I noticed that schematics are now online from the recent public meeting
Meeting info and index page
http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/100615.html (http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/100615.html)
Schematic
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/hou/notices/1006150-schematic.pdf (http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/hou/notices/1006150-schematic.pdf)
Observations
* This is from NASA 1 to south of FM 518
* 5 southbound main lanes are maintained to south of FM 518, where there will be four main lanes going southbound
* The updated design has a northbound braided ramp, with both the entrance and exit parts of the braided ramp having two lanes
* North of Clear Creek the right-of-way is widened from 300 to 360 feet
* South of Clear Creek the right-of-way is widened from 300 to 320 feet
* Estimated cost: $80 million
* Expected construction start: mid 2017
* The section (FM 518 to 517) south of this section , widening to 8 main lanes, is scheduled to start in 2016 and listed at $104 million
Will there be any HOT Lanes along this stretch?
From what I see of the schematics, no. Only an additional free lane in each direction.
Quote from: The Ghostbuster on October 26, 2015, 02:41:39 PM
Will there be any HOT Lanes along this stretch?
None of the HOV lanes in Houston that are two way and non-barrier separated offer SOV Tolling.
Quote from: Anthony_JK on October 26, 2015, 09:28:01 PM
From what I see of the schematics, no. Only an additional free lane in each direction.
There's really no need for it in this area, either. This is likely more about hurricane preparation rather than traffic relief, and the lack of toll lanes would suggest that it's being financed primarily through Proposition 1 cash.
I was browsing through the new Google Earth imagery of Houston, and I noticed how wide the I-45 overpass at FM 528 (NASA Parkway) is. It appears there is space for 6 or 7 lanes in each direction.
This used to be a cloverleaf where FM 528 went over I-45, with I-45 having six lanes. The interchange was rebuilt in 2010 or 2011, with I-45 now passing over FM 528 on a very wide bridge. The bridge is nearly 230 ft wide according to Google Earth.
Are there plans for a local-express system, or some kind of Katy Freeway-like configuration?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FK6MO5cJ.jpg&hash=51a16dd5352615988c2c287205f31fbf9b140af3)
Bids were opened on the first section of the expansion south of NASA 1, 3.4 miles from FM 517 to FM 518. The winning bid was $122 million.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/10063201.htm (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/10063201.htm)
Estimate $114,385,419.57 % Over/Under Company
Bidder 1 $121,744,991.33 +6.43% WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2 $123,204,960.83 +7.71% PULICE CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Bidder 3 $123,270,706.81 +7.77% FLATIRON CONSTRUCTORS, INC.
Bidder 4 $145,919,061.49 +27.57% WEBBER, LLC
Work is progressing very quickly on the section between Beltway 8 and NASA 1. The full width of main lane concrete (5-1H-5) is complete from just north of Bay Area Blvd northward. From just north of Bay Area Blvd southward, most of the asphalt base is ready for paving. Photos taken today.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20161023-45s-0004-800.jpg&hash=9b9e9f2e5e7233d66aadff9b3e471743cae6c662)
Looking north at Clear Lake City Blvd. The north and southbound traffic is on the right, which will be the future northbound lanes. On the left is the southbound main lanes, with paving complete.
Full size http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20161023-45s-0004-2560.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20161023-45s-0004-2560.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20161023-45s-0014-800.jpg&hash=3960e4cf6bf0a4d15c67e86c3b62e6fcce0dc741)
North of Bay Area Blvd. Full size http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20161023-45s-0014-2560.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20161023-45s-0014-2560.jpg)
The 5 southbound lanes were opened in their final configuration on February 12.
When I drove on it yesterday, there were still a lot of concrete fragments being agitated by the traffic. It sounded like I was driving through fine gravel. (No window chips, fortunately).
This effect seems to occur when new concrete opens and the top surface must be getting broken up into fine pieces of concrete.
For the northbound lanes, construction crews just need to finish the barrier for the HOV lane, then restripe and remove the barriers. Then the project is done. Work has already started on the next section further south.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20170218-0005-1200.jpg&hash=47ef95edac67a7af834351ae29343e5b17cdb8d8)
larger http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20170218-0005-1200.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20170218-0005-1200.jpg)
Bids were opened today for the section south of NASA Parkway. The winning bid was $99.8 million. No surprise, the winner was Williams Brothers construction, which has been doing all the recent work on the corridor
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/04043001.htm (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/04043001.htm)
Estimate $95,014,209.79 % Over/Under Company
Bidder 1 $99,783,476.68 +5.02% WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2 $109,438,620.41 +15.18% WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 3 $118,577,718.20 +24.80% ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Thank you for the photo updates. Houston has some really nice freeways. I sure wish Caltrans would invest in the Los Angeles freeways like TxDot does for Houston and Dallas.
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 04, 2017, 08:11:21 PM
Thank you for the photo updates. Houston has some really nice freeways. I sure wish Caltrans would invest in the Los Angeles freeways like TxDot does for Houston and Dallas.
Most CA cities have residents who would fight the eminent domain needed for significant expansion tooth & nail; such projects would be tied up in litigation for extended periods of time. So far they've been fortunate in this respect with the I-5 expansion SE of I-605; if plans for similar expansion extend farther north into Montebello, Commerce, or L.A. itself, expect to see a substantial level of uproar from both private and local public sectors.
Not to take this off subject but I think Caltrans will eventually do that as it needs it. I'd come off as crazy if I put a number on the amount of added lanes I think that some freeways in LA need, but I would love to see all of the freeways around DTLA rebuilt and widened with the deficiencies corrected.
Thing is whether or not it's in Texas or California, somehow someway they need to find middle ground putting these nimbys at bay and some eminent domain would be likely but they can also get creative like with what TxDot did with the new 635 reconstruction.
Though TxDot seeks to neglect San Antonio and Austin, Dallas and Houston have some incredible freeway projects and it seems to me like it's just a willingness of the state department investing in the infrastructure rather than a case of nimbys which I'm sure California has more of than Texas. Texas just seems to spend a hell of a lot more money on freeways and it shows.
Full disclosure, I am a 23 years old actor who lives in LA and relies on transit for the time being but I am about as anti transit as they come even fully understanding some of the benifits transit offers, I just cringe with jealousy when I see the investment TxDot makes vs Caltrans. :(
Photos of the dedication were posted today on the TxDOT-Houston Twitter feed. (Scroll down about 6 items). The ramp to NASA 1 was closed and the ceremony was on the ramp.
https://twitter.com/TxDOTHoustonPIO (https://twitter.com/TxDOTHoustonPIO)
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 05, 2017, 12:53:16 AM
Not to take this off subject but I think Caltrans will eventually do that as it needs it. I'd come off as crazy if I put a number on the amount of added lanes I think that some freeways in LA need, but I would love to see all of the freeways around DTLA rebuilt and widened with the deficiencies corrected.
Thing is whether or not it's in Texas or California, somehow someway they need to find middle ground putting these nimbys at bay and some eminent domain would be likely but they can also get creative like with what TxDot did with the new 635 reconstruction.
Though TxDot seeks to neglect San Antonio and Austin, Dallas and Houston have some incredible freeway projects and it seems to me like it's just a willingness of the state department investing in the infrastructure rather than a case of nimbys which I'm sure California has more of than Texas. Texas just seems to spend a hell of a lot more money on freeways and it shows.
Full disclosure, I am a 23 years old actor who lives in LA and relies on transit for the time being but I am about as anti transit as they come even fully understanding some of the benifits transit offers, I just cringe with jealousy when I see the investment TxDot makes vs Caltrans. :(
There is no need to be anti-transit. We can support building more roads and more transit to account for population growth and the expansion of our cities. We should not starve our road budgets to support transit, but some types of transit service do make sense and should be provided, within reason, of course.
Quote from: mrsman on July 06, 2017, 05:30:12 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 05, 2017, 12:53:16 AM
Not to take this off subject but I think Caltrans will eventually do that as it needs it. I'd come off as crazy if I put a number on the amount of added lanes I think that some freeways in LA need, but I would love to see all of the freeways around DTLA rebuilt and widened with the deficiencies corrected.
Thing is whether or not it's in Texas or California, somehow someway they need to find middle ground putting these nimbys at bay and some eminent domain would be likely but they can also get creative like with what TxDot did with the new 635 reconstruction.
Though TxDot seeks to neglect San Antonio and Austin, Dallas and Houston have some incredible freeway projects and it seems to me like it's just a willingness of the state department investing in the infrastructure rather than a case of nimbys which I'm sure California has more of than Texas. Texas just seems to spend a hell of a lot more money on freeways and it shows.
Full disclosure, I am a 23 years old actor who lives in LA and relies on transit for the time being but I am about as anti transit as they come even fully understanding some of the benifits transit offers, I just cringe with jealousy when I see the investment TxDot makes vs Caltrans. :(
There is no need to be anti-transit. We can support building more roads and more transit to account for population growth and the expansion of our cities. We should not starve our road budgets to support transit, but some types of transit service do make sense and should be provided, within reason, of course.
I'm anti transit for myself. If other people want to subject themselves to the negatives of public transit, it's a win-win. More people packed like sardines and less people on the road. Better news for people like me who are either fortunate enough to have a car or want to out of choice.
Work is proceeding on the new connection ramps at IH 610(s) and IH 45. These ramps will be very long.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg&hash=7da97359419375ff44f8853adb065747ee0698fc)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg&hash=71692538ead3f57e20b50de13550265577c1322c)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg&hash=4f10d9279e6bbed8cea16db4bfd64b8aa6dc4b40)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg)
I assume this project is just to build the two flyover ramps that have been missing from the I-45 & I-610 interchange on the SE side of Houston, right? It doesn't look anything like a complete interchange re-build. The Eastbound I-610 to Northbound I-45 flyover ramp looks like it will be a couple miles in length.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on March 07, 2018, 11:42:27 AM
I assume this project is just to build the two flyover ramps that have been missing from the I-45 & I-610 interchange on the SE side of Houston, right? It doesn't look anything like a complete interchange re-build. The Eastbound I-610 to Northbound I-45 flyover ramp looks like it will be a couple miles in length.
You are correct, this project adds the two missing connection ramps and does not change anything else in the interchange. I agree, the EB 610 to NB 45 ramp will be around 1.5 to 2 miles long.
Bids were opened today for the next segment. With this job, there will be 9 miles under construction from NASA bypass to FM 1764 (cutoff to Texas City). All work in progress and this job are rebuilding the existing 3x3 to be 4x4, and adding some auxiliary lanes.
This turned out to be an expensive contract (20.5% over estimate), with the lowest bid $230.5 million for 5.1 miles, which is $45 million per mile.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/06053001.htm (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/06053001.htm)
Estimate $191,354,507.34 % Over/Under Company
Bidder 1 $230,477,520.47 +20.45% WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2 $244,938,856.58 +28.00% BALFOUR BEATTY INFRASTRUCTURE, INC.
Bidder 3 $245,814,912.33 +28.46% WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 4 $252,253,496.52 +31.83% JOHNSON BROS. CORPORATION, A SOUTHLAND COMPANY
Bidder 5 $253,950,428.50 +32.71% PULICE CONSTRUCTION, INC.
Bidder 6 $257,957,252.52 +34.81% FLUOR HEAVY CIVIL, LLC
While this is a good start, let's not forget that the Pierce Elevated might still be removed further up the road. If I were in charge of TXDOT, I would keep that part of I-45 as is, no matter how redundant it may be.
Quote from: Henry on June 06, 2018, 09:14:45 AM
While this is a good start, let's not forget that the Pierce Elevated might still be removed further up the road. If I were in charge of TXDOT, I would keep that part of I-45 as is, no matter how redundant it may be.
It's not a "might" situation. It will be removed around 2022 I believe. I cringe at the thought of 45 traffic slowing as drivers try to maneuver the sharp turns on the flyovers connecting to either sides of the new alignment...
Nexus 5X
Quote from: nolia_boi504 on June 06, 2018, 12:13:00 PM
It's not a "might" situation. It will be removed around 2022 I believe. I cringe at the thought of 45 traffic slowing as drivers try to maneuver the sharp turns on the flyovers connecting to either sides of the new alignment...
The removal won't occur until the entire downtown rebuilding project is done. Of course, it has not even started yet, and probably won't start until 2020, and construction could take a long time depending on funding.
So I'm thinking 2025 at the earliest for the Pierce removal.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with Houston much, why is the Pierce removal bad?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 06, 2018, 09:40:02 PM
Sorry, I'm not familiar with Houston much, why is the Pierce removal bad?
It would have removed a significant routing of a major Interstate highway (I-45) around the western edge of downtown Houston.
Thankfully, HGAC and TDOT found a way to reroute it via the I-69 and I-10 ROWs, so at least capacity is retained.
I understand wanting to reconnect downtown to some sections immediately next to it, but a what cost to those who use these facilities?
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 06, 2018, 09:40:02 PM
Sorry, I'm not familiar with Houston much, why is the Pierce removal bad?
It's not, but roadgeeks.
Removing the Pierce Elevated structure on the Southwest side of Downtown Houston would make it easier to revitalize run down parts of the Midtown district. When you get on the other side of the Pierce Elevated from downtown there is a fair amount of run down property.
Maybe one of the long term goals is for Downtown Houston to grow to the Southwest toward Museum Park and the Medical Center district with its own collection of skyscrapers. Of course I can predict anti-freeway types to start campaigning for the removal of the aging I-69 elevated freeway from West of the TX-288 interchange to the TX-527 spur. But that particular freeway segment needs to be expanded rather than deleted.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on June 08, 2018, 12:41:16 PM
Removing the Pierce Elevated structure on the Southwest side of Downtown Houston would make it easier to revitalize run down parts of the Midtown district. When you get on the other side of the Pierce Elevated from downtown there is a fair amount of run down property.
Maybe one of the long term goals is for Downtown Houston to grow to the Southwest toward Museum Park and the Medical Center district with its own collection of skyscrapers. Of course I can predict anti-freeway types to start campaigning for the removal of the aging I-69 elevated freeway from West of the TX-288 interchange to the TX-527 spur. But that particular freeway segment needs to be expanded rather than deleted.
It's being sunk below grade as part of this project. Long term, it will likely have a cap put on it. But I don't think any expansion will ever happen. Urban freeways are congested; that's just how it is.
Quote from: TXtoNJ on June 07, 2018, 02:21:59 PM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on June 06, 2018, 09:40:02 PM
Sorry, I'm not familiar with Houston much, why is the Pierce removal bad?
It's not, but roadgeeks.
Looking at streetview and the plans to accommodate more traffic on existing freeways, this seems like a good plan and could help expand Houston's CBD to have a larger footprint.
Quote from: TXtoNJIt's being sunk below grade as part of this project. Long term, it will likely have a cap put on it. But I don't think any expansion will ever happen. Urban freeways are congested; that's just how it is.
That's the first I've heard of that section of I-69 being included in the massive I-45 re-routing project downtown. I thought that project started in the vicinity of the I-45/I-69/TX-288 interchange on the South corner of downtown and then going around the East and North sides of downtown.
The current elevated section of I-69 from the TX-527 split to the TX-288 interchange is only 3 lanes in each direction. It's a fairly serious bottleneck. Just West of the TX-527 split I-69 expands out to 5 lanes in each direction, plus a reversible HOV Lane (in a trench for about a mile).
If they do put that 6-lane section of I-69 into a trench I hope they can make the road at least 4 or 5 lanes wide in each direction. I'm sure such a road would still be congested. But it would be stupidly ridiculous for TX DOT to rebuild that section of freeway in a trench and still make it only 6 lanes wide. They should add at least some additional traffic capacity for all that effort. I think it's completely possible such a road could have a decorative cap with green space and even some buildings built over the top of it. That could set up a long term situation for Houston's downtown to grow Southwest all the way to the Astrodome and NRG Stadium.
The only thing I don't like about freeways in trenches in the Houston area: flooding potential.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on June 09, 2018, 12:48:00 PM
Quote from: TXtoNJIt's being sunk below grade as part of this project. Long term, it will likely have a cap put on it. But I don't think any expansion will ever happen. Urban freeways are congested; that's just how it is.
That's the first I've heard of that section of I-69 being included in the massive I-45 re-routing project downtown. I thought that project started in the vicinity of the I-45/I-69/TX-288 interchange on the South corner of downtown and then going around the East and North sides of downtown.
The current elevated section of I-69 from the TX-527 split to the TX-288 interchange is only 3 lanes in each direction. It's a fairly serious bottleneck. Just West of the TX-527 split I-69 expands out to 5 lanes in each direction, plus a reversible HOV Lane (in a trench for about a mile).
If they do put that 6-lane section of I-69 into a trench I hope they can make the road at least 4 or 5 lanes wide in each direction. I'm sure such a road would still be congested. But it would be stupidly ridiculous for TX DOT to rebuild that section of freeway in a trench and still make it only 6 lanes wide. They should add at least some additional traffic capacity for all that effort. I think it's completely possible such a road could have a decorative cap with green space and even some buildings built over the top of it. That could set up a long term situation for Houston's downtown to grow Southwest all the way to the Astrodome and NRG Stadium.
The only thing I don't like about freeways in trenches in the Houston area: flooding potential.
The below grade portion will have five lanes in each direction:
http://ih45northandmore.com/docs9/20180521_NHHIP_Seg3_Overview_Layout_PH_1-1.pdfAs stated before, after this project, I don't see there being any further expansion.
The new connection ramp at 45 and IH 69 on the southeast side of downtown is proceeding well. It will be a long, high-flying ramp.
Photo taken 9-June-2018
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180609-0003-1600.jpg&hash=d3d202debd5c274098edb60fb3a37c7818fb67f0)
Quote from: Bobby5280 on June 09, 2018, 12:48:00 PM
The only thing I don't like about freeways in trenches in the Houston area: flooding potential.
That's done on purpose. If it's going to rain a lot, you'd rather it flood a freeway than somebody's house.
As much of a pain it was for the Beltway to be shutdown after nearly a month Harvey due to drainage and repairs, imagine how many homes were saved because this massive volume of water was retained! IIRC, homes in this area still had about 3-4ft of water inside!
The parks and highways here are made to hold water. I don't understand why the media doesn't get that. I can't imagine any other city handling this much rain better than Houston did the last 3 major rain events. Sandy? Katrina? Neither we're nearly as much rain in such a short period...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180611/d697190d92710cc7af49bb4eac714878.jpg)
Nexus 5X
The media doesn't get that because they're in the business of drawing your attention, and seeing your daily commute blocked by millions of gallons of water gets a whole lot of people's attention.
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 10, 2018, 11:50:14 PM
The new connection ramp at 45 and IH 69 on the southeast side of downtown is proceeding well. It will be a long, high-flying ramp.
Photo taken 9-June-2018
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180609-0003-1600.jpg&hash=d3d202debd5c274098edb60fb3a37c7818fb67f0)
The Swamplot article below has some more photos and gives some details on the ramp. It also mentions a "glimpse" of the 45 downtown rebuild. How does this ramp fit into the total rebuild? Will this become the northbound connector to the new configuration parallel to 59/69?
http://swamplot.com/new-northbound-45-flyover-to-59-portends-east-side-future/2018-06-11/
Nexus 5X
Quote from: nolia_boi504 on June 11, 2018, 05:30:37 PM
How does this ramp fit into the total rebuild? Will this become the northbound connector to the new configuration parallel to 59/69?
I was told that it is designed to be compatible with the overall rebuild plan. The only potential non-compatible part is the end which dips into IH-69 trench. It may need to be razed to be repositioned.
Looking at the schematic and the existing design, it does appear that the current ramp lands too close to the middle of the trench, and the the landing position will need to be shifted westward. The schematic does not appear to indicate a radius change, so it is unclear how much of the west end would need to be rebuilt, but it will probably be between 500 and 1000 feet.
The ramp shown in the foreground of the photo below is now open, Tweet is shown.
https://twitter.com/TxDOTHoustonPIO/status/1023592507035328513
Quote from: MaxConcrete on June 10, 2018, 11:50:14 PM
The new connection ramp at 45 and IH 69 on the southeast side of downtown is proceeding well. It will be a long, high-flying ramp.
Photo taken 9-June-2018
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180609-0003-1600.jpg&hash=d3d202debd5c274098edb60fb3a37c7818fb67f0)
Connection to I-69SB to start soon...expected completion March 2019
http://abc13.com/traffic/txdot-connector-ramp-from-gulf-fwy-to-i-69-northbound-open/3658062/
Bids were opened today for the next segment in the ongoing widening to 4x4 between Houston and Galveston. This segment is south of Texas City, and will take the widening to within 6.5 miles of the Galveston Causeway.
The bid opening says it is for 6.79 miles, but looking at the plans online and plotting in Google maps shows the limits are only 3.4 miles, which makes the cost $43 million per mile, just about the same as the recently-awarded adjacent section. Unfortunately the bid is 12.4% above estimate, an overrun which seems to be expected lately and also indicative of more inflation, which will reduce the amount of projects which can be built. This is actually one of the lower overruns percent-wise this month, for example see http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/08073202.htm
Since Williams Brothers is already working on the adjacent segments, it appears that none of the other bidders attempted to submit a competitive bid, with all other bids way above the estimate.
County: GALVESTON Let Date: 08/07/19
Type: WIDEN FREEWAY Seq No: 3201
Time: 1500 WORKING DAYS Project ID: NH 1902(105)
Highway: IH 45 Contract #: 08193201
Length: 6.790 CCSJ: 0500-04-105
Limits:
From: SOUTH OF FM 1764 Check: $100,000
To: NORTH OF FM 519 Misc Cost: $855,000.00
Estimate $147,513,606.06 % Over/Under Company
Bidder 1 $165,825,006.99 +12.41% WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2 $197,995,615.66 +34.22% JOHNSON BROS. CORPORATION, A SOUTHLAND COMPANY
Bidder 3 $211,258,240.34 +43.21% BALFOUR BEATTY INFRASTRUCTURE, INC.
Bidder 4 $243,651,855.95 +65.17% FLUOR HEAVY CIVIL, LLC[/size]
Update on the upper-level ramp shown in this photo: the ramp opened to traffic around around June 16.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180609-0003-1600.jpg&hash=d3d202debd5c274098edb60fb3a37c7818fb67f0)
What was the point behind the rebuild?
Quote from: longhorn on August 08, 2019, 10:57:30 AM
What was the point behind the rebuild?
Looks like it was to create a better traffic flow. That area was always bottlenecked from people trying to merge and exit to 59/69 south or north. Now that the exit is much further south, it reduces that congestion (in theory)
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 07, 2018, 11:26:54 AM
Work is proceeding on the new connection ramps at IH 610(s) and IH 45. These ramps will be very long.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg&hash=7da97359419375ff44f8853adb065747ee0698fc)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg&hash=71692538ead3f57e20b50de13550265577c1322c)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg&hash=4f10d9279e6bbed8cea16db4bfd64b8aa6dc4b40)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg)
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.703523,-95.2976729,3a,75y,307.55h,95.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy4FvP5w7EiWjDJ5hmWXoGw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Wow, thats long, would love to know what computer modeling shows this eases congestion.
Quote from: longhorn on August 08, 2019, 02:41:25 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on March 07, 2018, 11:26:54 AM
Work is proceeding on the new connection ramps at IH 610(s) and IH 45. These ramps will be very long.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg&hash=7da97359419375ff44f8853adb065747ee0698fc)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0042_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg&hash=71692538ead3f57e20b50de13550265577c1322c)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0049_1600.jpg)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdallasfreeways.com%2Fdfwfreeways%2FAARoads%2F20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg&hash=4f10d9279e6bbed8cea16db4bfd64b8aa6dc4b40)
http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg (http://dallasfreeways.com/dfwfreeways/AARoads/20180306_288_45-0045_1600.jpg)
https://www.google.com/maps/@29.703523,-95.2976729,3a,75y,307.55h,95.79t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sy4FvP5w7EiWjDJ5hmWXoGw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
Wow, thats long, would love to know what computer modeling shows this eases congestion.
I was referring to the 45/59 interchange earlier. Were you asking about the new ramps being built at 610/45? I think they are long for similar reasons, to create a merge point further north to eliminate a bottleneck. Also, it's a tight turn from 610 east to 45N...a longer ramp is probably needed for safety.
Quote from: thisdj78 on August 08, 2019, 12:43:45 PM
Quote from: longhorn on August 08, 2019, 10:57:30 AM
What was the point behind the rebuild?
Looks like it was to create a better traffic flow. That area was always bottlenecked from people trying to merge and exit to 59/69 south or north. Now that the exit is much further south, it reduces that congestion (in theory)
There's still some congestion in that area where the old ramps used to be. But now, it's caused by I-45 going from 3 to 2 mainlanes just past the Downtown exit instead of it being caused by drivers weaving to get over to the now moved US59/I-69/SH288 South exit. The new ramps do make it easier to get to US59/I-69 and 288 from I-45 NB though, which I suppose may have been the main goal.
The new connection ramp from eastbound 610 to northbound IH 45 is now open. This is the super-long ramp. I'll check it out this weekend and get the length.
It appears that the southbound IH 45 to westbound IH 610 is not yet open. The article says the project will be complete in Q2 2021, which seems somewhat far in the future since the SB-WB ramp looked close to completion when I was there about a month ago.
https://houston.culturemap.com/news/city-life/06-02-20-610-south-loop-45-gulf-freeway-interchange-connecter-eastbound-complete-txdot/ (https://houston.culturemap.com/news/city-life/06-02-20-610-south-loop-45-gulf-freeway-interchange-connecter-eastbound-complete-txdot/)
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fres.cloudinary.com%2Fculturemap-com%2Fimage%2Fupload%2Far_3%3A4%2Cc_fill%2Cg_faces%3Acenter%2Cw_1200%2Fv1591132024%2Fphotos%2F312951_original.jpg&hash=54d7935efc63687c258c5714801f74d3fac7ea1a)
That ramp appears to be around 9,400 ft / 1.78 miles long. It makes you wonder if this is the longest ramp in Texas.
(https://i.imgur.com/na4PScN.jpg)
Isn't the whole south I-45/610 stack due for replacement?
Quote from: longhorn on June 05, 2020, 09:48:28 AM
Isn't the whole south I-45/610 stack due for replacement?
TxDOT has just launched a new study of the IH-45 corridor section which includes this interchange, and the first round of input took place in July. This study will likely determine if this interchange will be improved. Since it is probably infeasible to widen the corridor right-of-way, interchange and intersection improvements are likely candidates for being recommended.
https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/071620.html (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/071620.html)
I submitted comments in favor of elevated express lanes through the congested areas around the Loop 610 interchange, and also improvements to congested connections at the interchange, especially 610 EB to 45 SB.
Bids were opened this week for two more contracts to extend the 4x4 expansion southward. These two jobs cover the last remaining mainland section, between current construction and the causeway.
One more section on Galveston Island remains to go to bid. TxDOT has a public meeting next week. https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/081120.html (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/houston/081120.html)
Williams Brothers construction massively underbid the estimates and the next lowest bidder. I wonder if the company owner Doug Pitcock loses any sleep about leaving so much money on the table. I'm seeing a lot of bids under estimate this month, which is favorable for TxDOT's construction budget. Total low bid amount for the two sections is $325 million.
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/08053001.htm (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/08053001.htm)
County: GALVESTON Let Date: 08/05/20
Type: RECONSTRUCT FREEWAY Seq No: 3001
Time: 1667 WORKING DAYS Project ID: C 500-4-103
Highway: IH 45 Contract #: 08203001
Length: 10.582 CCSJ: 0500-04-103
Limits:
From: NORTH OF TEXAS CITY WYE Check: $100,000
To: SOUTH OF TEXAS CITY WYE Misc Cost: $3680174.14
Estimate $240,013,283.41 % Over/Under Company
Bidder 1 $225,845,814.41 -5.90% WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2 $264,120,305.67 +10.04% WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 3 $297,932,295.16 +24.13% THE LANE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION
Bidder 4 $318,546,341.88 +32.72% SACYR CONSTRUCTION USA LLC
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/08063202.htm (http://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/bidtab/08063202.htm)
County: GALVESTON Let Date: 08/06/20
Type: RECONSTRUCT FREEWAY Seq No: 3202
Time: 1470 WORKING DAYS Project ID: NH 2B20(048)
Highway: IH 45 Contract #: 08203202
Length: 2.042 CCSJ: 0500-01-107
Limits:
From: S OF TEXAS CITY WYE Check: $100,000
To: N OF GALV CAUSEWAY Misc Cost:
Estimate $122,641,385.55 % Over/Under Company
Bidder 1 $103,251,456.68 -15.81% WILLIAMS BROTHERS CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Bidder 2 $141,740,793.83 +15.57% WEBBER, LLC
Bidder 3 $164,681,129.79 +34.28% ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION