north of Hearne. For a trip between BCS and Temple, that would require driving on 17 miles of five lane undivided highway, and through the town of Hearne to connect to the existing divided highway outside of BCS.

So now you've spent $500 million widening US-190 between BCS and Madisonville to connect that area with I-45, you've built a bypass around Hearne on SH-6 for BCS to Temple traffic using SH-6 to reach I-14, and maybe even made it a divided highway throughout, probably another $500 million project. Now you have to build 77 miles of I-14 between Rogers and Madisonville which would at least be $2.5 billion with $30-35 million per mile for new location highway.

OR...

You shift I-14 slightly southward, have it connect with SH-6 just north of BCS (where it's already freeway), and parallel US-190 to Madisonville. That route comes up to around 83 mies, only 6 miles longer than a straight line connection. And you don't have to spend half a billion dollars widening 17 miles of US-190 to four lanes plus a 3 mile bypass around Madisonville, nor do you need to upgrade SH-6 north of BCS to divided highway or a bypass around Hearne, which could be another $500 million endeavor and redundant construction.

Adding 6 miles to I-14, assuming $30-35 million per mile, would add around $200 million to the project cost, and eliminate the need for almost a billion dollars in other projects.

--

Ultimately, I-14 is connecting I-35 to I-45, but BCS is a major urban area that will likely generate a lot of the trips. It's best to serve them directly with this highway, and not hover 20 miles away, necessitating the upgrade of arterial highways to connect to it. It's better for the region, and it's cheaper in the long run.

[splashflash]

Sounds like I-14 will be fit to link between BCS and points West, but whether that is to trace the outer loop of BCS north or south is potentially still up for grabs.  There is also a planned relief route for Hearne, so a freeway around it is already in discussion. 

The presentations note, ironically, that the cost of new alignments don't necessarily result in lower costs.

Here is the Hearne study.

https://ftp.txdot.gov/pub/txdot/get-involved/bry/hearne-relief-route/030724-notice.pdf