MaxConcrete Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 (edited) If you watch the video from last week's TxDOT commission meeting on comprehensive development agreementshttp://www.dot.state.tx.us/about_us/texas_..._2006_aug24.htmyou will see a graphic in which the construction cost of the Grand Parkway is listed at $1.485 billion and the concession fee is listed at a stunning $730 million. This means that TxDOT would sell off the project to a private developer and the developer will pay TxDOT $730 million for the privilege of collecting the tolls (and profit). The speaker said they expect the concession fee to go up as data is fine-tuned.My view is that section F-2 will be the most profitable. As long as Perry is reelected, I think there is no stopping the Grand Parkway because there is just too much profit in it for many interests, primarily TxDOT, the private developer, and construction firms. Edited August 31, 2006 by MaxConcrete Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 If you watch the video from last week's TxDOT commission meeting on comprehensive development agreementshttp://www.dot.state.tx.us/about_us/texas_..._2006_aug24.htmyou will see a graphic in which the construction cost of the Grand Parkway is listed at $1.485 billion and the concession fee is listed at a stunning $730 million. This means that TxDOT would sell off the project to a private developer and the developer will pay TxDOT $730 million for the privilege of collecting the tolls (and profit). The speaker said they expect the concession fee to go up as data is fine-tuned.My view is that section F-2 will be the most profitable. As long as Perry is reelected, I think there is no stopping the Grand Parkway because there is just too much profit in it for many interests, primarily TxDOT, the private developer, and construction firms.Like so many others, I'm just torn on the Governor's election.This is way off topic, Max, but would you happen to have any traffic count data on hand? I've been waiting for TXDOT to get back to me with some for the Sugar Land area, but they're sure taking their sweet time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaxConcrete Posted August 31, 2006 Author Share Posted August 31, 2006 This is way off topic, Max, but would you happen to have any traffic count data on hand? I've been waiting for TXDOT to get back to me with some for the Sugar Land area, but they're sure taking their sweet time.The most recent I have is 2003. 2005 data should be available soon if it is not already available. You may want to directly order the traffic count CD from TxDOT. I don't have an exact contact, but call the map room at the Riverside campus in Austin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pineda Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 (edited) thanks for the link, Max, here's a related recent story related story on Bridgelandwww.bridgelandtexas.comtranscript from June meeting of TTCFrom the transcript:MS. ANDRADE: Well, while we're waiting, can I ask a question?MR. WILLIAMSON: Sure.MS. ANDRADE: Their (The Grand Parkway Association) meetings have been canceled and we haven't heard why.MR. RANDALL: I talked to Mr. (David) Gornet about that, and at first they decided to a board meeting every other month rather than every month, and then one meeting they did not have a quorum of the board, and I believe that was in March.MS. ANDRADE: So they're still excited about what they're doing.MR. RANDALL: Yes, ma'am.MS. ANDRADE: Okay. I was worried.MR. WILLIAMSON: I think they may be slightly disrupted by the kind of tension right now that might exist between our department and the Harris County Toll Authority. That's why I asked if there was somebody from Houston. I think the tension is going to exist for a few more months until we can kind of get settled between the department and HCTRA about how we want to proceed, because sort of like 121 in North Texas, no one was really interested in it for a long time and now suddenly everyone is interested in it. It's probably going to be a while.-snip-MR. WILLIAMSON: Because we're getting to the point where we've either got to decide to break the record or get this puppy closed down.(General laughter.) Edited August 31, 2006 by pineda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Great Hizzy! Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 Am I right in assuming that the next section to start construction is the section from I-10 to US 290? What would this be, Section E? I"m too lazy to go to TxDOT's (or the Grand Parkway's) website.Well, actually, I just lied. But I really don't see anything listed at either website that talks about actual planned construction kickoffs and for which section. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheNiche Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 The most recent I have is 2003. 2005 data should be available soon if it is not already available. You may want to directly order the traffic count CD from TxDOT. I don't have an exact contact, but call the map room at the Riverside campus in Austin.They responded today. Thanks anyway, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Montrose1100 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 I think the grandparkway is needed. Expecially with the North, Northwest, and West outter areas/suburbs growing at the rate they are. However, it would be nice to have alot (pretty much -all-) of the current freeways expanded with more lanes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
desirous Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 I think the grandparkway is needed. Expecially with the North, Northwest, and West outter areas/suburbs growing at the rate they are. However, it would be nice to have alot (pretty much -all-) of the current freeways expanded with more lanes.Definitely. 290 needs serious help, and it isn't coming soon enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bachanon Posted September 3, 2006 Share Posted September 3, 2006 if the f-2 section reduces rush hour traffic on woodlands parkway and research forest then i'm all for it. sorry pineda. i'd wager that woodlands parkway and possibly research forest will get widened, at least to panther creek/cochran's crossing, before the f-2 section gets built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aosman Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Why is TxDOT collecting concession fees? since when they are in the business of making money? Why can't TxDOT build the frontage roads with the tax payer's dollars and HECTRA can build the tollway? I wounder if Perry had something to do with this! I am so upset! the more they wait the harder this thing is going to be to get built. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjb434 Posted October 6, 2006 Share Posted October 6, 2006 desirous: US 290 will begin reconstruction next year in 2007. It is expected to be completed in 2013. It will be completely rebuilt from I-610 to past SH-6.TxDOT is collecting concession fees because that is the way the new laws are written. The private companies that enter the CDA's are paying TxDOT the right to build a state road.TxDOT and HCTRA aren't on great terms right now. HCTRA cannot toll any state highways. And don't mention beltway 8. When you are on the tolled portions you are technically not on the Belway, but the Sam Houston Tollway. The feeders are the Beltway. This is how HCTRA could construct and manage the main lanes. Again, HCTRA cannot toll any state classified highways.The CDA's are speeding up construction, and the concession fees infuse money into TxDOT that it wouldn't have access to from gas taxes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.