448 replies to this topic

[renamerusk]

Texas Central Railway picks 2 sites for Dallas high-speed rail station

 

This is a positive concession and provides TCR with some much needed credibility.  We are well aware of the North Texas geo politics, but having yet to select the Houston HSR terminal causes me to believe that significant uncertainty surrounding this project. remains.

[Dallastar]

Jack Matthews: Dallas high-speed rail station to be 'massive game-changer'

 

http://www.bizjourna...tion-to-be.html

[renamerusk]

 

Texas Central Railway picks 2 sites for Dallas high-speed rail station

 

This is a positive concession and provides TCR with some much needed credibility.  We are well aware of the North Texas geo politics, but having yet to select the Houston HSR terminal causes me to believe that significant uncertainty surrounding this project. remains.

 

 

 

Jack Matthews: Dallas high-speed rail station to be 'massive game-changer'

 

Mr. Matthews only mentions Arlington and Fort Worth as an after thought.  TCR continues to have a glaring blind spot to what it will require when it comes to this region.  Not so surprisingly, TCR displays a similar blind spot in the Houston region.  When the autopsy is performed for TCR, it will surely reveal just how poorly TCR understood regional politics.

 

http://www.bizjourna...leaves-the.html

 

After so many "This is it" proclamations for Southern Dallas -"Mr. Matthews, will this be the one too?" 

[Dylan]

The Woodlands is a suburb of Houston and should not have a HSR stop, just as Arlington should not have a HSR stop. They will make HSR too slow and should be connected to their metro anchors by commuter rail instead. Only urban cores of major cities should have HSR stops.

[johnfwd]

More on this much-discussed topic in the Fort Worth Business Press, article by A. Lee Graham.  Any one of you rail experts know what a "utility corridor" is?

 

 

http://fwbusinesspre...-rail-plan.aspx

[renamerusk]

More on this much-discussed topic .....

 

 

I consider myself fairly knowledgeable about Texas geography, to the point, where cities in the state are in general so when I read that TCR is now considering stops in Huntsville and Bryan/College Station (90-degree turn) ;without a stop in The Woodlands along its Dallas to Houston route, I had a  "What the he-l" moment.

 

This is yet another strange twist to add to the many bungling ways of TCR.

 

Now, TCR interests me only in as much as I am curious to see what will be its latest shell game".

[AndyN]

I assume that the Utility Corridor refers to a route that primarily follows existing electric transmission line, pipeline or other utility right-of-ways. The linked map shows it as an orange line: https://dallashousto...ded-alternatives-october-19-2014.jpg

 

I think the other big news is that they are analyzing a route into downtown Houston. That seemed to be the big question after they announced potential downtown Dallas station sites the other day.

[Electricron]

An advantage of the utility corridor for almost the entire distance is that it avoids towns and cities by miles, meaning cheap rural land can to be bought or leased - and also avoiding noise and traffic complaints from all the intermediate town and city nimbys. 

 

They don't reach suburbia where there will be nimbys until they reach Dallas and Harris Counties. They have rail corridors to follow once they suburbia; UP or BNSF into Dallas County adjacent to I-45, and UP into Harris County adjacent to US 290. The UP rail corridor adjacent to US 290 is straight as an arrow for at least 30 miles within Harris County. Straight as arrow tracks usually means fast tracks.

 

I'm pretty sure they will build mostly on a viaduct once they reach higher densities in Harris and Dallas Counties avoiding traffic altogether. Once the operating speed decreases below 110 mph, they wouldn't need to avoid grade crossings according to regulations, but I believe they will anyways to avoid traffic. 

 

In rural areas, they will need to build viaducts to avoid traffic because the train speeds will be above 110 mph, but the viaducts will only need to be at water, road, and highway crossings. They could run the tracks at grade, at cheaper construction costs, between the required viaducts. 

 

It's obvious from their preferred route that they desire to build the cheapest route possible while still attaining the fastest speeds possible. 

[AndyN]

Lawmaker files bill to kill bullet train.:

 

www.texastribune.org/2015/02/25/lawmaker-files-bill-could-stop-proposed-bullet-tra/

[renamerusk]

 

...We are well aware of the North Texas geo politics, but having yet to select the Houston HSR terminal causes me to believe that significant uncertainty surrounding this project. remains.

 

....TCR continues to have a glaring blind spot to what it will require when it comes to this region.  Not so surprisingly, TCR displays a similar blind spot in the Houston region.  When the autopsy is performed for TCR, it will surely reveal just how poorly TCR understood regional politics.

 

 

 

Lawmaker files bill to kill bullet train.:

 

Highlights of the Texas Tribune report:

 

"Willis Metcalf (R-Conroe) has been an outspoken critic of the project, which at one point had the potential to go through his district in Montgomery County. Earlier this month, Texas Central revealed its preferred route, which would completely bypass Montgomery County....."While officials in Houston and Dallas have championed the project, officials and residents in rural communities in between have questioned how it would benefit them...Numerous county officials have come out in opposition to the Texas Central Railway and their use of eminent domain,"

 

I always said that TCR is tone deaf to geopolitics and that their fatal mistake has been to reduce Texas to simply two places: Houston and Dallas.  Its is usually the Davids that slew the Goliaths.

[Electricron]

I'm not surprised that rural politicians are against any form of transportation that isn't roads or highways. TXDOT has the power to enforce Eminent Domain - and TXDOT isn't TXDOH. Never-the-less, I don't think Texas Central will need to use Eminent Domain in rural areas, especially after selecting the Utility Corridor as the preferred choice. They should only need to use Eminent Domain in urban areas, for station locations and maintenance facility locations.

Geopolitics shouldn't apply to privately funded business opportunities. Business regulations applicable to all other business should apply...and FRA regulations special to running and operating trains....

[renamerusk]

Geopolitics shouldn't apply to privately funded business opportunities. Business regulations applicable to all other business should apply...

 

How could TCR not have seen this bill coming?

 

For starters, TCR announced their HSR project between Dallas and Houston in Downtown Fort Worth d Then TCR proceeded to make calculations that repeatedly turned out to be wrong. 

 

Not only does the bill probably reduces any chances that TCR will be able to secure the private investment that it needs; its probably reduces the prospects of their managing team securing the rights to manage the public HSR project that is being actively planned.

 

Compare TCR to the French HSR group which is a group that is approaching HSR with a greater sensitivity towards regional politics.

 

It takes political skills for which TCR is showing it lacks.

[Electricron]

Texas Central response:

"In short, the project owner qualifies as both a “railroad company” and an “interurban electric railway company” as those terms are defined in the Texas statutes and are vested with numerous rights and powers—its power will include the power of eminent domain.

Notwithstanding this legal status, turning to eminent domain proceedings would only be a last resort, after all other voluntary options have been exhausted. The Project is committed to respecting and honoring the private property rights of our fellow Texans. This reflects our personal values and simply makes good business sense. As such, the Project is committed to negotiating and settling with landowners fairly, transparently and in a way that seeks “win-win” solutions. We want this process to be fair and beneficial to all."

 

You can't pick out individual projects with legislation - you'd have to include all railroads and all electric interurbans. I don't think KCS, BNSF, UP, DART, FWTA, METRO, CapMetro. TRE, and DCTA will appreciate losing eminent domain capabilities.....

 

Therefore, I highly doubt that bill will go far. 

[renamerusk]

You can't pick out individual projects with legislation - you'd have to include all railroads and all electric interurbans. I don't think KCS, BNSF, UP, DART, FWTA, METRO, CapMetro. TRE, and DCTA will appreciate losing eminent domain capabilities.... 

 

You would think you can't say for instance Homeland Security?

 

I think a finer distinction should be made about your railroads and your electric interurbans. I would add TCR in the category of KCS, BNSF and UP as it is, like them, a private enterprise but unlike them, it is without its own ROW.  The latter are in the category of public agency established through the power of a referendum.

 

TCR is a new private enterprise hoping to acquire ROW and is an enterprise that has yet to go before the voters (property owners) for support and what they will most assuredly need.   IMO, the first obstacle with their current route , and one that TCR is facing, is proving to the rural constituents  the "public good" of their project coupled with the notions that the service that they provide is A -  essential; and B -  offers the public  limited alternatives or none at all.  Will competition with other ground and air transportation be sufficient reason to evoke eminent domain and take land?  What will the size of the benefit and what will be the size of the cost and who gets them and who bears them? What makes the project eminent? Seems to me that a I-45 ROW corridor overlay may still make more sense as it could be less disruptive and would be less contentious.

 

 

As for the Bill, it is both a financial and a political obstacle to this project and as such it represents to TCR a clear and present danger.  I only hope is that it will not become the blueprint for stopping the publicly planned TXDOT HSR project in its infancy.

[Electricron]

As for the Bill, it represents both a financial and a political derailment of this project and as such it represents a clear and present danger.  I only hope is that it will not become the blueprint for stopping the publicly planned TXDOT HSR project in its infancy.

If they take the power of eminent domain away from all railroads, public or private, it will effect I-35 HSR project being sponsored by TXDOT. The expansion of I-35 to 6 lanes doesn't leave much room, if any at all, within it's corridor. Both UP and BNSF will want HSR tracks parallel to their corridor, not in it. So somebody will have to buy property, and using eminent domain threats helps reduce the negotiated prices from all landowners.  

[renamerusk]

If they take the power of eminent domain away from all railroads, public or private..... So somebody will have to buy property, and using eminent domain threats helps reduce the negotiated prices from all landowners. 

 

 I find using the historical role of the legacy railroads to be irrelevant in this case.  TCR has not been designated for the purpose that they had been given as a goal. 

 

Using EM as a threat will backfire, especially in Texas.

 

The concept of eminent domain is founded on this notion and consists of two elements - 

 

"Property being an inviolable and sacred right no one can be deprived of it, unless the public necessity plainly demands it, and upon condition of a just and previous indemnity." Free World encyclopedia

TCR will be required to prevail in the two elements of eminent domain and will have to be established each in this order:

1. Public necessity:   Your case about railroads + eminent domain is a historical and one of a kind cause during the expansion era of the U.S..  The federal government, through elective representatives, declared the expansion of the country to the West as a goal that was plainly demanded for commerce and development and used the private railroads to accomplished this goal.  I am not aware of a modern case where the private railroads are still engaged in the expansion of the country.  If there is a case, then I would think that a railroad would have to plainly demonstrate that it is still engaged today in the 19th-20th century expansion of the country.

TCR is faced with numerous hurdles just to establish a public necessity and this will be a political battle.

2. Taking:  Ownership of private property is a fundamental tenet in law.  It demands just compensation be paid to the private property owners when land is to be taken.

TCR is faced with having to settle with hundreds if not thousands of urban and rural property owners and this will be a judicial battle.

I do not see how TCR gets passed the political hurdle, less seeing it get passed the judicial hurdle by the date that TCR projects that it will be in operation.
 

[Electricron]

The statue granting railroads eminent domain is still valid, not historical!
http://www.statutes....112.htm#112.051
They don't need to prove a public need for the land, they already have it just by being a railroad..

TRANSPORTATION CODE
TITLE 5. RAILROADS
SUBTITLE C. RAILROADS GENERALLY
CHAPTER 112. POWERS AND DUTIES OF RAILROADS
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Sec. 112.001. DEFINITION OF PERSON. In this chapter:
(1) "person" includes a corporation, as provided by Section 312.011, Government Code; and
(2) the definition of "person" assigned by Section 311.005, Government Code, does not apply.
Added by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 85 (S.B. 1540), Sec. 2.03, eff. April 1, 2011.

Sec. 112.002. GENERAL RIGHTS OF RAILROADS.
(a ) A railroad company has the right to succession.
(b ) A railroad company may:
(1) sue, be sued, plead, and be impleaded in its corporate name;
(2) have and use a seal and alter the seal at will;
(3) receive and convey persons and property on its railway by any mechanical power, including the use of steam;
(4) regulate the time and manner in which, and the compensation for which, passengers and property are transported, subject to the provisions of law;
(5) exercise the power of eminent domain for the purposes prescribed by this subtitle or Subtitle D;
(6) purchase, hold, and use all property as necessary for the construction and use of its railway, stations, and other accommodations necessary to accomplish company objectives, and convey that property when no longer required for railway use; and
(7) take, hold, and use property granted to the company to aid in the construction and use of its railway, and convey that property in a manner consistent with the terms of the grant when the property is no longer required for railway use.
Added by Acts 2009, 81st Leg., R.S., Ch. 85 (S.B. 1540), Sec. 2.03, eff. April 1, 2011.

[renamerusk]

They don't need to prove a public need for the land, they already have it just by being a railroad..

 

Maintaining an attitude in the bubble that  "We are a railroad and thus, [we] will not be required to prove a public necessity" will not get TCR very far. If there is a handy way for railroads to be labeled "legacy" and "non-legacy" in which category would TCR fit? I can show you BNSF and UP.  It seems to me that TCR is a conceptual railroad that must take land to become a reality.

 

I still maintain that TCR has yet to take the step necessary to build the public support that is required for their project to be actualized. 

 

The first step is to go to the people as California did with a proposition, where in a progressive state, the vote outcome was narrowly in favor of HSR:

http://ballotpedia.o...Rail_Act_(2008)

 

But even more critical, before a proposition can be put before the voters, TCR must deal with stories like this one that raise a number of issues:

 

http://www.navasotae...627491f1f3.html

 

Do the public necessity and benefit plainly exist as TCR will have you believe or do they not exist? This will be played out for sure in the legislature and the courts.

[Electricron]

 

They don't need to prove a public need for the land, they already have it just by being a railroad..

 

Maintaining an attitude in the bubble that  "We are a railroad and thus, [we] will not be required to prove a public necessity" will not get TCR very far. If there is a handy way for railroads to be labeled "legacy" and "non-legacy" in which category would TCR fit? I can show you BNSF and UP.  It seems to me that TCR is a conceptual railroad that must take land to become a reality.

 

I still maintain that TCR has yet to take the step necessary to build the public support that is required for their project to be actualized. 

 

The first step is to go to the people as California did with a proposition, where in a progressive state, the vote outcome was narrowly in favor of HSR:

CHSR is bing fully funded by state revenues, not fully by private enterprise revenues. CDOT and CHSR had to sell state backed bonds, where the taxpayers are responsible to make up losses, because its a government funded and operated railroad. Just like school, hospital, highway projects in Texas, a referendum must pass to sell the bonds. 

 

When is the last time you had Walmart or any other business for that matter pass a referendum to sell bonds to build and operate a retail store? You are crazy to think every business must!  There is a difference between the state and private enterprise.

 

​You have expresses your opinions based on your feelings, I've posted facts based upon the law! Guess what usually rules in court before a judge?

[Not Sure]

I am curious how the proposed railroad fits within this utility corridor. High speed curves must be very broad, surely larger than 2 Degrees, so how does that work with the commonly angular rights-of-way occupied by the majority of utilities in this state? It would seem that's where a lot of the right-of-way taking would occur.

 

Frankly, I'd understand such right-of-way taking by outright purchase, if all parties can agree, but eminent domain for the benefit of a private company? I'm not on board with that, regardless of how much politicking a company does to make the case it is a railroad. It's not the 1800s anymore and this isn't for such a lofty goal as Manifest Destiny. Nor is this a case of an active railroad serving the manufacturing, utility, trade and defense sectors of the economy needing additional right-of-way to add a second track or improve a bridge. This is a new taking of private and public land for the profit of a foreign company. Simple as that. <sarcasm>I'm sure the reaction will be nothing like the failed Trans Texas Corridor.</sarcasm>

[renamerusk]

You are crazy to think every business must!  There is a difference between the state and private enterprise....​You have expresses your opinions based on your feelings, I've posted facts based upon the law! Guess what usually rules in court before a judge?

 

Go ahead, call me crazy and assert the "smallness" of my opinions.

 

Yes there is a difference between the state and private enterprises. The state has greater legitimacy than a private venture when it attempts to assert public necessity.  

 

Regardless, the challenges that TCR faces are real and it will have to amass a 100% record of rulings in its favor; and that does not include counter suits and appeals.  Anything less spells doom and delays further the actualization of the project.

 

I think seeing this through rose colored glasses is a huge mistake.

[AndyN]

 

Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. I sense much fear in you. But beware. Anger. Fear. Aggression. The dark side are they. Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny.

 

 

So, when there was a chance that the route would come to Fort Worth, did you all-out support the concept?

 

I find myself generally in agreement with ElectricRon. (Dodges under table waiting for lightning to strike).... As a railroad, TCR will be able to use of eminent domain. It will not need to be reinvented. I would expect they have the sense not to use it except as a final resort.

 

I think the chance that the bill requiring all jurisdiction approval will be a factor in this year's legislation is unlikely. Not impossible, but unlikely.

 

Personally, I will look forward to riding the TRE to Dallas to catch a bullet train to Houston. I believe private enterprise will complete the undertaking more efficiently and rapidly than a government effort to complete the line. Shame on the self-serving interests to block the advancement of the State of Texas. (Btw, Happy 179th, baby!)

 

Assuming a route length of 248 miles and a nominal right-of-way width of 100 feet, that's 3006 acres of land needed, exclusive of stations, yards, special circumstances. The rail wouldn't necessarily follow the utilities foot for foot and curve for curve. I don't know, but if they piggyback the utilities then it would be possible to straighten some of the utility alignments, if needed, and return that land to the adjoiners. I don't know how much of the utility rights-of-way are paralleled. All I know is that is the name for the preferred alignment.

[Not Sure]

As a railroad, TCR will be able to use of eminent domain. It will not need to be reinvented. I would expect they have the sense not to use it except as a final resort.

 

Here's my problem with that: say this company convinces everyone they are a railroad with all the right hands shaken, all the filing fees paid, all the forms and paperwork submitted, checked, etc. Then say the right-of-way gets taken, some of it purchased, some of it condemned via eminent domain. Then before a shovel is turned the company goes belly up and the assets are now in bankruptcy. What happens to the right-of-way then? Is it considered an asset that can be used to pay creditors in a bankruptcy hearing? Can a creditor take the land and use it for another purpose other than HSR? Does it revert to the previous owner? Does the state take it for some future HSR venture? Does the fact that it's a foreign company impact ownership of the land, land that was earmarked for a project to benefit the public (hence the ability of the grantee to use eminent domain)?

 

I'm not trying to come across as a xenophobe (I'm certainly not), but before I can get on board there has to be some guarantee that any lands taken for such a project are reserved only for that purpose or they must revert to the previous use or owner or both. Projects like this always seem like a great idea with nothing but profits to rake in for years to come, until they don't materialize or turn out to be based on some poor projections. Look at how poorly the toll road bypassing Austin is doing. Am I wrong to be concerned the same thing might happen with the 820 toll road or this HSR proposal?

 

 

Assuming a route length of 248 miles and a nominal right-of-way width of 100 feet, that's 3006 acres of land needed, exclusive of stations, yards, special circumstances. The rail wouldn't necessarily follow the utilities foot for foot and curve for curve. I don't know, but if they piggyback the utilities then it would be possible to straighten some of the utility alignments, if needed, and return that land to the adjoiners. I don't know how much of the utility rights-of-way are paralleled. All I know is that is the name for the preferred alignment.

 

Typically utility easements/right-of-way, such as the large swaths of land used for high voltage electric transmission lines, are comprised of straight segments that make abrupt angles in order to avoid some geographic feature or change direction toward some related facility. Assuming a speed of 200 kmph, the minimum curve might have to be around 2,000 m radius. There's a lot of land orphaned inside the el of a 90° bend when the curve radius is over a mile. I would expect several of these situations to exist along any utility corridor.

[johnfwd]

The very informative arguments above got me thinking of high-speed rail's struggle to compete with interstate motor vehicle travel and jet passenger service in our country.  HSR's only real model is the slower Amtrak service inherited from decades of rail passenger service going back to the 1830s.  I was struck by the Grime County judge's comparison (Post 268 above) of motor vehicle travel versus proposed HSR from Dallas to Houston.  If his facts are true, HSR will be hard-put to compete with motor vehicles as to both cost and convenience.  I suspect that the same comparisons were made previously between jets and the automobile (e.g., time wasted driving to and from the airport). 

 

Jet travel has succeeded in this competition, and I'm afraid high-speed rail will not be (at least in the short term).  A major reason is that jet travel does not have to contend with eminent domain, except for locating and building airports.  Generally put, airspace doesn't offend rural communities not served between the airports.  And the only airspace regulations come from the FAA.  To make eminent domain easier to swallow, the interstate highway system largely overcame the concerns of small city and rural community residents by granting as much arterial access from these points to the Interstate highway with minimal cost and without sacrificing convenience of travel.  In other words, the interstate highways, Dallas to Houston, for example, were successful because they provided such access between major cities. They won a lot of stakeholders, including federal government funding for military defense purposes.  Moreover, eminent domain was easier to swallow because an interstate highway near any community spurred economic development.  Even farmers were enticed into accepting it because of the increase in their land value.

 

I's not impossible for HSR to do same thing, but it will have to be with minimal eminent domain transactions.  And it's going to require a lot of political will in our state and a lot of money, as suggested in the arguments of others above.  And it's not likely the funding will be coming from the penny-pinchers in Congress.

[renamerusk]

 

As a railroad, TCR will be able to use of eminent domain. It will not need to be reinvented. I would expect they have the sense not to use it except as a final resort.

 

Here's my problem with that: say this company convinces everyone they are a railroad with all the right hands shaken, all the filing fees paid,...Am I wrong to be concerned the same thing might happen with the 820 toll road or this HSR proposal?

 

 

 No, no, no.......You are not wrong to be concerned. Instead you have thoughtfully raised questions that need

answering.

[AndyN]

Texas Central Railway has issued a fact sheet (with pictures) that answers a lot of the concerns that have been raised about its proposed line.

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/261864577/Texas-Central-Rumor-vs-Reality

[RD Milhollin]

HUGE STEP BACKWARDS! Texas rural legislators looking to block TCR:

 

http://www.star-tele...le18623106.html

[JBB]

Why spend that kind of effort trying to block something that will probably die a long, slow death all on its own?

[AndyN]

I agree. The fact that the bill passed the Senate doesn't mean much. I don't think it will get past the house and then I would hope that Govenor Abbott wouldn't support such legislation. He probably raises more money from Dallas and Houston than all the counties inbetween.

 

DON'T PANIC.... yet.

[JBB]

I was talking about any and all HSR proposals inevitably dying a long, slow death. The legislation seems like a waste since this proposal and others like it aren't likely to come to fruition.

[renamerusk]

I agree. The fact that the bill passed the Senate doesn't mean much. I don't think it will get past the house and then I would hope that Govenor Abbott wouldn't support such legislation. He probably raises more money from Dallas and Houston than all the counties inbetween.

 

DON'T PANIC.... yet.

 

So what are you agreeing with : post 261 & 263 or that the bill is immaterial? Property Rights is a genuine Third Rail.

 

I also believe that there is powerful and influential undisclosed support for TCR to fail. Even politicans who were quick to jump onto TCR, now sense the dissension and are quickly bailing out . If not Eminent Domain, then there will be others.

 

JBB is likely correct when suggesting that TCR will inevitably suffer a long, slow death.

[AndyN]

Well, I misunderstood JBB's post 278 then. As the member of a family who got royally screwed by eminent domain in Ohio, I think this project is one of the rare, appropriate uses of ED by a private business. And I sure hope the people who do not support ED use by the TCR don't support the use of ED by the Trinity Uptown/Panther Island Project.

[RD Milhollin]

If high-speed passenger rail that travels 185 mph or faster can lose power of ED, why not pipelines, etc? Perhaps a way around if this short-sighted legislation was to pass would be for the Texas H-S Rail Commission to raise bond funds and initiate ROW ED proceedings itself, and have the TCR lease the property for 50 or 100 years... uh-oh, that sounds something like the current private party toll road scheme...

[renamerusk]

Well, I misunderstood JBB's post 278 then. As the member of a family who got royally screwed by eminent domain in Ohio, I think this project is one of the rare, appropriate uses of ED by a private business. And I sure hope the people who do not support ED use by the TCR don't support the use of ED by the Trinity Uptown/Panther Island Project.

 

Until my understanding is shown to be incorrect, here is what I find to be a fundamental difference between Trinity Uptown/Panther Island and TCR - one is authorized by the state (ballot) while the other is not.

 

* Under Texas law, TRVA is the “authority and instrumentality” of the Tarrant Regional Water District, a Water Control and Improvement District created and existing pursuant to Article 16, Section 59, of the Texas Constitution (the “Water District”). TRVA is authorized to assist in the coordination, implementation, and management of the Trinity River Vision Project and may exercise any power of the Water District in carrying out these objectives. Therefore, all references on the Site to TRVA also include the Water District

 

One is accountable to the public; one is not.

[BlueMound]

Debunking 5 Myths about Texas High Speed Rail

http://www.citylab.c...ed-rail/390903/

[renamerusk]

 

You are crazy to think every business must!  There is a difference between the state and private enterprise....​You have expresses your opinions based on your feelings, I've posted facts based upon the law! Guess what usually rules in court before a judge?

 

Go ahead, call me crazy and assert the "smallness" of my opinions.

 

Yes there is a difference between the state and private enterprises. The state has greater legitimacy than a private venture when it attempts to assert public necessity.  

 

Regardless, the challenges that TCR faces are real and it will have to amass a 100% record of rulings in its favor; and that does not include counter suits and appeals.  Anything less spells doom and delays further the actualization of the project.

 

I think seeing this through rose colored glasses is a huge mistake.

 

 

As this Texas Legislative Session comes to a weekending closure, an opinion authored by the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association in the Fort Worth Business Press sums it up as to why TCR was ultimately an "art project".  The epitome of its impending downfall is to be found in paragraph 10 of the story -

 

http://www.fwbusines...1dd7e07f3e.html

[Electricron]

As this Texas Legislative Session comes to a weekending closure, an opinion authored by the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association in the Fort Worth Business Press sums it up as to why TCR was ultimately an "art project".  The epitome of its impending downfall is to be found in paragraph 10 of the story -

 

http://www.fwbusines...1dd7e07f3e.html

 

Another demand for increased private property rights against ONLY high speed rail train operators. 

Existing Texas law doesn't distinguish between high speed rail and low speed rail, just as it should be. 

 

The existing eminent domain law in Texas wasn't changed at all in this legislative session, and will not be in future sessions as well. I suggest the ranchers and farmers get their act together and negotiate a good deal getting as much cash and concessions as possible from Texas Central RR.

 

None of their mud slinging stuck to the wall. 

[RD Milhollin]

$75 Million added to Texas Central Railroad by Texas investors:

 

http://www.star-tele...le28248565.html

[renamerusk]

$75 Million added to Texas Central Railroad by Texas investors:

 

Or point 0075 percent of $10B estimated start up cost. Presumably, their investments are refundable.

 

Added to what amount that has been raised?

 

Mayor Price, without any guarantees that HSR will come to Fort Worth by way of TCR,  is a more vocal cheerleader of TCR than the Mayor of Dallas and for which Dallas is being guaranteed a HSR station.

 

Price comes across as a nice lady, but increasingly demonstrates that she is a poor negotiator for Fort Worth interests inside and outside of the city. And as for as the Star-Telegram, it has long regarded itself and has had aspirations to be a "NORTH TEXAS/fort worth" newspaper.

 

OMG, how I miss Joel Burns.

[fortworthhorn]

 

$75 Million added to Texas Central Railroad by Texas investors:

 

Or point 0075 percent of $10B estimated start up cost. Presumably, their investments are refundable.

 

Added to what amount that has been raised?

 

Mayor Price, without any guarantees that HSR will come to Fort Worth by way of TCR,  is a more vocal cheerleader of TCR than the Mayor of Dallas and which Dallas is being guaranteed a HSR station.

 

Price comes across as a nice lady, but increasingly demonstrates that she is a poor negotiator for Fort Worth interests inside and outside of the city. And for the Star-Telegram, it has long regarded itself and has had aspirations to be a "NORTH TEXAS/fort worth" newspaper.

 

OMG, how I miss Joel Burns.

 

I suspect that the College Station stop was added to appease those rural areas that are likely to be affected.  I could be wrong there though.

It might come down to a Arlington vs Fort Worth battle for an additional stop if it gets that far.  

I do wish Bass was as interested in public transportation as he is in ice cream.  That would be something that really moved the ball.

 

I actually think that Mayor Price has done a decent job with what she can do.

Would I like some grand vision for multi-modal transportation including rail?  Of course.

But she is fighting the establishment, dollars and a difficult political climate for transportation funding.

[JBB]

I do wish Bass was as interested in public transportation as he is in ice cream.  That would be something that really moved the ball.

It's not about interest. It's about actually making money. The Blue Bell investment is as close to a sure thing as an investor could get. People are clamoring to see them back on the grocery store shelves. Barring another contamination issue, he'll see his return on that loan in a matter of months. A $125 million investment in HSR would be just a slightly larger drop in the bucket than the above mentioned investment and it might not see a return for decades, if ever.

I actually think that Mayor Price has done a decent job with what she can do.
Would I like some grand vision for multi-modal transportation including rail?  Of course.
But she is fighting the establishment, dollars and a difficult political climate for transportation funding.

I don't know that she's really had to make much of a tough stand when it comes to rail, but I've seen plenty in other areas (especially development) to suggest that she's no less a part of the establishment than her predecessor.

[fortworthhorn]

 

I do wish Bass was as interested in public transportation as he is in ice cream.  That would be something that really moved the ball.

It's not about interest. It's about actually making money. The Blue Bell investment is as close to a sure thing as an investor could get. People are clamoring to see them back on the grocery store shelves. Barring another contamination issue, he'll see his return on that loan in a matter of months. A $125 million investment in HSR would be just a slightly larger drop in the bucket than the above mentioned investment and it might not see a return for decades, if ever.

I actually think that Mayor Price has done a decent job with what she can do.
Would I like some grand vision for multi-modal transportation including rail?  Of course.
But she is fighting the establishment, dollars and a difficult political climate for transportation funding.

I don't know that she's really had to make much of a tough stand when it comes to rail, but I've seen plenty in other areas (especially development) to suggest that she's no less a part of the establishment than her predecessor.

 

Everything you said is fair.  I am not arguing the merits of his investment.  I am saying if they put their weight behind rail like they have with an arena and ice cream that this would be a different story.  On the actual dollars side, there are some big dogs who obviously see money to be made on this so they are investing their cash.  Unless a massive cultural shift takes place, Price might be the best we get. 

[renamerusk]

Channel 5 NBC has a short segment on the HSR system being shopped by the Texas Central Partners for their Dallas - Houston line:

 

http://www.nbcdfw.co...partner=nbcnews

 

Another segment tomorrow will look at problems the project faces. 

 

Seems to me that this is the appropriate place in this instance. Just making the effort to keep the HSR Public and HSR Private separate of one another and to attempt to have each threads from being further mingled into each other.

[360texas]

Looks like back in 2014 DFW Airport is ready for the Bullet train.... 

 

DFW Land Use Plan (using Aerial photo dated January 2014).  Click the map to zoom in to read the tiny print.

Of particular note HIGH SPEED RAIL black line starting at South end DFW adjacent to the Soil Stock Pile area.  Appears that HIGH SPEED RAIL is in their Land Use Plan through Jan 2014

 

Forum link:
http://www.fortworth...ge=2#entry94517

 

DFW Land Use Map link

https://www.dfwairpo...t/p2_139331.jpg

[RD Milhollin]

US VP Biden, a long-time train commuter, endorses the Texas Central HSR line:

 

http://transportatio...ng-in-d-c.html/

[fortworthhorn]

Bad news today.  No DT Houston stop:

 

http://www.citylab.c...ep-back/416733/

[Dylan]

This HSR line is a massive waste of money if it doesn't connect the two downtowns.

 

They just removed a big advantage they had over flying.

[360texas]

I did find the FRA route layout (may have been updated by now)  in a .pdf page 4 and 23  https://www.fra.dot..../Details/L17203 .  For Dallas County there are no details.  Only a black squiggly route line that terminates in the Dallas city area.  

 

Maybe the builders are expecting Dallas and other DFW folks to build out to the HSR terminal using Light Rail.

[360texas]

I personally think... the (Dallas) Fort Worth Airport should be the North End terminus.  Let all the other rail + Taxi + Car traffic merge at the DFW Airport.

[renamerusk]

I personally think... the (Dallas) Fort Worth Airport should be the North End terminus.  Let all the other rail + Taxi + Car traffic merge at the DFW Airport.

 

 A HSR terminal in an U.S. airport would be the first of its kind; and that is because it is not viewed as a viable strategy given the highly sophisticated air service network in this country.  For instance the daily landing and takeoffs at DFW during 2014 was 1,863 recorded movements.  It is nearly impossible to mesh an effective train schedule with that of the airlines.

 

 

 

HSR terminals are most effective when located in the CBD.