Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
I. Background
II. Mobility Options
III. Urban Form/Connectivity
IV. Economic Development
V. Alternative Comparison
VI. Funding Strategies
VII. Closing
I. Background
HNTB Institute
The mission of the Institute
is to bring HNTB’s national
experts together with clients
and stakeholders in a
targeted and collaborative
session to explore strategic
partnerships and investigate
innovative solutions for
implementation on
complicated projects.
Study Area
AREA MAP
Why I-30?
• Catalyst for new urban and multi-modal
design solutions
• Physically reconnect Fair Park and the
Deep Ellum communities
• Catalyst for community reinvigoration
• Area can serve as a sustainable center
for medical, cultural, scientific,
residential, historical and commercial
development
Why I-30?
Metropolitan Mobility
Plan
Major Investment
Study (MIS)
Preliminary Design Focus of our
Schematic
project
Environmental
Assessment
Right-of-Way
Purchasing
Construction
Why I-30?
Why I-30?
I-30 Objectives
• Improve Regional Mobility
• Reconnect/Urban Form
• Enhance Economic Development
• Minimize Infrastructure Cost
• Road Revenue
Brainstorming Ideas
II. Mobility Options
Alternative 1 TxDOT Plan
Alternative 1 Section
Alternative 1
10 general purpose lanes with 4 barrier separated
managed lanes, includes wishbone. Profile in canyon
Description section between old railyard to Carroll Street. X-pattern
ramps with continuous frontage roads.
PURPOSE
• Maintains number of lanes
• Increase local connections (Lindsley
& Carroll)
• Maintains same number of access
points
• Reduce footprint (less right-of-way)
Alternative 2 Section
R.O.W. Width 249 ft to 371 ft variable (minimum 60’ less than Alt. 1)
• Lid
• Narrow freeway
How are we better • Reconnect two additional streets:
connecting neighborhoods? – Lindsley
– Carroll
Access between I-30 and Same number of access points, configured differently
neighborhood?
Alternative 3
PURPOSE
• Maintains number of lanes
• Increase local connections
(Lindsley, Carroll, Fitzhugh)
• Revised access points for better
neighborhood connections
• Eliminated frontage roads for
narrower footprint
Alternative 3 Section
255’ typical
Alternative 3
10 general purpose lanes with 4 buffer separated managed
Description lanes, without wishbone. Profile in canyon section
between old railyard to East Grand with no frontage roads
• Lid
• Narrow freeway
How are we better • Reconnect three additional streets:
connecting neighborhoods? – Lindsley
– Carroll
– Fitzhugh
Access between I-30 and Less number of access points, combination of different
neighborhood? ramps were used
Cost Implications
• Construction costs are within 4% for all
three alternatives
• Alternative 1: $205M
• Alternative 2: $216M
• Alternative 3: $207M
• Anticipated lower R.O.W. costs with
Alternatives 2 & 3
III. Urban Form/Connectivity
Urban Form Concepts
• Neighborhood Connectivity
• I-30 Branding and Character
• Neighborhood Goals
Neighborhood Connectivity
Neighborhood Connectivity
Baylor
University
Neighborhoods Medical
Peak-Haskell Center
Deck Park
Revitalization of
Commercial Corridor
Neighborhoods
East Grand
Neighborhood Connectivity
Neighborhood Connectivity
Fair Park / Deep Ellum
Neighborhood Connectivity
Fair Park / Deep Ellum
• DESIGN INSPIRATION : FAIR PARK – A NATIONAL & REGIONAL DESTINATION
Branding and Character
Bridge Concept
Bridge Wall / Abutment
Bridge Deck / Section
Bridge Columns
Neighborhood Character
Neighborhood Character
Neighborhood Form
Land Use – Density & Scale
ROAD REVENUE
Alternative 1
ROAD REVENUE
Alternative 2
ROAD REVENUE
Alternative 3
ROAD REVENUE
VI. Funding Strategies
Existing Land Use
Priority Development Areas
Priority Development Area I
Priority Development Area II
Build Alternative Land Use
New Value Capture Zone (TIF
Boundary)
Detailed TIF Data
Chart Inflection Line Graph
Funding Summaries
• $100 M available for bonding
• City of Dallas Contributions to I-30 Project
ITEM COST
Decking $50M