Cintra will invest $7.2 billion for the Trans-Texas Corridor

TxDOT Expressway ^ | December 16, 2004 | Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT)

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE December 16, 2004

AUSTIN —Taking an historic step, the Texas Transportation Commission today selected a proposal by Cintra — an international group of engineering, construction and financial firms — as the best value for the state in developing the Oklahoma-to-Mexico portion of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC-35).

Cintra proposes to invest $6 billion in a toll road between Dallas and San Antonio by 2010, give the state $1.2 billion for additional transportation improvements between Oklahoma and Mexico, and to extend the corridor into the Lower Rio Grande Valley to Mexico.

"This is an historic change in the way major transportation assets are built and paid for in Texas," said Ric Williamson, chairman of the Texas Transportation Commission. "Private investment, not taxpayer dollars, will be where we look first for funding."

To address the state’s need for immediate congestion relief on Interstate 35, the first phase of Cintra’s proposal calls for developing $6 billion in new roadways roughly paralleling the interstate by 2010. This includes building 316 miles of new four-lane divided highway from Dallas to San Antonio. According to the proposal, pending environmental clearance and the public-involvement process, construction could begin immediately after right-of-way acquisition.

Cintra’s package also includes funding options for a route connecting southeast San Antonio to State Highway 130 and for relocating — to the east — the existing Union Pacific Railroad between San Antonio and Austin.

Future projects envisioned by Cintra include separate lanes for cars and trucks on SH 130, a relief route around the west side of Fort Worth, a TTC-35 route from San Antonio to the Rio Grande Valley, and rail between Dallas and San Antonio.

Cintra is one of three groups to submit detailed proposals on how to develop the Oklahoma to Mexico element of the Trans-Texas Corridor. TxDOT has been studying the proposals since August, and today the Texas Transportation Commission accepted a staff recommendation that the Cintra proposal provided the best long-term value to the state.

In return for building the new transportation corridor and giving it to the state — plus paying the state $1.2 billion to invest in the corridor — Cintra proposes to negotiate for a 50-year contract to maintain and operate the new highway as a toll road.

"The private sector is willing and able to invest in transportation improvements to reduce congestion, improve safety, provide economic development, and protect our quality of life," said Williamson. "There are many details to be worked out and separate environmental studies must be completed. Without a doubt, the private sector is knocking at our door with a nearly incredible opportunity for Texas."

Contract negotiations between TxDOT and Cintra will begin immediately. The complete proposals will be made available for public review once a contract has been signed and TxDOT obtains ownership of the ideas and innovations presented by all three private firms. Prior to that, release of the proposals is prohibited due to the proprietary information they contain.

The five-member transportation commission voted unanimously to select Cintra as the state’s first private-sector firm on the Trans-Texas Corridor.

"In Texas, we’re breaking new ground," Commissioner Robert Nichols said. "By far, this will be one of the largest private-sector investments in transportation in U.S. history."

Commissioner Hope Andrade pointed to the proposal’s economic impact. "This is an enormously important crossroad for Texas," she said. "This project will mean jobs and opportunities for the people of this state for generations to come."

Commissioner John W. Johnson sees the proposal as a major stepping-stone toward the development of I-69 as well. "It amounts to a blueprint for building I-69," he said.

"All of us on the commission appreciate the vision of Gov. Perry in proposing the Trans-Texas Corridor, which has now become a reality." Commissioner Ted Houghton said.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Needed improvements or big government boondoggle?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

TTC Update. Ping your Texas friends.

[BobL]

I put that up last night also.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1303145/posts

Let's keep it going.

There are some real wanderlusts out there that think this is the best idea since sliced bread.

[BobL]

TCC Ping

[BobL]

Your posting is a little different than mine.

A couple of things worth noting in your posting:

1) This company will "build and maintain" this new toll road (and, I guess, somehow make money).

2) We don't get to see the contract until it's signed, sealed, and delivered. That's real nice. I guess we can start complaining after we see what our wonderful governor has committed us to. Here's what to look for:

a) State guarantee of a specific return on investment (with taxpayers being stuck if the road is a White Elephant)

b) Non-compete Clause: California was unable to find any investor for a set of toll lanes running right down the middle of the horrendously-clogged freeway SH 91 (possibly the worst in CA) unless they committed the state to not building or upgrading anything (freeways or surface roads) that ran parallel to SH 91. When California had to add a three quarter stretch of a single lane - they were SOL and wound up having to take over the entire toll road, just to be able to add that stretch.

c) Tolling for I-35, or some other restrictions. I-35 cannot be allowed to compete with this toll road, or the toll road will never make a penny. Something will have to be done - somehow, to protect the new toll road.


We get to see all of that AFTER the governor has signed the contract - seems to me that we have a dysfunctional state.

Finally, watch out for the governor's shills, they're into personal attacks now.

[BobL]

Final post (before going to work):

To believe that there will not be any non-compete clauses, one would have to believe that Governor Hutchison in 2007, or any future governor will not simply raise the gas tax a bit and then widen the existing I-35 (adding 2 lanes in the cities, and 1 lane between the cities) - and thereby driving this toll road in bankruptcy.

You would be making that bet with $7.2 Billion on the line. It ain't gonna happen.

[lodwick]

You know that it's a scam to end all scams.

[Freebird Forever]

Cintra — an international group of engineering, construction and financial firms

Does anyone have more information on Cintra?

I found a Mexican holding company which specializes in airline transportation by that name.

Link to Cintra

"CINTRA is the holding corporation for a group of companies that participate in the air transportation business and related aviation services. We are committed to: Offering trunk, regional and freight airline transportation systems, as well as supplementary services to the aviation industry, applying the highest commercial practices in full compliance with current norms and regulations. "

[MarshallDillon]

B: BIG Government boondoggle!

Thanks for the post. Yesterday, a friend of mine at Austin Toll Party took copies a 15 page press release to a Texas Transportation Commission OPEN MEETING and was ordered to leave by one of the TTC members or his representative for hending it out.

Change the road sign to: "Welcome to SOVIET TEXAS"!

[MarshallDillon]

More complete info available at: http://www.corridorwatch.com

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Redbob]

As one who only occasionally must drive I-35, I think this sounds like a great idea.
Maybe this toll road will be what the interstate highway system once hoped to be: a way to get around the country without having to dawdle through every Middlesex village and town.

I'd gladly pay to be able to avoid driving through Dallas or Ft. Worth on the way south toward San Antone or the Hill Country.

[TXnMA]

I'd gladly pay to be able to avoid driving through Dallas or Ft. Worth on the way south toward San Antone or the Hill Country.

At 15 - 20 cents per mile? (With no guarantee that 20 cents is a fixed upper limit if they don't turn a profit?)

[TXnMA]

MD, last night, I couldn't remember who originally turned me on to this TTC fiasco; apologies for not pinging you to BobL's Cintas thread yesterday evening...

[TXnMA]

Needed improvements or big government boondoggle?

TTC=BGB

(...except I'd substitute "Monstrous". Humongous", "Outlandish", "Asinine", "Criminal", and/or "Outrageous" for "Big"...)

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Thanks for the post. Yesterday, a friend of mine at Austin Toll Party took copies a 15 page press release to a Texas Transportation Commission OPEN MEETING and was ordered to leave by one of the TTC members or his representative for hending it out.

Whatever happened to freedom in Texas? Lemme guess...it was stolen by a governor intent on shoving his hero project down the "little people's" throats?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Why not just widen I-35 by two lanes in the country and four lanes in the city, as was mentioned in an earlier reply?

As I understand it, Texas devotes about 1/4th of its gas tax money to education. Imagine what directing ALL of the tax to roads could do for I-35 and other "needy" highways.

[1rudeboy]

"This is an historic change in the way major transportation assets are built and paid for in Texas," said Ric Williamson, chairman of the Texas Transportation Commission. "Private investment, not taxpayer dollars, will be where we look first for funding."

Anyone remember when conservatives used to think that this sort of thing (generally) is a good idea?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Anyone remember when conservatives used to think that this sort of thing (generally) is a good idea?

The problem is, with "free" alternatives around, people might choose to use "free" roads their gas taxes already pay for while avoiding the extra cost of tolls.

[BobL]

"I'd gladly pay to be able to avoid driving through Dallas or Ft. Worth on the way south toward San Antone or the Hill Country."

That's understandable, I'd probably pay, at times, to go on a toll road, so as to escape a clogged freeway. The problem is that they cannot both function side-by-side in any realistic economic model, without some form of monopoly to protect the toll road. That's why there has to be a wording in the contract that somehow forces people to use the toll road.

In other words, the governor here basically just stole I-35 from us - that what angers me.