Cooke, Denton, and Tarrant Counties – Authorize an agreement with the National Railroad Passenger Corporation relating to the provision of passenger rail service on the Amtrak Heartland Flyer route and the department’s financial support for the operation of the service (MO) The Heartland Flyer provides daily passenger rail service over the BNSF Railway line between Fort Worth and Oklahoma City. The route has been in service since 1999. Operating losses are funded by the states of Oklahoma and Texas. This minute order authorizes the department to enter into an agreement with Amtrak for continued operations through September 2010 and fund the Texas share of operating losses up to $1.95 million. Without state subsidies Amtrak could discontinue passenger rail service on the route.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Texas Transportation Commission authorizes funding for Amtrak Heartland Flyer route
From Texas Transportation Commission Minutes, August 27, 2009
Texas Requests About $1.8 Billion for High Speed Passenger Rail
By TxDOT - August 29, 2009
AUSTIN - Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) officials have submitted nine applications to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) under tracks one, three and four of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Acts (ARRA) High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) program. Applications for track two funding are due October 2.
In all, $8 billion in ARRA funds, in addition to a little over $90 million in FY 2008 and 2009 federal appropriations are available through this program. Last month, TxDOT submitted pre-applications for seventeen projects. Applications will be reviewed by the FRA with announcements expected sometime this fall.
The Texas Department of Transportation
The Texas Department of Transportation is responsible for maintaining nearly 80,000 miles of road and for supporting aviation, rail and public transportation across the state. TxDOT and its 15,000 employees strive to empower local leaders to solve local transportation problems, and to use new financial tools, including tolling and public- private partnerships, to reduce congestion and pave the way for future economic growth while enhancingsafety, improving air quality and preserving the value of the state's transportation assets.
Read more at txdot.gov
AUSTIN - Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) officials have submitted nine applications to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) under tracks one, three and four of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Acts (ARRA) High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) program. Applications for track two funding are due October 2.
"An integrated, multimodal transportation system is key to efficiently moving people and goods throughout the state," said Phillip Russell, TxDOT assistant executive director for innovative project development. "This isn't something that can be achieved overnight, but I believe that these applications set us on a course that will Keep Texas Moving."
In all, $8 billion in ARRA funds, in addition to a little over $90 million in FY 2008 and 2009 federal appropriations are available through this program. Last month, TxDOT submitted pre-applications for seventeen projects. Applications will be reviewed by the FRA with announcements expected sometime this fall.
The Texas Department of Transportation
The Texas Department of Transportation is responsible for maintaining nearly 80,000 miles of road and for supporting aviation, rail and public transportation across the state. TxDOT and its 15,000 employees strive to empower local leaders to solve local transportation problems, and to use new financial tools, including tolling and public- private partnerships, to reduce congestion and pave the way for future economic growth while enhancingsafety, improving air quality and preserving the value of the state's transportation assets.
Read more at txdot.gov
Monday, June 15, 2009
Eddie Bernice Johnson and Chet Edwards seek billions for rails and roads
By Associated Press - Sunday, June 14, 2009
DALLAS -- Some North Texas lawmakers are lining up huge transportation money requests as a congressional committee readies a highway bill.
The Dallas Morning News reported Saturday that U.S. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, the highest-ranking Texan on the House Transportation Committee, was asking for nearly $2.5 billion for 25 projects. Eighty percent of the Dallas Democrat's request would be for a dozen transit and rail projects. The remainder is for road and highway improvements.
Of some $660 million sought by Waco Democrat Chet Edwards, nearly two-thirds is for transportation or rail projects. One of Edwards' requests is money for a portion of a high-speed rail line, known as the Texas T-Bone, to connect Waco with Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.
Arlington Republican Joe Barton is an exception. Of his nearly $116 million in project requests, only $3 million is for public transportation. Barton's request includes $42 million for improvements to Interstate 35E.
Johnson's largest request -- $593 million -- is for engineering and construction of the Cotton Belt Corridor commuter line, an east-west rail project involving Dallas Area Rapid Transit and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority. Another DART project, costing $483 million, would extend rail to D/FW airport.
The transportation bill undergoes committee scrutiny this month.
DALLAS -- Some North Texas lawmakers are lining up huge transportation money requests as a congressional committee readies a highway bill.
The Dallas Morning News reported Saturday that U.S. Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson, the highest-ranking Texan on the House Transportation Committee, was asking for nearly $2.5 billion for 25 projects. Eighty percent of the Dallas Democrat's request would be for a dozen transit and rail projects. The remainder is for road and highway improvements.
Of some $660 million sought by Waco Democrat Chet Edwards, nearly two-thirds is for transportation or rail projects. One of Edwards' requests is money for a portion of a high-speed rail line, known as the Texas T-Bone, to connect Waco with Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport.
Arlington Republican Joe Barton is an exception. Of his nearly $116 million in project requests, only $3 million is for public transportation. Barton's request includes $42 million for improvements to Interstate 35E.
Johnson's largest request -- $593 million -- is for engineering and construction of the Cotton Belt Corridor commuter line, an east-west rail project involving Dallas Area Rapid Transit and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority. Another DART project, costing $483 million, would extend rail to D/FW airport.
The transportation bill undergoes committee scrutiny this month.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
North Texas cities must wait for rail
By GORDON DICKSON - Fort Worth Star Telegram - June 1, 2009
Cities hoping for help from the state in paying for commuter rail service must now reassess plans after Texas lawmakers killed a proposed law that would have allowed local-option elections to raise taxes and fees for transit.
The Fort Worth Transportation Authority, also known as the T, has a service area that only includes about half of Tarrant County’s 1.8 million residents. Cities such as Arlington, North Richland Hills and Burleson must now find other ways to connect to the agency’s rail network.
In Arlington, elected leaders must now decide whether to ask city voters for permission to raise sales taxes for transit. Arlington has a quarter-cent available, but transit elections in the city have failed three times since 1980.
A quarter-cent would provide enough funding to build a Trinity Railway Express station near Farm to Market 157 in far north Arlington, and extend express bus service from that station to the entertainment district, said T President Dick Ruddell.
Projects continue
Other cities near Fort Worth are in much the same situation.
In Northeast Tarrant County, cities such as North Richland Hills and Haltom City may have to wait many years before building train stations on the proposed southwest to northeast commuter rail line that will cut through their city and is scheduled to have passenger service by 2013. Those cities don’t have any room under the state’s 8.25 percent sales tax limit, and were hoping for options such as a local gas tax or vehicle registration fee to generate revenue.
But several commuter rail projects already in the planning or construction phases will press on, and that’s good news for cities such as Fort Worth and Grapevine, which are combining forces to develop the rail line from southwest Fort Worth to the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport north entrance.
Grapevine voters already agreed to raise their sales tax by .375 cents to pay for commuter rail to their city.
Tough questions
The failure in Austin also won’t hurt the efforts of the Denton County Transportation Authority to get its A-train open from Denton to Carrollton by December 2010. The project is already funded, and rail cars have been ordered.
Private investment on the Cotton Belt portion of the southwest to northeast line could improve the financial picture — and Dallas Area Rapid Transit is actively seeking private partners. However, private funding likely would benefit cities such as Addison and Carrollton on the more densely populated North Dallas segment, Ruddell said.
County officials may now look at their options. In Tarrant County, officials in 2006 passed a $433 million bond package for roads.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
Cities hoping for help from the state in paying for commuter rail service must now reassess plans after Texas lawmakers killed a proposed law that would have allowed local-option elections to raise taxes and fees for transit.
The Fort Worth Transportation Authority, also known as the T, has a service area that only includes about half of Tarrant County’s 1.8 million residents. Cities such as Arlington, North Richland Hills and Burleson must now find other ways to connect to the agency’s rail network.
In Arlington, elected leaders must now decide whether to ask city voters for permission to raise sales taxes for transit. Arlington has a quarter-cent available, but transit elections in the city have failed three times since 1980.
"Everything is back on the table. We’ll look at all the options and do the best we can do," said Arlington Councilwoman Kathryn Wilemon. "A decision will have to be made by the Arlington council."
Barring a sales tax increase for transit in Arlington, Wilemon said, "it just leaves Arlington out of the rail picture, pretty much. There’s no funding for that right now."
A quarter-cent would provide enough funding to build a Trinity Railway Express station near Farm to Market 157 in far north Arlington, and extend express bus service from that station to the entertainment district, said T President Dick Ruddell.
Projects continue
Other cities near Fort Worth are in much the same situation.
In Northeast Tarrant County, cities such as North Richland Hills and Haltom City may have to wait many years before building train stations on the proposed southwest to northeast commuter rail line that will cut through their city and is scheduled to have passenger service by 2013. Those cities don’t have any room under the state’s 8.25 percent sales tax limit, and were hoping for options such as a local gas tax or vehicle registration fee to generate revenue.
But several commuter rail projects already in the planning or construction phases will press on, and that’s good news for cities such as Fort Worth and Grapevine, which are combining forces to develop the rail line from southwest Fort Worth to the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport north entrance.
Grapevine voters already agreed to raise their sales tax by .375 cents to pay for commuter rail to their city.
Tough questions
As for the cities that can’t afford to join, the T will continue to keep their proposed stations in the master plan, Ruddell said. "It doesn’t cost anything to leave them in the plan."
The failure in Austin also won’t hurt the efforts of the Denton County Transportation Authority to get its A-train open from Denton to Carrollton by December 2010. The project is already funded, and rail cars have been ordered.
Private investment on the Cotton Belt portion of the southwest to northeast line could improve the financial picture — and Dallas Area Rapid Transit is actively seeking private partners. However, private funding likely would benefit cities such as Addison and Carrollton on the more densely populated North Dallas segment, Ruddell said.
County officials may now look at their options. In Tarrant County, officials in 2006 passed a $433 million bond package for roads.
"These are really tough questions, and we don’t have the answers for now," said Amanda Wilson, a council of governments spokeswoman. "If you’re not a member of the T, and not planning on it, I can imagine that rail is not in your future for the next two years."
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Railroads seek stimulus funds to ease congestionn: Tower 55 in Fort Worth included
By Gordon Dickson - Fort Worth Star-Telegram - Friday, May 15, 2009
FORT WORTH, Texas — Two of the nation's largest railroads are seeking $70 million in federal stimulus money to lay tracks at the notoriously congested Tower 55 rail intersection near downtown Fort Worth.
Construction of a third north-south rail line at Tower 55 would reduce diesel emissions, speed traffic flow on area roads and improve safety at railroad crossings.
Officials from Fort Worth-based BNSF and Union Pacific, based in Omaha, Neb., say that although the new track would remain private property, the project enjoys wide support from public officials.
The request for funding will likely be made within weeks by the Texas Department of Transportation or another public agency on behalf of the railroads. The project will compete with other nationally strategic rail, port and road projects for $1.5 billion in discretionary funding to be disbursed by U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.
"We won’t have trains sitting and people sitting and waiting for trains to get out of the way," said Nate Asplund, BNSF director of public private partnerships. "It will be a reduction in at-grade crossing delays and a definite improvement in air quality."
If the bid for federal funding is successful, it would be a rare sign of progress on Tower 55, which has been under study by regional planners for more than five years.
The intersection, which features two rail lines running east-west and two running north-south, is one of the most congested in the U.S. About 112 trains pass through the intersection each day, and trains are often queued up on side tracks across Tarrant County, their diesel engines idling, while waiting their turn to go through.
The long-term plan is to dig a trench and move one set of Tower 55 railroad tracks below the other — but no funding sources have been identified for that $700 million-plus project.
Read more in Fort Star-Telegram
FORT WORTH, Texas — Two of the nation's largest railroads are seeking $70 million in federal stimulus money to lay tracks at the notoriously congested Tower 55 rail intersection near downtown Fort Worth.
Construction of a third north-south rail line at Tower 55 would reduce diesel emissions, speed traffic flow on area roads and improve safety at railroad crossings.
Officials from Fort Worth-based BNSF and Union Pacific, based in Omaha, Neb., say that although the new track would remain private property, the project enjoys wide support from public officials.
The request for funding will likely be made within weeks by the Texas Department of Transportation or another public agency on behalf of the railroads. The project will compete with other nationally strategic rail, port and road projects for $1.5 billion in discretionary funding to be disbursed by U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.
"We won’t have trains sitting and people sitting and waiting for trains to get out of the way," said Nate Asplund, BNSF director of public private partnerships. "It will be a reduction in at-grade crossing delays and a definite improvement in air quality."
If the bid for federal funding is successful, it would be a rare sign of progress on Tower 55, which has been under study by regional planners for more than five years.
The intersection, which features two rail lines running east-west and two running north-south, is one of the most congested in the U.S. About 112 trains pass through the intersection each day, and trains are often queued up on side tracks across Tarrant County, their diesel engines idling, while waiting their turn to go through.
The long-term plan is to dig a trench and move one set of Tower 55 railroad tracks below the other — but no funding sources have been identified for that $700 million-plus project.
Read more in Fort Star-Telegram
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Transportation bill clears first hurdle; opposition still lurks
By DAVE MONTGOMERY - Fort Worth Star Telegram - March 25, 2009
AUSTIN — Legislation aimed at funding billions of dollars in road and rail improvements in North Texas cleared its first hurdle in the Legislature on Wednesday, winning approval from a key Senate committee.
The 7-2 vote by the Transportation and Homeland Security Committee sends the bill to the Senate floor for a vote as early as next week.
"We’ll pass it," Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, the committee chairman and sponsor of SB 855, said of the likely outcome in the Senate. Approval there would send the issue to the House, where Rep. Vicki Truitt, R-Keller, is sponsoring a companion measure.
Sens. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, and Joan Huffman, R-Houston, voted against the bill.
City and county governments throughout North Texas, including Fort Worth and Arlington, have made the bill their top legislative priority to help the area escape traffic congestion and pollution they say endanger future development. But opposition has arisen on several fronts amid concerns that proposed fees and taxes in the bill would impose further hardships during the recession.
The legislation would allow countywide elections in which voters would decide on a menu of funding options to finance transportation improvements at the local level. North Texas officials want to use the revenue to improve roads and develop more than 200 miles of commuter rail throughout Dallas-Fort Worth, the fourth most populous region in the nation.
Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, secured an amendment that would spare users of Dallas/Fort Worth Airport from an added $2-a-day parking assessment at public lots. Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, questioned the exemption, but Carona noted that parking charges at the airport are already among the costliest in the region, about $12 to $15 a day.
"It seemed like a reasonable compromise," Carona said.
The committee also added an amendment by Carona that would prohibit the use of revenue raised for the transportation projects to be used for lobbying. The Dallas lawmaker said he wanted to include the restriction because "of public concern over taxpayer-funded lobbying."
Fort Worth, Arlington and the multicity Tarrant Regional Transportation Coalition have agreed to pay $275,000 to a prominent Austin lobbying firm, HillCo Partners, to help push the transportation bill through the Legislature.
The bill was originally designed for North Texas but has been broadened to include local-option provisions for the Austin and San Antonio areas, and the committee accepted an amendment that would add El Paso to the mix. Gov. Rick Perry, who at first supported the measure, has raised concerns about the inclusion of regions other than North Texas.
Williamson County, near Austin, would be excluded from the bill under another amendment adopted on behalf of Senate Finance Chairman Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, who is cool to the legislation and whose district includes the county.
Under the measure, local voters would choose from a combination of proposed funding sources, including fees on parking, vehicle emissions and driver’s license renewals. The bill also includes an optional tax on gasoline or diesel fuel and "an impact fee" charged to new Texas residents.
Ellis said he fears that the bill would create a "system of city-states," but he acknowledged that cities may need to find new revenue sources for transportation because of inadequate funding from the state.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
AUSTIN — Legislation aimed at funding billions of dollars in road and rail improvements in North Texas cleared its first hurdle in the Legislature on Wednesday, winning approval from a key Senate committee.
The 7-2 vote by the Transportation and Homeland Security Committee sends the bill to the Senate floor for a vote as early as next week.
"We’ll pass it," Sen. John Carona, R-Dallas, the committee chairman and sponsor of SB 855, said of the likely outcome in the Senate. Approval there would send the issue to the House, where Rep. Vicki Truitt, R-Keller, is sponsoring a companion measure.
Sens. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston, and Joan Huffman, R-Houston, voted against the bill.
City and county governments throughout North Texas, including Fort Worth and Arlington, have made the bill their top legislative priority to help the area escape traffic congestion and pollution they say endanger future development. But opposition has arisen on several fronts amid concerns that proposed fees and taxes in the bill would impose further hardships during the recession.
The legislation would allow countywide elections in which voters would decide on a menu of funding options to finance transportation improvements at the local level. North Texas officials want to use the revenue to improve roads and develop more than 200 miles of commuter rail throughout Dallas-Fort Worth, the fourth most populous region in the nation.
Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, secured an amendment that would spare users of Dallas/Fort Worth Airport from an added $2-a-day parking assessment at public lots. Sen. Florence Shapiro, R-Plano, questioned the exemption, but Carona noted that parking charges at the airport are already among the costliest in the region, about $12 to $15 a day.
"It seemed like a reasonable compromise," Carona said.
The committee also added an amendment by Carona that would prohibit the use of revenue raised for the transportation projects to be used for lobbying. The Dallas lawmaker said he wanted to include the restriction because "of public concern over taxpayer-funded lobbying."
Fort Worth, Arlington and the multicity Tarrant Regional Transportation Coalition have agreed to pay $275,000 to a prominent Austin lobbying firm, HillCo Partners, to help push the transportation bill through the Legislature.
The bill was originally designed for North Texas but has been broadened to include local-option provisions for the Austin and San Antonio areas, and the committee accepted an amendment that would add El Paso to the mix. Gov. Rick Perry, who at first supported the measure, has raised concerns about the inclusion of regions other than North Texas.
Williamson County, near Austin, would be excluded from the bill under another amendment adopted on behalf of Senate Finance Chairman Steve Ogden, R-Bryan, who is cool to the legislation and whose district includes the county.
Under the measure, local voters would choose from a combination of proposed funding sources, including fees on parking, vehicle emissions and driver’s license renewals. The bill also includes an optional tax on gasoline or diesel fuel and "an impact fee" charged to new Texas residents.
Ellis said he fears that the bill would create a "system of city-states," but he acknowledged that cities may need to find new revenue sources for transportation because of inadequate funding from the state.
Read more in the Fort Worth Star Telegram
Sunday, March 22, 2009
An Inventory of Records at the Texas State Archives, 1970-1995 (bulk 1990-1994)
Records of the Texas High Speed Rail Corporation in the Archives of Texas
MegaRail High Speed Rail alternative to Trans Texas Corridor
Content from MegaRail Corporate website
Note: Claims have not been verified by DFWRCC or Texas Rail editors
120-mph Non-stop Passenger, Automobile & Cargo Service in Single System over Existent Highway Rights of Way
Low-cost alternate to costly projects such as Texas Corridor Plan
* High-speed, inter-city MegaRail can carry most inter-city passenger, cargo and automobile traffic on a single pair of small, low-cost guideways installed over interstate highway rights of way.
* Avoids the very high cost of additional highways and railroads and right-of-way.
* High-speed, inter-city MegaRail is low-cost, low-risk and near-term.
* Rubber tires in enclosed rail tubes and electric propulsion for noise-free operation.
* Electrically powered vehicles with rail-supplied power are non-polluting.
* Heavy-duty CargoRail guideways can be added over same interstate right-of-ways to transport large trucks and containers should future need arise.
Note: Claims have not been verified by DFWRCC or Texas Rail editors
120-mph Non-stop Passenger, Automobile & Cargo Service in Single System over Existent Highway Rights of Way
Low-cost alternate to costly projects such as Texas Corridor Plan
* High-speed, inter-city MegaRail can carry most inter-city passenger, cargo and automobile traffic on a single pair of small, low-cost guideways installed over interstate highway rights of way.
* Avoids the very high cost of additional highways and railroads and right-of-way.
* High-speed, inter-city MegaRail is low-cost, low-risk and near-term.
* Rubber tires in enclosed rail tubes and electric propulsion for noise-free operation.
* Electrically powered vehicles with rail-supplied power are non-polluting.
* Heavy-duty CargoRail guideways can be added over same interstate right-of-ways to transport large trucks and containers should future need arise.
Landowners question high-speed rail
By Peggy Fikac - San Antonio Express-News - 2/08/2009
AUSTIN — For travelers, a 200-mph train connecting San Antonio, Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth may sound like a dream. But for some landowners along the proposed Texas T-Bone high-speed rail route, it's a question mark that they fear could easily turn into a nightmare.
“From a rural, agricultural standpoint, we're very concerned. It just seems like every time we turn around, someone's got us in their cross hairs,” said Central Texas farmer Richard Cortese, a Bell County commissioner and a leader in the Texas Farm Bureau.
Despite efforts by high-speed rail backers to build a partnership with local communities, some landowners are wary, partly because the fresh rail push comes after heated battles over the Trans-Texas Corridor, a massive proposal pushed by Gov. Rick Perry for a network of highways, tollways, pipelines and rails.
State officials recently buried the Trans-Texas Corridor's name after a backlash from property owners who feared their land would be devalued or taken. But “it hasn't gone away,” Cortese said.
“If you were to take a template of the Trans-Texas Corridor and lay it over this high-speed rail issue, I think you would find that many of the concerns would be very much the same,” said the Texas Farm Bureau's Gene Hall. “Fixing eminent domain (strengthening private property rights) is the first step toward increasing our comfort level with any of these projects.”
Several proposals are percolating in the Legislature to strengthen property rights. Hall said one key element is to ensure that property owners are compensated not only when they're forced to sell their land for a public project but when access to their property is diminished, affecting its value.
Besides the property-rights concern, Ralph Snyder of Snyder Salvage in Holland raised issues including train noise and who'd be on the hook for mitigating it.
He and Cortese said they understand the need for transportation in a growing state but that they want a detailed plan before making up their minds about the $12 billion to $18 billion rail proposal that would follow the Texas T-Bone — from Dallas-Fort Worth through Austin to San Antonio and branching off in Temple to go to Houston.
“We haven't seen any financial prototypes on this. I think that's our concern,” said Cortese, with questions including the expense to local governments if they're responsible for train stations.
Backers envision a project that's primarily privately financed but stems from a partnership with local governments. They'd like to have it running by 2020.
This legislative session, they're asking for state help, including tax exemptions for companies that would build the project.
“There's a perception about rural people that they are backward and they don't understand the problem. That's just simply not true,” Snyder said. “They want the studies done before a project is undertaken to make sure the right thing is being done.”
A key high-speed rail backer said details still are being developed because supporters want to ensure the proposal bubbles up from communities instead of being seen as handed down from the state capital.
“We want to involve the communities and the counties and the interest groups in that planning process, as opposed to ‘You bring this back when you have a plan and then we'll shoot at it,'” said Temple Mayor Bill Jones, vice chairman of the nonprofit Texas High Speed Rail and Transportation Corp.
Local communities will decide whether to contribute financially to such things as building a train station, he said.
Among key points, Jones noted the consortium includes elected leaders, cities and counties, among others, and that backers have said they want to elevate the rail where necessary to reduce the effect on property.
“We are committing as best we can possibly commit at this stage to elevate as much of the system as we can where it's necessary,” Jones said.
Property owners said the prospect of the rail being elevated would help address their concerns because it would allow access to land on both sides of the track.
Former Harris County Judge Robert Eckels, chairman of the nonprofit corporation, said the group is sensitive to local concerns and would want to stay along existing routes and minimize the infringement on private property. “It's not only good politics,” Eckels said. “It's cheaper that way.”
Read more in the San Antonio Express-News
AUSTIN — For travelers, a 200-mph train connecting San Antonio, Houston and Dallas-Fort Worth may sound like a dream. But for some landowners along the proposed Texas T-Bone high-speed rail route, it's a question mark that they fear could easily turn into a nightmare.
“From a rural, agricultural standpoint, we're very concerned. It just seems like every time we turn around, someone's got us in their cross hairs,” said Central Texas farmer Richard Cortese, a Bell County commissioner and a leader in the Texas Farm Bureau.
Despite efforts by high-speed rail backers to build a partnership with local communities, some landowners are wary, partly because the fresh rail push comes after heated battles over the Trans-Texas Corridor, a massive proposal pushed by Gov. Rick Perry for a network of highways, tollways, pipelines and rails.
State officials recently buried the Trans-Texas Corridor's name after a backlash from property owners who feared their land would be devalued or taken. But “it hasn't gone away,” Cortese said.
“If you were to take a template of the Trans-Texas Corridor and lay it over this high-speed rail issue, I think you would find that many of the concerns would be very much the same,” said the Texas Farm Bureau's Gene Hall. “Fixing eminent domain (strengthening private property rights) is the first step toward increasing our comfort level with any of these projects.”
Several proposals are percolating in the Legislature to strengthen property rights. Hall said one key element is to ensure that property owners are compensated not only when they're forced to sell their land for a public project but when access to their property is diminished, affecting its value.
Besides the property-rights concern, Ralph Snyder of Snyder Salvage in Holland raised issues including train noise and who'd be on the hook for mitigating it.
He and Cortese said they understand the need for transportation in a growing state but that they want a detailed plan before making up their minds about the $12 billion to $18 billion rail proposal that would follow the Texas T-Bone — from Dallas-Fort Worth through Austin to San Antonio and branching off in Temple to go to Houston.
“We haven't seen any financial prototypes on this. I think that's our concern,” said Cortese, with questions including the expense to local governments if they're responsible for train stations.
Backers envision a project that's primarily privately financed but stems from a partnership with local governments. They'd like to have it running by 2020.
This legislative session, they're asking for state help, including tax exemptions for companies that would build the project.
“There's a perception about rural people that they are backward and they don't understand the problem. That's just simply not true,” Snyder said. “They want the studies done before a project is undertaken to make sure the right thing is being done.”
A key high-speed rail backer said details still are being developed because supporters want to ensure the proposal bubbles up from communities instead of being seen as handed down from the state capital.
“We want to involve the communities and the counties and the interest groups in that planning process, as opposed to ‘You bring this back when you have a plan and then we'll shoot at it,'” said Temple Mayor Bill Jones, vice chairman of the nonprofit Texas High Speed Rail and Transportation Corp.
Local communities will decide whether to contribute financially to such things as building a train station, he said.
Among key points, Jones noted the consortium includes elected leaders, cities and counties, among others, and that backers have said they want to elevate the rail where necessary to reduce the effect on property.
“We are committing as best we can possibly commit at this stage to elevate as much of the system as we can where it's necessary,” Jones said.
Property owners said the prospect of the rail being elevated would help address their concerns because it would allow access to land on both sides of the track.
Former Harris County Judge Robert Eckels, chairman of the nonprofit corporation, said the group is sensitive to local concerns and would want to stay along existing routes and minimize the infringement on private property. “It's not only good politics,” Eckels said. “It's cheaper that way.”
Read more in the San Antonio Express-News
Monday, July 7, 2008
High speed rail plan put to sniff test
By Paul A. Romer - The Temple-Telegram Staff Writer - July 6, 2008
BELTON - The best way to describe a meeting between high speed rail proponents and Bell County commissioners last week may be to compare them to two dogs that approach each other, sniff around for a while and then choose to go in different directions.
Officials from both organizations used careful language after the Monday meeting to describe exactly what occurred but their words were measured, possibly to preserve political relationships for future considerations.
It may be more beneficial to the people of Bell County to know what didn’t occur.
The Texas High Speed Rail and Transportation Corp. would like Bell County to become a dues paying member of the corporation, which is taking its message all around the state that now is the time for high speed rail in Texas. But an invitation for Bell County to come aboard for the ride was not extended.
Maybe it was the tepid response from commissioners that curtailed the invitation, but paperwork describing the benefits of such membership was contained in packets of information distributed to commissioners before the meeting.
Two Bell County cities, Killeen and Temple, are already spending taxpayer money to support the rail corporation’s efforts in bringing high speed rail, dubbed the Texas T-Bone Corridor, to the state. Each city pays annual membership dues of $25,000.
The rail corporation is proposing that two high speed rail lines be built: one from the Dallas-Fort Worth area to San Antonio and the other from Houston to Fort Hood. The lines would cross in the Temple area.
This fiscal year the rail corporation will bring in $210,000 in membership dues, according to officials. At this point the dues appear to be used almost exclusively to promote the idea.
“We are working to plan this,” Bill Jones III, Temple mayor and corporation vice chairman, said to commissioners. “We don’t have all the answers. We’re doing nothing but raising dues that support us to get the word out right now.”
None of the Bell County commissioners spoke in favor of the proposal. Each had questions that when considered together helped show the high speed rail project for what it is: a speculative proposal that is in its infancy.
Eddy Lange, commissioner in Precinct 3, spoke with the most passion against high speed rail.
“The timing could not be worse coming right off the tail of the Trans-Texas Corridor,” he said. “I’m open (to new ideas) but right now I’m not coming out in support of this. It would be political suicide for any of us.”
Lange said he felt sure his constituents in eastern Bell County would be against selling their land so that rail infrastructure could be built. He said his constituents would even be against an above ground rail that would help preserve farmland.
In its promotional materials the rail corporation identifies more than 20 congressional and legislative supporters - including U.S. Rep. John Carter - but it is unclear the level of support of these state and national leaders.
Some have written letters supporting the concept of high speed rail, encouraging the rail corporation to combine private and public resources to see if it has potential to benefit Texas. Others believe high speed rail is coming and want it in their state or district first.
Tim Brown, commissioner for Precinct 2, said the transportation model in Texas is very different from the model where similar trains are operating in Asia and Europe. The population in Texas is more spread out than other regions using high speed rail.
And Brown doesn’t believe the train would make a substantial impact on highway traffic. He said it would compete more directly with small airports.
“This could put our small airports out of business,” said Richard Cortese, commissioner for Precinct 1.
Brown said it is time that the corporation move past concepts and start compiling data to see if such a project is even feasible.
“I understand the concepts; I’d like to see the numbers,” he said. “We need to know if it can work. Right now there is a line on the map drawn up by the people who have given money.”
County Judge Jon Burrows intimated that the county would like to be involved early on with a venture that would relieve future highway congestion and provide more transportation options to residents but at this point he doubts that the organization would have the political clout to bring the T of the T-Bone through Bell County. He said a more logical route might be from Houston to Austin.
“My concern is the political realities,” Burrows said. “If this thing gets close to happening, Austin and San Antonio may come forward with fistfuls of money and Bell County could be left out.”
Comments made by John Fisher, commissioner for Precinct 4, seemed to support Burrow’s position. Fisher asked the group who they had spoken to at Fort Hood. He said he has not talked to a single official from the base who said high speed rail was an option for the Army moving its freight.
Jones said the rail line may prove most useful to families and soldiers traveling to and from Fort Hood.
The annual meeting of the rail corporation is scheduled for Aug. 13 in Irving. The meeting will include a year-end review, overview of fact-finding missions to areas with high speed rail and legislative planning for 2009.
The corporation has a goal of bringing high speed rail to the state by 2020, which critics say may not be possible.
Brown estimates that it would take 10 years to do an environmental analysis of the area where the track would run and another 10 years to build it.
To accomplish its objectives the rail corporation would have to move at a pace much faster than what government is generally accustomed to. Jones says the project can meet its objectives if the public and private sector work together.
“We’re out of the station. We’re quickly picking up momentum,” he said.
Read more in the Temple-Telegram
BELTON - The best way to describe a meeting between high speed rail proponents and Bell County commissioners last week may be to compare them to two dogs that approach each other, sniff around for a while and then choose to go in different directions.
Officials from both organizations used careful language after the Monday meeting to describe exactly what occurred but their words were measured, possibly to preserve political relationships for future considerations.
It may be more beneficial to the people of Bell County to know what didn’t occur.
The Texas High Speed Rail and Transportation Corp. would like Bell County to become a dues paying member of the corporation, which is taking its message all around the state that now is the time for high speed rail in Texas. But an invitation for Bell County to come aboard for the ride was not extended.
Maybe it was the tepid response from commissioners that curtailed the invitation, but paperwork describing the benefits of such membership was contained in packets of information distributed to commissioners before the meeting.
Two Bell County cities, Killeen and Temple, are already spending taxpayer money to support the rail corporation’s efforts in bringing high speed rail, dubbed the Texas T-Bone Corridor, to the state. Each city pays annual membership dues of $25,000.
The rail corporation is proposing that two high speed rail lines be built: one from the Dallas-Fort Worth area to San Antonio and the other from Houston to Fort Hood. The lines would cross in the Temple area.
This fiscal year the rail corporation will bring in $210,000 in membership dues, according to officials. At this point the dues appear to be used almost exclusively to promote the idea.
“We are working to plan this,” Bill Jones III, Temple mayor and corporation vice chairman, said to commissioners. “We don’t have all the answers. We’re doing nothing but raising dues that support us to get the word out right now.”
None of the Bell County commissioners spoke in favor of the proposal. Each had questions that when considered together helped show the high speed rail project for what it is: a speculative proposal that is in its infancy.
Eddy Lange, commissioner in Precinct 3, spoke with the most passion against high speed rail.
“The timing could not be worse coming right off the tail of the Trans-Texas Corridor,” he said. “I’m open (to new ideas) but right now I’m not coming out in support of this. It would be political suicide for any of us.”
Lange said he felt sure his constituents in eastern Bell County would be against selling their land so that rail infrastructure could be built. He said his constituents would even be against an above ground rail that would help preserve farmland.
In its promotional materials the rail corporation identifies more than 20 congressional and legislative supporters - including U.S. Rep. John Carter - but it is unclear the level of support of these state and national leaders.
Some have written letters supporting the concept of high speed rail, encouraging the rail corporation to combine private and public resources to see if it has potential to benefit Texas. Others believe high speed rail is coming and want it in their state or district first.
Tim Brown, commissioner for Precinct 2, said the transportation model in Texas is very different from the model where similar trains are operating in Asia and Europe. The population in Texas is more spread out than other regions using high speed rail.
And Brown doesn’t believe the train would make a substantial impact on highway traffic. He said it would compete more directly with small airports.
“This could put our small airports out of business,” said Richard Cortese, commissioner for Precinct 1.
Brown said it is time that the corporation move past concepts and start compiling data to see if such a project is even feasible.
“I understand the concepts; I’d like to see the numbers,” he said. “We need to know if it can work. Right now there is a line on the map drawn up by the people who have given money.”
County Judge Jon Burrows intimated that the county would like to be involved early on with a venture that would relieve future highway congestion and provide more transportation options to residents but at this point he doubts that the organization would have the political clout to bring the T of the T-Bone through Bell County. He said a more logical route might be from Houston to Austin.
“My concern is the political realities,” Burrows said. “If this thing gets close to happening, Austin and San Antonio may come forward with fistfuls of money and Bell County could be left out.”
Comments made by John Fisher, commissioner for Precinct 4, seemed to support Burrow’s position. Fisher asked the group who they had spoken to at Fort Hood. He said he has not talked to a single official from the base who said high speed rail was an option for the Army moving its freight.
Jones said the rail line may prove most useful to families and soldiers traveling to and from Fort Hood.
The annual meeting of the rail corporation is scheduled for Aug. 13 in Irving. The meeting will include a year-end review, overview of fact-finding missions to areas with high speed rail and legislative planning for 2009.
The corporation has a goal of bringing high speed rail to the state by 2020, which critics say may not be possible.
Brown estimates that it would take 10 years to do an environmental analysis of the area where the track would run and another 10 years to build it.
To accomplish its objectives the rail corporation would have to move at a pace much faster than what government is generally accustomed to. Jones says the project can meet its objectives if the public and private sector work together.
“We’re out of the station. We’re quickly picking up momentum,” he said.
Read more in the Temple-Telegram
Thursday, June 26, 2008
CONGRESSWOMAN SHEILA JACKSON LEE HOLDS HEARING TO STRENGTHEN RAIL SECURITY
Jackson Lee Holds Hearing In New York City, Examining Rail Systems To Enhance Rail Security Nationwide
By Office of Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee - April 25, 2008
Brooklyn, New York- Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, Chair of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection, released the following statement at a hearing, at the Brooklyn Public Library, Grand Army Plaza Branch, in New York City entitled “Protecting the Mass Transit Critical Infrastructure in New York City and in the Nation:”
Read press release
By Office of Congresswoman Shelia Jackson Lee - April 25, 2008
Brooklyn, New York- Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee, Chair of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation Security and Infrastructure Protection, released the following statement at a hearing, at the Brooklyn Public Library, Grand Army Plaza Branch, in New York City entitled “Protecting the Mass Transit Critical Infrastructure in New York City and in the Nation:”
“As we all know, securing mass transit in this country is critical to ensuring that we protect the American public from terrorists. Each weekday, 11.3 million passengers in 35 metropolitan areas and 22 states use commuter rail. It is imperative that we in Congress continue to give those on the frontlines the tools they need to continue to protect the traveling public..
“Until recently, the Department of Homeland Security has focused almost exclusively on aviation security. However, we in Congress changed that focus with the enactment of the 9/11 legislation last August. The law now mandates that TSA put more focus on surface transportation security. The requirements of the 9/11 legislation include expanded transportation grant criteria, protocols for frontline employee training, authorization for Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response Teams, increases in surface transportation security inspectors, and many other improvements that will help to make our nation’s mass transit systems safer.
“Today, in New York City, home to the largest mass transit system in America, we are here to discuss how we can continue to make mass transit safe for Americans. New York has been on the forefront of securing mass transit for many years. As the site of ground zero, the State of New York, the NYPD, Amtrak, Metropolitan Transit Authority, the Port Authority, and all of the frontline workers who work the subways, the trains, buses, bridges and tunnels are all keenly aware of how important their jobs are, and what must continue to be done. We in Congress are your partners in ensuring that you have the tools needed to secure surface modes of transportation. We have already accomplished much in the passage of the 9/11 bill, but surely our work continues. The dialogue we have today gives those of us in Congress the opportunity to hear directly from those who work these issues on the ground, so that we can continue to be a resource for you. I would like to thank Commissioner Kelly and Deputy Secretary Balboni for sharing their perspectives with us today.
“The lessons we learn during this process can help secure transportation across the nation. In my district, in Houston TX, we have the METRO system that transports thousands of people around the downtown Houston area everyday. While that system is different in many ways from what exists here in New York, there are common threads that we can share to make sure all mass transit systems have access to the most effective and innovative methods of security. I am pleased that Chief Thomas Lambert is here today to share with us his perspective.
“However, as we focus on security operations, methods, and technology- we should not forget the frontline workers who are the eyes and ears of any security operation. We must continue to ensure that they get the training and worker protections they need to do their jobs effectively. I am pleased that James Little of TWU is here to share that perspective with us
“History has shown us that terrorists view rail and public transportation systems as potential targets. London, Madrid, Mumbai- have fallen victim to attacks on rail and mass transit. These attacks have killed and maimed thousands. Even more devastation could be caused by a successful attack on our mass transit system. Further, this threat is always present. In January of this year, a plot was thwarted to attack the Barcelona Public Transit system. This attempted attack is yet another reminder that we must remain vigilant.
“While we continue to make strides in securing our nation, we must not neglect any part of our transportation infrastructure, which includes our rail and mass transit systems. As we closely examine the New York City’s mass transit rail system, my goal is to extract important finds and lessons learned and create ways to apply them across the nation to strengthen rail security.”
Read press release
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
DART sees 5 percent rise in train passengers
By JUSTIN FARMER - WFAA-TV - Wed., June 25, 2008
DALLAS - The rising price of gasoline has more people in the Dallas area relying on mass transit.
That pleases DART but also offers challenges as it tailors routes to riders' needs.
North Texans love their trucks and SUVs but maybe with gas at $4 a gallon, habits are changing.
The number of passengers on DART trains was up 5 percent last month.
The number of passengers on the TRE which runs between Dallas and Fort Worth was up 7 percent.
May represented the busiest month ever for DART trains - so busy that the parking lots in Plano and Garland were often full.
DART says if this happens to you, then drive to the next DART stop.
DART's future was in doubt in the early 1990s but now is being talked about as brighter than ever.
"We have the largest rail system currently under construction in North America," said DART spokesperson, Mark Ball.
"The 28-mile system is seeing condominiums and restaurants and all kinds of development that DART has nothing to do with, adjacent to our rail system. It's exciting thinking about in the very near future, those are the areas we are going to be servicing and those are the people who are going to be riding on DART," he added.
Read more on WFAA NEWS
DALLAS - The rising price of gasoline has more people in the Dallas area relying on mass transit.
That pleases DART but also offers challenges as it tailors routes to riders' needs.
North Texans love their trucks and SUVs but maybe with gas at $4 a gallon, habits are changing.
The number of passengers on DART trains was up 5 percent last month.
The number of passengers on the TRE which runs between Dallas and Fort Worth was up 7 percent.
May represented the busiest month ever for DART trains - so busy that the parking lots in Plano and Garland were often full.
DART says if this happens to you, then drive to the next DART stop.
DART's future was in doubt in the early 1990s but now is being talked about as brighter than ever.
"We have the largest rail system currently under construction in North America," said DART spokesperson, Mark Ball.
"The 28-mile system is seeing condominiums and restaurants and all kinds of development that DART has nothing to do with, adjacent to our rail system. It's exciting thinking about in the very near future, those are the areas we are going to be servicing and those are the people who are going to be riding on DART," he added.
Read more on WFAA NEWS
Friday, April 25, 2008
Suburban rail network causes friction
By MICHAEL A. LINDENBERGER - The Dallas Morning News - Friday, April 11, 2008
Elected officials and business leaders appeared no closer to a consensus Thursday over how to find at least $400 million it would take annually to pay for a huge suburban rail network.
A push to get the Legislature to permit cities to increase sales taxes by up to a penny to pay for the 239-mile rail network has failed in the past two sessions, but supporters insist the plan is more necessary than ever. Many of its key backers are pressing to put the issue before the Legislature again next year, though key Dallas area senators have said it is likely to fail again.
Thursday's meeting in Arlington only underscored the deep differences between elected officials and leading business interests over how to pay for the plan.
Top businesses, including Texas Instruments and other North Texas corporate leaders, have flatly opposed an increase of any amount to the sales tax rates.
Bill Alloway, president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, said told those gathered Thursday that the business community remains flatly opposed to any sales tax increase. In a statement distributed at the meeting, the association said, "the case for increasing the cap on local sales taxes has not been made. We will continue to oppose any increase in that cap in light of the compelling state interest in the sales tax and the existence of other viable local options."
There were wide differences between elected officials as well.
"I don't think that there is a snowball's chance in you know where that the people of Collin County would support a sales tax increase," said Plano City Council member Loretta Ellerbe.
The leaders narrowed funding options to five options, and will meet again April 28 to discuss them. Those options range from continuing to push for a sales tax increase, to raising property taxes, to imposing car registration fees of more than $100.
The suburban rail service, if funded, would begin operating in 2025, or perhaps 2030, its backers said.
Read more in the Dallas Morning News
Elected officials and business leaders appeared no closer to a consensus Thursday over how to find at least $400 million it would take annually to pay for a huge suburban rail network.
A push to get the Legislature to permit cities to increase sales taxes by up to a penny to pay for the 239-mile rail network has failed in the past two sessions, but supporters insist the plan is more necessary than ever. Many of its key backers are pressing to put the issue before the Legislature again next year, though key Dallas area senators have said it is likely to fail again.
Thursday's meeting in Arlington only underscored the deep differences between elected officials and leading business interests over how to pay for the plan.
Top businesses, including Texas Instruments and other North Texas corporate leaders, have flatly opposed an increase of any amount to the sales tax rates.
Bill Alloway, president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, said told those gathered Thursday that the business community remains flatly opposed to any sales tax increase. In a statement distributed at the meeting, the association said, "the case for increasing the cap on local sales taxes has not been made. We will continue to oppose any increase in that cap in light of the compelling state interest in the sales tax and the existence of other viable local options."
There were wide differences between elected officials as well.
"I don't think that there is a snowball's chance in you know where that the people of Collin County would support a sales tax increase," said Plano City Council member Loretta Ellerbe.
The leaders narrowed funding options to five options, and will meet again April 28 to discuss them. Those options range from continuing to push for a sales tax increase, to raising property taxes, to imposing car registration fees of more than $100.
The suburban rail service, if funded, would begin operating in 2025, or perhaps 2030, its backers said.
Read more in the Dallas Morning News
Saturday, January 19, 2008
European rail logistics firm buys Texas Railcar Leasing Co. (TRLX)
ProgressiveRailroading.com news
Updates from Texas Railcar Leasing, Alstom, TÜVRheinland, David J. Joseph Co. and Brookville Equipment
Rail industry suppliers and service providers continue to be active in the United States and abroad:
Updates from Texas Railcar Leasing, Alstom, TÜVRheinland, David J. Joseph Co. and Brookville Equipment
Rail industry suppliers and service providers continue to be active in the United States and abroad:
• European rail logistics firm VTG Aktiengesellschaft has acquired Texas Railcar Leasing Co. (TRLX), which leases rail cars to railroads and shippers in the United States, Mexico and Canada. Investment bank Citi Capital Strategies served as financial advisor to TRLX. Terms weren't disclosed. VTG Aktiengesellschaft, which currently manages a fleet of 48,200 rail cars, plans to acquire additional cars.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Transit authority to spend $51,000 to repair faulty signs
By GORDON DICKSON - Star-Telegram Staff Writer - Jan. 18, 2008
At every train station in Tarrant County, electronic message boards hang from the platform ceilings. The signs are supposed to project helpful messages to Trinity Railway Express riders, such as "The next eastbound TRE will depart in 11 minutes."
But the signs have been dark for most of the past year because of mechanical problems, Fort Worth Transportation Authority finance officer Rob Harmon said.
On Thursday, the T board agreed to spend $51,215 to repair the signs over several months. The work will be performed by Inova Solutions, the only company to submit a bid.
Even without the signs, passengers can still check times the old-fashioned way: by consulting print schedules posted at each station.
The signs look fancy but don't actually track the precise location of trains, Harmon said.
That may change in the next year or two. Dallas Area Rapid Transit intends to install a more sophisticated passenger information system, which would use sensors to precisely monitor trains in Dallas County, Harmon said. Once that system is up and running, the T likely will tap into it on the Tarrant County side, he said.
Also at the meeting
In other action Thursday, the T board:
Hired Freese and Nichols to design the location of a second track at Richland Hills Station. An extra track stretching a half-mile in each direction from the station would allow faster, more frequent train service. The design will cost at least $129,000.
Discussed a potential First Amendment lawsuit in closed session but took no action. Last month, a passenger complained she was escorted off a bus for reading the Bible to her children. T officials said it was the volume of her voice, not the subject matter, that caused the problem.
At every train station in Tarrant County, electronic message boards hang from the platform ceilings. The signs are supposed to project helpful messages to Trinity Railway Express riders, such as "The next eastbound TRE will depart in 11 minutes."
But the signs have been dark for most of the past year because of mechanical problems, Fort Worth Transportation Authority finance officer Rob Harmon said.
On Thursday, the T board agreed to spend $51,215 to repair the signs over several months. The work will be performed by Inova Solutions, the only company to submit a bid.
Even without the signs, passengers can still check times the old-fashioned way: by consulting print schedules posted at each station.
The signs look fancy but don't actually track the precise location of trains, Harmon said.
That may change in the next year or two. Dallas Area Rapid Transit intends to install a more sophisticated passenger information system, which would use sensors to precisely monitor trains in Dallas County, Harmon said. Once that system is up and running, the T likely will tap into it on the Tarrant County side, he said.
Also at the meeting
In other action Thursday, the T board:
Hired Freese and Nichols to design the location of a second track at Richland Hills Station. An extra track stretching a half-mile in each direction from the station would allow faster, more frequent train service. The design will cost at least $129,000.
Discussed a potential First Amendment lawsuit in closed session but took no action. Last month, a passenger complained she was escorted off a bus for reading the Bible to her children. T officials said it was the volume of her voice, not the subject matter, that caused the problem.
ACTION ALERT: Tx House Committee on Transportation Public Hearing on role of MPO and Rural Planning Authorities within COGs
Texas House of Represenatives Meeting Notice - Jan. 18, 2008
TEXAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMITTEE: Transportation
SUBCOMMITTEE: Planning Authorities
TIME & DATE: 10:00 AM, Wednesday, February 06, 2008
PLACE: E2.012
CHAIR: Rep. Fred Hill
The Subcommittee will meet to consider the following:
Charge #5: Examine the role of metropolitan planning authorities in state law, as well as the creation of rural planning authorities to address the planning needs outside of metropolitan planning organizations but within council of government boundaries.
TEXAS HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMMITTEE: Transportation
SUBCOMMITTEE: Planning Authorities
TIME & DATE: 10:00 AM, Wednesday, February 06, 2008
PLACE: E2.012
CHAIR: Rep. Fred Hill
The Subcommittee will meet to consider the following:
Charge #5: Examine the role of metropolitan planning authorities in state law, as well as the creation of rural planning authorities to address the planning needs outside of metropolitan planning organizations but within council of government boundaries.
Thursday, December 6, 2007
ACTION ALERT: Comments for Sunset Review of TxDOT due by Jan. 7, 2008
December 5, 2007
Dear Recipient:
The Sunset Advisory Commission would like your help in reviewing and improving the State’s transportation system. The Legislature, through the Texas Sunset Act, has charged our Commission with reviewing the mission and performance of the Texas Department of Transportation.
In general, the Sunset Commission periodically evaluates state agencies to determine if the agency is needed, if it is operating effectively, and if state funds are well spent. Based on the recommendations of the Sunset Commission, the Texas Legislature ultimately decides whether an agency continues to operate into the future. Additional information on the Sunset Commission can be found on our website.
As part of this agency’s review, we seek the input of organizations and individuals who have an interest in the agency. Please take some time to comment on the attached preliminary issues identified by the Sunset Commission staff as potential research areas. Also, let us know of other issues of interest to you or your organization. Feel free to share copies of this e-mail and the attachment with any others who may have an interest in the Texas Department of Transportation. To help ensure the free flow of information, anything submitted to Sunset staff during the review until the staff report is released is confidential, and will not be shared with anyone outside of Sunset staff.
To give the staff time to consider your information during our review of the Texas Department of Transportation, we request you send your response by Monday, January 7, 2008. Please mail, e-mail, or fax your comments to the address or fax number provided in the attached Preliminary Issue List. Also, if you need more information or have questions about our process, please contact Jennifer Jones at (512) 463-1300. We greatly appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing your ideas.
Sincerely,
Ken Levine
Deputy Director
Sunset Advisory Commission
Dear Recipient:
The Sunset Advisory Commission would like your help in reviewing and improving the State’s transportation system. The Legislature, through the Texas Sunset Act, has charged our Commission with reviewing the mission and performance of the Texas Department of Transportation.
In general, the Sunset Commission periodically evaluates state agencies to determine if the agency is needed, if it is operating effectively, and if state funds are well spent. Based on the recommendations of the Sunset Commission, the Texas Legislature ultimately decides whether an agency continues to operate into the future. Additional information on the Sunset Commission can be found on our website.
As part of this agency’s review, we seek the input of organizations and individuals who have an interest in the agency. Please take some time to comment on the attached preliminary issues identified by the Sunset Commission staff as potential research areas. Also, let us know of other issues of interest to you or your organization. Feel free to share copies of this e-mail and the attachment with any others who may have an interest in the Texas Department of Transportation. To help ensure the free flow of information, anything submitted to Sunset staff during the review until the staff report is released is confidential, and will not be shared with anyone outside of Sunset staff.
To give the staff time to consider your information during our review of the Texas Department of Transportation, we request you send your response by Monday, January 7, 2008. Please mail, e-mail, or fax your comments to the address or fax number provided in the attached Preliminary Issue List. Also, if you need more information or have questions about our process, please contact Jennifer Jones at (512) 463-1300. We greatly appreciate your assistance and look forward to hearing your ideas.
Sincerely,
Ken Levine
Deputy Director
Sunset Advisory Commission
Friday, November 23, 2007
Easing Fort Worth's Rail Jam
By 5hd NBC5i.com, November 14, 2007
FORT WORTH, Texas -- Tower 55, the busiest at-grade railroad intersection in the United States, is the subject of an environmental assessment that could find ways to improve air quality, safety, and movement at the congested spot.
Named for a two-story wooden railroad building on the edge of downtown Fort Worth, the Tower 55 intersection is typically backed up with idling locomotives that sit there emitting clouds of diesel exhaust into the air.
The North Central Texas Council of Governments, NCTCOG, hosted two public meetings at the Fort Worth Central Library Tuesday to discuss issues surrounding Tower 55 and the plans for an estimated $300 million improvement of the rail intersection.
More than 100 freight trains and 70 passenger trains pass through and adjacent to Tower 55, and wait time for trains to use the crossing averages 90 minutes.
Several different rail lines converge at Tower 55, including the Burlington Northern Santa Fe, Union Pacific Railroad, Fort Worth & Western Railroad, Amtrak, and the Trinity Railway Express.
In addition to creating air pollution, the rail jam impedes the distribution of goods and blocks the possibility of expanding commuter rail service in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
NCTCOG staff introduced eight improvement alternatives under consideration at the public meetings. They include a third north-south track at grade, a north-south track in a trench, an east-west fly-over elevated track, and a bypass for the Forth Worth and Western Railroad.
Even as locomotives pile up at Tower 55, NCTCOG planners are watching the demand for rail access to the intersection steadily increase.
If the rate of traffic at Tower 55 continues to grow, by 2010 all trains needing access in an average 24 hour period will not be able to pass through, the public meetings were told.
This growth is caused by the continuous increase in regional economic activity, changes to the national freight rail network, and international trade, which indicates demand for access to the Tower 55 interchange is likely to grow in the near future.
According to the Texas State Rail Plan, rail is the primary mode of moving goods in the region, and to and from the west coast. These goods must pass through Tower 55 before moving throughout the region, the nation, or internationally.
The North Central Texas Council of Governments says that if a remedy is not found for the problems at Tower 55, companies in freight oriented developments throughout the region will be faced with two options - stay in the region and deal with the congestion issues and unreliability of shipments or move out of the region to a more reliable, less congested location.
Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved
FORT WORTH, Texas -- Tower 55, the busiest at-grade railroad intersection in the United States, is the subject of an environmental assessment that could find ways to improve air quality, safety, and movement at the congested spot.
Named for a two-story wooden railroad building on the edge of downtown Fort Worth, the Tower 55 intersection is typically backed up with idling locomotives that sit there emitting clouds of diesel exhaust into the air.
The North Central Texas Council of Governments, NCTCOG, hosted two public meetings at the Fort Worth Central Library Tuesday to discuss issues surrounding Tower 55 and the plans for an estimated $300 million improvement of the rail intersection.
More than 100 freight trains and 70 passenger trains pass through and adjacent to Tower 55, and wait time for trains to use the crossing averages 90 minutes.
Several different rail lines converge at Tower 55, including the Burlington Northern Santa Fe, Union Pacific Railroad, Fort Worth & Western Railroad, Amtrak, and the Trinity Railway Express.
In addition to creating air pollution, the rail jam impedes the distribution of goods and blocks the possibility of expanding commuter rail service in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.
NCTCOG staff introduced eight improvement alternatives under consideration at the public meetings. They include a third north-south track at grade, a north-south track in a trench, an east-west fly-over elevated track, and a bypass for the Forth Worth and Western Railroad.
Even as locomotives pile up at Tower 55, NCTCOG planners are watching the demand for rail access to the intersection steadily increase.
If the rate of traffic at Tower 55 continues to grow, by 2010 all trains needing access in an average 24 hour period will not be able to pass through, the public meetings were told.
This growth is caused by the continuous increase in regional economic activity, changes to the national freight rail network, and international trade, which indicates demand for access to the Tower 55 interchange is likely to grow in the near future.
According to the Texas State Rail Plan, rail is the primary mode of moving goods in the region, and to and from the west coast. These goods must pass through Tower 55 before moving throughout the region, the nation, or internationally.
The North Central Texas Council of Governments says that if a remedy is not found for the problems at Tower 55, companies in freight oriented developments throughout the region will be faced with two options - stay in the region and deal with the congestion issues and unreliability of shipments or move out of the region to a more reliable, less congested location.
Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2007. All rights reserved
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Metro Rail of Austin receives two rail cars
By Ed Sterling - Wilson County News - Oct. 31, 2007
Swiss trains
Austin’s Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority accepted delivery of two rail cars shipped in pieces from Switzerland. Four more cars are on order.
“MetroRail” is scheduled to begin in about a year, carrying passengers from Leander, north of Austin, to downtown Austin, with a few stops in between. What’s more, Austin Mayor Will Wynn is proposing a separate project — a light rail line — to connect Austin Bergstrom airport, downtown Austin, the University of Texas, and other stops. He wants to make it a November 2008 ballot issue.
Early voting
Registered voters can take advantage of early voting through Nov. 2.
Computer users can easily determine polling locations and hours, by going to the Secretary of State’s Web site. www.sos.state.tx.us.
Read more in the Wilson County News
Swiss trains
Austin’s Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority accepted delivery of two rail cars shipped in pieces from Switzerland. Four more cars are on order.
“MetroRail” is scheduled to begin in about a year, carrying passengers from Leander, north of Austin, to downtown Austin, with a few stops in between. What’s more, Austin Mayor Will Wynn is proposing a separate project — a light rail line — to connect Austin Bergstrom airport, downtown Austin, the University of Texas, and other stops. He wants to make it a November 2008 ballot issue.
Early voting
Registered voters can take advantage of early voting through Nov. 2.
Computer users can easily determine polling locations and hours, by going to the Secretary of State’s Web site. www.sos.state.tx.us.
Read more in the Wilson County News
Friday, October 26, 2007
Stop FTA's Plan to Raid Federal Transit Funding for Roads!
Commentary by The Overhead Wire • September 2007
The following commentary has been adapted from entries originally posted to The Overhead Wire Weblog on 10 September 2007 and the Daily Kos on 11 September 2007.
The US Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has issued an extremely ominous and potentially retrogressive Notice of Proposed Rule-Making (NPRM) for the New and Small Starts programs. These programs provide the basic new-starts funding for major fixed-guideway capital projects such as light rail transit (LRT), rail rapid transit (RRT, or "heavy rail"), and so-called bus rapid transit (BRT).
Rails to roads?
The proposed new rules are alarming on a number of levels. Most notably, they downgrade the importance of land use and economic development despite congressional direction to the contrary, and they propose to redefine the definition of "fixed-guideway" to include transit funding for highway lanes that use tolling schemes – thus diverting rail transit money into roadway (tollway) development.
Why is this important? To some extent, the FTA's proposed new rules would entrench policy positions advocated by notorious motor vehicle zealots and transit critics – folks such as the libertarian Reason Foundation and the Randal O'Toole/Wendell Cox cabal. The proposed rules ignore current transportation law regarding required project justification criteria and add new Federal intervention into the local decision-making process. If finalized, the new rule-making policy will hamper American cities' ability to build new transit lines for the next 5 years!
However, the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill moving through congress is an opportunity to formally weigh in and stop or alter the proposed FTA rule. In a recent development, Senators Christopher Dodd and Richard Shelby have proposed an amendment to kill the FTA's new rules. Transit advocates may wish to communicate their views on this issue to their own Senators on the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Subcommittee, which can be accessed at the Senate Transportation appropriations webpage.
UPDATE: Light Rail Now has been informed that the Dodd-Shelby amendment was passed and has been added to the appropriations bill. However, President George W. Bush is threatening to veto this legislation. It's currently unknown whether there are sufficient votes in the US Senate to override such a veto.
More details on the new rule-making
See full text of the FTA's proposed rule.
This would diminish the ability of cities to get funding from an already crowded grant program. HOT lanes qualify for funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) ... and we all know there's a lot of funding there. Over 300 New Starts projects – light rail transit (LRT), rail rapid transit, regional passenger rail ("commuter rail"), bus rapid transit – were authorized by the SAFETEA-LU federal transportation bill, and the argument by the FTA as to why they have such an intensive scrutiny of proposals is based mainly on the high demand for limited funding. Adding High Occupancy Toll freeway lanes to the list of eligible projects further strains the FTA's ability to fund new transit projects.
2. FTA would make the dreadful (and misnamed) cost-effectiveness index (CEI) the primary factor in deciding the fate of funding for New Starts projects
This "index" is the same measure that is killing top-quality rail projects, such as the Tyson's Corner Metro extension (Washington, DC area) and has killed, or set back, light rail plans in Columbus, Ohio, Raleigh. NC, and elsewhere. Almost every city that is looking to build new transit projects is worried about qualifying under this seriously flawed measure, and now it's being made even stronger. This measure is the reason why Minneapolis's Central Corridor light rail project might not be able to tunnel under the University of Minnesota, and why locally backed expansion of light rail has been turned into less effective BRT projects in some Houston corridors.
3. FTA's rulemaking pushes cheap, not completely dedicated-guideway, bus projects
The irony of the cost-effectiveness index is that, in reality, it fails to capture the full benefits and cost-effectiveness of a project. The index evaluates the cost-effectiveness of a light rail project versus corridor improvements such as bus rapid transit or improved local bus service. What this does is force cities to choose bus rapid transit projects over citizen-backed light rail projects that may have greater community benefits but also a higher initial price tag. Also, the measurements for the Very Small Starts program are set using the Southtown rapid bus project in Kansas City (which runs on city streets), and not rail or fixed-guideway BRT projects such as Los Angeles's Orange Line busway.
4. FTA reduces or ignores the importance of land use and economic development measures
Congress elevated land use and added economic development as project justification criteria in SAFETEA-LU (the current federal transit authorization). The US Department of Transportation (DOT), however, ignores this and has combined them into one measure with a combined weight of 20% in the overall rating process. The FTA states that it is too costly to implement the economic development measure, but the cost and burden to grantees such as cities and transit agencies is not considered when local jurisdictions are required to adopt the FTA's travel demand models, which have many problems and questionable aspects. The fact that they use those models to determine the "cost-effectiveness" rating – which decides who gets funding – is a problem in itself, as this rating index can't address all the benefits of fixed-guideway transit.
Furthermore, FTA argues that it's too difficult to separate land use from economic development, and that the increase in property values associated with proximity to transit is merely a result of improved time savings alone. We're sure many zoning offices and developers would be surprised to have these effects categorized so simplistically.
5. FTA's new policy could lower ratings for cities who are trying to address future rather than current congestion issues
The FTA would like to measure the New Starts program by the benefits to highway users, but ignores the effect of induced demand, which means that, when you build a new transit project, the space from cars that are taken off the road by transit is filled by new cars. The aim of transit opponents – to push money from the transit program into congestion pricing schemes and not-so-rapid bus projects – would result in less useful transit projects in corridors that might have real future need.
What can be done?
Transit advocates and other proponents of improved public transportation might consider contacting their congressmen or senators, to request them to stop the FTA's proposed rule and give the Department of Transportation a clear directive that the FTA must:
1. Comparably weight all 6 project justification criteria (mobility improvements, environmental benefits, operating efficiencies, cost-effectiveness, land use factors, and other factors – e.g., economic development, environmental justice considerations, livable communities initiatives, etc.), while recognizing the particular importance of transit-supportive land use and economic development in fostering successful and sustainable projects rather than considering just the direct costs of the project.
2. Maintain the current definition of "fixed-guideway transit" – i.e., focused on transit services operating on rails, special guideways, or busways.
3. Desist from raiding the federal transit program for road pricing schemes.
Light Rail Now! website
Here are details on what the FTA's new rules would do:
1. FTA would allow High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes to qualify for New Starts funding
The following commentary has been adapted from entries originally posted to The Overhead Wire Weblog on 10 September 2007 and the Daily Kos on 11 September 2007.
The US Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has issued an extremely ominous and potentially retrogressive Notice of Proposed Rule-Making (NPRM) for the New and Small Starts programs. These programs provide the basic new-starts funding for major fixed-guideway capital projects such as light rail transit (LRT), rail rapid transit (RRT, or "heavy rail"), and so-called bus rapid transit (BRT).
Rails to roads?
The proposed new rules are alarming on a number of levels. Most notably, they downgrade the importance of land use and economic development despite congressional direction to the contrary, and they propose to redefine the definition of "fixed-guideway" to include transit funding for highway lanes that use tolling schemes – thus diverting rail transit money into roadway (tollway) development.
Why is this important? To some extent, the FTA's proposed new rules would entrench policy positions advocated by notorious motor vehicle zealots and transit critics – folks such as the libertarian Reason Foundation and the Randal O'Toole/Wendell Cox cabal. The proposed rules ignore current transportation law regarding required project justification criteria and add new Federal intervention into the local decision-making process. If finalized, the new rule-making policy will hamper American cities' ability to build new transit lines for the next 5 years!
However, the fiscal year 2008 appropriations bill moving through congress is an opportunity to formally weigh in and stop or alter the proposed FTA rule. In a recent development, Senators Christopher Dodd and Richard Shelby have proposed an amendment to kill the FTA's new rules. Transit advocates may wish to communicate their views on this issue to their own Senators on the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Subcommittee, which can be accessed at the Senate Transportation appropriations webpage.
UPDATE: Light Rail Now has been informed that the Dodd-Shelby amendment was passed and has been added to the appropriations bill. However, President George W. Bush is threatening to veto this legislation. It's currently unknown whether there are sufficient votes in the US Senate to override such a veto.
More details on the new rule-making
See full text of the FTA's proposed rule.
This would diminish the ability of cities to get funding from an already crowded grant program. HOT lanes qualify for funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) ... and we all know there's a lot of funding there. Over 300 New Starts projects – light rail transit (LRT), rail rapid transit, regional passenger rail ("commuter rail"), bus rapid transit – were authorized by the SAFETEA-LU federal transportation bill, and the argument by the FTA as to why they have such an intensive scrutiny of proposals is based mainly on the high demand for limited funding. Adding High Occupancy Toll freeway lanes to the list of eligible projects further strains the FTA's ability to fund new transit projects.
2. FTA would make the dreadful (and misnamed) cost-effectiveness index (CEI) the primary factor in deciding the fate of funding for New Starts projects
This "index" is the same measure that is killing top-quality rail projects, such as the Tyson's Corner Metro extension (Washington, DC area) and has killed, or set back, light rail plans in Columbus, Ohio, Raleigh. NC, and elsewhere. Almost every city that is looking to build new transit projects is worried about qualifying under this seriously flawed measure, and now it's being made even stronger. This measure is the reason why Minneapolis's Central Corridor light rail project might not be able to tunnel under the University of Minnesota, and why locally backed expansion of light rail has been turned into less effective BRT projects in some Houston corridors.
3. FTA's rulemaking pushes cheap, not completely dedicated-guideway, bus projects
The irony of the cost-effectiveness index is that, in reality, it fails to capture the full benefits and cost-effectiveness of a project. The index evaluates the cost-effectiveness of a light rail project versus corridor improvements such as bus rapid transit or improved local bus service. What this does is force cities to choose bus rapid transit projects over citizen-backed light rail projects that may have greater community benefits but also a higher initial price tag. Also, the measurements for the Very Small Starts program are set using the Southtown rapid bus project in Kansas City (which runs on city streets), and not rail or fixed-guideway BRT projects such as Los Angeles's Orange Line busway.
4. FTA reduces or ignores the importance of land use and economic development measures
Congress elevated land use and added economic development as project justification criteria in SAFETEA-LU (the current federal transit authorization). The US Department of Transportation (DOT), however, ignores this and has combined them into one measure with a combined weight of 20% in the overall rating process. The FTA states that it is too costly to implement the economic development measure, but the cost and burden to grantees such as cities and transit agencies is not considered when local jurisdictions are required to adopt the FTA's travel demand models, which have many problems and questionable aspects. The fact that they use those models to determine the "cost-effectiveness" rating – which decides who gets funding – is a problem in itself, as this rating index can't address all the benefits of fixed-guideway transit.
Furthermore, FTA argues that it's too difficult to separate land use from economic development, and that the increase in property values associated with proximity to transit is merely a result of improved time savings alone. We're sure many zoning offices and developers would be surprised to have these effects categorized so simplistically.
5. FTA's new policy could lower ratings for cities who are trying to address future rather than current congestion issues
The FTA would like to measure the New Starts program by the benefits to highway users, but ignores the effect of induced demand, which means that, when you build a new transit project, the space from cars that are taken off the road by transit is filled by new cars. The aim of transit opponents – to push money from the transit program into congestion pricing schemes and not-so-rapid bus projects – would result in less useful transit projects in corridors that might have real future need.
What can be done?
Transit advocates and other proponents of improved public transportation might consider contacting their congressmen or senators, to request them to stop the FTA's proposed rule and give the Department of Transportation a clear directive that the FTA must:
1. Comparably weight all 6 project justification criteria (mobility improvements, environmental benefits, operating efficiencies, cost-effectiveness, land use factors, and other factors – e.g., economic development, environmental justice considerations, livable communities initiatives, etc.), while recognizing the particular importance of transit-supportive land use and economic development in fostering successful and sustainable projects rather than considering just the direct costs of the project.
2. Maintain the current definition of "fixed-guideway transit" – i.e., focused on transit services operating on rails, special guideways, or busways.
3. Desist from raiding the federal transit program for road pricing schemes.
Light Rail Now! website
Here are details on what the FTA's new rules would do:
1. FTA would allow High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes to qualify for New Starts funding
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
