That’s true, but this concept also minimizes the impact on landowners. You’d think landowners would be for it.
Instead of having part of your land taken for a freeway, another part for a pipeline, and then a railroad track coming through it as well, it’s all concentrated into the smallest amount feasible.
It’s going to happen regardless. Let’s do it smart, even it isn’t optimal for all parties concerned. It takes less land.
OK, then, here’s a more pragmatic reason to slim down or stop this corridor. There are people quoted in news articles indicating their willingness to stop the “frickin’ road” using armed force. Do you really think there’d be such vitriol if they were simply putting in a 300-foot-wide interstate?