Posted on 04/09/2008 5:10:22 AM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
As the state's population continues to grow in its urban centers, expansion plans for the highway system continue to be the focus for transportation improvements.
The Trans Texas Corridor proposal is aimed to alleviate traffic congestion, improve air quality and provide safer traveling for drivers, among other goals. In 2002, Texas Governor Rick Perry released the plan to create the passageway, which spans northeast from Laredo to Oklahoma and is set to total 4,000 miles in the next 50 years.
The $140 billion project calls for the incorporation of new toll roads, commuter railways, power lines and gas pipelines, while promoting economic development and movement.
The proposal, in its sixth year, received opposition in Austin this Saturday, as hundreds of voters marched in disapproval of the plan. The proposal has received a steady current of opposition over the years from homeowners who realize that the land and homes their families own may be potentially threatened through acquisition for construction of the corridor.
The corridor is planned for two regions of the state, one of which will run through Laredo and potentially pass through Waco, has been called TTC 35. The other corridor, TTC 69, will run northeast from Brownsville, pass through Houston and proceed toward Texarkana.
Opponents of the project include city-based groups, who spoke against taking away from private rural and urban landowners at the Austin rally. There is a concern for the loss of local property taxes, usually absorbed by the counties and their school districts, and a belief that the project is designed to increase transportation revenue more than improve transportation.
Texas Department of Transportation spokesman Chris Lippincott said that in response to the public disapproval, TxDot is keeping the issue of growth as a motivator for proceeding with the corridor and understands that private property rights are to be protected.
"We are faced with significant opportunities and challenges when it comes to population growth, the environment and air quality," Lippincott said. "Every time the legislation comes to Austin it addresses the expansion of private property rights and opportunities to private landowners. TxDot does not seize land -- we purchase it at fair market value. The acquisition of land for the corridor will not be any different than acquiring land for any other type of state project."
Lippincott said that TxDot has received suggestions by the public to consider greatly expanding the current Interstate 35 as an alternative to constructing the corridor and in response released a strategic plan that outlined the project requirements and cost to taxpayers.
The plan calls for wiping out businesses and historical markers in Waco, Austin and other cities.
Lippincott said that even Baylor's campus would be affected, as the Clifton Robinson Tower stands feet away from the highway.
Lippincott said that the public should understand the implications of taking this mode of action.
"In order to expand the footprint of I-35 in Waco, for example, we would essentially be taking out churches and moving schools," Lippincott said. "This would involve the acquisition of land from the Texas Ranger Museum as well as the First Street Cemetery. Our state uses I-35 as an artery road. We either have to expand I-35 or come up with a relief route."
Waco Metropolitian Transit Organization has been working with TxDot for the phase of the project to include McLennan County.
The organization's director Chris Evilia said that the organization is awaiting approval from the Federal Highway Administration to determine if Waco is still projected for inclusion on the corridor.
The transit organization is also waiting to hear the status of a two-tier plan for the project.
The first tier provides that the part of the corridor running through McLennan County will be 10 miles wide. The second tier is a detailed study of exactly where within the county it will be.
"At this point we are not sure that it is coming through McLennan County," Evilia said. "There is a possibility that the corridor might be planned for as much as 20 miles west of our area or 50 to 70 miles east. If that happens, we would not have a say in it."
Evilia said that the response to the corridor in McLennan County have included different degrees of opposition.
"It depends on which (transit organization) policy board member you ask," Evilia said. "The rural areas are opposed and the urban areas are less opposed. In the urban areas there is still more of a latency approach that wants to see TxDot finish the improvements on I-35 and then see if there is an additional need for the Trans Texas Corridor."
Lippincott contends that inaction is the worst kind of action in light of the state's growing population and environmental concerns.
"I haven't encountered anyone who has looked at the future of this state and thinks we should do nothing," Lippincott said. "There is nothing more dangerous than doing nothing."
TxDot has projected that the population growth by the year 2060 in the Harris, Dallas, and Bexar counties will total more than 2 million.
John Pape
FortBendNow.com
April 8, 2008
Anyone still wanting to be heard on the controversial I-69/Trans-Texas Corridor Proposal can still have their chance after Texas Department of Transportation officials announced the public comment period has been extended for an additional 30 days.
TxDOT made the announcement late last week. The comment period was initially slated to close March 19, but the 30-day extension will allow for additional comment through April 18.
TxDOT Executive Director Amadeo Saenz said that his department had requested the extension, and it had been approved by the Federal Highway Administration, which oversees the environmental review process for transportation projects. Saenz pointed out that his agency held over 500 meetings on the TTC, including 254 county meetings, 95 environmental meetings and hearings on the I-69 portion of the TTC, 171 meetings and hearings on the I-35 portion of the corridor and 12 town hall meetings.
“TxDOT’s request results in a 30-day extension beyond the original closing date of March 19. The public comment period opened in December and an extension through April 18 allows more citizens the opportunity to express their views regarding I-69/Trans-Texas Corridor,” Saenz said. “We have already received over 14,000 comments regarding I-69/TTC, and although the extension may affect the project’s schedule, we are committed to public awareness and public involvement.”
State Sen. Glenn Hegar, an outspoken critic of the Trans-Texas Corridor, was among numerous elected officials who had called for the 30-day extension.
“I was glad that TxDOT and the FHWA agreed to extend the public comment period for the environmental study,” Hegar said. “The potential impact on the local environment is significant and few know that as well as those who live on the land under study. The acrimonious relations between TxDOT and the public have led to great skepticism for many, and that is understandable. That said, it is extremely important that all concerned parties detail their position in writing, particularly as it relates to any negative environmental effects that the project would have on the area, so that their thoughts are clearly known to the FHWA, which will act as the ultimate authority on the path of this potential roadway.”
Although no further public meetings are scheduled during the 30-day extension, the public can still submit comments electronically or by mail. Comments can be submitted on-line at www.keeptexasmoving.com or by mail in care of I-69/TTC, PO Box 14428, Austin, TX 78761.
Even as the 30-day extension was being announced, TxDOT also announced the newly-appointed members of an I-69-TTC Advisory Committee. No members came from the Fort Bend or Greater Houston area, but Hegar’s Senate District 18 will be represented by Victoria Mayor Will Armstrong; Carbett “Trey” Duhon, acting vice president/director of Citizens for a Better Waller County and Chanda Spenrath, executive director of the El Campo City Development Corporation.
Trans-Texas Corridor PING!
BTTT
Not Austin, we've already have our TTC segment.
Funny TXDoT doesn't mind tearing down historic markers, buildings, graveyards, etc. in rural areas. (among other decimating acts)
Well, it sound like the “wiping out” would be done, were I-35 to be expanded in lieu of building TTC-35.
If they are talking the Texas Ranger Museum then they’re talking the Dr. Pepper Museum also. Down with TTC.
Lippincott and TXDOT are just sucking wind. They are trying to play urban property owners off rural property owners in a divide-and-conquer strategy.
For many years, TXDOT has refused to run its agency with the slightest efficiency or vision, since it wants the public to clamor for TTC at all costs. This is the most crass example of a poison pill I have ever seen.
Abolish TXDOT!
Either you widen the existing road or you build a new road?
The third option should be to scrap plans for a mega-tollroad and instead disperse the growing traffic burden on I-35.
Many of those traveling north and south on I-35 would take alternate north-south routes to the east or west if there were other good roads that didn’t involve stops in every town along the way. There aren’t.
It’s crazy how TXDOT continues to trumpet the need to relieve congestion and improve air quality and safety, yet they continue to condense traffic into one north-south path through the center of Texas.
Improve existing smaller routes into good divided highways, alterative routes throughout the state, serving Texans, not just those passing through — that’s the 3rd option. But it’s just too common sense for TXDOT to understand.
And it won’t solve the NAFTA truck problem.
Close the border to the south.
They’re not going to build the TTC through any large cities. (too expensive) Thw widening of I-35 has been in progress for years.
They’re making all alternatives to the TTC sound infeasible.
Which of these alternate routes would you chose to improve?
Improve (including removing stop lights/speed zones through small towns, which would probably require building overpasses or bypasses):
— 281 from San Antonio/Austin to Stephenville and Wichita Falls, where it would connect with I-44. Can you imagine how much traffic that would take off of I-35 for drivers heading to Oklahoma City or Colorado? Avoid DFW altogether.
— 83 N/S through West Texas, from Junction to Abilene to the Panhandle.
— Widen (NOT TTC/tolled) 69 from Houston to Lufkin, then 259/271 to Kilgore and Paris, where it connects with the Indian Nation Turnpike into Oklahoma en route to Tulsa and Kansas City.
(Why don’t the tollroad proponents plan on connecting to Oklahoma’s tollroads? Makes no sense whatsoever to funnel every OKC-bound vehicle into a traffic nightmare north of Gainesville.)
We need more N/S routes across this state (as evidenced by the fiasco on I-45 out of Houston during Hurricane Rita).
TXDOT lists congestion, safety, and environmental concerns as prime reasons for building the TTC. However, dispersing traffic will meet all of those goals better than concentrating traffic into mega-corridors.
We need to offer alternatives instead of sending so much traffic through Dallas/Ft. Worth, despite what business interests there may want.
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.