ST9904-CS 981101Texas Department of Transportation
Major
Investment Study
121
STUDY HEWSLETTER
Department
of Transportation
The second Public Meeting was held on September 3,
1998 at the Grapevine City Council Chambers. More
than thirty people attended, providing the Study Team
with useful input concerning local issues, constraints
and preferences.
Members of the Texas Department of Transportation
(TxDOT) and the HDR Study Team were available
during the course of the evening to discuss the study
and answer questions. Participanls were encouraged to
provide their comments regarding the transportation
congestion problem along the SH 114 / SH i21 corri-
dor, environmental constraints and possible transporta-
tion solutions.
Comments from the Public Meeting included: 1) the
need for direct access in the western portion of the
study area between SH 114 and SH 121; and 2) the
adverse impact a new location roadway corridor would
have on the City of Grapevine and the natural environ-
ment. Using the comments from the Public Meeting,
along with input from the Technical Committee and
previous studies, a consensus was roached on a list of
solutions that should be considered to reduce conges-
tion within the study corridor.
With a consensus rcached ~egarding the alternatives to
consider, the study learn began their analysis of the
Conceptual Alternatixcs. These C(~nceptual
Alternatives to be considered included:
l~Bus Transil Systems,
I~'Rail Transit Systems,
~Transportation Demand Management (TDM),
~'Transportation System Management (TSM),
~'Constructing additional / new lanes along
various parallel corridors, and
~'Constructing additional / new lanes along the
existing SH 114/SH 121 corridor.
The additional / new lanes fi~r either parallel corridors
or within the existing right-of-way corridor could be
either General Purpose (Freeway), High-Occupancy
Vehicle (HOV), or Express lanes depending on the
overall transportation needs.
The diagram below illustrates how the Study Team will
evaluate the alternatives through a three-phase process.
These evaluation phases will analyze the alternatives
using successively more detailed criteria. The selected
ahemative will be the one that best achieves these
study goals:
· Reduce congestion in the SH 114/SH 121 corridor,
· Provide acceptable impacts to the natural and man-
made enviromnent and community; and
· Provide the best enhancement to safety.
'File M IS Prucess
Phase l
Evaluation
Considerable progress in
identifying the viable
alternatives has been
made since the September
public meeting. Enhanc
lng mobility in the SH
I14/SH 121 study area is
the primary study goal
and objective. Traffic
modeling allows for the
planning of future
improvemenls and the
identification of the key
paths of travel within the
study area. The initial
traffic modeling includes the establishment of a base model in which all alternatives
will be compared, as well as a link analysis.
The link analysis provides useful information as 1o where drivers are anticipaled to
lravel within the study area based on year 2020 demographics and land use patterns.
The information from the base model and link analysis is vital in determining the
effectiveness of a particular alternative. It is a major component of the Phase One
Screening process. The link analysis that was performed for thc SH 114/SH121
Major Investment Study forecasts where drivers will want to travel within the
existing corridor.
Results from the analysis (see figures) indicate that there are two major movements
within the corridor. Vehicles traveling eastbound on SH 114 and vehicles traveling
eastbound on SH 121 make up the major movements within the corridor. Other impor-
tant travel movemcnls
in the corridor include
northbound SH 121 to
eastbound SH 114, and
from eastbound S}t 114
to southbound SH 121.
Many of the projections
correspond to tbe pub-
lic conlments that the
Project Team has
received previously, as
well as lhc findings of
earlier studies of the
corridor.
:Alternatives Remain?
Phase 1 of the evaluation process was to screen out alternatives. Those which did
not meet the study purpose of significantly reducing congestion along the
SH 114 / SH 121 corridor or which included significantly more adverse environ-
mental or engineering considerations than similar ahernatives were eliminated.
The evaluation R)cused on determining the effectiveness each conceptual alter-
native would have on reducing congestion as a stand-alone solution. Their
effects were evaluated as if no other improvements were considered. Although
these alternatives may be eliminated as stand-alone solutions, several will be
revisited for incorporation into the Locally Preferred Alternative.
Through the initial screening, the Study Team evaluated all of the Conceptual
Alternatives and recommended several alternatives for elimination. Those elim-
inated include alternatives focusing on other modes of transportation (bus and
rail systems), the management alternatives (TSM and TDM) and new location
roadway alternatives. Their elimination was due to their minimal impact on con-
gestion within the corridor, significant environmental effects or engineering con-
siderations. Based upon the Study Team's evaluation, three Viable Alternatives
have been identified which could be constructed within the existing SH 114/SH
121 corridor. The Viable Alternatives include:
~- Gonoral Purpose or freeway lanes
added within the existing corridor,
4 High-Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)
lanes combined with general purpose
lanes within the corridor, and
I~ Express Lanes combined with gen-
eral purpose lanes withing the corridor.
The number of general purpose, HOV and express lanes will be studied in
additional detail to determine the best strategy for relieving congestion
within the corridor.
The next opportunity for formal public
input will be at the third public meeting to
be held December 10, 1998. The Project
Team will discuss the findings from the
initial screening analysis and the resulting
list of viable alternatives for the study
area. The goal of the public meeting is to
gain consensus on the viable alternatives
in order to begin the more detailed evalu-
ation of the remaining alternatives. The
format for this public meeting will
include a formal presentation and a com-
ment and question session. The public
meeting is one of the many ways to voice
your opinions on the SHII4/SHI21
study. You may also:
'Mail commcnts on the SH l l4/SH 121
Major Investment Study to:
Texas Department of Transporlatinn
P.O. Box 6868
Fort Worth, TX 76115-0868
Attention: Joe Atwood, P.E.
,Email your comments to:
sh I 14mi.5@mailgw.dot.state.t x .us
'Express your comments to your local
representative of the Fechnical
Committee
Department
of Transportation
The SH 1 ]4/SH 121 Study Newsletter t.s a publication q! thc b?wt Worth l)i.writ t I)epartmcnt
Transportation. Its, p~rp~e i~o m~brm ihtetz',wed ( ttizcn,~ q~ the SIt 114 and ,$'ft 12l
Major hlveslmeltl S~dV pro~re~ and up('omin ~
Major
Investment Study
Texas Department of Transportation
EO. Box 6868
Fort Worth. TX 76115-0868
Allention: Joe Atwood, P.E.
Mr. Kenneth Cn'iffin, PE
City of Coppell
PO Box 478
Coppell, TX 75019
I-DR
HDR Engineering, Inc.
TxDOT Planning Consultant