[Paleo Conservative]

Anyway, the non-compete clause will be there, as it is in Canada, and it will be academic as to whether the state has any options, since Cintra will simply prevent improvements (or charge the state).

Quite frankly I would prefer new highways built closer to me than I-35 is. Corpus Christi, the city I live in is just about due south of Dallas, but I currently have to go to as far West as San Antonio if I want to drive to Dallas on Interstate grade highways. Having a highway east of and parallel to I-35 would improve north-south traffic for people living on the Gulf Coast and the Rio Grande Valley.

Anyway, it isn't just a highway right of way. There will be a double tracked railroad right of way too. Most of Texas has really lousy single tracked rail connections like the ones connecting Dallas, Houston, and San Antonio (three of the ten largest cities in the US). Texas today has a 21st century population of over 20 million people but has a rail capacity that isn't any better than it had in the late 19th century. It makes sense to build a few concentrated multipurpose rights of way than to build a hodgepodge of poorly connected ones.

[BobL]

I agree on your point about having to divert to San Antonio (and then deal with its traffic) to get to Dallas. People going west out of Houston have exactly the same problem with San Antonio.

The solution: Build some cheap bypass sections to get around San Antonio (and Austin, as necessary). Five cents more of gas tax would easily cover both (but not too many other additional projects).

In other words, don't just trash and sellout the entire Interstate system in the State of Texas.