[Reverberation]

From: http://ttc.keeptexasmoving.org/about/

The Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that will incorporate existing and new highways, railways and utility right-of-ways. Specific routes for the TTC have not been determined.

As envisioned, each route will include:

* separate lanes for passenger vehicles and large trucks
* freight railways
* high-speed commuter railways
* infrastructure for utilities including water lines, oil and gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband and other telecommunications services

Plans call for the TTC to be completed in phases over the next 50 years with routes prioritized according to Texas’ transportation needs. TxDOT will oversee planning, construction and ongoing maintenance, although private vendors will be responsible for much of the daily operations.

(from thfrc.org)
http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/05jul/images/pal4.gif

(from kwtx.com)
http://media.graytvinc.com/images/Trans-Texas-Corridor-2.jpg

(from worldnetdaily.com)
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/images2/nasco.jpg

-------------------------

This has been a very heated debate in Texas with strong local opposition. Despite this, construction has already begun along the I-35 corridor. I am curious what everyone here thinks of this.

[Ashok_Montreal]

isn't this part of the North American Union? I am not sure how good this would be for Canadians. It will make Texas a even major transport hub, so it will be great for Texas obviously.

[James Bond Agent 007]

You should have included a "meh" option.

[KevinFromTexas]

Meh, it's a Republican's fix for transportation planning. I do however like the rail portions, but I have to roll my eyes at the horrid highway.

[BnaBreaker]

Yes, the key to our transportation problems is to pave over every square inch of available land. We'll never have traffic problems now!

[Reverberation]

Thanks for the responses so far. I was thinking this is more dismal for us politically, as this is not only backed by republicans. The issue is more a one of the economic impact it will have on the trade between the United States, Mexico, and Canada and the issue of the North American Union. It is not really great for Texas as the toll-roads are owned by foreign companies. It all seems to have been done quietly.

[LordMandeep]

so the 401 in Toronto will go from 16-22 lanes to 44-50 lanes now???:shrug:

[TexasBoi]

I really really really hope this doesn't happen. That first map is horrible.

[BTinSF]

As someone who occasionally has to drive THROUGH Texas to get from AZ to FL, the roads through and around major Texas cities like Houston, Dallas, El Paso and San Antonio are traffic-choked horrors now and a north/south route that simply feeds I-10 and I-20 more traffic from and to Mexico will make matters even worse. I could be FOR this if they improve all the roads feeding into the system (and the rail systems; especially the rail sustems) and separate truck traffic from cars as shown in the diagrams. But if it's mostly I-35 that gets improvements and the east/west routes get the negative impact, I say a loud, "No way!"

Incidentally, as someone who lives only a mile or two from I-19, an alternative route from Mexico into the US through AZ, I'd love to see the pressure taken off us and the more traffic that goes through Texas, the better. I-19 right now is only 2 lanes in each direction and the traffic isn't at all heavy. I'd like to see it stay that way and until Mexico builds better roads on its side to the crossing point, it probably will. Which brings up the issue of what Mexico is doing (or not doing) to cooperate with the the grand Texas scheme.

[Mister F]

Hey! Quit taking our acronyms!

http://ktransit.com/transit/Canada/Toronto/Subway/Photos/ttc-hr-sign-050602-01.jpg

[j korzeniowski]

From: http://ttc.keeptexasmoving.org/about/

The Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) is a proposed multi-use, statewide network of transportation routes in Texas that will incorporate existing and new highways, railways and utility right-of-ways. Specific routes for the TTC have not been determined.

As envisioned, each route will include:

* separate lanes for passenger vehicles and large trucks
* freight railways
* high-speed commuter railways
* infrastructure for utilities including water lines, oil and gas pipelines, and transmission lines for electricity, broadband and other telecommunications services

Plans call for the TTC to be completed in phases over the next 50 years with routes prioritized according to Texas’ transportation needs. TxDOT will oversee planning, construction and ongoing maintenance, although private vendors will be responsible for much of the daily operations.

This has been a very heated debate in Texas with strong local opposition. Despite this, construction has already begun along the I-35 corridor. I am curious what everyone here thinks of this.

oh, how i hate everything about texas ...

i wonder if those united states of canada maps following the '04 election could become reality.

please?

[JManc]

no one asked for your opinion about texas.

[Rail Claimore]

We'll see what happens with it if I-69 is ever completed as planned. I think that's a more effective remedy to the problem for now, but I don't neccessarily view the TTC as bad. What's interesting is that Texas seems to be taking initiative in implementing a "next level" freight transportation system. Surely if this is to have maximum impact, other regions of the country will follow.

[Justin10000]

Considering the record of the Republicans, this project is good for the billionaires, and bad for everyone else.

[Cirrus]

TTC would:
A) Initiate a 2nd major wave of interstate building, and
B) Make Texas the hub of American commerce

Neither of those things would be good for America.

[WonderlandPark]

Why the need? I would rather have a diffuse system, with many crossing points, spreading the load and burden and risk all along the borders. It is also an incredible waste, why drag stuff all the way from San Diego and Vancouver BC to Texas then into Mexico and vice versa? Are the other feeders like the 10 from FL or CA going to be upgraded to feed this monster? I know this also goes hand in hand with the NAFTA highway, 69 from Pt. Huron to the Mexican border, a new interstate that is generally opposed.

This thing seems only good for southern Texas and Monterey, Mexico.

And I have an opinion about Texas and I am going to say it anyways. Its mostly fugly, endless highways, frontage roads and strip malls, sprawling far in every direction. I worked a bunch in DFW last summer, and what a gawd awful metropolis. If you guys want to pave over yet more and more of the state, have at it.

[Mister F]

The NAFTA Superhighway doesn't exist.

http://www.nascocorridor.com/new_home_page/NASCO%20Op-Ed%20Melvin.pdf

[JManc]

i don't see how this would really benefit texas either; it's a land grab and really won't benefit average texans. what TX needs to do is high speed rail linking austin, san antonio, houston and dallas.

[totheskies]

i don't see how this would really benefit texas either; it's a land grab and really won't benefit average texans. what TX needs to do is high speed rail linking austin, san antonio, houston and dallas.

Wow, that would be as close to a perfect world as one could get!!!! Let's start a campaign for it.

BTW this thread needs to go ahead and get closed... TEXAS BASHING will not be tolerated :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell:

[borgo100]

ha ha Union with the mexicans and american's, ya not over my dead beaver

[TexasBoi]

And I have an opinion about Texas and I am going to say it anyways. Its mostly fugly, endless highways, frontage roads and strip malls, sprawling far in every direction. I worked a bunch in DFW last summer, and what a gawd awful metropolis. If you guys want to pave over yet more and more of the state, have at it.

Thank you for sharing this. I mean it is relevant to the topic of this thread and all. :rolleyes: Maybe you need to keep such comments like these to yourself because for one, this is not the thread to do this. Quite funny, people who just love to spew negativity about Texas appear in threads like these. But they are the same people that do not appear in threads about Texas when it deals with progressing.

[Cirrus]

Can we stay on topic, please.

[Trae]

As someone who occasionally has to drive THROUGH Texas to get from AZ to FL, the roads through and around major Texas cities like Houston, Dallas, El Paso and San Antonio are traffic-choked horrors now and a north/south route that simply feeds I-10 and I-20 more traffic from and to Mexico will make matters even worse. I could be FOR this if they improve all the roads feeding into the system (and the rail systems; especially the rail sustems) and separate truck traffic from cars as shown in the diagrams. But if it's mostly I-35 that gets improvements and the east/west routes get the negative impact, I say a loud, "No way!"

Incidentally, as someone who lives only a mile or two from I-19, an alternative route from Mexico into the US through AZ, I'd love to see the pressure taken off us and the more traffic that goes through Texas, the better. I-19 right now is only 2 lanes in each direction and the traffic isn't at all heavy. I'd like to see it stay that way and until Mexico builds better roads on its side to the crossing point, it probably will. Which brings up the issue of what Mexico is doing (or not doing) to cooperate with the the grand Texas scheme.

I'm glad it isn't going through Houston anymore though. Let the I-35 corridor have all the traffic.

[TexasPlaya]

What about just building a bi-directional dedicated truck lanes? They are already upgrading I35 between San Antonio and Austin and getting those 18 wheelers off I35 would help greatly. Something does need to be done with this "superhighway" but I don't think it has to be as massive as proposed.

[Beltliner]

So TxDOT is telling me that a 1200-foot-wide Trans-Texas Corridor is set to accommodate passenger motorways, lorry routes, freight rail, commuter rail, power lines, and underground utilities, whereas Alberta's 1300-foot-wide Transportation and Utility Corridors (http://www.tuc.gov.ab.ca/) can't handle the lorry routes or the rail.

Is TxDOT overselling what the Trans-Texas Corridor can accomplish, or is INFTRA lacking in vision, or does the truth lie somewhere in the middle?

[austin242]

Austin is the only one that would seem to need more highways because we only have one real highway and I dont think mopac or highway 71 counts, and now they are trying to turn mopac into toll and that was built many years ago. We don't deserve this we allready have little choice as it is and toll is built as a option its not suposed to be the only source of transportation. If they could they would make I35 toll luckily its owned by the federal government. The only project planed is I45 and that plan sucks.

[Saddle Man]

Railways part of the Trans-Texas Corridors...I'll believe it when I see it.

[skyscraperfan23]

No, because it is nothing but treason at the highest order, this will end america as we know it.

[Spocket]

If there's an actual need , this will be built one way or another. I'm not coming out either for or against it , I'm just saying that it will either be planned or be built piecemeal. That's only IF there's a need though. I don't know if it would improve traffic congestion in Texas (I kinda doubt it to be honest) but if the basic idea behind it is to create a corridor stretching from Mexico up to Canada with Texas as the hub then eventually you'll get something very similar to this.

The 401 running through Toronto was probably never meant to be what it has become but there it is anyway , in all it's multi-lane glory. I'm not knocking it , I'm just saying that if there was no need it wouldn't be as huge as it is.

The idea in principle seems like a good one though. It involves a lot more than transportation infrastructure for it to be superior to what currently exists.

[TexasPlaya]

The problem here in Texas with this project is that it will go through hundreds of properties and over many rivers. I have no problem with the "land grab" aspect of this deal if it will serve the greater good. I don't believe the current idea will serve the greater good at all. More alternatives should be looked at before deciding anything. Also, they should look at regional rail with the Texas Triangle while they are at it.

[Lord_of_Darkness]

I heard the railroud will go from Mexico City to Toronto, making stops in every state of each of the 3 countries.
The NAFTA Super Highway could be a good or bad thing for the 3 nations.

1. Will increase the trade among Mexico, USA and Canada, and thise super highway will be neded to handle the massive traffic.

2. It would take almost a day to cross the whole highway if ur in Canada and want to get to Mexico and vise versa.

3. Is the train going to be passenger or cargo????
If it's bouth then thats a good idea, more flow of people and les trafic.

4. I want to think that this train will be a bullet train, other wise its a waste of money and time.

[Saddle Man]

The trains would only be in Texas, and would be part of a second (or maybe third) phase. The trains would be the first thing 'sacrificed'. I'm using sarcastic quote marks because I believe there is no intention of having trains in the first place. The chances of this happening are slim to none. Passenger or otherwise.

[SnyderBock]

Our country needs to modernize and upgrade our existing infrastructure that we can't afford to maintain, before we construct redundant infrastructure - such as this plan does.

The only exception to this, would be to construct a transcontinental mag-lev line and also an east-coast mag-lev and west-coast mag-lev backbone system. Then our existing rail could be upgraded to high-speed rail and networked to the mag-lev backbone in a hub system.

[Lord_of_Darkness]

I really think a high speed cargo and passenger trains are needed.
Other wise it would be a caus, to much trafic and air pollution in thise super highway.

The whole point is to speed up time and make more conections, but it would take like 20 hours to cross from Canada to Mexico or viseversa, and airplanes tranportation makes no sence, because why build a huge highway????????

The best option are Bullet trains for cargo and passengers.

In my opinion.

*Thise could be the first real bullet train in North America.
Since Argentina and Venezuela have some type of fast train.