Latest on Texas 50 year infrastructure plan

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

Some observations: As far as I know, the railroad infrastructure in this proposal would be open access. BNSF and UP have up to now have reserved judgement. With this latest information (although still scant on the specifics of the railroad sector), what are some thoughts of the members of this forum?

Texas Governor Seeks to Build Megahighways

Wed Dec 29, 2:10 PM ET

By JIM VERTUNO, Associated Press Writer

AUSTIN, Texas - In what sounds like another tall tale told by a Texan, the Lone Star State has embarked on an audacious project to build superhighways so big, so complex, that they will make ordinary interstates look like cowpaths.

The Trans-Texas Corridor project, as envisioned by Republican Gov. Rick Perry in 2002, would be a 4,000-mile transportation network costing an awesome $175 billion over 50 years, financed mostly if not entirely with private money. The builders would then charge motorists tolls.

But these would not be mere highways. Proving anew that everything’s big in Texas, they would be megahighways #8212; corridors up to a quarter-mile across, consisting of as many as six lanes for cars and four for trucks, plus railroad tracks, oil and gas pipelines, water and other utility lines, even broadband transmission cables.

Supporters say the corridors are needed to handle the expected NAFTA-driven boom in the flow of goods to and from Mexico and to enable freight haulers to bypass heavily populated urban centers on straight-shot highways that cut across the countryside.

The number of corridors and exactly where they would run have yet to be worked out. But the Texas Transportation Commission on Dec. 16 opened negotiations with the Spain-based consortium Cintra to start the first phase of the project, a $7.5 billion, 800-mile corridor that would stretch from Oklahoma to Mexico and run parallel to Interstate 35.

"Some thought the Trans-Texas Corridor was a pie-in-the-sky idea t

2

The upside is people from civilization could cross Texas faster :slight_smile:

In '97 the Texas State government chartered MegaRail Transportation Systems. They have patented a lightweight, enclosed rubber tire, $5 million per mile system for 125 mph passenger and intermodel service. I think heavy rail should stick to heavy freight but for passengers and fast intermodel freight a lighter cheaper system is much more practical.

It’s an interesting concept and they are building a pilot system in Europe, check it out. http://www.megarail.com/

3

MEGARAIL has some fascinating ideas and they seem to have a business plan that would let these systems be built with private money(although there would still be some eminent domain issues, etc). They seem to be trying to interest railroads in partnering in these projects, their websites suggests that these guideways could be built over existing RR ROW’s(though as I drove to work today up RT.24 N in MA, I realized the problem is dealing with road bridges. A major railroad investing in this could not only take time sensitive freight business(specifically what can’t go on stack trains) away from the interstate truckers but partner with passenger agencies to implement high speed rail without messing up their own track capacity. In fact they could increase the total capacity on major routes.

4

But, this is a pet project of highway engineers, not railroaders …and because of that , the railroaders back off a safe distance. Those proposed “straight-as-a-string” roads might work for trucks, but the grades won’t work for trains except out on the plains in some places (causing more R/E to be gobbled-up).[X-)][X-)][X-)]

There has got to be a few old railroad location engineers laughing their butts of upstairs in the great beyond over this.[swg][swg][swg]

5

I am willing to reserve judgement until more details are brought forth regarding the rail aspects of this plan. The websites provided little detail.

However, if it is true that the rails would simply follow highway alignments, then that would probably rule out HAL’s in deference to high speed passenger/intermodal consists, then the argument becomes whether the latter is a viable usage of railroad technology.

6

I am of the opinion that the Trans Texas Corridors plan is a bit too ambitious… as far as a quarter mile swath of land for the right of way… It would be too expensive, and as noted above, not necessarily suitable for freight railroads…

However, I do support the funding mechanism, which is needed for any transportation initiative… Back in the 1980s the HSR plan was defeated by not having a funding mechanism in place…

I think it would be better to build new 6 lane parallel freeways for automobiles, and let the old interstate system serve the trucking industry… I also think the rail, pipeline, and power line corridors should fit their needs and be sized as such independent of the freeway corridors…

For example, would it not be better to doube track the railroad tracks in existence now than to invest in a new right of way, and build HSR lines separately?

And its the same with power lines too… We should build more power lines using the same corridors already…