cajunken said:

---

One possible answer for a western bypass is to create a four-lane connection between SH 40 (William D. Fitch Pkwy) and SH 47 where it ties in to SH 60 just south of the airport. To make for an easier tie-in without having to construct an overpass or request a new railroad crossing, the Barron Road segment between W.D. Fitch and Wellborn road can be designated as SH Alt 40, and the road widened to accommodate four lanes and slightly veered north as it nears Wellborn Road in order to align with the current Capstone Drive railroad crossing. Capstone would then also be designated as SH Alt 40 and widened to a four lane as well. A new section of highway could be built between the current west end of Capstone Drive to connect to North Dowling Rd, to continue to the hairpin turn near Aggie Acres. From that point, it is a straight shot to connect to SH 47, skirting the south edge of Easterwood Airport and minimizing the land needed for construction.

---

I find it amusing that we are trying to solve a problem without looking at the future plans.

At the south end, there is already a plan to extend fitch to Rock Prairie. Also to extend Rock Prairie out to the river.

From the other end, there is a plan to make a minor arterial road from HSC pkwy at 47 south around the airport to meet up with Hopes Creek, which runs into the Rock Prairie extension. There is your path around the back of the airport. Not a 4 lane divided highway like 2818, but an alternate path to using the existing major arterials. If you really think there is a need for a bigger path, the efforts would be better targeted at upgrading the green minor arterial to a red and advocating for intersection modifications to improve flow along the path.

That green dashed line is probably as close to the backside of the airport as you are going to be able to build a road. That "empty space" back there is University land and the university uses the land for various purposes, including an observatory that would be negatively impacted by light pollution from a major road and streetlights.

It is also pretty amusing that on this thread people are complaining about east inner loop being redundant with I214 because they are only 4 miles apart, yet we are proposing a road to duplicate 2818 by extending 47 a meter half mile from 2818.

2818 and Wellborn are not the answer, especially as the town grows to the south. Those roads are already used heavily for city traffic. What is needed is a way for traffic on 21 to get to the south without mixing with the city. The Unna Med/Hopes Creek/Rock Prairie route would help but are really just an continuation of the Wellborn/2818 problem.

Now, if you you made it a divided highway by continuing 47 along that route then splitting from Rock Prairie to join up with Fitch, that would be optimal. I have no idea what the logistics of that actually are, but I think it makes the most sense.

Something that should also be considered when planning roads around Easterwood are possible expansions of the airport.

Ag97 said:

---

With all the new subdivisions going in, they better get the land secured quickly. Looking at that route, looks like they will come across either by Carraba Rd or Merka. That's a little too close to my place for comfort. Maybe construction won't start till after i pass away in 20 or 30 years.

---

I think you're about right with Carraba Road. The best map I've seen showed it crossing 1179 along the rise just to the east of where the new Stella Ranch development is being built.

Which would run it right through the Stone Creek neighborhood on the south side of 1179. Probably run right along Risinger Ln off Steep Hollow Rd as well. Those are some $$ homes there.

hopeandrealchange said:

---

I would like to know why we are even talking about this when the state does not have funding to start the projects they have ready to go. The amount of waste on the Hwy30. Project through the river bottom is unbelievable. And now it is on hold for at least another

---

East Loop 2818 Project appears superfluous due to proposed I-214 loop only a few miles away.

There are a lot of details on the website.
https://www.brazoscountytx.gov/653/Inner-Loop-East

There will be a public meeting Thursday 7 November. 1700-1900 at the Brazos Center.

BiochemAg97 said:

---

Animal Eight 84 said:

---

hopeandrealchange said:

---

I would like to know why we are even talking about this when the state does not have funding to start the projects they have ready to go. The amount of waste on the Hwy30. Project through the river bottom is unbelievable. And now it is on hold for at least another

---

East Loop 2818 Project appears superfluous due to proposed I-214 loop only a few miles away.

There are a lot of details on the website.
https://www.brazoscountytx.gov/653/Inner-Loop-East

There will be a public meeting Thursday 7 November. 1700-1900 at the Brazos Center.

---

The idea that 2 loops are redundant because they are close assumes all roads are the same and serve the same purpose.

I214 would likely be a divided controlled access interstate highway, similar to 6 bypass. That means access roads, but only some major local roads crossing in over/underpass. Useful for routing traffic around BCS at high speed (70 mph?).

East loop would be a major arterial (4-6 lanes), but would likely have intersections with other local roads. Isn't effective for routing semi traffic around BCS but is more useful for local traffic to get around in the area between 6 and I214.


I lived in Round Rock before moving back to BCS. They had their own traffic issues, particularly a lack of north-south routes west of I35 driving lots of local traffic to I35 access road. However, their planning on the east side where there was newer growth included having major arterials every mile. Made a nice grid to get around.

If you expect east BCS to remain rural with no development, you don't need east loop. But since that isn't going to happen and there is already significant development, east loop provides another major N/S arterial for that side of town.

---

I think generically expecting enormous east side growth is a fallacy.
Compared to South Brazos County growth rates , East side is significantly less.
Why - limited existing road access.


More roads becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
If the county spends a couple hundred million of taxpayer funds on bonds to build East Loop through empty rural property , now the ag land is worth billions to developers- and the houses and congestion follow.
(Just like NW Harris County along toll road 99.)
We can guess who benefits from that !

East side housing density is low thus is a low contributor to road congestion on Hwy6 which is the issue.
Building I214 significantly reduces through traffic on Rudder Freeway and lowers congestion.

Some development is occurring on 1179 but road widening from 2 to 5 is funded which routes traffic to 5 lane artery road ( Booneville, Hwy30).

Spend the arterial road money where significant housing growth is actually happening. Adjacent to Wellborn, south Hwy 6, Hwy 30, and plan for arterial roads to support housing at the future jobs adjacent to Rellis.

Agree - next 20 yrs are going to be E Brazos Co and 47 corridor imho. All Bryan. CoCS is pretty land locked by flood plain.

EBrazosAg said:

---

Agree - next 20 yrs are going to be E Brazos Co and 47 corridor imho. All Bryan. CoCS is pretty land locked by flood plain.

---

Also, CSISD boundaries were shaved off to Bryan and Navasota ISDs decades ago.

When did that happen ? I've been here a long time and don't remember anything like that. How is that done - wouldn't one district have to be willing to give up coverage to another ?

bet the "inner loop" follows the powerline easement, just past the water tower. Also, along with "inner loop" & I-214, University is going to come out at Coyote Run

EBrazosAg said:

---

When did that happen ? I've been here a long time and don't remember anything like that. How is that done - wouldn't one district have to be willing to give up coverage to another ?

---

Shortly after consolidation of all the school districts in the state after WWII I think. Before my time too. CS was much smaller and there was no desire to run buses out to the far south of the county when those kids could just go to Navasota which was closer. Bryan ISD took rural chunks nobody wanted. Bryan Utilities took rural areas too.

Chris98 said:

---

bet the "inner loop" follows the powerline easement, just past the water tower. Also, along with "inner loop" & I-214, University is going to come out at Coyote Run

---

That's a possibility, and would make sense somewhat. (Although I'm sure the property owners who have the easement going along the edge of their land now would dispute that assessment.) Here's the link for what I believe is the most current map (which is dated 2017, so it might be obsolete.)

https://bcsmpo.org/DocumentCenter/View/196/Revised-Approved-Full-Size-Final-2050-MPO-Thoroughfare-Concept-06272017?bidId=

Proposed Inner Loop is purple, which means 150' RoW. It looks like it crosses Steep Hollow Rd just east of Risinger, then crosses 1179 east of Stella Cir.

I couldn't make the meeting because of kids' activities. Did anyone here go?

Yes, and there were tons of people there. It was packed. Not sure we will make any difference but at least we tried.

Hornbeck said:

---

woodiewood said:

---

What really needs to be done, but extremely expensive and would take a decade or two, is to extend Hwy 249 north around Navasota and BCS on the east side going somewhere around Kurten and link into Hwy 6 around OSR about where the Interstate is proposed to go. Some of it could be the planned I-214 loop in the BCS area.

---

This makes waaayyy too much sense, and requires Grimes County to actually do something productive. The extension they added to 249 is two lanes, and there's been numerous fatalities because they were too cheap to go divided 4 lanes like the rest of 249.

---

From what I recall, Grimes Co. and Navasota did not want 249 to go north of 105, so 105 will get extra lanes to to 6.

Also, Grimes Co did not want a toll road on 249 like it is in Montgomery Co so that's why there were only two lanes built instead of four.

Smeghead4761 said:

---

Drove down Steep Hollow Road today for the first time in a good while. Saw lots of NoEastLoop.com signs.

I can understand the sentiment, especially for those folks who have probably lived along that road for a couple decades or more. (My neighborhood off 1179 has quite a few homes that are 30+ years old, and inhabited by the original owners). They bought/built a home in a out of town location to get away from things like traffic, and now the town traffic is coming to their (in some cases literal) doorstep.

But it's also got a good bit of "Old Man Shouts at Cloud" to it. At least one East Bypass is coming, and needed. Especially once Stella Ranch and other larger developments get going. It's just a matter of when it will be built, and the exact route or routes.

---

Pound sand. Old man will win. I am single minded once I am committed to doing something I see it through. I will lead and lay waste to who or whatever I must to keep this boondoggle from taking our home. Peters, Chuck K, rest of county officials, we find their support or find their replacements. Unelected bureaucrats same. This is a fight we have nothing to lose. I told my wife when we built only one way I wasn't moving again and only one way I was leaving.

Look at what they are doing in Houston along 45. They just take/condemn land and businesses when they want. Just like widening a road.

tunnels

More meetings announced.

https://wtaw.com/more-meetings-about-the-future-inner-loop-highway-to-the-east-of-bryan-college-station-and-a-request-to-brazos-county-commissioners-to-get-citizen-input/

Article from 2022 regarding passage of Prop A and defeat of Prop B.

https://www.kbtx.com/2022/11/09/brazos-county-voters-split-transportation-propositions/

Another 2022 oldie but goodie.

https://wtaw.com/chairman-of-brazos-countys-rma-asks-city-councils-for-funding-and-resolutions-supporting-increasing-vehicle-registration-fees/

Shouldn't this be called the East Outer Loop since we already have an east loop - the Bypass?

EBrazosAg said:

---

Good call out in KBTX article about the bait and switch on how the funds for this are coming from a bond issue that was sold as something else, while the issue that was supposed to fund it was defeated- i believe in the same election.

https://www.kbtx.com/2024/11/20/residents-against-east-loop-project-host-public-meeting-wednesday/

---

Whole lot of confusion in that article.

Top of the article:
BCSMPO Director saying this isn't one of their projects, they aren't funding it.
Bottom of the article:
Funds are coming from a BCSMPO bond.

Likely the amount of money being spent at this planning stage is small, but no one has committed the big money to acquire ROW and build the road yet.


I also wouldn't take a vote against an additional fee as a vote against a particular road project, even if that road and others were listed. Seems more like don't want a funding mechanism that would allow MPO to build roads without the bond vote to approve them.

Wonder how many voters are renters that don't want to pay more for vehicle registration (which they will see) but are fine with increasing property tax, not considering that increasing property tax will increase their rent.

I was under the impression that the Feds were going to pay for the 214 loop. Why are we looking to build another loop at the cost of TXDOT or the local governments?

The two named city to the south has a terrible track record at improvements to roadways to improve traffic flow (see 2818 - the WEST bypass… stoplight city)

BiochemAg97 said:

---

EBrazosAg said:

---

Good call out in KBTX article about the bait and switch on how the funds for this are coming from a bond issue that was sold as something else, while the issue that was supposed to fund it was defeated- i believe in the same election.

https://www.kbtx.com/2024/11/20/residents-against-east-loop-project-host-public-meeting-wednesday/

---

Whole lot of confusion in that article.

Top of the article:
BCSMPO Director saying this isn't one of their projects, they aren't funding it.
Bottom of the article:
Funds are coming from a BCSMPO bond.

Likely the amount of money being spent at this planning stage is small, but no one has committed the big money to acquire ROW and build the road yet.

---

11.4 million isn't a small amount, what I understand is what we paid for the feasibility study.