Construction has begun on the $ 910 million phase 3C of the 'North Tarrant Express' megaproject of I-35W north of Fort Worth. It will be completed in 2023.
A press release by Ferrovial:
QuoteFerrovial to build and operate new extension to North Tarrant Express in Texas, worth €813 million
Ferrovial, through a consortium led by its toll road subsidiary Cintra Infraestructuras, is to build and operate a new extension (segment 3C) to the North Tarrant Express in Texas, worth USD 910 million, equivalent to €813 million. The consortium, NTE Mobility Partners Segments 3 LLC, also includes the Meridiam fund and APG, a specialized pension fund management firm.
Ferrovial Agroman will be in charge of designing and building this new road segment.
It will extend along 6.7 miles (11 km), from Heritage Trace Parkway, north of US 81/287, to Eagle Parkway, in Denton County. Existing lanes will be upgraded and will continue to be toll-free, while two tolled Managed Lanes each way will be built, as well as on-ramps. Construction work is already under way and the road is expected to be open to traffic by the end of 2023. The concession expires in 2061.
The project, which has just achieved financial closure, will be financed through a combination of equity contributions by the partners (USD 160 million) and the issuance of a PAB (USD 750 million).
This is the fourth Managed Lanes project to be operated by Cintra in the DFW area, one of the most dynamic and fastest-growing areas of the United States. The company already operates the LBJ Express, the North Tarrant Express (NTE) and NTE 35W, which is an extension of the NTE (segments 3A & 3B).
Ferrovial, through subsidiary Cintra, is one of the world's leading private sector developers of transport infrastructure, in terms of the number of projects and the volume of investment. It currently manages over 1,468 kilometers of toll roads in 24 concessions in Canada, the US, Europe, Australia and Colombia.
Phase 3C on Open Street Map:
(https://i.imgur.com/bjlMOE9.png)
I just hope they don't build this expansion with skinny lanes. I really really hate I-35E from North Dallas up to Denton for that nonsense; it's only great if a motorist wants a thrilling white-knuckle driving experience, feeling like he's going to trade paint with other cars in the adjacent narrow lanes.
BTW, is there a time line when the other big phase of the I-35E expansion North of Dallas will begin? Supposedly when that later phase is complete I-35E will have two separate express lane roads for NB and SB traffic rather than the reversible setup currently in use. And the lanes are supposed to go back to being 12 feet wide.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on August 13, 2019, 01:35:48 PM
BTW, is there a time line when the other big phase of the I-35E expansion North of Dallas will begin? Supposedly when that later phase is complete I-35E will have two separate express lane roads for NB and SB traffic rather than the reversible setup currently in use. And the lanes are supposed to go back to being 12 feet wide.
I have noticed that right-of-way clearance is ongoing along much of the corridor, which is a good sign. According to the UTP, work Between LBJ and Bush will proceed first.
According to the draft 2020 UTP http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf (http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf)
LBJ to Dallas/Denton county line (just north of Bush Turnpike): $600 million is funded for construction in the 2020-2023 period.
Work at 3 locations in Lewisville (Main, BS 121 and Corporate): $165 million is funded for construction in the 2020-2023 period.
Main expansion in Lewisville, Dallas/Denton county line to FM 407: Listed for construction in 2024 to 2029 for $657 million, not yet funded
Lewisville to Lake Dallas (finish bridge work): Listed for construction in 2024 to 2029 for $620 million, not yet funded
Quote from: Chris on August 13, 2019, 12:53:00 PM
Construction has begun on the $ 910 million phase 3C of the 'North Tarrant Express' megaproject of I-35W north of Fort Worth. It will be completed in 2023.
This project was delayed due to its being a public-private partnership, and TxDOT's current policy is to no longer participate in PPPs.
However, there is no conventional funding to build this, and the PPP has been in the works for a very long time. Local interests lobbied to allow the project to proceed, and TxDOT acceded.
As far as I know, this is the last PPP that will be built in Texas. Any new PPPs will require authorization from the Texas legislature.
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 13, 2019, 07:18:28 PM
Quote from: Chris on August 13, 2019, 12:53:00 PM
Construction has begun on the $ 910 million phase 3C of the 'North Tarrant Express' megaproject of I-35W north of Fort Worth. It will be completed in 2023.
This project was delayed due to its being a public-private partnership, and TxDOT's current policy is to no longer participate in PPPs.
However, there is no conventional funding to build this, and the PPP has been in the works for a very long time. Local interests lobbied to allow the project to proceed, and TxDOT acceded.
As far as I know, this is the last PPP that will be built in Texas. Any new PPPs will require authorization from the Texas legislature.
They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles. I don't get how costs are up to 10x the cost of building a tollway from scratch. The deal is raw for North Texas drivers. So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
Yeah I'm not the biggest fan of PPP's currently for freeway and road projects. The tolls often seem to be much higher than other toll roads and it seems like a quick fix with negative long term results.
Quote from: motorola870They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles.
I realize the toll cost per mile on various express lane systems in Texas is above average (it's certainly quite a bit higher per mile than the Turnpikes here in Oklahoma), but which set of express lanes in the Dallas area is charging $10 per toll gantry? If price gouging like that is indeed happening I'd like to know specifically where so I can be sure to avoid it.
Quote from: Plutonic PandaYeah I'm not the biggest fan of PPP's currently for freeway and road projects. The tolls often seem to be much higher than other toll roads and it seems like a quick fix with negative long term results.
I'm not a fan of public-private partnerships for toll roads (much less anything else) either. It just seems a bit sleazy.
Low toll rates are common on publicy owned toll roads, in particular those with a low investment programme and where the initial bonds have long been paid off.
Large-scale reconstruction and expansion costs a lot of money and if the PPP developer has to recover the entire cost, the toll rates are likely to be in the range of 10-15 cents per mile, which is comparable to most European privately operated toll roads in France, Spain or Italy. This particular project has a cost of over $ 900 million for just a 6 mile segment.
I would be weary of very long-term concessions. There should be no need for a concession to expire in more than 30 years, which is a common period to amortize infrastructure. For example the 99 year lease of the Indiana Toll Road was just to generate a large amount of upfront money for other purposes than that particular toll road. I believe this method is called 'asset recycling', which was first developed in Australia. However it is typically difficult to amend a PPP contract without major cost, and transportation planning doesn't reach that far in the future. We already can't accurately predict mobility 20 or 30 years in the future, not to mention 99 years.
A major advantage of PPPs is that funding is always available. Traditional revenue sources are always cash-strapped, this is not the case with toll projects, there is more money available than projects to spend it on. Some people want to lift the ban on tolling existing Interstate Highways, I think that the potential of toll financing is huge and could quickly turn much of the system into a tolled system. Not very attractive from a driver's point of view, but on the other hand it will generate the funding needed to reconstruct and widen everything they want.
I'm not entirely against PPP's but they should bring tolls down a bit.
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
The Southeast Connector project is fully funded with conventional funding, no tolls, and is slated to begin construction in the FY 2020-2023 period. This is the next "megaproject" to proceed in North Texas, after the LBJ East project.
See the UTP page 144, funding is listed at $1.59 billion.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf (http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf)
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 16, 2019, 05:25:30 PM
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
The Southeast Connector project is fully funded with conventional funding, no tolls, and is slated to begin construction in the FY 2020-2023 period. This is the next "megaproject" to proceed in North Texas, after the LBJ East project.
See the UTP page 144, funding is listed at $1.59 billion.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf (http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf)
Okay glad to hear this for several years now in the planning they have had HOV/Express lanes for it on the planning. I will just be glad when they reconstruct interstate 20 from this project to the Dallas county line. The corridor is getting very congested and not to mention the uptick in wrecks since they raised the speed limit to 70 MPH. They need to do something about on east bound Interstate 20 on ramp at Matlock road that on ramp has been a nightmare for years can barely merge on and people will ride the lane to the end forcing non merging traffic to hit the brakes.
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 10:34:47 PM
Quote from: MaxConcrete on August 16, 2019, 05:25:30 PM
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
The Southeast Connector project is fully funded with conventional funding, no tolls, and is slated to begin construction in the FY 2020-2023 period. This is the next "megaproject" to proceed in North Texas, after the LBJ East project.
See the UTP page 144, funding is listed at $1.59 billion.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf (http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/tpp/utp/2020-utp.pdf)
Okay glad to hear this for several years now in the planning they have had HOV/Express lanes for it on the planning. I will just be glad when they reconstruct interstate 20 from this project to the Dallas county line. The corridor is getting very congested and not to mention the uptick in wrecks since they raised the speed limit to 70 MPH. They need to do something about on east bound Interstate 20 on ramp at Matlock road that on ramp has been a nightmare for years can barely merge on and people will ride the lane to the end forcing non merging traffic to hit the brakes. I don't know why this wasn't addressed when they reconfigured the westbound entrance to Matlock road 11 years ago for the Arlington Highland Shopping center. They have the right of way and the new Center St. Bridge was designed with widening the road in the future. An auxilary lane is needed from the east bound on ramp to the collins st. off ramp.
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles. I don't get how costs are up to 10x the cost of building a tollway from scratch. The deal is raw for North Texas drivers. So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
The toll lanes on 35W are "managed" lanes. The tolls are dynamically adjusted to keep traffic flowing at 50mph or higher. The base price is around 15¢ per mile, but it can go beyond 10x that during the busiest times. The westbound express lanes on the combined SH 121/SH 183 between their merge and I-820 (traffic from the vicinity of DFW Airport headed towards Fort Worth) average $1.68 per mile at 5pm on Fridays.
I believe that the projects other than this I-35W phase 3C that already have most of the preliminary work done with express lanes will keep them, just without tolls, since it would be more costly to redo everything than to just leave the express lanes there. I wouldn't expect to see express lanes included on too many future projects except where they make sense as peak flow reversible lanes, e.g. replacing the zipper HOV lane on I-30 east of downtown Dallas with either one dedicated HOV lane or two dedicated regular lanes.
Here's the basic problem with PPPs and privatization of tolls:
Public authorities have more public oversight, through appointment of boards from elected officials. Also, we have learned from negative experiences, such as with Robert Moses and more controls have been put in place through public regulation.
With private operators, the focus goes from public service to maximizing profit. Therefore, the public will always end up gouged as private operators ensure that they increase their profit over their expenses.
It is like when I worked at a law firm: Sure, your retainer and contract may have all sort of safeguards in it, but at the end of the day, you are solely dependent upon the law firm itself when it comes to determining if the results of the work were adequate -- had the fun experience of dealing with a perplexed in-house counsel of a client that could not figure out if the settlement reached was a good one -- we just told him that it was (it wasn't) and he had to go with it and couldn't prove otherwise.
The public will pay more to private operators because of the profit motivation and the monopoly over the facility, not less. You pay expenses + profit with them, whereas at least there are some more direct checks on the tolls levied by public authorities.
Quote from: dfwmapper on August 18, 2019, 03:01:23 AM
Quote from: motorola870 on August 16, 2019, 02:59:42 PM
They need to reign in the costs to drive the lanes No excuses for having $10+ tolls during peak from one toll gantry to the next while Some tollways are cheap such as the 360 south tollway less than $2 for 9 miles. I don't get how costs are up to 10x the cost of building a tollway from scratch. The deal is raw for North Texas drivers. So if this is the last set of express lanes approved does this basically deal a blow to the plan to add express lanes to the Interstate 20, Interstate 820 and U.S. 287 funnel rebuild project? That is supposed to break ground in 3 years?
The toll lanes on 35W are "managed" lanes. The tolls are dynamically adjusted to keep traffic flowing at 50mph or higher. The base price is around 15¢ per mile, but it can go beyond 10x that during the busiest times. The westbound express lanes on the combined SH 121/SH 183 between their merge and I-820 (traffic from the vicinity of DFW Airport headed towards Fort Worth) average $1.68 per mile at 5pm on Fridays.
I believe that the projects other than this I-35W phase 3C that already have most of the preliminary work done with express lanes will keep them, just without tolls, since it would be more costly to redo everything than to just leave the express lanes there. I wouldn't expect to see express lanes included on too many future projects except where they make sense as peak flow reversible lanes, e.g. replacing the zipper HOV lane on I-30 east of downtown Dallas with either one dedicated HOV lane or two dedicated regular lanes.
to be honest they should have just gone with the NTTA building the express lanes and charging solo riders 24/7 for use the lanes and 2+ HOV would be free. That would encourage people to carpool to use the new lanes or pay up if they want to avoid congestion. Saying oh lets charge an arm and a leg during rush hour to make these lanes less attractive is very out of touch. They are basically creating a traffic jam on the main lanes during rush hour instead of evenly distributing traffic the whole keep a certain speed in the express lanes is a joke as well if people drive 10 or 15 below the limit and drive the main lane speeds and more.
Quote from: motorola870 on August 18, 2019, 11:23:00 PM
to be honest they should have just gone with the NTTA building the express lanes and charging solo riders 24/7 for use the lanes and 2+ HOV would be free. That would encourage people to carpool to use the new lanes or pay up if they want to avoid congestion. Saying oh lets charge an arm and a leg during rush hour to make these lanes less attractive is very out of touch. They are basically creating a traffic jam on the main lanes during rush hour instead of evenly distributing traffic the whole keep a certain speed in the express lanes is a joke as well if people drive 10 or 15 below the limit and drive the main lane speeds and more.
If I remember correctly, the NTTA has the right of first refusal on all toll projects in the Metroplex, stemming from the outcome of the legal battles around what is now the Sam Rayburn Tollway, and so they would have had to have declined all of these projects. I believe there are limits on how much they're willing and able to bond to fund construction of new toll roads, and with everything else they've done in the last decade or so (acquiring the rights to build the SRT and actually building it, building the SRT/DNT flyovers, extending the PGBT, extending the DNT, widening the PGBT/DNT/SRT, building the CTP) and what they have coming up (more DNT extensions, PGBT extension to I-20) they just didn't have the interest of taking on more projects, especially with the high costs and questionable ROI involved. Since they weren't going to do it, the only way they were going to get built was with outside money.
The blame ultimately lies with dumbshit voters who demand increased services from the government but elect legislators who campaign on a platform of lowering taxes. Your choices are lower taxes and fewer services, or higher taxes and more services. Reasonable people can disagree on exactly where along that spectrum they want their government to be, and that used to form the basis of the political system in this country. Unfortunately, there are far too many people who have been infected with the idiocy of wanting more but paying less, and those people control things at the moment. Raising the gas taxes 15 years ago and indexing them to inflation would have prevented the worst of this, but here we are.
Way too many American voters are cluelessly selfish. They want the government to provide things like great roads, but don't want to pay for any of it. In fact, let's have some tax cuts and make all these new demands. They latch on to any tired, lame excuse to rationalize the impossible budgetary math. Obviously the favorite, go-to excuse is gettin' all them thar darkies off the welfare -as if that makes up 100% of all "entitlement" spending. The idea is we would be able to get all of the things we want, such as really great roads and other elements of infrastructure if it wasn't for all these lazy folks getting a hand out. Obviously the reality of it is a whole lot more complicated. If we got rid of every social safety net program, in return for more tax cuts (and maybe some new roads) the consequences of a cartoon-ish political move would be pretty far reaching.
Anyway, roads themselves are severely over priced. I suppose a good bit of the cost inflation is due to rising materials costs. Regulations on how roads much be built change routinely and that increases costs. I think the extremely long, drawn out legal and bureaucratic process does a whole lot to balloon costs as well. 40-50 years ago the US was building out elements of the Interstate Highway System at a very rapid pace. There's no way we can do that now with the slog of bureaucratic procedure and lawsuits suffocating development.
Quote from: Rothman on August 18, 2019, 06:47:44 AM
With private operators, the focus goes from public service to maximizing profit. Therefore, the public will always end up gouged as private operators ensure that they increase their profit over their expenses.
Not when they are regulated like a public utility, such as electricity, water, natural gas, cable TV and internet, landline telephone, etc. Because that is what they are, a public utility.
The public utility commission and/or state corporation commission, if properly run, will allow a fair rate of return, but will not allow the "gouging" and "profit maximization" that you keep complaining about.
Are you opposed to public utilities?
Quote from: Beltway on August 19, 2019, 12:37:31 PM
Quote from: Rothman on August 18, 2019, 06:47:44 AM
With private operators, the focus goes from public service to maximizing profit. Therefore, the public will always end up gouged as private operators ensure that they increase their profit over their expenses.
Not when they are regulated like a public utility, such as electricity, water, natural gas, cable TV and internet, landline telephone, etc. Because that is what they are, a public utility.
The public utility commission and/or state corporation commission, if properly run, will allow a fair rate of return, but will not allow the "gouging" and "profit maximization" that you keep complaining about.
Are you opposed to public utilities?
Nope.
There are regulations in place. In free flow, the company can set tolls up to a certain maximum rate, at whatever level they think will maximize income. If traffic counts become high, or speeds slow, then they're required to set the toll rate at a certain level, according to a formula in the contract. The goal is the maintain a certain minimum speed, which I believe is 50, excluding problems that can't be controlled by regulating demand, such as accidents or weather. They're pretty heavily regulated when the managed lanes experience heavy use, not being allowed to charge rates higher or lower than formula dictates.
The starting point for economic regulation as practiced by public utility commissions is capping the maximum rate of return. While this has its own problems (e.g., to protect ratepayers' interests, the commission staff generally has to study the operations of the utility carefully to ensure that profit above the cap is not hidden through internal consumption), it is a widely accepted model and does not usually fail badly.
It sounds like the element of economic regulation in the Texas transportation PPPs are focused on the prices drivers pay during high-demand times, which creates perverse incentives to keep the prices high at low-demand times to improve profitability and exploit the lack of a cap on rate of return. The LBJ Express lanes in Dallas are an expensive proposition even in the middle of the night when traffic is very low. And my concern about transportation PPPs in general is that capital is mobile (at least in the West), so profits often travel very far away from the infrastructure rather than being retained for re-investment in added capacity.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 20, 2019, 12:50:42 AM
And my concern about transportation PPPs in general is that capital is mobile (at least in the West), so profits often travel very far away from the infrastructure rather than being retained for re-investment in added capacity.
Some people complain about infrastructure and development companies like Transurban that are in foreign countries, but nothing prevents companies from being formed in the U.S. that will perform the same type of business, and even try to buy out PPPs from other such companies. The U.S. has been dropping the ball in this area.
Quote from: J N Winkler on August 20, 2019, 12:50:42 AM
It sounds like the element of economic regulation in the Texas transportation PPPs are focused on the prices drivers pay during high-demand times, which creates perverse incentives to keep the prices high at low-demand times to improve profitability and exploit the lack of a cap on rate of return. The LBJ Express lanes in Dallas are an expensive proposition even in the middle of the night when traffic is very low. And my concern about transportation PPPs in general is that capital is mobile (at least in the West), so profits often travel very far away from the infrastructure rather than being retained for re-investment in added capacity.
Of course the tolls are high. LBJ Express was a $2.6 billion project and NTE so far was $2 billion for segments 1/2, $1.6 billion for segments 3A/3B, and now nearly another $1 billion for segment 3C, and that's got to be paid for out of toll revenues. It seems like a lot of people are just kind of in the frame of mind that the costs on these should match greenfield construction like the DNT or PGBT extensions, where there was clear ROW just sitting there waiting for a new freeway. All of these express lane projects had to be built largely within the footprint of existing freeways, though obviously with expanded ROW in some areas, and expensive tunnels in the case of LBJ, and it all had to be done while minimizing impacts to the existing freeways during construction. The cost per mile is well beyond typical toll road construction costs.
I do agree with the dislike of the profits vanishing off into some foreign country. I also understand that there aren't necessarily a lot of companies in this country who are willing to put themselves on the hook for that much debt on projects like this where it's far from guaranteed that there will be enough revenue generated to pay it off. It's a very fine line that has to be walked of charging enough to pay for things while not charging so much that it discourages use. There's also the very real risk of everything turning to shit with a recession. If unemployment starts going up, that means fewer people driving at peak hours and therefore less demand for the express lanes, and if money is tight, cutting out trips on the Lexus Lanes is a good place to start saving.
Quote from: Beltway on August 20, 2019, 01:05:39 AMSome people complain about infrastructure and development companies like Transurban that are in foreign countries, but nothing prevents companies from being formed in the U.S. that will perform the same type of business, and even try to buy out PPPs from other such companies. The U.S. has been dropping the ball in this area.
It should be noted that these consortiums could have a U.S. financing component, for example an investment or pension fund. Transurban, Cintra or Ferrovial are the developers, but U.S. investment funds may be involved as well, so it's not like all profit is automatically shipped overseas.
I think the reason why so few U.S. companies are involved in these large PPPs is that it is a relatively new phenomenon in the U.S., I've read that many states even today don't have legislation that allow PPPs, so that may explain why you typically see foreign companies leading these large-scale projects. PPPs have long been common in Australia and Europe.
I haven't looked at all of the agreements, but I remember one of the earlier ones including a provision for profit sharing with TxDOT at certain levels of income. The purpose seems to be to limit the return on investment to the private company. They have to charge the high rates to limit traffic counts, so price caps won't work. The other way to do that is to require payments to TxDOT if the profits are inordinately high. It doesn't save the tollpayers money, but it it puts some of it back into public projects.
Are there really no price caps? That would be a huge mistake if the price was allowed to get too high. There seemed to be a fair amount against the HO/T lanes in Virginia hitting high prices in a relatively toll friendly area but in Texas I suspect there would be bills introduced to ban the practice all together if that ever happened. lol
There are two levels of operation. We could call one the discretionary mode. This is what they use most of the time, when there are no challenges to the capacity of the managed lanes. The company sets the price at whatever level they want. That price has a cap. I believe for the LBJ project it's 70 cents per mile for the first year of operation and then adjusted for inflation. When the traffic count gets too high, or speeds get too low, they go to the second mode, what we might call the formula mode. The contract contains a mathematical formula, accounting for the current rate and the count and speed of traffic. The company is then required to set the per-mile rate in accordance with the formula. If the count jumps rapidly or speeds fall rapidly, that causes a higher increase in tolls. If the count slowly increases or speeds slowly decrease, that leads to a smaller increase in rates. As traffic eases, rates are reduced in accordance with the formula until traffic thins out to below the threshold for discretionary mode. There is no maximum for that price, because it would limit the capacity for managing demand. However, those prices are set by the contract, so the company can't just gouge people because they want to.
Quote from: Chris on August 20, 2019, 03:33:36 PM
I think the reason why so few U.S. companies are involved in these large PPPs is that it is a relatively new phenomenon in the U.S., I've read that many states even today don't have legislation that allow PPPs, so that may explain why you typically see foreign companies leading these large-scale projects. PPPs have long been common in Australia and Europe.
That is a good point, PPPs have been common in many countries for decades, the U.S. is a latecomer.
The English Channel Tunnel was a PPP and was opened in 1994.
The free to use general purpose lanes will finally be expanded to six lanes in parts of north I-35
https://communityimpact.com/dallas-fort-worth/keller-roanoke-northeast-fort-worth/transportation/2021/03/03/txdot-proposes-400-million-project-to-improve-i-35w-in-north-fort-worth/
Quote from: Plutonic Panda on March 04, 2021, 02:19:27 PM
The free to use general purpose lanes will finally be expanded to six lanes in parts of north I-35
https://communityimpact.com/dallas-fort-worth/keller-roanoke-northeast-fort-worth/transportation/2021/03/03/txdot-proposes-400-million-project-to-improve-i-35w-in-north-fort-worth/
Does this include initial preparation for the TX114 stack interchange? Surely the original bridge configuration with the traffic light between the service road sections is coming down. The off ramp bridge for buccee's is not going to be in service as long as the mainline bridges have. I can't believe they did not prepare it for an eventually expansion of TX114. The writing was on the wall when they built the partially completed grade seperated mainlanes to FM156.
Quote from: motorola870 on March 04, 2021, 03:58:15 PM
Does this include initial preparation for the TX114 stack interchange? Surely the original bridge configuration with the traffic light between the service road sections is coming down. The off ramp bridge for buccee's is not going to be in service as long as the mainline bridges have. I can't believe they did not prepare it for an eventually expansion of TX114. The writing was on the wall when they built the partially completed grade seperated mainlanes to FM156.
Schematics for IH35W are available here
https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/dallas/021821.html (https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/get-involved/about/hearings-meetings/dallas/021821.html)
For the IH35W main lanes the schematics show 3x3 with a wide median, presumably for future 2x2 managed lanes, and continuous frontage roads for the full length from Eagle Parkway to IH-35 at Denton.
The schematic does NOT show any direct connectors at SH 114. There are no stubouts for future ramps where we would expect to see them, although there is a stubout to the managed lanes just south of SH 114. This is very surprising. I agree with with Motorola870 that it's a serious mistake for no connectors to be planned for this interchange. This is definitely baffling.
The schematic does show four connectors at the future Loop 288 extension, including stubouts in the main lanes.
I had to make an impromptu road trip down to the DFW area last night. On the trip down I went through Fort Worth and had to take the I-35W express lanes to avoid jams on the free/general purpose lanes. The spot where the 100+ vehicle pile up happened on February 11 was all repaired & cleaned up. On the way back I drove up US-67 and I-35E to check out progress on that massive expansion project (still a long way to go). Then I picked up TX-114 to exit DFW via Grapevine.
TX-114 is badly overdue for that freeway upgrade from Roanoke out West to the Texas Motor Speedway complex. I was passing through there after 9:00pm last night and the traffic along TX-114 was still pretty heavy. There is a huge median there ready for a new freeway to be dropped into it. TX DOT needs to get that done already.
The intersection with TX-114 and I-35W is a pain in the ass. Traffic there is ridiculous, even well into the night. If TX DOT and other powers that be have no plans to build a freeway to freeway stack interchange in that spot they must be smoking some special kind of weed.
Of course there is an obvious question of HOW they would even build a freeway to freeway direct-connect stack interchange between I-35W and TX-114 at this point. The four corners of that intersection have become badly encroached with commercial and industrial properties. And more are snugging into that location as time passes. Buc-ee's #37 occupies a big footprint on the SW corner. Four new stores squeezed their way even farther into the point of that SW corner. The SE corner has a QuikTrip location, a Shell station as well as a growing number of restaurants, hotels and apartment buildings. The NE corner has had some big industrial buildings for a long time, but lately new restaurants and stores have been squeezing in more tightly into that intersection corner. The NW corner belongs to Texas Motor Speedway. That's the only corner with enough open land to allow a pair of flyover ramps (EB TX-114 to NB I-35W and SB I-35W to WB TX-114). TX DOT would have to get pretty creative to build useful freeway to freeway connector ramps that didn't span directly over buildings for the other three corners of the intersection.
Wait, it gets better, TX DOT appears to be screwing the pooch on TX-114 going farther West past Texas Motor Speedway to the US-287 intersection. Not too long ago they upgraded TX-114 through there as a divided expressway with at-grade intersections. They're really going to have to upgrade that and US-287 as well to full Interstate standards, starting with SECURING RIGHT OF WAY. Unfortunately a lot of new properties, such as big home developments are building close enough to the existing TX-114 ROW that a future freeway upgrade might have to be elevated over the existing lanes, which would then function as frontage roads. There doesn't appear to be enough room to build a new freeway with flanking frontage roads all at grade, most certainly not on the usual 350'-450' footprints many such freeways in Texas have already. Only about 250' or less of width is available between utility easements.
Anyone who has driven along TX-114 to the North of Fort Worth has no doubt noticed the explosive growth in home building out in that area. A lot of new businesses are popping up. But some planned developments out in that area are really staggering. PMB Capital Investments has a plan to build 10,000 new homes in the Rhome area, near the intersection with TX-114 and US-287. When that is completed, along with lots of other stuff going up at the same time, a shit-ton more traffic will be dumped onto TX-114.
Right now it doesn't look like TX DOT has any plans at all to make TX-114 a freeway any farther West than Texas Motor Speedway. All this development going on makes that outlook extremely short sighted.
The $55 million SH 114 main lanes at US 377 is slated to receive bids in June. This project has taken forever to move forward, and I don't know why it has taken so long because the frontage roads have been in place since 2000.
https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/denton.htm#035309002 (https://www.dot.state.tx.us/insdtdot/orgchart/cmd/cserve/let/2021/denton.htm#035309002)
According to the recent public meeting info, the main lanes between US 377 and IH35W will be ready for bidding in winter 2022. However it is currently not included in TxDOT's planned 2022 letting list.
http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/get-involved/dal/sh114/041720-location-map.pdf (http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot/get-involved/dal/sh114/041720-location-map.pdf)
I agree with Bobby5280 it is mistake that SH 114 is not being planned as a freeway west of FM 156. The reason may be lack of financial resources, with available funding being directed to the IH35W expansion all the way to Denton. Officials may end up in a situation similar to Collin County with US 380, which is that they'll realize a mistake was made and then face an expensive program to try to build what is needed.
I have to say, I've recently seen some videos of the Dallas freeway system and I'm surprised and impressed by how much some of it has changed since I was last in dfw in 2011. The 635 express between 35E and 75 is very cool looking. And they have express lanes or hot lanes on practically every freeway, even roads that are only freeway for a few miles like Loop 12. And the mixmaster of IH 30/45/35E/US 75 is so nice cooler looking and seems so much better designed than the old configuration. Kinda makes me wish we more cool looking aghff like that being done here in Houston. Our only new freeways and most of the additional construction is building roads that look very standard. Grand parkway has a few interesting intersections with other freeways but they are all like typical stacks. 249 is just a normal rural freeway with nothing cool of note.
The 288 express lanes were the coolest thing we've done in a while.
The Ih 45 rebuild will probably be pretty badass if it's ever actually built and completed but that's a long way off.
Ideally, I'd love to see:
The west 610 loop given an elevated two way express facility that rises above the main lines in the median.
Express lanes on 249 like those on 288
SH 35 freeway built
The Hempstead tollway built along Hempstead road, elevated and with few exits so it functions more as express lanes for 290
US 290 given an interstate designation. IH 14 would be perfect I'd they would change the planned route to bring it through Austin using US190/IH35/US290. Or if settle for an IH 12 or even IH 510 designation.
Inside the 610 loop from galleria heading into downtown– built three lanes each direction elevated above the current depressed lanes. Upper level will be express lanes with exits only at shepherd, IH 45, Smith street and IH 69. Though this would be impossible with the current plans.
Extend Hardy and Have it terminate into Elysian street, then complete the ramps to Elysian from IH69 and construct a connection from Elysian south to Ih 69 south.
As for the TX 114 needs by TX Motor Speedway, they *at least* need to freeway-ize/grade-separate it in the area where the Northwest schools complex is. I can't imagine what school days (especially without the virus-of-the-moment) are like out there in TX 114's current condition.
At the I-35W/TX 114 interchange, I guess short of doing ramps like the recent EB TX 114-to-SB TX 121 elevated one over the 2 car dealerships in Grapevine, the only other option at this point is shifting the ramps footprint slightly north, even though those latest restaurant/retail/whatever additions (SW corner, not counting Buc-ee's) should have gone somewhere else nearby. It is so amazing to see what that intersection has become since the Speedway was built.
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on March 06, 2021, 05:05:17 PM
As for the TX 114 needs by TX Motor Speedway, they *at least* need to freeway-ize/grade-separate it in the area where the Northwest schools complex is. I can't imagine what school days (especially without the virus-of-the-moment) are like out there in TX 114's current condition.
At the I-35W/TX 114 interchange, I guess short of doing ramps like the recent EB TX 114-to-SB TX 121 elevated one over the 2 car dealerships in Grapevine, the only other option at this point is shifting the ramps footprint slightly north, even though those latest restaurant/retail/whatever additions (SW corner, not counting Buc-ee's) should have gone somewhere else nearby. It is so amazing to see what that intersection has become since the Speedway was built.
The irony in this is TXDOT has known for years they planned a freeway through there. Having frontage roads on the east side of the underpass in early 2000s should be been a wakeup call to prepare for a full stack. Instead they just let them build right up on the frontage roads so likely now its going to be a 3 level stack with frontage roads providing road to road transitions instead of a proper interchange. Then again isn't the first time TXDOT skimped on a project. US 67 at US 287 has no direct access to Northbound 67 from US 287 southbound. That complicated stack is under review for modifications. You have to exit US 287 business to access Northbound US67.
Quote from: MaxConcreteI agree with Bobby5280 it is mistake that SH 114 is not being planned as a freeway west of FM 156. The reason may be lack of financial resources, with available funding being directed to the IH35W expansion all the way to Denton. Officials may end up in a situation similar to Collin County with US 380, which is that they'll realize a mistake was made and then face an expensive program to try to build what is needed.
It's a ridiculous situation that will have easy to predict results. That 10,000 home development in Rhome by the US-287/TX-114 junction just on its own should be setting off alarm bells at TX DOT. Never mind all the ancillary development that will ride in on that project's coat tails.
BTW, going westbound on TX-114 into northbound US-287 is not a fun junction. It's quite an odd, downhill curve going into US-287. The experience is kind of scary at night. TX DOT will have to add more lanes to both roads and do a little calming on those curves. It's not quite as bad as the TX-511 split with US-287 in Sunset just South of Bowie. TX DOT recently fixed that junction. Previously, if you were driving in the right lane on US-287 (and doing so at night)
and not paying close attention US-287 would suddenly fall off to the left under a bridge. And you'd find yourself doing 75mph (or more) up a short off-ramp up onto a dinky 2 lane road! I guess enough crashes happened to make TX DOT remedy that situation.
Quote from: US-175At the I-35W/TX 114 interchange, I guess short of doing ramps like the recent EB TX 114-to-SB TX 121 elevated one over the 2 car dealerships in Grapevine, the only other option at this point is shifting the ramps footprint slightly north, even though those latest restaurant/retail/whatever additions (SW corner, not counting Buc-ee's) should have gone somewhere else nearby. It is so amazing to see what that intersection has become since the Speedway was built.
I still remember the I-35W/TX-114 intersection before the speedway was built. There was hardly anything out there except bushes and trees. Texas Motor Speedway just on its own was a staggering project; that's as big as any racing facility in the nation. Add Buc-ee's, the Tanger Outlets, a bunch of restaurants and other stores. Hotels and golf courses are sprouting up around there. If development keeps going at this pace we'll start seeing office towers.
A volleyball connection with thru freeway main lanes for both TX-114 and I-35W will be better than nothing. But nevertheless, there is going to be way too much surface level traffic just related to the businesses at the TX-114 and I-35W intersection to have that mix in with traffic just trying to move to/from TX-114 and I-35W at street level. TX DOT has to figure out some way how to build flyover connectors for all the interchange movements between TX-114 and I-35W.
I noticed that long ramp that goes over the car dealerships in Grapevine has really tall fencing. And the car lots below have large tent structures and other things to protect the vehicle inventory below from
objects thrown from vehicles above. I can imagine TX DOT taking this idea a step farther: build a flyover ramp that spans over the top of commercial buildings and parking lots, but build the ramp with tall walls
and maybe even a cap. I don't know how well tall chain link fences work on flyover ramps just on their own.
I thought the blue tarp covers at car dealerships were to protect cars from hail. I guess they don't want anyone chunking rocks at them, either.
Quote from: -- US 175 -- on March 10, 2021, 04:28:34 AM
I thought the blue tarp covers at car dealerships were to protect cars from hail. I guess they don't want anyone chunking rocks at them, either.
The dealers here in OKC have to deal with birds using the underside as perches and nests. The amount of bird crap on the cards is frightening. May have hired a cleaning company to come in twice a day to clean it off the cars.
This project was officially dedicated today. This is a surprise to me, because when I drove through the area less than a year ago, there was a lot of work to be done.
https://twitter.com/webberllc/status/1671219848678981632 (https://twitter.com/webberllc/status/1671219848678981632)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FzFdlj3WYAYJbPc?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FzFdljwWAAAChWg?format=jpg&name=large)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FzFdlh_WABoWp3J?format=jpg&name=large)
When I was through last Friday, they had 2/3 of it already striped and were pouring some Jersey barriers and a bridge railing. I have to be back in 10 days and will be thrilled that it is open.
Quote from: rte66man on June 21, 2023, 01:59:42 PM
When I was through last Friday, they had 2/3 of it already striped and were pouring some Jersey barriers and a bridge railing. I have to be back in 10 days and will be thrilled that it is open.
I drove northbound on it Tuesday. There was an accident at the former north end of the express lanes so I didn't get on it until past Heritage Trace Pkwy. As someone who drives to OKC often, I'm glad to see it open as that area is usually my only choke point.