Proposed route released for Trans-Texas Corridor

Texas Agriculture ^ | April 21, 2006 | Mike Barnett

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The slightly rolling hills about five miles east of Troy is where Robert Fleming tills the Blackland soils day after day, providing a living off the land for his wife and children.

Wistfully looking over a field of six-inch high corn on April 5, Fleming agonized over the realization that the first section of the Trans-Texas Corridor may plow smack through his property.

According to the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), the first leg of the toll road would flank Interstate 35 to the east from Dallas to San Antonio and would then follow I-35 to Laredo instead of Brownsville, which was originally planned.

In a 4,300-page, two-foot-thick draft environmental report, the much anticipated path for the toll road was released by TxDOT on April 4. Approximately 1 million Texans potentially affected by the TTC can now look at a map of the proposed route and see if their land, business or home could be potentially affected by the huge project.

However, even with the route being narrowed to a 10-mile wide swath, this draft environmental impact statement is still subject to review, public hearings this summer and additional work over the next year. Where the final route (1,200 feet or less) will land in that 10-mile width is anyone's guess.

Wherever it ends up, it's likely to affect the 3,500 acres Fleming farms and ranches—most of which lies east of Troy and Temple—right in the proposed corridor path.

"I figured all along that it was going to be that way, but this morning it kind of set it in stone, that this was the final route," this Bell County Farm Bureau member said on April 5, noting he saw the route on a local television news show. "If it comes through one side or the other, I'll be highly impacted."

A vocal opponent of the TTC since its inception, Fleming doesn't understand why this route's been chosen.

"You go west of the interstate and it's rocks and cedar trees and you can't run a lot of livestock out there. You can't farm," he said. "This land here, you plant it to grass and build fences and pens and dig tanks, you can run a cow to three acres. Or, you farm and plant it to corn and make a hundred bushels to the acre or plant wheat and make 50 or 60, or maize will make 4,500 or 5,000 pounds pretty easy. And do it without irrigation.

"I've always pushed for expansion of I-35—that land along I-35, 300 to 400 feet on either side of it. That's already there. This, once it's concreted over, it's gone."

That's the choice, too, of Marc Scott, McLennan County Farm Bureau president. He farms, ranches and has just built a new house east of Waco on land that also lies on the proposed path.

Noting that he sees the need for I-35 expansion, Scott contends the route should follow I-35 more closely.

"As the paper said, there's a million people being displaced by this thing. That and by the time they buy all the land, and the controversy they're going to go through, I think they could double- or even triple-deck I-35 all the way down, if they can't buy the land next to it." he said.

The recommended corridor, according to the report, includes 2,403 square miles of prime farmland, the highest amount of the 12 alternatives studied. Although alternative routes west of I-35 would have run over less productive land, the report said those routes would not fulfill the road's purpose of taking cars and trucks off I-35.

North of Waco, the proposed route cuts away from I-35 and I-35 East to follow the most direct route toward the eastern side of Dallas, a path that runs right through productive Blackland farms. From Waco south, the western side of the 10-mile swath typically runs between two to five miles from the interstate. South of San Antonio to Laredo, the study corridor narrows from 10 miles to four miles and directly follows the I-35 tract.

According to the Texas Farm Bureau Research, Education and Policy Development Department, the typical corridor section will require 146 acres of right-of-way per mile. The study area of the proposed TTC-35 will include more than 2,400 square miles of prime farmland and nearly 1 million residents.

According to Texas Farm Bureau Legislative Director Steve Pringle, Farm Bureau will continue its opposition to the corridor.

"However, we recognize that many of the public officials which supported the corridor initially continue service in Austin today," he said. "It should be noted that progress was made in the last session of the legislature with the support of the governor and the current chairman of the Transportation Committee in the Texas legislature."

Pringle said concessions were made to agriculture that impact landowners access in crossing the corridor and economic development along the corridor, among others.

"As long as our policy position remains unchanged, we will continue to try to work with the legislature to minimize the impact of the corridor on farmers and ranchers," he added.

Scott, too, thinks that approach is important: "I know it's coming and I would like to have some say."

Meanwhile, Fleming just wants to be left alone: "I don't want anything to do with the corridor. I just want to farm. I started farming back when I got out of high school. I tried other jobs and I came back to farming. Now, it looks like about halfway through my career, it's going to be busted. I hope not, but it looks like it."

[raybbr]

Economic Costs: Based on the estimated construction cost of $31.4 million per mile, the 4,000-mile Texas sections of the NAFTA corridors will cost $125.5 billion, not including right-of-way and miscellaneous costs. Adding in right-of-way costs of $11.7–$38 billion and miscellaneous costs of $8–$20 billion, the estimated total outlay for the NAFTA corridors in Texas ranges from $145.2 billion to $183.5 billion. Cost estimates for the entire NAFTA corridor system have not been disclosed but could double those figures. Public return on this massive investment will be minimal because, even though the NAFTA corridors will be toll roads, most of the profits will flow to private entities under exclusive development agreements with the various state governments. This move to privatize highways contrasts sharply with the U.S. Interstate Highway System that was built with public money and benefited the nation at large.

Thirty-one million dollars a mile!!!!!!

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

You're welcome.

[RobbyS]

Don't show the proposed I-69.

[B4Ranch]

Just the corridor of where it'll be.