Firm to lead Union Pacific rail facilities project in Texas to Matamoros, Mexico
Release by HTNB
SAN ANTONIO - Cameron County, the southernmost tip of Texas, has selected HNTB Corporation to lead the fast-track design of Union Pacific rail facilities in Texas and Transportacion Ferroviarias Mexicana facilities across the border in Matamoros, Mexico.
The Cameron County West Railroad Relocation Project involves an estimated $22 million of construction, including approximately seven miles of relocation railway, final design of a new 2,300-foot rail bridge over the Rio Grande River, hydraulic river models and a 1.5-mile arterial roadway.
HNTB's offices in San Antonio and Houston expect to complete design by early 2005 and then provide construction administration services for the project through its completion in late 2005.
"Rail traffic passes through the core of both communities and endangers residents with more than 175 at-grade crossings and the transport of hazardous and industrial cargo through residential areas," said HNTB project director Lamberto "Bobby" Ballí. "The county and city commission feel this is the largest and most important project the area has ever undertaken."
Showing posts with label Union Pacific. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Union Pacific. Show all posts
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Governor signs lopsided agreement with BSNF
By Faith Chatham - June 21, 2007
The Perry administration is intent on spending taxpayers money on the railroads upgrading their privately owned and controlled infrastructure at taxpayer's expense. There are some private public partnerships with rail which make sense, especially commuter rail. However, read to the end of this memorandum and you'll see exactly how little committment BSNF is making to the citizens of Texas. They are here holding their hands out for our bucks but unwilling to invest financially in this state.
From Governor Perry's Website
READ GOVERNOR PERRY'S MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH UNION PACIFIC RAIL ROAD.
The Perry administration is intent on spending taxpayers money on the railroads upgrading their privately owned and controlled infrastructure at taxpayer's expense. There are some private public partnerships with rail which make sense, especially commuter rail. However, read to the end of this memorandum and you'll see exactly how little committment BSNF is making to the citizens of Texas. They are here holding their hands out for our bucks but unwilling to invest financially in this state.
From Governor Perry's Website
BNSF Memorandum of Understanding
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE STATE OF TEXAS ACTING THROUGH THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND THE BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY FOR A COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIP TO ADDRESS FREIGHT RAILROAD TRANSPORTATION ISSUES IN THE STATE OF TEXAS
WHEREAS, the Governor of Texas has proposed the development of a multimodal
WHEREAS, in accordance with House Bill Number 3588, 78th Texas Legislature, the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) was authorized to proceed with the development of the Trans-Texas Corridor facilities; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with House Bill Number 3588, 78th Texas Legislature, TxDOT has been authorized to acquire, finance, construct, maintain, and lease operations on state owned rail facilities in order to improve the safety and efficiency of Texas transportation systems; and
WHEREAS, in certain areas of the state, the growth of freight movements in and through the state of Texas is projected to increase in volumes that will eventually exceed the capacity of existing transportation systems in the state; and
WHEREAS, the state recognizes the essential need to promote and improve the efficiency of the multiple modes of transportation within the state, in order to facilitate the efficient movement of freight goods in and through the state of Texas; and
WHEREAS, the BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) operates and performs freight rail transportation services within the state of Texas, and recognizes the important role played by TxDOT in rail transportation planning and will participate in studies to advance statewide transportation interests; and
WHEREAS, the BNSF in its cooperation with the state herein will be guided by its own internal principles as outlined in the policy document entitled "Public Private Partnerships," (Exhibit A, attached), which contains an overview as to how BNSF will consider and participate in projects such as the Trans-Texas Corridor, beneficial freight rail relocations or other rail infrastructure projects and the state of Texas is willing to work with BNSF under the guidelines in Exhibit A for projects of this nature; and
WHEREAS, the state of Texas has seen a need to improve the Texas transportation system, and the potential to include the possibility of relocating some portions of freight rail services to alternative alignments that would benefit multiple modes of transportation; and
WHEREAS, improvements in the statewide freight rail system will offer opportunities to maximize the safety of all Texans while providing increased capacity for freight; and
WHEREAS, the BNSF and the state of Texas have agreed that improvements to the Texas freight rail system will benefit the state by enabling increased freight rail efficiencies and improving services to freight customers, and encouraging additional economic development within the state;
WHEREAS, the State of Texas understands and appreciates that BNSF operates in a competitive business environment and BNSF understands and appreciates that the State of Texas intends to enter into similar Memorandums of Understanding with other transportation providers, including BNSF's competitors; and
WHEREAS, the State of Texas and BNSF agree that to the extent that any other Memoranda are executed by the State of Texas with any of BNSF's competitors, and to the extent that such Memoranda contain substantive terms that effect the competitive environment BNSF operates in, that the same or functionally similar terms will also be offered to BNSF.
NOW THEREFORE, we declare to direct our respective planning and development personnel to work in a cooperative manner to identify potential rail projects which will facilitate the safe and reliable movement of goods and people within the state of Texas, and which will benefit the transportation system of Texas and the people of the state.
By: ________________________
RICK PERRY
Governor of Texas
Date: _________________________
By: ________________________
Matthew Rose
Chairman, President and CEO
BNSF Railway Company
Date: _________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit A
Public Private Partnerships Brochure
BNSF Railway Company (BNSF) will consider public-private partnerships in cases that benefit the public and ensure the interests of BNSF customers, investors and employees are protected. BNSF has successfully accomplished a number of public-private partnerships, including a partnership with several California state entities resulting in the Alameda Corridor and a partnership with various entities in Missouri and Kansas resulting in fly-over projects in Kansas City.
What are public-private partnerships?
Public-private partnerships combine the business interests of companies with the diverse goals of the local, state and federal entities who are working in the interest of the public. Cooperation between the private and public sectors may, in many cases, allow both sides to achieve their respective goals better, faster, and at lower costs.
How does BNSF approach public-private partnerships?
Public-private partnerships must be voluntary on both sides. Decisions on behalf of the public must protect the public interest and investment. BNSF's decision on whether to participate must protect our assets and the interests of our customers, shareholders and employees.
Coordinated state and federal transportation planning is necessary to ensure prudent public investments are made in the national rail network. BNSF works with local, state, federal agencies and public officials to provide whatever relevant information is needed to achieve public goals.
What factors does BNSF consider when evaluating a potential public-private partnership?
Public-private partnerships require a fact-based planning approach that:
Describes project scope;
Assesses impact on current freight traffic levels and future traffic growth;
Provides a cost-benefit analyses on an after-tax risk-adjusted basis; and
Identifies public funding sources, timing, processes and probability of obtaining funding to meet the public's timeliness objectives and achieve the public's goals.
BNSF's preliminary interest in exploring the possibilities of a public-private partnership should not be construed as a real or implied commitment by BNSF to support a project or participate either operationally or financially. BNSF's official support or concurrence of a project's benefit will follow the fact-based planning process outlined above, completion of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the parties, and BNSF's issuance of a formal statement of benefit and support.
What factors may lead BNSF to reject a potential public-private partnership?
Any public project cannot negatively affect BNSF's freight customers or BNSF's ability to provide them with consistent service, now or in the future.
Will BNSF consider participating financially in a potential public-private partnership?
BNSF recognizes public funding for rail projects should be commensurate with public benefits. BNSF's contributions to public-private partnerships will be commensurate with benefits derived by BNSF in comparison with other freight transportation projects competing for BNSF capital dollars.
Even though a project may produce some benefits for BNSF, it may not rank sufficiently high enough compared to other capital projects, or meet BNSF's internal capital investment or timeframe thresholds. When this occurs, BNSF would still support a project but would not provide financial participation.
READ GOVERNOR PERRY'S MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH UNION PACIFIC RAIL ROAD.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Camera to catch railroad crossing violators
Camera to catch railroad crossing violators
From Staff Reports - Dallas Morning News - Friday, June 1, 2007
Read more
From Staff Reports - Dallas Morning News - Friday, June 1, 2007
GRAND PRAIRIE - What is believed to be the first railroad-crossing camera in the state will be activated Friday morning in Grand Prairie at the corner of Southeast 9th and Pacific streets, city officials said.
Those caught on camera ignoring the warning signs of an approaching train can be fined $150. Officials say they hope the cameras will encourage people to drive safely and obey railroad-crossing signals.
“We look forward to the day when the cameras don’t catch any violators,” police chief Glen Hill said in a news release.
The camera is the first to be installed along the main Union Pacific rail line in Grand Prairie, which currently has 11 crossings. Grand Prairie has the highest railroad-crossing fatality rate of any Texas city, officials said. Since 2003, five people have died in motor vehicle collisions at crossings.
Read more
Saturday, June 9, 2007
Flattened by freight carriers, fleeced by slick operators and dumbfounded by the audacity of the Rail Roads
By Faith Chatham - June 9, 2007
The railroads and regional and Arlington city officials have been meeting, discussing plans and seeking funding to relocate the Union Pacific tracks which run through the heart of Arlington and Grand Praire. Toxic chemicals carried on those tracks pose risk to large populations, but that does not seem to be the major consideration for relocation of the tracks. There is now much community support for commuter rail. Arlington, one of the three cities in this 16 county NCTCOG region, with a population which places it in the top 50 most populous cities in the nation, combined with neighboring Grand Prairie, are the largest cities in Texas not to have mass transit. Failure of the region to meet EPA clean air standards by the year 2010 may lead to Federal funding sanctions.
Increased gas drilling has also skewed previous air pollution forecasts even further into the negative column. Cities of Arlington and Fort Worth rushed to permit gas drilling without accounting for increased carbon dioxide emmissions from generators on gas drilling units. This is cited by the EPA as reasons for rejecting the regions Clean Air Plan.
The dialogue about relocating the Union Pacific tracks irritates me. For decades cries of concerned citizens over shipment of dangerous chemicals on freight trains through major population centers have been ignored. Now, as the freight lines want to improve their bottom lines and reap the profits from shipment of tonnage from China through Texas to Kansas City and Canada, there is a big push to get the taxpayers to underwrite relocation of rail lines. Despite how the rail roads, regional planners and groups like NASCO attempt to sell it, I doubt that protection of civilian population groups or promotion of passenger rail is prompting these inititives. The rail carriers want the tax payers to pay to upgrade rail infrastructure owned and controlled by private rail corporations.
Gee... does this seem familar? Private rail promoters acquire massive segments of American real estate to build railroads and provide passenger and freight services to the American people. Rail road promoters get rich, decided that oil and gas is more lucrative than running rail roads and hauling freight is less bothersome than providing passenger service. Passenger rail is discontinued by most carriers. Eventually public transit authorities develop passenger rail and the US government leases use of the tracks from private rail roads to provide AMTRAK passenger rail service to American citizens. Oil and gas makes land developers rich. Citizens sit for hours while freight trains have priority to the tracks over passenger trains. The energy sector gets richer and richer and citizens pay higher and higher electric, residential gas and automobile gasoline rates.
Somehow it is insulting to think that the public is being expected to pay for upgrading rail road infrastructure for freight shipments! Then comes the push to get the public sector to pay for relocating the UNION PACIFIC tracks which run between UTA and the new Cowboy Stadium in Arlington!
It makes absolutely no sense to me to relocate the Union and Pacific tracks that run through the heart of Arlington. What better location could there be for PASSENGER rail tracks? They run a few blocks north of the University of Texas at Arlington and a few block south of the new Cowboys Stadium.
Why is it that lawmakers and RTC members rush to convert highway transporation project to PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP while ignoring rail which has been a private partnership from its inception?
Why are public dollars tapped for improving privately owned and rail road controlled rail lines? One of the biggest obstacles to effective passenger rail in Texas (AMTRAK) has been the control of privately owned tracks. Freight carriers grant right of way to freight trains while AMTRAK passengers sit for hours, unable to estimate reasonable arrival or departure times.
BSNF, KCS (de Mexico), and Union Pacific want the benefits but do not intend to fork out the cash to maintain and improve their infrastructure. Most train derailments in the US have been attributed to the railroads refusal to properly maintain their tracks. It's time that the rail industry and elected officials (such as County Judge Glen Whitley and the RTC) face some realities. Ownership comes with responsibility. If the railroads refuse to maintain the tracks and pay for desired infrastructure upgrades, they should GIVE the tracks to the government and allow them to be coverted to passenger lines. If they want straighter routes from Mexico to Oklahoma to ship freight at better profit margins for their companies, they should pay for the right of way and construct their own straighter routes. They should not expect the citizens of Texas to underwrite their schemes to improve their bottom lines through prioritization of the TTC over more critical transportation projects designed to solve Texas's most critical transportation bottlenecks. Moving freight is a commercial enterprize. Freight haulers should pay for upgrades to commercial infrastructure.
Moving people is the governments responsiblity. If private public partnerships are called for, there is an excellent opportunity running right straight through the center of Grand Prairie and Arlington. The Union Pacific track passes within walking distance of Grand Prairie's downtown business district, Arlington's downtown business district, the University of Texas at Arlington, the Cowboy's Stadium and Glory Park. There is not enough money left in the sales tax cap (after citizens underwrote the Cowboy Stadium) for Arlington to underwrite rail as a city initiative. However, there is a great opportunity for a private partner to step up to the plate, negotiate a deal for use of existing Union Pacific tracks and provide passenger rail service to citizens of Grand Prairie and Arlington.
The rail roads should devote the effort they've expended on lobbying to change the Texas Transportation Code and changing the eminent domain law to favor exercise of eminent domain for private gain in their push for the construciton of the Trans Texas Corridor into pursuing existing opportunities to provide transportation solutions in passenger rail.
The rail roads (and regional transportation planner) have focused on getting the laws changed so that the public underwrites improvements to privately owned rail infrastructure. It is time Union Pacific, KCS, BSNF and other rail conglomerates step up to the plate and carry more of the civic repsonsiblity. Hey, maybe Mr. Jones might underwrite some of the expense. After all, passenger rail in Arlington located near his stadium would be a definite plus for transporting fams to all games -- not just a one time trip to the Super Bowl.
June 9, 2007 1:46 PM
The railroads and regional and Arlington city officials have been meeting, discussing plans and seeking funding to relocate the Union Pacific tracks which run through the heart of Arlington and Grand Praire. Toxic chemicals carried on those tracks pose risk to large populations, but that does not seem to be the major consideration for relocation of the tracks. There is now much community support for commuter rail. Arlington, one of the three cities in this 16 county NCTCOG region, with a population which places it in the top 50 most populous cities in the nation, combined with neighboring Grand Prairie, are the largest cities in Texas not to have mass transit. Failure of the region to meet EPA clean air standards by the year 2010 may lead to Federal funding sanctions.
Increased gas drilling has also skewed previous air pollution forecasts even further into the negative column. Cities of Arlington and Fort Worth rushed to permit gas drilling without accounting for increased carbon dioxide emmissions from generators on gas drilling units. This is cited by the EPA as reasons for rejecting the regions Clean Air Plan.
The dialogue about relocating the Union Pacific tracks irritates me. For decades cries of concerned citizens over shipment of dangerous chemicals on freight trains through major population centers have been ignored. Now, as the freight lines want to improve their bottom lines and reap the profits from shipment of tonnage from China through Texas to Kansas City and Canada, there is a big push to get the taxpayers to underwrite relocation of rail lines. Despite how the rail roads, regional planners and groups like NASCO attempt to sell it, I doubt that protection of civilian population groups or promotion of passenger rail is prompting these inititives. The rail carriers want the tax payers to pay to upgrade rail infrastructure owned and controlled by private rail corporations.
Gee... does this seem familar? Private rail promoters acquire massive segments of American real estate to build railroads and provide passenger and freight services to the American people. Rail road promoters get rich, decided that oil and gas is more lucrative than running rail roads and hauling freight is less bothersome than providing passenger service. Passenger rail is discontinued by most carriers. Eventually public transit authorities develop passenger rail and the US government leases use of the tracks from private rail roads to provide AMTRAK passenger rail service to American citizens. Oil and gas makes land developers rich. Citizens sit for hours while freight trains have priority to the tracks over passenger trains. The energy sector gets richer and richer and citizens pay higher and higher electric, residential gas and automobile gasoline rates.
Somehow it is insulting to think that the public is being expected to pay for upgrading rail road infrastructure for freight shipments! Then comes the push to get the public sector to pay for relocating the UNION PACIFIC tracks which run between UTA and the new Cowboy Stadium in Arlington!
It makes absolutely no sense to me to relocate the Union and Pacific tracks that run through the heart of Arlington. What better location could there be for PASSENGER rail tracks? They run a few blocks north of the University of Texas at Arlington and a few block south of the new Cowboys Stadium.
Why is it that lawmakers and RTC members rush to convert highway transporation project to PRIVATE PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP while ignoring rail which has been a private partnership from its inception?
Why are public dollars tapped for improving privately owned and rail road controlled rail lines? One of the biggest obstacles to effective passenger rail in Texas (AMTRAK) has been the control of privately owned tracks. Freight carriers grant right of way to freight trains while AMTRAK passengers sit for hours, unable to estimate reasonable arrival or departure times.
BSNF, KCS (de Mexico), and Union Pacific want the benefits but do not intend to fork out the cash to maintain and improve their infrastructure. Most train derailments in the US have been attributed to the railroads refusal to properly maintain their tracks. It's time that the rail industry and elected officials (such as County Judge Glen Whitley and the RTC) face some realities. Ownership comes with responsibility. If the railroads refuse to maintain the tracks and pay for desired infrastructure upgrades, they should GIVE the tracks to the government and allow them to be coverted to passenger lines. If they want straighter routes from Mexico to Oklahoma to ship freight at better profit margins for their companies, they should pay for the right of way and construct their own straighter routes. They should not expect the citizens of Texas to underwrite their schemes to improve their bottom lines through prioritization of the TTC over more critical transportation projects designed to solve Texas's most critical transportation bottlenecks. Moving freight is a commercial enterprize. Freight haulers should pay for upgrades to commercial infrastructure.
Moving people is the governments responsiblity. If private public partnerships are called for, there is an excellent opportunity running right straight through the center of Grand Prairie and Arlington. The Union Pacific track passes within walking distance of Grand Prairie's downtown business district, Arlington's downtown business district, the University of Texas at Arlington, the Cowboy's Stadium and Glory Park. There is not enough money left in the sales tax cap (after citizens underwrote the Cowboy Stadium) for Arlington to underwrite rail as a city initiative. However, there is a great opportunity for a private partner to step up to the plate, negotiate a deal for use of existing Union Pacific tracks and provide passenger rail service to citizens of Grand Prairie and Arlington.
The rail roads should devote the effort they've expended on lobbying to change the Texas Transportation Code and changing the eminent domain law to favor exercise of eminent domain for private gain in their push for the construciton of the Trans Texas Corridor into pursuing existing opportunities to provide transportation solutions in passenger rail.
The rail roads (and regional transportation planner) have focused on getting the laws changed so that the public underwrites improvements to privately owned rail infrastructure. It is time Union Pacific, KCS, BSNF and other rail conglomerates step up to the plate and carry more of the civic repsonsiblity. Hey, maybe Mr. Jones might underwrite some of the expense. After all, passenger rail in Arlington located near his stadium would be a definite plus for transporting fams to all games -- not just a one time trip to the Super Bowl.
June 9, 2007 1:46 PM
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
Posts
