Perry Touts Benefits Of Trans Texas Corridor Plan

KWTX-TV 10 ^ | March 15, 2005 | KWTX

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Gov. Rick Perry, in satellite interviews with TV stations around the state Monday, said the $184 billion Trans Texas Corridor project is the best solution to the growing congestion on Interstate 35, especially in urban areas.

"It will take that massive amount of congestion out of city centers," Perry said.

Perry's Trans Texas Corridor Plan calls for a 4,000-mile network of transportation corridors that would crisscross the state with separate highway lanes for passenger vehicles and trucks, passenger rail, freight rain, commuter rail and dedicated utility zones for water, natural gas and broadband communications.

Click Here For Interactive Map Of Proposed Corridor Route

The Texas Department of Transportation signed a contract Friday with the Cintra-Zachry consortium for planning on the controversial Trans Texas Corridor project, the most ambitious highway construction project since the Eisenhower administration launched the effort to build an interstate highway system.

Madrid-based Cintra was chosen in December by the Texas Transportation Commission to begin developing the first phase of the massive project.

Designers envision a corridor with six separate passenger vehicle lanes and four commercial truck lanes; two high speed passenger rail lines, two freight rain lines and two commuter rail lines and a utility zone that will accommodate water, electric, natural gas, petroleum, fiber optic and telecommunications lines.

Under the agreement signed Friday, Cintra-Zachry will begin work on a master development plan for the first segment of the corridor, which will parallel Interstate 35 from San Antonio to Oklahoma.

The plan will take 12 to 15 months to complete.

Cintra, which is an international engineering and construction firm, and the San Antonio-based Zachry Construction Corporation, have agreed to provide $7.2 billion for construction of the first six segments of the project, Perry's office said.

Cintra will spend $6 billion to build a four-lane toll road on the corridor and will pay the state $1.2 billion in return for the exclusive rights to operate the toll road for 50 years, money that Perry said could be used for maintenance and expansion of the existing interstate.

Cintra would also operate businesses along the route.

A constitutional amendment approved by voters in November 2003 cleared the way for the state to issue bonds to fund major transportation projects on an accelerated basis and to combine available funds with other funds to help build toll roads.

Perry says the project will be good for Texas, but the plan is not without its opponents.

Officials in Interstate 35 corridor cities such as Waco and Dallas are concerned about the commercial impact of the project.

McLennan County Commissioners approved a resolution last month opposing the corridor.

The Waco-based Texas Farm Bureau also opposes the project because of concerns about the loss of farm and ranchland and the impact of the construction on the tax base of Texas counties and communities.

The newsletter of the conservative Eagle Forum called the project "Tyrannosaurus Tex."

Perry likened those who oppose the plan to Texans of an earlier age who stood in opposition to the construction of interstate highways or farm to market roads.

"There will always be opponents to change," he said.

Click Here For Trans-Texas Corridor Web Site

Click Here For Background Information On The Trans-Texas Corridor

Click Here For An Opposing Point Of View From Corridor Watch

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The original article includes a link to a video of Rick Perry talking about the Trans-Texas Corridor.

[isthisnickcool]

well, they just passed an insane tax bill out of the Texas house and sent it to the Senate. I had my accountant read the law. here was his bottom line:

The wage tax is a crock of crap and this is going to make employers leave the state. Why would we want to keep businesses here and not move them offshore?

So, it appears to me that the Trans-Texas Corridor is being built to give Texas businesses that leave the state a way to get out quicker then move their merchandise through the state faster to the states they moved to.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

From the Corsicana Daily Sun:

3/15 Corridor meets opposition: Commissioners concerned about the way the proposal is written

Navarro County commissioners voted Monday to oppose the Trans Texas Corridor project. Seminars have been held in the county to educate citizens about the project. Daily Sun file photo

By LOYD COOK/Daily Sun Staff

All but one Navarro County commissioner voted Monday to oppose the proposed Trans Texas Corridor project endorsed by the state, approving a resolution to that effect be sent to the state Legislature.

Only Precinct 1 Commissioner Kit Herrington did not vote in favor of the measure. Herrington abstained from the vote, saying he had confidence the area's state representative and state senator would protect local interests. Herrington added he did not feel comfortable voting for or against something he didn't feel adequately informed about.

County Judge Alan Bristol said he spent some time researching the matter and looking at the governing legislation.

"I'm not saying we should be opposed to the corridor," Bristol said. "The resolution is saying that we're not in favor of it as (the enabling legislation) is presently written."

Precinct 4 Commissioner John Paul Ross concurred. He made the motion to approve the resolution which was seconded by Precinct 2 Commissioner Olin Nickelberry. Bristol joined Precinct 3 Commissioner William Baldwin in approving the resolution.

Area resident Grover Pearson agreed with Herrington's thoughts on not approving the measure. "I hate to see us oppose this when we don't know enough about it," Pearson said. "I hate to line us up with something when things might change and ... it's something that's not even in five or 10 years."

Bristol had noted that the corridor project is a 50-year plan and "we'll all probably be dead by then."

But he said the plan calls for up to a quarter-mile wide path that would include high-speed rail along with multiple lanes of traffic.

Ross said a major drawback is, as the present legislation is written, there would be very limited access and exit to and from the proposed corridor. He said the access and exit would be at major intersections, like I-35 and Highway 171 -- many miles apart.

And with the distances so far, Ross said farmers finding their land bisected would have difficulty moving equipment to opposite sides of the roadway -- likely having to travel many miles just to get past the corridor and back to the other portion of their property.

That's a concern of farmers in his precinct in western Navarro County, Ross said.

Of the several routes proposed for the corridor -- intended to run from the Red River in the north to the Mexican border on the south -- Navarro County has one of the higher-probability routes proposed for its western border with Hill County.

----------

Loyd Cook may be contacted via e-mail at
loydcook@corsicanadailysun.com

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Trans-Texas Corridor PING!

[ken21]

"There will always be opponents to change," he said.

that's not the issue.

the issue is giving this lucrative contract to a cintra, a spanish company, conducted in secrecy.

[Diddle E. Squat]

$184 billion!?!?! Wow. Where the heck are they going to get all that cash? Makes me fondly recall the initial "only a couple billion!" estimates for the Big Dig project!

Investors and tollway users.

I suggest rereading the (albeit poorly written) article. The $184 billion cost estimate is for the full 50+ year, 4000 mile network buildout of roads, rail, and utilities. The actual Dallas-San Antonio section that will be built first (within the next 6-10 years) will cost $6 billion. The private toll company will pay all the construction and land acquisition costs, plus $1.2 billion to the state for the rights to build and operate the tollway for 50-years. Texas is paying Cintra $3.5 million to develop a master plan for the project, that's it for the state's costs. Texas also has the right to cancel the contract at any time.

The whole idea is to get toll road investors and then users to pay for new roads, instead of the state.

[Diddle E. Squat]

The TTC has nothing to do with the tax bills in the legislature. (Though I agree that the House's bill is ridiculous and will hurt job creation, when we already have one of the higher unemployment rates.)

[isthisnickcool]

So, you can assure me that no money from the general guaranty fund will ever go to the TTC?

[Diddle E. Squat]

Well I'm not a lawyer and haven't read the entire agreement(though Tolerance Sucks Rocks posted a link to it a few days ago), but everything I read says yes, at least on the first Dallas-San Antonio segment, which is the only one with an agreement.

I could see in the future some other routes might not be sufficiently profitable as stand alone projects for a private firm to bid on, so maybe some of the latter roads (such as the ones out in West Texas that are more political than need-based) might require something like a 10-90,20-80,30-70 split in construction funding with the state paying part of the tab. But if the state gets a road but only pays 20% of the cost, that may still be a good deal(provided there is a sufficient need for it.) Though I also seem to recall that they were going to negotiate that after profits reached a certain threshold the remaining profits would be split between the company and state, with the state's portion used to fund future projects. Don't know if that is still in the agreement or not.

Tolerance Sucks Rocks, could you post the link to the comprehensive development agreement in future posts? I think it was from a Friday or Saturday thread.

[deport]

Comprehensive Development Agreement

Other documents

[BobL]

"Texas also has the right to cancel the contract at any time."

Please provide proof of the above. Or be more factual.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Here is a link to a list of items on the TxDOT website, including the CDA, exhibits, and a Cintra-Zachry "fact sheet."

http://www.dot.state.tx.us/txdotnews/ttc_update.htm

[BobL]

"Well I'm not a lawyer and haven't read the entire agreement"

I'll be more than happy to read through it.

That is, if you can get the governor or Cintra to release it. The last that I read said that portions (probably the key portions) will remain SECRET.

Forgive me for being suspicious, but this is exactly the same model that Cintra followed in Ontario - with politicians and their cronies saying how great the deal was for drivers - but only to later find that the people had been SCREWED BIG TIME, once the details finally got out.

[BobL]

"Here is a link to a list of items on the TxDOT website, including the CDA, exhibits, and a Cintra-Zachry "fact sheet."

Yes, but it's incomplete, as quoted below:

"*Note: Official signed version of CDA will be posted as soon as it becomes available."

Ok - it's been 4 days. I'm happy to give them a week or two. However, if they want three years, as in Canada, I may get a bit impatient.

(thanks for the ping - Tol)

[B-Chan]

As I've said before, I think that this is great news for Texas and I look forward to investing in the bonds!

By the way, I am not generally a supporter of new roads construction. I think freeways are for the most part ugly, sprawl-enabling neighborhood-killers. Among the reasons I make an exception to this and support the TTC is the possibility that high-speed intercity rail will become part of Texas' transportation options. I have long thought that high-speed rail infrastructure should be built and maintained as part of our comprehensive state transport mix. Another reason is that I expect that within the next 50 years or so several of the northernmost states of Mexico will vote to join the Union. The TTC system will enable Texas to integrate these new states into its economic development system more easily, and will allow easy access from Texas to Mexican ports on the Pacific coast. (Even if the northern Mexican states do not join the U.S., the existence of a direct superhighway and rail link between the Pacific coast ports in Mexico and the Gulf coast ports in Texas will be of immense strategic benefit to the United States, especially if we should ever be denied use of the Panama Canal for some reason.) I support the TTC because there is no way the 50 million citizens we will have here in the near future can be serviced by the freeways we have now. If Texas is to grow, we must have a transportation infrastructure capable of supporting that growth. Finally, I am in favor of toll roads instead of increased taxes. It only makes sense that users should bear more of the cost of building and maintaining our freeways.

For these reasons and others, I support the TTC project.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Thanks for the links to the CDA.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Please don't be such a lazy ass. It is in post 13.