This is a pro Trans-Texas Corridor ping list.
Please let me know by Freepmail if you want on or off the list.
Posted on 02/18/2005 9:27:41 AM PST by Paleo Conservative
Not since the Texas High Speed Rail Authority proposed the controversial "bullet train" in the early 1990s has a transportation initiative riled so many landowners. But is the Trans Texas Corridor for real? Or is it merely a concept? Is it a visionary plan for Texas' exploding population and highway congestion, or a train wreck for agriculture? The answer seems to depend on whom you ask.
With that in mind, the Texas Farm Bureau, at its recent Leadership Conference in Austin, held a special session on the Trans Texas Corridor. TFB voting delegates, during the 2004 state convention in San Antonio, adopted policy in opposition to the corridor. The forum gave leaders the opportunity to hear directly from lawmakers. For many attendees, more questions were raised than answered regarding the controversial transportation system, which, if built, will completely transform the state's highways over the next 50 years.
Rep. Mike Krusee (R-Taylor), who coauthored the corridor legislation (HB 3588) with State Sen. Steve Ogden (R-College Station), told Texas Farm Bureau leaders they were confused about the size and scope of the TTC because it had been "misportrayed in artist renderings."
"I'm here to tell you we are not going to build all that stuff," said Krusee, adding that there would be additional hearings on the subject during this legislative session, and "in my office."
Some conferees suggested that Krusee's comments contradicting what had appeared in Texas Department of Transportation news releases, brochures, and on the Trans Texas Corridor's official web site, created a "credibility problem."
It has been reported, discussed in hearings, and stated in various Texas Department of Highways and Trans Texas Corridor news releases, as well as on the official TTC website, that the proposed corridor would create a 4,000-mile network of multimodal corridors for transporting goods and people by car, truck, rail and utility line. Each corridor would have six lanes for cars, four additional lanes for 18-wheel trucks, half a dozen rail lines and a utility zone for moving oil and water, gas and electricity?even broadband data. The projected cost for the mammoth highway system is $183 billion, which would come from private companies who would offer franchises to businesses and collect tolls to pay for it.
Krusee called the Trans Texas Corridor "a concept."
"TxDOT made people aware. Ultimately, they are only allowed to do what the Legislature authorizes," he said.
The Williamson County lawmaker said transportation problems must be addressed because traffic congestion has a direct relationship to the economy. He said he first realized the urgent need to fix choke points on I-35 when Williamson County lost 10,000 Dell Computer jobs to another state because of an inadequate infrastructure to accommodate 800 truckloads of computers that are shipped out daily.
"Basically, our current system has reached the end of its useful life," Krusee observed.
Rep. Lois Kolkhorst, also a session speaker, commended Gov. Rick Perry for his visionary approach towards planning for future transportation needs. Then she proceeded to state her concerns regarding the TTC's impact on her constituents, and her hometown of Brenham, which is right in the corridor's proposed path.
"The width of it bothers me. Look at the width (which by some estimates is a quarter of a mile across)," said Kolkhorst. Kolkhorst, vice chair of the House Rural Caucus, a bipartisan group of lawmakers who focus on issues important to rural Texas, cited other worries, such as the amount of acreage involved, access, and accountability, since foreign investors (Spain-based Cintra) have been awarded the initial contract.
"Cintra is going to lend us money. It takes TxDOT too long to build highways. Private contractors can build it a whole lot quicker. That's positive. As for the tolling fee, I'd like for the Commission to have some say over the tolls," she said.
Kolkhorst also questions whether or not the proposed franchises will actually be subject to free market pressures if ingress and egress is controlled. And she questions whether or not the corridor will really be an asset to Texas.
"Are we building a big NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) corridor? Are we making Texas stronger? We must remain fervent and focused on making Texas better, so we can produce something and not just become a service industry. If you study history, you don't give away your seed corn...We need a balance on the amount of land taken out of production," she said.
In an interview during the conference, State Sen. Todd Sta-ples, who chairs the Transportation and Homeland Security committee, like Rep. Krusee, characterized the corridor as a "concept."
"I want to assure everyone that it's more of a concept for the future than a reality today," said Staples, a Republican from Palestine in East Texas. "I think all Texans realize we're in a mobility crisis in this state today. And we have to think long-term on how to solve this crisis we face and the long-term arena. Now, a regional corridor from San Antonio to Dallas has raised some concerns, and rightly so. We're working with private property rights groups like the Texas Farm Bureau to find ways to ensure that landowners are not taken advantage of in this process. We're thinking outside the box on ways that landowners might receive royalties...how landowners could continue to utilize land that's actually not being used for the transportation corridor. We're looking at access issues to ensure that landowners' property is not unfairly divided, and always to ensure that just compensation is provided to those landowners. And we're also looking to see that the formulas for compensation are fair."
Dist. 12 State Rep. Jim McReynolds (R-Lufkin) said the Trans Texas Corridor is "still a dream." McReynolds said his solution for moving traffic in Texas would be to expand the "foot print" of existing highways by building lanes for trucks.
"There are issues with Trans Texas Corridor that give rural members heartburn. We're not sure in terms of `quick take' what that means to us. Our biggest issue is access," said McReynolds, expressing concern that owners whose property is dissected by the corridor might have to drive 30 miles or more to get to the other side unless there is an overpass or underpass. "We've got to weed through those things. Mike Krusee is coming to the Rural Caucus to talk to us about it. Frankly, there's a fear factor. This is a private property ownership state. To some extent that threatens a little. We're not against it. We'd like to move traffic, but we just want to be darn certain that all the pieces come together favorable to everybody."
Property rights infringement was the leading concern among lawmakers interviewed. Dist. 11 Sen. Mike Jackson (R-Shore Acres), chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, made a strong statement.
"We must make sure we don't go too far in allowing the government the ability to come in and condemn land. We don't need to let the government go crazy and take people's property for the Trans Texas Corridor right-of-way," said Jackson, whose district lies southeast of Houston.
Jackson emphasized the importance of addressing potential problems, such as access, in the developmental stage. Like Krusee, he said the TTC plan includes a number of proposals which are not set in concrete.
"If we keep attuned to exactly what's going on with the highway department, I think we can make some changes there so we do not overrun property owners' rights," he said.
State Rep. David Swinford (R-Dumas) said landowners had every right to be concerned.
"That bill gave unprecedented power to the transportation system. It negated some of the things about property rights our forefathers fought and died for," said Swinford, a Republican who represents Dist. 87.
The Panhandle lawmaker said the Legislature must be very careful, if the TTC goes forward, to ensure adequate landowner protections.
"It's not just a rural Texas issue. It's an issue of Texans," said Swinford. "I think you'll find that urban people will be just as upset about the loss of property rights as rural people will be, and I think they will be very helpful to us. It's not to say it (the Trans Texas Corridor) is not a great idea and all that, but we need to make sure we have property protections."
Dist. 53 Rep. Harvey Hilderbran (R-Kerrville), who represents a large swath through the Texas Hill Country and west, voiced yet another concern.
"I'm hearing more about the Trans Texas Corridor as it relates to infrastructure in the right-of-way," said Hilderbran. "I knew there was going to be some utility and telecommunications, that the State was going to try to do the same thing as the cities do, and charge a franchise and basically require where those lines go and things like that. I was aware of that last session. What I was not aware of, and what we've got to protect ourselves against, is to use that as a distribution system for water, to take water away from agriculture in rural areas and move it to population centers."
Hilderbran, a member of the Natural Resources Committee with oversight with respect to water, is working with Rep. Robby Cook (D-Eagle Lake) on a bill that would require any public entity, such as TxDOT, to comply with the rules of local underground water districts.
"That's not the case right now," Hilderbran noted. "Under this bill, if they decide to mine water, and we need to let them have a well field, they must comply with local regulations and get a permit. That will put a stop to a lot of that."
Rep. Rick Hardcastle (R-Vernon), chairman of the Agriculture and Livestock Committee who also serves with Hilderbran on the Natural Resources Committee, made some cogent points regarding TTC investor participation. Said Hardcastle, "One of our arguments is if you're going to condemn my farm and put an eight-lane highway down the middle and then turn around and lease out the median to a fast food restaurant, why are we being cut out of being able to own that fast-food restaurant?"
Hardcastle said a statute already in place for a landowner to collect tolls as one of the investors needs more specificity, and he will work towards that end. On a final note, Hardcastle said the corridor did not bode well for the future of Texas agriculture.
"The Trans Texas Corridor is one of the scariest things on the horizon for agricultural landowners. It can be a great thing for the future of Texas, no doubt, and is probably needed since we're 10 to 15 years behind on highways, but it can also be the largest wreck production agriculture's been through in the last 100 years," he said.
In Part II, some landowners located in the likely path of the proposed Trans Texas Corridor will have their say.
The whole title wouldn't fit within the limits of Free Republic, so I am putting it below this paragraph.
Trans Texas Corridor:
Visionary concept or a
train wreck for agriculture?
It depends on who you ask!
This is a pro Trans-Texas Corridor ping list.
Please let me know by Freepmail if you want on or off the list.
A map of possible alternatives for TTC-35. 
Free Republic search on keyword "TTC"
Interview (Audio) NPR | February 8, 2005 A Superhighway for Texas?
Here's the website with more info and explanation:
http://www.keeptexasmoving.org/
Here's a list of meetings where you can ask questions(and I encourage everyone who can to attend and ask questions)
http://www.keeptexasmoving.org/pdfs/TTC-35_Public_Meetings.pdf
Here's a link to the map of the TTC-35 corridor alternatives, which are approximately 10 miles wide study areas (the actual selected single corridor will be at most 1/4 mile wide):
http://www.keeptexasmoving.org/pdfs/TTC-35_Alternatives_Map.pdf
1990-2000 Population Growth of Border Metro Areas
Port of Houston teams up with Panama to draw a piece of Asia's massive trade away from West Coast
Neither -it's a Texas size cluster f...!
People don't seem to realize they are talking about wiping out entire cities, and in some cases COUNTIES that are full of historical sites as well as agricultural land under PRIVATE ownership!
The Spainish company that owns this (Citra?) has already screwed over Canada...when will we finally tell our politicians that enough is ENOUGH?
Could you please direct me to the company that is paying for your to astroturf? I am interested in a little extra money and this seams like an easy way to do it.
That doesn't matter. All that matters is that those in Austion who are pushing this bill will get very high paying jobs from the companies involved in it when they leave public service.
Toll roads, property taxes, and thinking about indexing the gas tax. What happend to republicans being the party of limited government? And yes, I am from Texas.
Name one city that is being wiped out (much less a county). More facts and less hyperbole might lead to a more convincing argument.
Most of the folks calling themselves Texas Republicans used to be Texas Democrats. Their views really haven't changed (in fact, many of them said when they switched 'I didn't leave the Democratic party, it left me.')
Neither -it's a Texas size cluster f...!
Please specify which 'entire cities' and 'counties' that will be 'wiped out'.
Because that is a bold-face lie. If you are against it, fine, state the reasons and stick to the facts. If your position is correct, why must you resort to lies and ridiculous hyperbole?
Easy! The town of Bastrop, Bastrop County, located in Southeastern part of Central Texas. Towns like Marion, Cibolo Geronimo, Zorn and Staples sit in the triangle between I-35 and I-10, along with the town of McQueeny and Lake McQueeny .
The land between the two interstates will be gone as they come together in the southern part of the state.
Look at the TTC page... there are a LOT of small towns and counties under those purty blue and yellow lines.
What exactly are we going to be transporting?
Manufacturing is still very weak. The companies that moved from the US to Mexico are starting to head out for places with cheaper labor, like China.
IMO, The "Free" trade agreement has less to do with making transportation faster/cheaper/better than it does to ERASE what's left of our borders.
More facts and less hyperbole might lead to a more convincing argument.
My *facts* are fine, Hon!
How's yours?
Oh. Please see post #13.
Oh. Please see post #13.
I've got a veery bad feelin' about this beast.
Depends...
do I get a cut?
:)
Sorry, but that is false. The first TTC corridor, the one parallel to I-35, is only considering these corridors in this map: http://www.keeptexasmoving.org/pdfs/TTC-35_Alternatives_Map.pdf
None of the 4 come within 10 miles of Bastrop. And there have been subsequent statements that the portion of the TTC that bypasses Austin will use the Hwy 130 tollway that is already under construction, which will pass a few miles east of the Austin airport, which is about 15 miles west of Bastrop. The corridor is at most going to be 800-1000 feet wide(as TXDOT has studied the concept they've narrowed down from 1200' the ROW width potentially needed. Bastrop and all the other towns you named are all wider than that, and no roads will go through them, because it would cost more to take residences and businesses than to build through undeveloped rural land. That's the whole point of this concept, to save money and minimize relocations by building where people are not. Do you realize that to add the same capacity to existing roads would require taking by eminent domain land from far more owners and residents that front the urban roads?
As to the other cities you named, even after buildout (if that happens) all might be with 1-20 miles of 2 corridors, but none would be 'wiped out'. Before I go further, do you understand that those wide colored lines on the map are only 10-mile wide study areas of options, not the actual land that would be taken, and that only 1 of those routes would be chosen, in which just a single 800-1000' wide route would be required?
And why on earth would miles and miles of land between to roads be 'gone' after the roads were built? These roads are spraying nuclear radiation for miles and miles.
In other words, they do not really work for a living nor do they understand the concept of limited government.
My sympathies with producers of anything, not made in this country, but the multitude of lies echoed back and forth between "business professionals" are bubbles waiting to burst.
The Bush Administration is subsidizing foreign profiteers, and there are trillions of dollars involved, the name of "foreign investment," that providing in the U.S., junk.
The isles at the stores, are full of junk produce.
The oranges are bad.
The avocados are bad.
The lettuce is bad.
The tomatoes are bad.
If you think that it costs less to buy oranges from Chile, than from Florida, you are mistaken.
The costs of doing business, that is hurting production in America, are government-imposed costs --- taxes.
The U.S. government taxes production. The State and local governments, have followed suit.
Here and there, there is some rebellion, but the business assumptions are as phony as whatever the last tech bubble was, that burst.
Kind of like the business assumptions that led to massive spending of the public's money, on the cities' infrastructures, for a hockey league (mostly government-subsidized), that no longer exists except on paper.
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.
