Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Scott5114]

It's pretty simple. Without an incentive to get people to adjust their travel choices, they/we will use US 69 in the most selfish and least efficient way possible.

It's Johnson County, I'm pretty sure they're gonna be selfish and inefficient no matter what you do...May as well put in some toll lanes so KDOT can have some of the money the rich people don't need.

Really, though, if US-69 is expanded, any extra traffic would be coming from people who are using Quivira, Antioch, or Metcalf in lieu of 69 because it's too congested.

[sprjus4]

What is the AADT on that segment of US-69?

1.  Could it be that the induced demand was real, but it was less than the additional capacity gained?

Perhaps, but it's a counter-example to the idea that induced demand always happens to the point widening shouldn't happen, as used by some RE/T groups or heavy proponents of toll lanes.

How about all rural interstates that have been expanded to 6 lanes? I recall driving on I-95 in Georgia during a peak weekend recently, traffic was heavy but moving 75 - 80 mph through without any delays. As soon as you entered South Carolina, traffic is choked down to 45 - 60 mph sustained, then many areas of down to near complete stops, then moving again, and vice versa.

No issues with 6 lanes Georgia, major issues with 4 lane South Carolina.

[kphoger]

It's Johnson County, I'm pretty sure they're gonna be selfish and inefficient no matter what you do...May as well put in some toll lanes so KDOT can have some of the money the rich people don't need.

Stereotype much?

My parents both grew up in Johnson County, and it's not all like that.  Here's the house my mom grew up in, for example.  And here's the house where my dad grew up, as part of a family of seven with one bathroom.

[kphoger]

What is the AADT on that segment of US-69?

2016 figures:

93 600 = north of 103rd
83 100 = between 103rd & I-435
82 500 = between I-435 & College Blvd
75 400 = between College Blvd & 119th
59 900 = between 119th & Blue Valley Pkwy
78 200 = between Blue Valley Pkwy & Santa Fe
?? ??? = between Santa Fe & 151st
34 700 = south of 151st

[Scott5114]

It's Johnson County, I'm pretty sure they're gonna be selfish and inefficient no matter what you do...May as well put in some toll lanes so KDOT can have some of the money the rich people don't need.

Stereotype much?

I have family in both Wyandotte and Johnson counties, so I'm legally obliged to make fun of both of them.

[mvak36]

Looks like Congresswoman Davids has submitted an earmark request for a part of the US69 project:https://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article250974644.html

Davids’ $15 million earmark request for KDOT covers a portion of the project to improve the interchange at 167th st.

[route56]

What is the AADT on that segment of US-69?

20162019 figures:

93 600 99 500 = north of 103rd
83 100 84 600 = between 103rd & I-435
82 500 84 600 = between I-435 & College Blvd
75 400 88 500 = between College Blvd & 119th
59 900 66 600 = between 119th & Blue Valley Pkwy
78 200 88 400 = between Blue Valley Pkwy & Santa Fe 135th
?? ??? 58 210 = between Santa Fe 135th & 151st
34 700 41 300 = south of 151st

Fixed and updated numbers loaded onto my US 69 page.

https://www.route56.com/kansas-highways/us-69/#aadt

[sprjus4]

I feel like with 6 general purpose lanes and 2 C/D lanes in each direction, that stretch of highway would seem to operate relatively smoothly in the long term, more so than simply shoving a toll lane that may or may not get high utilization in.

[Plutonic Panda]

Not sure if this will affect the plan or not but thankfully the toll lane proposal is starting to face some pushback.

https://www.kcur.org/news/2021-06-15/express-lanes-could-ease-traffic-jams-on-highway-69-but-proposed-tolls-raise-concerns-about-equity

[The Ghostbuster]

Let me guess: The opponents of the toll lanes are proponents of anti-toll "Lexus Lanes" argument. Areas that haven't had a history of toll lanes in their areas are more likely to say toll lanes are "Lexus Lanes." The truth is, although it may seem like higher-income people are more likely to use toll lanes, research has indicated that drivers of all incomes use the toll lanes. Here is an article about the "equity" of Express Toll Lanes: https://reason.org/commentary/are-express-toll-lanes-equitable/.

[Rothman]

Let me guess: The opponents of the toll lanes are proponents of anti-toll "Lexus Lanes" argument. Areas that haven't had a history of toll lanes in their areas are more likely to say toll lanes are "Lexus Lanes." The truth is, although it may seem like higher-income people are more likely to use toll lanes, research has indicated that drivers of all incomes use the toll lanes. Here is an article about the "equity" of Express Toll Lanes: https://reason.org/commentary/are-express-toll-lanes-equitable/.

Pfft.  Reason Foundation misrepresented the findings of the actual study.

https://depts.washington.edu/trac/research-news/freeway-and-arterial-management/i-405-express-toll-lanes-analysis-usage-benefits-and-equity/

[Ned Weasel]

I have such a hard time buying any argument against toll lanes.

Let's say you go to a fast food restaurant and want a hamburger.  The hamburger costs $2.50, just for the sake of argument.  The clerk asks you if you want fries with that.  Fries cost $0.75, again, just for the sake of argument.  Maybe the fries are worth the extra 75 cents to you, maybe they aren't.  The US 69 proposal is like the hamburger and fries.  If you use US 69, you're already committed to the hamburger.  You've invested the money into a car and fuel, the $2.50 example.  The existence of the toll lanes give you the option of adding fries to your order, for a bit of an extra cost.  Either it's worth it to you, or it's not.  What about the normal lanes on US 69 (the hamburger) getting more congested?  Well, sometimes fast food restaurants have long lines, too, right?

Here's another example.  Let's say you order a package.  I don't care what it is.  But normal shipping costs $5.00, and it gets to you between one and two weeks from the time you order it, or maybe longer if it's a busy season like the holidays.  For an additional two bucks, you can get express shipping that guarantees you'll get it within five business days.  The toll lanes are like the express shipping.  Either it's worth it to you, or it's not.

Now, to the other side of the coin, let's suppose we add lanes without any additional cost to the end user.  That's like selling the burger and fries for the original $2.50 price of the burger.  That's like selling the express shipping for the original $5.00 price of standard shipping.  Maybe it works as a short-time promotion.  But is it really a sustainable business model?

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^^ your analogy really doesn’t add up here. This isn’t a private venture it’s a public works project to facilitate the greater good. The only comparison I’d make between a fast food restaurant is adding a special like that you pay to extra to stand in just so you can order the food you already were going to order anyways. The new pay to use like prices the poor people out so you get your food faster than everyone else.

If they want to add toll lanes fine but add a GP lane as well.

[sprjus4]

I have such a hard time buying any argument against toll lanes.

Using tax dollars to construct new lanes to then charge drivers an additional fee to drive in them?

  But is it really a sustainable business model?

Funny, they’ve added numerous of GP lanes back in the Hampton Roads area where I’m at over the last 30-40 years, and those areas still have virtually no congestion during peak hours, but right when it merges to 2 lanes each way (with LESS traffic volumes than the expanded 8 lane areas), bottleneck and bumper to bumper traffic.

But sure… “induced demand”  

[skluth]

I have such a hard time buying any argument against toll lanes.

Using tax dollars to construct new lanes to then charge drivers an additional fee to drive in them?

  But is it really a sustainable business model?

Funny, they’ve added numerous of GP lanes back in the Hampton Roads area where I’m at over the last 30-40 years, and those areas still have virtually no congestion during peak hours, but right when it merges to 2 lanes each way (with LESS traffic volumes than the expanded 8 lane areas), bottleneck and bumper to bumper traffic.

But sure… “induced demand”  

Huh? Most of the Tidewater backups are at the water crossings (HRBT, Hi-Rise Bridge), but I remember daily backups at I-64/264 when I lived in the area. Local authorities went back to tolling both the Downtown and Midtown Tunnels since I left (to pay for the much needed second Midtown tube), so the only way to fix one of the local bottlenecks was to toll it. Another local bottleneck that is now tolled after expansion is the Elizabeth River US 17 bridge, and Chesapeake built the tolled Chesapeake Expressway 20 years ago to get traffic out of Great Bridge. The cancelled Southeastern Parkway was also going to be a toll road. It seems like Tidewater is using toll roads to fix bottlenecks even if you don't personally use them.

[sprjus4]

^ I’m referring to segments of I-64 that have been expanded to 8 lanes - I-464 to I-264, north of I-664 on the Peninsula, also I-264 east of Independence Blvd… US-58 between Suffolk and Bowers Hill was also constructed as a rural 6 lane divided highway in the 70s… plus 6 lanes of I-464 for most of its length.

None of these segments built or widened with 6 or more lanes have recurring congestion even at peak hours, and carrying high volumes of traffic.

I never mentioned the crossings, which are bottlenecks now proposed to be addressed with HO/T lanes. We shall see how they hold up in the next decade once built, notably the HRBT and HRB.

Chesapeake built the Dominion Blvd project as a toll road because there was simply no funding. The city and area residents heavily opposed the use of tolling initially - it’s not popular and they tried holding out for years to find the funding… they reluctantly finally agreed to it because it was the only way to get it built. The same for the Expressway, which the toll portion does not bypass Great Bridge, it bypasses the southern portion of rural 2 lane Battlefield. The Great Bridge portion was built by VDOT in 1980 toll free.

Despite its continued use and growth, tolling continues to seem to be heavily opposed to locally, especially as the now proposed billions of dollars worth of HO/T lane expansions in the area heavily rely on tax dollars.

Portions of I-64 west of I-464 and all of I-664 could be expanded to 8 general purpose lanes and likely suffice for decades to come.

[Scott5114]

I have such a hard time buying any argument against toll lanes.

Using tax dollars to construct new lanes to then charge drivers an additional fee to drive in them?

Eh, if this was really a huge argument against the project it could easily be dispelled by just paying for it with KTA funds.

And, as I've alluded to before, I don't think people are going to be particularly up in arms about paying a few bucks to use a toll lane in this area. The 2010 census median household income for Overland Park is $71,513, which is frankly kind of absurd for a Plains state (for Kansas as a whole it's $56,422).

  But is it really a sustainable business model?

Funny, they’ve added numerous of GP lanes back in the Hampton Roads area where I’m at over the last 30-40 years, and those areas still have virtually no congestion during peak hours, but right when it merges to 2 lanes each way (with LESS traffic volumes than the expanded 8 lane areas), bottleneck and bumper to bumper traffic.

But sure… “induced demand”  

Any traffic increase on US-69 is going to be the result of traffic that was avoiding 69 and using Metcalf, Quivira, etc. instead shifting back to the freeway where it belongs. So while you'll see an increase of traffic on 69, you'll see less on surface streets.

[mvak36]

https://www.kshb.com/news/local-news/overland-park-city-council-approves-us-69-toll-lane

OVERLAND PARK, Kan. – An express toll lane will be added to U.S. 69 Highway in Overland Park.

The Overland Park City Council voted 10-2 to approve the expansion for the roadway, which the Kansas Department of Transportation estimates is used by roughly 80,000 drivers daily between West 103rd and West 197th streets, with the toll-lane included.

[mvak36]

https://www.69express.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/2021.06.25_US69_NewsRelease_KTA_SFC_Approvals_FINAL.pdf

U.S. 69 Express toll lanes receive approvals from Kansas Turnpike Authority, State Finance Council

KDOT continues public engagement, project environment assessment

TOPEKA—Following the June 21 approval by the Overland Park City Council to add express toll lanes to U.S. 69 between 151st and 103rd streets, the project received additional required approvals this week from the Kansas Turnpike Authority and the State Finance Council.

The KTA board voted 5-0 to approve and the State Finance Council voted 8-0 in favor of the KDOT-Overland joint proposal for express toll lanes on U.S. 69.

“The Overland Park City Council, Kansas Turnpike Authority and State Finance Council decisions set direction for how KDOT will proceed with the next phases of the U.S. 69 Expansion and Modernization project,”  said KDOT Deputy Secretary Lindsey Douglas.

The environmental assessment has been underway since the project began in October 2020, and KDOT expects it to be complete in late 2021. A noise study also will be conducted to determine whether noise levels specific to the express toll lanes configuration meet or exceed federal and state guidelines.

KDOT’s public engagement efforts will continue throughout the life of the project. Over the next year, Overland Park residents can participate in several public meetings — one when the environmental analysis is complete in October, one in February 2022 about right-of-way acquisitions and one prior to the start of construction. Groups also may request project presentations through the U.S. 69 Expansion project website at Feedback — 69 Express.

In addition to a new, third tolled lane in each direction, the initial project phase will include a completely rebuilt U.S. 69 roadway between 151st and 103rd streets, as well as reconfigured interchanges at Blue Valley Parkway and at I-435.

[mvak36]

https://davids.house.gov/media/in-the-news/us-highway-69-project-overland-park-would-get-15m-federal-funds-bill-passed-house

Federal money from a $715 billion infrastructure bill approved by the U.S. House Thursday could make the project to expand U.S. Highway 69 in Overland Park richer, if the measure survives an eventual Senate conference.

The prospective $15 million injection –plus a state match – is targeted specifically at the 167th Street interchange.

[route56]

The US 69 widening in Overland Park is one of the improvement projects that will be built as part of the IKE program.

https://ikewebstorage.blob.core.windows.net/files/Construction-Announcements-2021/US69_Johnson_July2021.pdf

Plans are scheduled to be let next year... 0.85:1 that Clarkson winds up with the best bid.

[Ned Weasel]

https://ikewebstorage.blob.core.windows.net/files/Construction-Announcements-2021/US69_Johnson_July2021.pdf

First express toll lane in the Midwest.

I guess the ones in Minnesota don't count because HOVs get to use them for free?

[mvak36]

Got a newsletter via email about the project:

Construction on the 69Express project is set to begin later this year. The project will involve adding a new, third tolled lane in each direction from 151st to 103rd streets, replacement of 50-year old pavement, 11 noise walls, and improving interchanges at 167th street, Blue Valley Parkway and I-435. The existing two lanes in each direction will remain untolled as they are now.

The Kansas Department of Transportation (KDOT) also is working this summer to focus on making sure 69Express provides equity in area mobility access; selects a proven, effective design-build team to implement nearly three years of construction ahead; and kicks off construction with a September groundbreaking. 

KDOT continues its review and analysis of competing design-build teams’ proposals for constructing the U.S. 69 improvements. A winning team and approach are expected to be announced mid-summer. KDOT selected design-build for delivering 69Express because it means this complex Project can be completed more quickly through improved innovation and collaboration. Once a team is selected, the official Project groundbreaking ceremony will follow in mid-September. 

They haven't posted the newsletter on the project site yet but I think it should be on there sometime soon.

[The Ghostbuster]

Whatever happens to the corridor, I do hope they eliminate that left-hand southbound on-ramp from the Blue Valley Parkway, and move it to the right-hand side.

[Ned Weasel]

Whatever happens to the corridor, I do hope they eliminate that left-hand southbound on-ramp from the Blue Valley Parkway, and move it to the right-hand side.

That will cost a lot of money, but it's worth it considering the scope of this project.  I would be appalled if they didn't.