The Super Superhighway 1005
valdean writes "The state of Texas is seeking to build a 4,000-mile megahighway network between Oklahoma and Mexico, called the Trans-Texas Corridor. The highway will be up to a quarter-mile across, and include separate lanes for passenger vehicles, large trucks, freight railways, high-speed commuter railways, and infrastructure for utilities including water lines, oil and gas pipelines, electricity, and broadband. In a recent press release, the governor of Texas said it will 'forever change the way we build roads.' So much for scenic drives."
Comment removed (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Soooo... (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Traffic jams? (Score:5, Informative)
In terms of the traffic, there are 2 possible outcomes: The highway will sit almost completely unused [google.com] or it will be a giant parking lot as everyone uses this megaroad to get wherever they're going.
Re:Fine and Dandy (Score:3, Informative)
Officials promise property owners will be fairly compensated for any land seized.
I suppose they would seize them? Of course, it'd be a lot of different property owners to deal with, rather than just a few farmers.
Interesting that there is a capacity to seize land, especially in the United States where the right to property seems so enshrined in your constitution? I'll have to look into this further.
Humm (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Fine and Dandy (Score:5, Informative)
Two words: eminent domain.
Re:Soooo... (Score:5, Informative)
If the new super highway is planned and executed correctly (i.e. limited development along the route, avoid passing directly through urban areas, etc.), it could do a lot to help traffic problems in the cities. Also, from the conceptual pictures I've seen, it will be safer for both passenger vehicles and trucks, because they will be running on separate sets of lanes with their own entrance/exit ramps, etc.
Some more details... (Score:4, Informative)
Cintra is ponying up all the money for this project. The State of Texas will pay nothing. And gets the ability to take over tolls in 50 years.
It will go south, around the east side of Dallas, and around the east side of Austin.
Tolls are expected to be about what current tolls are, which means (according to the Star Telegram, at least) to drive the whole thing will cost about $40. Seems like a lot, but it isn't - truck drivers have to routinely sit in Dallas/Fort Worth traffic, which probably costs an hour's worth of time. Same with Austin.
I don't particularly feel sorry for the small towns - usually, the town builds up around the road, and once they have several hundred people, drop the speed limit to 45 while going through their town. Thanks, guys. Not.
Oh, and the speed limit's supposed to be 85.
I'm really looking forward to it. For those of you who think this is minor, it's not. The drive from Mexico to Oklahoma is probably 10 hours - DFW is about an hour south from Oklahoma, 3 hours from Austin, and probably 8 from the border. Yes, Texas is big.
And for those who don't think this is so great... (Score:5, Informative)
A little Googling around and I found that those opposed to this thing have also organized, and can be found at http://www.corridorwatch.org
I haven't 100% made my mind up on this yet, but the fact that it's a toll road REALLY leaves a bad taste in my mouth, all the new roads being built around here are toll now, and that's a major annoyance of mine.
Anyway, I found that site describing the opposing viewpoint, and figured I'd pass it on...
Re:Speedy Limit (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Fine and Dandy (Score:5, Informative)
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."
Basically, the Founding Fathers knew that people would claim land that the Government would find too useful to pass up. So they put this piece into the Bill of Rights. This is called Eminent Domain. The government decides that it needs a piece of land, determines a fair value for it, and gives you the money, and you have to leave.
Now, this is is probematic on occasion because 'Just Compensation" isn't defined in the constitution, and it is up to the government to decide what is 'just'. You (sometimes) can sue for more money, but it's a real challenge in the courts.
Eminent Domain is something that governments need. The problem is balance.
Re:Why? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:The Roads Must Roll (Score:3, Informative)
Been involved with this before, on a smaller scale (Score:5, Informative)
It was a good project -- neither the state nor the county had funds to improve one of the single most congested segments of freeway in the country, and there were no good alternate routes. There was, however, a median, which a private company leased from the state for a nominal fee. They built toll lanes on their own nickel (well, Wall Street bond buyers' nickels) and opened for business. The deal, as they're proposing in Texas, was for the road to be privately run for 30 years and then turned over to the state, which would be able to continue to charge tolls.
The road's been open for less than a decade and although it's been a big success in terms added traffic capacity, there are some lessons no one expected:
Re:Super High(UP)ways (Score:4, Informative)
for those of you who havent had the forune of seeing a truly good mass transit system in action, let me put it this way: There is pretty much no-where in NYC that one cant get to on the train, 2 bucks will get you anywhere in the city, and you dont have the stress of sitting in traffic. Oh, and the subway's open 24/7/365 so no need to worry about not being able to get home. For the few places that the subway isnt useful, there are the buses, still more eficient than cars. For getting out to long island there's the LIRR and for upstate there's metro-north. The path and NJTransit connect in NJ. So yeah, more public transportation, not more cars.
Re:Some more details... (Score:2, Informative)
Speed doesn't kill, excessive speed does. Since we're talking about highways here, the factors that determine what constitues excessive speed are: weather conditions, heavy traffic (because drivers don't maintain safe distances), roads with turn radiuses and banking angles that aren't designed for speed, poor road maintanence, and poor vehicle condition or design.
Texas is basically always hot and sunny, so weather is out. The highway will obviously be designed and maintained for safe high-speed use. Traffic shouldn't be bad if the road has adequate capacity. Let's hope it does; there is an unfortunate tendency to design highways for today's traffic loads, completely neglecting the inevitable population growth in a region.
The only valid point you make is that American vehicle design is suboptimal for high speed driving. Aerodynamics really start to matter above 60mph or so, and your average SUV has a profile somewhat like a brick. Some cars and trucks aren't geared well for highway driving, and have to operate at ridiculously high RPM at high speed. I think this is the main reason for the poor fuel economy you mentioned. Older cars simply vibrate and make a lot of noise. These factors are probably why high speed driving is "stressful," combined with the fact that it takes a little getting used to. American auto makers, and even some American-tuned imports, don't inspire a lot of confidence.
All that said, I've never sat in a car that didn't do 85 comfortably. Even the cheapest cars only start to get sketchy at 90 or so.
Re:Why? (Score:3, Informative)
CorridorWatch.org (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Speedy Limit (Score:5, Informative)
There are many reasons.
The land rights upon which the freeway rests is still actually owned by the government.
A speed limit is a safety issue, which doesn't start or stop on public property.
Bull. Far too many people have NO idea where criminal law ends, and civil law starts. Even if it was privately-owned land, that doesn't mean laws broken on it are civil, rather than criminal. Shoplifting happens on private property, and involving private property, but it's still a criminal offense. Police have raided the homes of Cable-Modem uncappers, and arrested them on criminal charges. Don't pretend to be a lawyer, when you don't know what you are talking about.
Re:Ten gallon hat, half-pint brain (Score:3, Informative)
And if the road is cost-neutral to government (capital, yes, operating, probably not), and will give the public good things, then what's the problem?
As an aside, I looked at it as being really stupid at first but I wonder how the rail will be handled. If it is handled well (and toll roads are good because they charge people for the costs they incur) then this could be Very Interesting in a good way.
Re:Soooo... (Score:2, Informative)
It would be good to divert some of the traffic on I-35 (E and W through DFW, Austin, and San Antonio). But for the TTC to succeed, connection to current activity centers have to be provided. Here's why.
The TTC (TransTexas Corridor) was first proposed by Gov. "Good-hair" Rick Perry in the spring of 2002. Since then, TxDOT has funded a number of studies at TTI (the A&M transportation wing), CTR (the UT Austin transportation wing) and CTS (the UT Arlington transportation wing) re. the TTC. Here are some very interesting quotes from a document from one such study (the report is under review for publication?):
Re:Fine and Dandy (Score:5, Informative)
When the city has 3 times the parking it will need in the next 20 years, and city council members have just contracted to sell more empty lots to the city as parking, and the purchase price was $15,000: just compensation is $120k. When the property is a thriving restaurant located in hte heart of downtown (specifically the Old Virginia Ham Cafe, now nonexistant), and the replacement/relocation cost runs about $250k, just compensation is $10k.
This is the essence of emminent domain, as far as I can tell: I take what you have in the name of my power. In practical application, it doesn't sound to me any different than carjacking.
How it works (Score:4, Informative)
Once you have done that, then you have legal jurisdiction though no highway.
Then, you put out bonds, just as any city does (there's your private investment). Once the bonds are out, then you build the highway. Finally, you set up toll gates or whatnot to pay back the money to the investors.
Along the way (for the CBBT) as I remember, the CBBT did default on its bonds, making them technically worthless for about 3 years, but let the investors know "do not part with these, because we're going to repay them." After something like 3 years, they had managed to restructure their debt, and went back to full repayment. Finally, they paid everything off, and then within 5 years were back building another lane.
Current cost per 17-mile trip? $8.50 per vehicle axle. People still find it to be worthwhile, because it cuts out 350 miles of round trip. However, I'm not so sure that the same could be said for a mega highway.
Re:Speedy Limit (Score:3, Informative)
In my state (Washington), all laws use the word "highway". The legal defintion of "highway" is: "Highway means the entire width between the boundary lines of every way publicly maintained when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel." This is RCW 46.04.197 [wa.gov]. Please note the wording. It's the entire width between the boundary lines of every way PUBLICLY MAINTAINED when any part is open to the public for vehicular travel. It must be publicly maintained _and_ open to the public for vehicular travel. If it's privately owned and operated, it's likely privately maintained too. That means it does not fall under jurisdiction of Washington State vehicle laws.
Furthermore, your assertion that speeds are a safety issue are actually quite irrelevant. There exist private tracks specifically for racing cars. If speed limits were a safety issue, then why aren't these tracks closed down?
Re:Soooo... (Score:2, Informative)
OK, his facts are wrong, but the numbers are right:
Texas = 268,601 sq. miles
France = 543 965 km^2
Germany = 357 023 km^2
Re:Soooo... (Score:2, Informative)
texas: [worldatlas.com]695673 km2 (268,601 sq miles)
france: [worldfacts.us]547030 km2
germany: [worldfacts.us] 357 021 km2
Just one way to classify them, by surface area
Re:Soooo... (Score:4, Informative)
Actually it all depends on the initial planning. The whole point to the current design is to drastically limit the number of connecting ramps. The current design calls for designated rest-gas stops that only have access on and off the freeway lanes, no connections for local traffic, and ramps leading to other, existing freeways for access into the current commercial and industrial centers. Basically it would come up on the west side of say, DFW and to actually go into the metroplex, you would have to exit onto IH-20 or IH-30 to then get into town.
Terrorism isn't even worth one minute of concern. (Score:5, Informative)
You're thousands of times more likely to be killed in a car accident than by a foreign terrorist.
You're tens of thousands of times more likely to be killed by preventable disease than a foreign terrorist.
You are thousands of times more likely to be murdered by a common criminal than killed by foreign terrorism.
Here in the US, you're more likely to be killed by lightning, falling off your roof, the flu, tripping on the sidewalk, just about anything you can think of that regularly kills people is more dangerous that foreign terrorists.
Yet when someone points out how ridiculous it is that we US citizens spend all this money to avoid the tiny risk of terrorism, you take it personally? Sometimes the truth hurts, suck it up.
Bottom line, if you live in the US and are honestly concerned about terrorism, you're either a coward or a fool. Take your pick.
Re:Soooo... (Score:3, Informative)
Now, whether the relationship between Russia and Europe is more akin to Macedonia and Greece or Epirus and Greece is your business.
Rail is markedly less expensive (Score:3, Informative)
Fresh fruit and produce probably does move by truck (and you pay for it), but your boxed and canned goods move by rail. Spoilage in Del Monte tomato sauce is pretty low. There's a running joke about oatmeal running by slurry pipe (well, in some circles....).
Basically, you've got a hierarchy of shipping rates, most to least expensive being air, expedited ground (FedEx, UPS), local drayage, long-haul trucking, rail, barge, bulk maritime, and pipeline. The difference in cost very marked. The slower methods are best suited to bulk goods where it doesn't particularly matter what specific item you get, just how much (crude oil, grain, coal, lumber).
Costs are based on both fuel and labor costs. Rail crews run about 6 per train (IIRC), a 110 unit train can carry 400+ 40' containers (more in "SixPac" and related specialized configurations). The same load on trucks requires 200 drivers. A barge equals about 15 rail cars or 60 trucks. And a large container ship will handle thousands of containers. Comparative fuel requirements: 1 gallon gets you about 60 ton-miles by truck, 200 ton-miles by train, and 515 ton-miles by barge. Source [tamu.edu].
That link includes a calculator so you can compare fuel costs. Assuming 1000 tons, 1000 miles, and $1.50/gal fuel costs. truck works out to $25,338, rail to $7,426, barge to $2,918. That excludes labor and capital costs, as well as insurance (cost of covering damaged shipments is a considerable expense).
In the early 1990s, Mid-Western droughts lead to historically low water levels on the Mississippi. One consequence was a tremendous increase in rail traffic as loads which would once have moved by barge went by rail. Great if you were a railroad, not so good for shippers and farmer.
The big development of the past three decades has been "intermodal" transport. Shipping containers to you and me. A container is filled at the factory in China, trucked to a rail point, trained to a shipyard, shipped to a US port, railed to a local delivery point, and trucked to local destination.
In practice, runs of < 300 miles tend to be cost-effective for truck, anything more, rail, and if a navigable waterway exists, ship.
Last I looked into it (about 15 years back) there were expedited intermodal cross-country tarrifs for 7-14 day delivery. Perhaps not "JIT", but useful for those who figure a rolling warehouse is useful (and railroads had to fight for years to get their boxcars back on time). Did a college research paper on the Japanese fresh broccoli market. That was crop from Salinas Valley, California, via refrigerated intermodal transport, to Japan, across 8,000 miles of ocean, in 14 days. Feasibly. Pretty impressive.
Not a railroader, but I've known a few pretty well.