ST9904-CS 981210Texas Depelmeet o(
!121 114
Il lltlSt 121
STUDY NEWSLETTER
Texas
Major Department
Investment Study of Transportation
The third of five Open House / Public Meetings was
held on December 10, 1998 at the Grapevine City
Council Chambers. Consensus was reached on carry
ing three Viable Alternatives forward for more detailed
study. Members of the Texas Department oF
Transportation (TxDOT) and the HDR Study Team
prcsented findings of the Phase I initial screening of
alternatives. The Study Team had previously analyzed
19 Conceptual Alternativcs as stand alone solutions.
Those that were eliminated through the evaluation
process either did not meet the study purposes of
reducing congcstion, or had significantly marc adverse
environmental or engineering impacts.
The three remaining Viable Alternatives are proposed
to be developed mostly within the existing rights-oF-
way. They include adding: 1) Gcncral Purpose lancs to
the existing freeway; 2) High-Occupancy Vehicle
(HOV) lanes with general purpose lanes; and 3)
Express Lancs with general purposc lanes. These
alternatives may also incorporatc elements of othcr
stand-alone alternatives as a preferred alternative is
identified. All three alternatives will also bc compared
with [he "No-Build" alternative.
The Study Team also presented existing alld future
traffic volumes and discussed travel patterns. Traffic
forccasls were dcvclopcd by thc North Central Texas
Council of Governments (NCTCOG) regioual travel
demand computer model.
Today, more Ihan 130,000 vehicles use Iht SH 114/SH
121 corridor on an average weekday. By the year
2020, Iraffic volumes arc expected to grow to about
200.000 vehicles per day lvpd). This leaves about
70,000 vpd that must be handled by thc proposed
improvements.
About 30 people attended thc meeting, including many
city officials from communities in the study area.
Study Team members wcrc availahle during thc course
of thc cveuing to discuss sludy progress and auswcr
questions.
Participants were encouraged lo provide comments
rcgarding the congcstiou along the SH 114 / SH 121
corridor, enviroumoutal constraints and suggcMcd
transportation solulions.
Open Hous /Publi Meetin :[
April 27, 1999 6:30 pm Open House
I
7:00 pm Public Meeting
Grapevine City Hall, 200 S. Main St., Grapevine.
!121' 114
In addition to endorsing further detailed
study of the three Viable Alternatives,
thosc attending gave the team additional
comments on problems in the corridor and
possible solutions. Citizen comments
included:
· Improve access between FM 1709
(Southlake Blvd.) and SH 114:
· Retain and improve local access to
and from Grapevine;
· Consider using International
Parkway (airport spine road) to
accommodatc north-south traffic:
· Investigate toll financing as a
mechanism to speed up
implementation of improvemenls;
· Exaluate a combination of HOV and
Express lanes in the existing SH 114
/ SH 121 right-of way;
· Provide direct connection from
northbound SH 121 to westbound
SH114, and for the rcverse
movement;
· Identify and implement "bottleneck"
and "interim" improvements to pro
vide congcstion relief sooner
The Study Team will be preparing draw-
ings showing possible local access
options and analysis of thc three Viable
Alternatives for presentation at thc next
Open House / Public Meeting to bc held
April 27, 1999.
lues
The next step after consensus and screening of tile Conceptual Ahcrnativcs is to fur-
ther analyze and screen the Viable Alternatives. The SH 114 / SH 121 Corridor Sludy
General Purpose Lanes Alternative
Typical Section
Ia vade~ q. 188 fl
iIl ] 111111 ~ llllll
Team has identified
three Viable
Altcruatixcs that
could be cons[rncted
within the existing
freeway corridor:
General Purpose,
H igh-Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV) Lanes,
and Express l,anes.
AGeneral Purpose
or fi'eeway lanes
added within lhe
e~isting corridor:
~ High-Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV)
with generttl
~oxe lanes ~ilhin
the corridor
HOV Lane Alternative
Typical Sections
224 fl vm~e$
I lllll ~ ,[~1,~ 11I II ',
Two-way HOV
varies 194 ~ vahes
11 11111 ~ ,IIIII II ·
Reversible HOV
Express Lane Alternative
Typical Sections
224 ff wines
IIII : L[ II· ~, ~ IIII II !
Two-way Express Lanes
! 11 1111 ~ ~ IIII
Reversible Express Lanes
~ Express Lanes
~'ombim,d with gem
era/ pttrpose Itt/les --
withmg the corri-
Thc proposed
roadway cross-
sections may vary
due to the number
of lanes, topogra
phy, right-of-way
width, ramp loca-
tions or other fac
tors. The number
of general pur-
pose, HOV and
express hines will be determined based on travel demand analysis of thc ahcrnativcs.
Screening of the allernatives will be based on their efficiency in the corridor how
well does each one carry trips through thc area'?
In addition to the Viable Alternatives, the Study Team is developing local access
options. In order to evaluate the optinns, the study corridor has been divided into Ihree
segments. Yellow, Green, and Blue.
This approach allows the team to develop and analyzc various options for the three
alternatives separalely in each segment, including addressing specific traffic move-
meres, providing access~ desigu issues, and constraints. The segment options will be
presented for discussion and comments at thc next Public Meeting on April 27, 1999
at 7:00 pm at Grapevine City HaLl.
The next scheduled opportunity for public
input will be at the fourth public meeting
scheduled for 7:00 pm April 27, 1999 in
thc Grapevine City Hall Council
Chambers, 200 S. Main St., Grapevine.
The Project Team will discuss the screen-
ing analysis of the viable alternatives and
the options in the three corridor segments
of the study area. The goal of the public
meeting is to present the findings of the
screening and gain consensus on a pre~
ferred mode. The format for this public
meeting will include a formal prescnta-
tion and a workshop session to gather
ideas and comments on the segtnent
optkms. The public meeting is one of the
many ways to voice your opinions on thc
SHI14/SHI21 study. You may also:
· Mail comments on thc SH 114/SH 121
Major Investment Study to:
Texas Department of Transportation
Re. Box 6868
Fort Worth, TX 76115-0868
Attention: Joe Atwood, RE.
· Email your comments to:
sh114mis @ mailgw.dot.state.tx.us
· Express your comments to your local
representative of the Technical
Cc~mmittee
Department
of Transportation
The SH II4/SH 121 Slud.~ Newsletter is a pubiFcirrfim q£ the fbrt Worth Di,~trict
Departtnent of D'cmSl~ortalion. Iix purpo~'e iv tc~ fi~/brm ittlerc.sled citize~ ~¥ the SH l l4 wtd SH
121 Corridor Major hlw, xttllent StucIv l.'ogres'x al~d upcoming
Major
Investment Study
Texas Department of Transportation
Re. Box 6868
Fort Worth, TX 76115 0868
Attention: Joe Atwood, RE.
Next Open House/
Public Meeting:
April 27, 7999 6:30 pm Open House
7:00 pm Public Meeting
Grapevine City Hall,
200 S. Main St., Grapevine.
Mr. Kenneth Griffin, PE
City of Coppell
PO Box 478
Coppell, TX 75019
I-DR
HDR Engineering, Inc.
TxDOT Planning Consultant
Viable Alternative
Evaluation Results
No Build General HOV Lane Express
Purpose Alternative (Managed)
Lane Alternative
Alternative
EnvironmentaI Criteria
Consistent with Regional Mobility Plans No Yes Yes Yes
Enhances Land Usage No Yes Yes Yes
Right of Way Impact None Minimal Minimal Minimal
Regional Air Quality (Tons / Day)
Carbon Monoxide (CO) 660 603 604 603
Hydrocarbons (HC) 90 83 83 83
Nitrous Oxides (NOx) 195 187 187 187
Mobility Criteria
Freeway Volume in the Corridor (vehicles/day) 169,000 252,000 230,000 ~ 254,1)00
Volume on SH 114 HOV Lane (vpd) 2,500 8,500 9,000 9,000
Utilization of Adjoining Freeways: (vpd)
IH 635 93,000 107,000 106,000 105,000
SH 121 North of Project Area 147,000 183,000 182,000 184,000
SH 121 / SH 360 157,000 215,000 214,000 215,000
SH 114 East of Project Area 119,000 141,000 140,000 147,000
SH 114 West of Project Area 134,000 172,000 171,000 173,000
Congestion on Arterials: (vpd)
William D. Tate 54,000 25,000 23,000 25,000
East-West Connector (DFW Airport) 100,000 84,000 86,000 83,000
North Airfield Drive (DFW Airport) 19,000 1,000 8,000 2,000
Freeport Parkway 25,000 11,000 12,000 11,000
SH 26 (North ofSH 114 / SH 121) 64,000 54,000 57,000 54,000
Arterial Demand (Vehicle Miles of Travel) 1.7 Million 1.4 Million 1.4 Million 1.4 Million
Arterial Demand (Vehicle Hours of Travel) 80,000 59,000 61,000 59,000
Allows for Multi-modal Flexibility No No Yes Yes
Allows for Traffic Pattern Changes No Yes No No
Reduces Traffic Weaving No Change No Change No Change Improved
Total Traffic Average Speed (mph) 33.7 39.8 39.3 39.9
Annual Benefits (Person Hours / Year) 3,455,000 3,340,000 3,526,000
Engineering Criteria
Constructability Less Complex Less
Complex (Ramps) Complex
Creative Financing Opportunities None Transit Transit/Toll
Order of Magnitude Construction Costs (/Mile) $5.9 Million $8.7 Million $6.7 Million
Physical Constraints Normal Extra @ Normal
Ramps