click for more on build based on need...
The phrase 'built based on need' really bothers me. I realize the official definition of need would be something along the lines of serving the transportation needs of the area. However, I suspect that if you get a private developer involved with billions of dollars at stake you could probably safely assume that need would be stretched to include need to turn a profit and not just public transportation needs.
The first person I visited with was explaining the maps to an older couple who are in the Preferred Corridor Alternative, the orange swath on the map. He explained that the orange was merely a study area and that there were no definite plans to build a road there yet...it was just a narrowed down study area. Well, we've heard that line before. This couple was in the path of one of the corridor connectors that is envisioned to connect the corridor to the Houston port from the Southwest. The TXDOT rep explained that road segments would be built based on need. In all likelihood, the connector into Houston and the ports would not be needed immediately. This stuck me as odd. A stated purpose of the corridor is the efficient movement of GOODS. Don't goods come from the ports? So wouldn't we then assume that a connection into a port would be a must if you were to make any part of the road profitable/useful? Was this guy being dishonest or just not thinking? Could be either with TXDOT.
The older couple then stepped back and it was my turn. I was determined to push the "built based on need" concept. My question...."Since you just said that segments of the corridor would be built based on need and the entire preferred corridor alternative lies outside of existing roadways would we assume that if segment X is built, let's just say the loop around Houston, but the adjacent segments were not that you'd need a connection to existing interstates?" The answer came back as a yes. I then asked where the study considered those potential connections. There were no orange paths from the preferred alternative routes to the existing roadways. He explained that those connections, if they went through new areas would be studied and then presented to the public. So, one would assume that the overall project would slow down to allow the appropriate amount of time for study and public involvement of these new areas. Well, the response from TXDOT was that it would probably not slow down the project and, while they'd be studied, the timeline would be compressed to fit the overall project schedule.
I'd argue that there is no need for the entire plan, as its proposed today. How bout that for built based on need.
The first person I visited with was explaining the maps to an older couple who are in the Preferred Corridor Alternative, the orange swath on the map. He explained that the orange was merely a study area and that there were no definite plans to build a road there yet...it was just a narrowed down study area. Well, we've heard that line before. This couple was in the path of one of the corridor connectors that is envisioned to connect the corridor to the Houston port from the Southwest. The TXDOT rep explained that road segments would be built based on need. In all likelihood, the connector into Houston and the ports would not be needed immediately. This stuck me as odd. A stated purpose of the corridor is the efficient movement of GOODS. Don't goods come from the ports? So wouldn't we then assume that a connection into a port would be a must if you were to make any part of the road profitable/useful? Was this guy being dishonest or just not thinking? Could be either with TXDOT.
The older couple then stepped back and it was my turn. I was determined to push the "built based on need" concept. My question...."Since you just said that segments of the corridor would be built based on need and the entire preferred corridor alternative lies outside of existing roadways would we assume that if segment X is built, let's just say the loop around Houston, but the adjacent segments were not that you'd need a connection to existing interstates?" The answer came back as a yes. I then asked where the study considered those potential connections. There were no orange paths from the preferred alternative routes to the existing roadways. He explained that those connections, if they went through new areas would be studied and then presented to the public. So, one would assume that the overall project would slow down to allow the appropriate amount of time for study and public involvement of these new areas. Well, the response from TXDOT was that it would probably not slow down the project and, while they'd be studied, the timeline would be compressed to fit the overall project schedule.
I'd argue that there is no need for the entire plan, as its proposed today. How bout that for built based on need.
click to collapse...
No comments:
Post a Comment