News:

The AARoads Wiki is live! Come check it out!

Main Menu

I-35 and I-35E North Texas bid openings

Started by MaxConcrete, April 05, 2024, 06:29:16 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Plutonic Panda

#25
In a more literal sense the same argument often seems to be made for expanding I-15 from Barstow to Primm. Why should california pay for upgrading a highway that gets people out of the state to spend money. Well, my opinion is because they have an obligation to upgrade the road to keep traffic moving at acceptable levels and keep people on its roads as safe as possible whether they're residents or not.


Rothman

Quote from: In_Correct on April 28, 2024, 09:58:33 AM
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 28, 2024, 09:46:39 AM
Quote from: Rothman on April 28, 2024, 08:52:06 AM
Quote from: In_Correct on April 28, 2024, 01:42:18 AMTime for this discussion to be locked ?! If any body is concerned about tax dollars being wasted, perhaps they should be concerned that their tax dollars are paying for D.O.T. Employees to hijack discussions, spread narratives and other oppositions, for the most childish of reasons. Keep your toxic attitudes off of here AND the roads.

Last I checked, DOT employees were still allowed to have a sense of humor, just like other human beings. But, thank you for the reminder that there are indeed people that do not detect irony, sarcasm, lightheartedness, or nuance out there.
Agreed, but it also seems like this is a running joke that is beaten to death and it isn't really funny or needed for a thread discussing a highway expansion in North Texas. Come up with something original.

And as for the thread being locked, I would think that would be a bit of an overkill.

It is a message board, and difficult to interpret comedy. If there was any smileys used, I did not notice them.

Also I am trying to figure out any possible justifiable reasons for these absurd reactions toward Oklahoma, which Texas has highways connected to. It seems that Nay Sayers on here are worried that Texas is paying for Oklahoma's Roads. I very much doubt such things actually occur.

The dangerous situations and traffic problems in for example Interstate 35 in Texas is absolutely nothing to joke about. Seeing fatalities, or otherwise traffic congestions in areas such as the main lanes and / or the Interchange Ramps ( which includes automobiles lined up in the shoulders ) I find very difficult to laugh.


The rivalry between Oklahoma and Texas is legendary, hence DNAGuy's snark and me running with it.  Don't forget the two states fought a war against each other. 

Worked with a guy from Norman that would have made similar snark about Texans coming northward.

It was just a fun, ridiculous premise.  Don't overthink it.
Please note: All comments here represent my own personal opinion and do not reflect the official position(s) of NYSDOT.

hotdogPi

I think DNAGuy was serious. Scott5114 says (not in this thread) he's not the only one with that belief.
Clinched

Traveled, plus
US 13, 50
MA 22, 35, 40, 53, 107, 109, 126, 141, 159
NH 27, 78, 111A(E); CA 90; NY 366; GA 42, 140; FL A1A, 7; CT 32, 320; VT 2A, 5A; PA 3, 51, 60, WA 202; QC 162, 165, 263; 🇬🇧A100, A3211, A3213, A3215, A4222; 🇫🇷95 D316

Lowest untraveled: 36

Bobby5280

Quote from: Plutonic PandaIn a more literal sense the same argument often seems to be made for expanding I-15 from Barstow to Primm. Why should california pay for upgrading a highway that gets people out of the state to spend money. Well, my opinion is because they have an obligation to upgrade the road to keep traffic moving at acceptable levels and keep people on its roads as safe as possible whether they're residents or not.

Just in case any lawmakers from California forgot, it's the INTERSTATE highway system. It's supposed to be a NATIONAL highway network rather than a bunch of different local roads poorly stitched together. A great deal of the traffic is commercial in nature, travels great distances and does cross state lines.

I've seen plenty of the Oklahoma vs Texas jokes and rivalry -largely influenced by the college football thing. It kind of sucks both OU and UT are going to the SEC rather than just one school or the other. The rivalry will remain intact along with all the tired bullshit connected to it.

Currently, I-35 drops down to just 2 lanes in each direction just North of the US-380 exit in Denton. That's ridiculous. I-35 should have already been 3x3 lanes from the I-35E/W split up to the Red River a long time ago. Some of these current 2-lane sections need to be expanded to at least 4 lanes. In Denton I-35 probably needs to be at least a 5x5 arrangement leading into the E/W split, if not even wider. I-35 construction in Gainesville is an example of playing catch-up.

ODOT expanded I-35 to 3 lanes in each direction from the Red River up to Rogers Road in Thackerville -largely to improve traffic movement to casinos. Plenty of space is available in the median to add additional lanes when needed. Most of the casino customers at places like WinStar are from Texas. Those casinos tend to provide more benefit to tribes (and "white" investors) than they do the state of Oklahoma. ODOT widened the road anyway because traffic is still traffic no matter what license plates are on the vehicles. It's a safety issue.

J N Winkler

I've personally never found I-35 over the Red River to be intolerably congested, but it does carry significant volumes for a rural Interstate, and the northern of the two projects under discussion will finally remove the 45 MPH advisory curve at the south end of the bridge.  I've always found it ironic that drivers on this route have to slow down when entering the state that has 75 MPH speed limits on two-lane rural highways.

Quote from: Plutonic Panda on April 28, 2024, 10:06:04 AMIn a more literal sense the same argument often seems to be made for expanding I-15 from Barstow to Primm. Why should California pay for upgrading a highway that gets people out of the state to spend money. Well, my opinion is because they have an obligation to upgrade the road to keep traffic moving at acceptable levels and keep people on its roads as safe as possible whether they're residents or not.

I suspect California's hands may be tied since there is no plausible way to argue that a project adding lanes to I-15 won't increase VMT and thus be forbidden under current state law.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

Plutonic Panda

Oh I'm very familiar with that law. CAHWYGUY told me all about it. It's one of the dumbest laws I've seen. So how orange county manage to continously widen its roads? How does caltrans figure this would increase VMTs on this section of I-15? I do believe induced demand exists to an extent and that there can be an argument made widening urban freeways would increase VMTs but is just on that particular road? Tens of thousands of parking spaces are being constructed in LA alone. Will that not increase VMTs? Will refusing to widen a road have unintended consequences because idling cars and stop and go traffic will emit just as much if not more pollution than free flowing traffic? I don't know nothing about that law makes a lick of sense to me. Someday I'll do more research on it to find out what it actually says. It's not a small document, at least what I came across one night.

But I am skeptical it will raise VMTs. It's mostly about truck traffic tying up automobile traffic. They're also supposedly actually working on Brightline West now so I'd imagine that will cut down on some car trips but they should still widen it to at least 3 lanes each way. If I had my way it'd be four lanes each way.

I also think the AG check point on I-15 at least should be removed for cars. That seems to be a huge source for backups. If they really cared they could do something but they give a shit. They had a project to open a shoulder to traffic during specific times. Big whoop. California just doesn't give a shit. They won't even do a study for crying out loud.

BJ59

Well, back to I-35, I think this upgrade is much needed. I'm surprised that upgrades to the corridor have not been prioritized over other projects, such as US-75 in Far North Collin County and I-35E south of Waxahachie. These upgrades are needed, but I think I-35 prioritizes these, especially just north of the split in Denton.

Scott5114

#32
Quote from: hotdogPi on April 28, 2024, 11:25:38 AMI think DNAGuy was serious. Scott5114 says (not in this thread) he's not the only one with that belief.

To put a finer point on it: whether or not DNAGuy was serious, I've met people who would say something like that and be 100% dead serious about it, so I don't think it being a joke is a safe assumption.

(Not that it makes much sense from a policy standpoint anyway...Oklahomans visiting Dallas bring money with them for food and hotel rooms, not all of them are OU fans, anyway, and I-35 would also be how most Kansans, Nebraskans, etc. would access Texas.)
uncontrollable freak sardine salad chef

TXtoNJ

Quote from: hotdogPi on April 28, 2024, 11:25:38 AMI think DNAGuy was serious. Scott5114 says (not in this thread) he's not the only one with that belief.

He's not being serious. He's just mad we keep coming down there to whip his team's backside. 17-8 over the last 25 years.

Signed, an OU grad.

Chris

https://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/wichita-falls/i35-cooke-county.html

You can download the schematics here.

They're not only going to expand the freeway, but they're also improving the geometry and curvature.

For example at the bridge across the Red River:

Bobby5280

Nice. I like the plans calling for a 4x4 lanes configuration across the Red River and down thru Gainesville. One nit to pick though. On the Oklahoma side of the river their plans show two of the four lanes being dropped at the Border Casino exit and I-35 dropping to 2x2 there. I-35 is actually 3x3 configuration starting at that exit and going North to the WinStar Casino complex. The existing Red River I-35 bridge is still a 2x2 configuration.

J N Winkler

Quote from: Bobby5280 on May 03, 2024, 11:37:35 AMNice. I like the plans calling for a 4x4 lanes configuration across the Red River and down thru Gainesville. One nit to pick though. On the Oklahoma side of the river their plans show two of the four lanes being dropped at the Border Casino exit and I-35 dropping to 2x2 there. I-35 is actually 3x3 configuration starting at that exit and going North to the WinStar Casino complex. The existing Red River I-35 bridge is still a 2x2 configuration.

Those are the schematics.  The actual construction plans show Exit 1 (the Border Casino exit, to be signed as Merle Wolfe Road) as a multilane exit with one dropped lane and one option lane in the northbound direction.
"It is necessary to spend a hundred lire now to save a thousand lire later."--Piero Puricelli, explaining the need for a first-class road system to Benito Mussolini

DNAguy

Quote from: TXtoNJ on May 02, 2024, 01:20:45 PM
Quote from: hotdogPi on April 28, 2024, 11:25:38 AMI think DNAGuy was serious. Scott5114 says (not in this thread) he's not the only one with that belief.

He's not being serious. He's just mad we keep coming down there to whip his team's backside. 17-8 over the last 25 years.

Signed, an OU grad.

I now agree this thread should be locked down.

thisdj78

Quote from: Chris on May 03, 2024, 04:02:54 AMhttps://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/wichita-falls/i35-cooke-county.html

You can download the schematics here.

They're not only going to expand the freeway, but they're also improving the geometry and curvature.

For example at the bridge across the Red River:


Drove through this segment yesterday and a significant amount of land clearing is already in progress where the new bridge and alignment will run. I'll try to get some pictures when I pass back through.

MaxConcrete

Bids were opened yesterday for expansion of a 1-mile-long section from just south of Corporate to north of Business 121 in Lewisville (which is north of SH 121 (Sam Rayburn Tollway)).

The freeway is currently in the interim configuration. This project will build it to the final configuration, which is 4x4 main lanes with 2x2 managed lanes. Looking at the plans, the wide paved median for the 2x2 managed lanes is built, but only a 2-lane reversible is implemented, surely because adjacent sections are 2-lane reversible.

The sequencing of projects I-35E seems odd, because it leaves gaps in the sections. For example, there is an interim-design section south of this project, then this project, then a short interim-design section, then a project (in progress) at W. Main Street for the ultimate design, then back to interim design, then a partially-completed ultimate design section south of Lake Lewisville.

HIGHWAY   PROJECT  CLASS   PROJECT ID   PROJECT LIMITS FROM
IH 35E   Interchange (New or Reconstructed)   AT CORPORATE DRIVE

Txdot Engineer's Estimate
SEMA CONSTRUCTION, INC.
WEBBER, LLC
SUNDT CONSTRUCTION, INC.
FLUOR HEAVY CIVIL, LLC
    202,715,257.60
217,964,538.53
221,370,118.20
229,225,287.77
232,710,000.00
    0.00%
7.52%
9.20%
13.08%
14.80%
www.DFWFreeways.com
www.HoustonFreeways.com

Bobby5280

#40
Google Earth overhead imagery of the location, dated 2/2024, shows early work being done outside the existing frontage roads in the utility easements. It looks like similar work is being done just North of the Business TX-114 exit, between Fox Avenue and College Parkway.

It's going to be a tight squeeze upgrading the current 4x2x4 configuration into 4x2x2x4. Even if they build it out with skinny 11' wide lanes. Too bad they couldn't do the initial expansion job years ago as 4x2x2x4.

I guess the eventual 4x2x2x4 expansion will also get the old Northbound I-35 bridge across Lewisville Lake replaced with something similar to the newer Southbound bridge.

MaxConcrete

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 09, 2025, 01:18:50 PMIt's going to be a tight squeeze upgrading the current 4x2x4 configuration into 4x2x2x4. Even if they build it out with skinny 11' wide lanes. To bad they couldn't do the initial expansion job years ago as 4x2x2x4.

It is a tight squeeze, even with the right-of-way expansion. There is little or no space between the main lanes and frontage roads. All lanes are 12 feet wide, and all shoulders are full-sized (minimum of 10 feet wide).
www.DFWFreeways.com
www.HoustonFreeways.com

Bobby5280

The lack of space would make it challenging to properly design slip ramps in that location. At least the lanes will be built at a proper width. Hopefully TX DOT will be able to get rid of the skinny lanes in other nearby locations as they phase in upgrades to a 4x2x2x4 configuration.

BJ59

Will the current project on I-35E from I-635 to President George Bush Turnpike include space for the final configuration, or will that only accommodate enough space for the reversible managed lanes?

Bobby5280

With as much property as they've been clearing I'd hope they grabbed enough room for an ultimate 4x2x2x4 configuration (if not wider near the I-635 interchange). If they're going to start building segments of 4x2x2x4 highway a little farther North it would be really stupid if the segment coming from I-635 was only a 4x2x4 thing.

BJ59

Quote from: Bobby5280 on January 13, 2025, 10:35:29 PMWith as much property as they've been clearing I'd hope they grabbed enough room for an ultimate 4x2x2x4 configuration (if not wider near the I-635 interchange). If they're going to start building segments of 4x2x2x4 highway a little farther North it would be really stupid if the segment coming from I-635 was only a 4x2x4 thing.

Just looked on the TxDot website, and the project is planned expand I-35E to 8 main lanes and 4 managed lanes. I am wondering if some of the new bridge support beams they are building are access ramps to the managed lanes like the ones they have in the Fort Worth area. Also interested to see how the managed lanes will tie into the 635 interchange

Bobby5280

It will be interesting to see the end result. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that all of these new 4x2x2x4 segments will have proper 12' wide lanes and proper shoulders. The skinny 11' lanes currently in use in various spots really suck.

I wish the recently upgraded segments of I-35W going North of downtown Fort Worth were at a minimum of 3x2x2x3 lanes, if not 4x2x2x4. The segments along I-35W and I-820 that are 2x2x2x2 seem kind of like a wasted effort. It goes along with other metroplex oddities, such as the barrier separated single lane express lanes in various locations. I'm sure plenty of DFW motorists have been pissed by paying a premium toll to enter that express lane only to get stuck behind a slow poke and be unable to pass.

motorola870

Quote from: thisdj78 on December 22, 2024, 08:43:52 AM
Quote from: Chris on May 03, 2024, 04:02:54 AMhttps://www.txdot.gov/projects/projects-studies/wichita-falls/i35-cooke-county.html

You can download the schematics here.

They're not only going to expand the freeway, but they're also improving the geometry and curvature.

For example at the bridge across the Red River:


Drove through this segment yesterday and a significant amount of land clearing is already in progress where the new bridge and alignment will run. I'll try to get some pictures when I pass back through.

I went to Winstar this weekend and they have cranes present at the River on both sides getting ready to start driving the pilings down into the river for the pillars of the new bridges. They are likely getting the North bound bridge ready first so they can remove the existing Northbound and eventually route the southbound over the new bridge that replaces it.

I do wonder if they will extend out the 3x3 wide to the Texas state line southward from exit 1 in Oklahoma until TXDOT widens the section from the north end of Gainesville to the state line.



Opinions expressed here on belong solely to the poster and do not represent or reflect the opinions or beliefs of AARoads, its creators and/or associates.