New Braunfels-San Marcos-Kyle Projects Thread

[longhorn]

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?

[longhorn]

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.

[thisdj78]

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.

[thisdj78]

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

[Bobby5280]

I guess that's a start?

[thisdj78]

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/

[sprjus4]

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.

[MaxConcrete]

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.

[Bobby5280]

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.

[sprjus4]

^ 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.

[thisdj78]

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/

[Bobby5280]

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.

[thisdj78]

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.

[Bobby5280]

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.

[thisdj78]

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

[thisdj78]

TxDOT talks I-35 expansion between Austin, San Antonio

https://www.fox7austin.com/news/txdot-talks-i-35-expansion-between-austin-san-antonio

[24Whiskey]

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.