Posted on 01/05/2005 3:10:55 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
AUSTIN, Tex., Dec. 31 (AP) - Texas has embarked on a project to build superhighways so large and so complex that they will make ordinary Interstates look like cowpaths.
As envisioned by Gov. Rick Perry, the project, the Trans-Texas Corridor, would be a 4,000-mile transportation network costing $175 billion over 50 years and financed mostly, if not entirely, with private money. The builders would then charge motorists tolls.
These would be megahighways: corridors up to a quarter-mile across, consisting of as many as six lanes for cars and four for trucks, plus railroad tracks, oil and gas pipelines, water and other utility lines, even broadband transmission cables.
Supporters say the corridors are needed to handle the expected Nafta-driven boom in the flow of goods to and from Mexico and to enable freight haulers to bypass urban centers on straight highways that cut across the countryside.
The number of corridors and exactly where they would run have yet to be worked out. But on Dec. 16 the Texas Transportation Commission opened negotiations with the Cintra consortium to start the first phase of the project, a $7.5 billion, 800-mile corridor from Oklahoma to Mexico that would parallel Interstate 35.
"Some thought the Trans-Texas Corridor was a pie-in-the-sky idea that would never see the light of day," said Governor Perry, a Republican who has compared his plan to the Interstate system. "We have seen the future, and it's here today."
But some have called the project a Texas-size boondoggle. Environmentalists say they worry about its effect on the countryside, and ranchers and farmers who stand to lose their land through eminent domain are mobilizing against it. Small towns and big cities alike fear a loss of business when traffic is diverted around them.
Even the governor's own party opposes the plan. The platform drafted at last summer's state Republican convention rejected it because of its effect on property rights.
The tolls would represent a sharp departure for Texas, which has traditionally relied on federal highway money from gasoline taxes to build roads. But supporters of the Trans-Texas Corridor say its combination of tolls and private money would allow Texas to lay concrete at a rate that would be impossible through gasoline taxes alone.
The corridors could generate about $135 billion for the state over the 50-year span and lure new industry by offering efficient shipping routes for goods and utilities, Ray Perryman, a Texas economist, said.
In addition, Robert Black, a spokesman for Mr. Perry said, the new rail lines could lower the risk of chemical spills in urban areas.
For the Oklahoma-Mexico corridor, Cintra plans to spend $6 billion for about 300 miles of four-lane highway from Dallas to San Antonio and give the state an additional $1.2 billion for improvements along the route. In return, Cintra, which is based in Spain, wants to maintain and operate the toll road for 50 years.
The Texas Farm Bureau, generally regarded as an ally of Mr. Perry, opposes the project, with the organization's president, Kenneth Dierschke, saying: "They're proposing going primarily through farm and ranch lands. If someone comes in and cuts your property in half, that's no good."
Officials promise that property owners will be fairly compensated for any land seized. And a special provision put in for the benefit of rural Texas would allow some property owners to negotiate for a share of the revenue generated by traffic on the corridor.
"Houston and Dallas/Fort Worth should be bulldozed for any highway. They are the two butt-ugliest metro areas in the USA"
There's nothing in the constitution that ever requires you to lower those cities level with your presence
"Toll Roads do just the opposite - they punish people for driving at any time and, particularly, the "wrong" times"
Where is it you live that you are "forced" to use toll roads?
Most of the recent accidents on I-35 have happened where there are only two lanes and you have somebody trying to pass a semi. Having at least one more lane on the present I-35 would do a world of good because it would allow for a very usable passing lane on the left.
I am all for a new highway system. We have pulled a travel trailer all over the U.S. for the better part of 30 years. It is a real bear having to just drive through a city when all you are doing is passing through. We know that it's going to take us at least an extra hour and a half, especially around rush hour. This trans-traffic thing will probably be a big hit with all the semi-truckers and travel-trailers.
"Only 98%? Who paid the other 2%?"
Contentious, aren't we. The other 2% was existing toll roads, that were allowed to join the Interstate system.
Now here's a question for you - name a toll road that, in the past 20 years, became a freeway.
Agree - did I say that?
"Where is it you live that you are "forced" to use toll roads?"
California - Corona, 1994-1998. Forced to take a toll road that costed up to 40 cents per mile (now they charge 70 cents).
I assume you approve of this diversion also...
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/front/2994429
allow for a very usable passing lane on the left.
a passing lane that would be bumper to bumper in rush hour. extra lanes don't do anything but make traffic jams wider
I assume you approve of this diversion also...
You assume wrong. What your commissioners divert money for is not the question. Toll roads are an excellent way of paying for road projects without tax increases. They shouldn't be perpetual pay roads though, once paid for, booths come down.
I take it you have never traveled from Hillboro TX to Austin TX on I-35 at any time of the day.
Now you will see the real dangers of Emminent Domain and how much you really matter when you are faced with the Powerbrokers don't mind telling you that they don't mind and "YOU" don't matter. Remember I told ya so, now you have proof!
I take it you have never traveled from Hillboro TX to Austin TX on I-35 at any time of the day.
You take it wrong. I've been there many times. You fail to grasp the fact that congested roads are congested because of access. The cars are not backed up because of too few lanes. You could put in twenty lanes and someone in the left lane would still wait till a quarter mile from their exit to move to the right lane. Limited access is the solution. Seperate through traffic from local traffic.
Connecticut Turnpike--was that within the past 20 years?
The western several exits of the Mass Pike were made free in the 1990s by Bill Weld, who recognized that people in the rural Berkshires didn't need to pay for a metropolitan area highway.
D'oh! Now you've done it!
Instead of making roads the topic of conversation, why don't you organize a $100,000 Tournament of Champions for the International Straining-at-Gnats Society?
Hopefully the court will determine that that part of the agreement is unenforceable.
They're hamstrung in Canada, and they were hamstrung in California (another private operator of toll lanes, and another case where nothing could be done to improve nearby roads). Unfortunately, the courts generally rule according to contract - that's why it's best to prevent this insanity in the first place.
Yes.
Then you're right, it would be pretty bad news. It's a lot like the old railroad and oil trusts, governments unto themselves that would effectively jack-over and starve out entire towns until they gave up and played ball the way the trust told them to. But then, isn't that what the antitrust laws are supposed to stop?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.