07.24.08
A Case For The TTC?
There may be a case to be made for Rick Perry’s Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) but the one that Phillip Jankowski of the Taylor Daily Press recently tried to make isn’t it – A case for the Trans-Texas Corridor. In an attempt to show how the TTC can make the city of Taylor a “player” again in Williamson County, he shows that he is obviously unaware of some of the greatest flaws and complaints rural and small town Texans have had with the TTC from the beginning.
In his Op-Ed Jankowski implores Taylor to “forget its past” and “embrace” Rick Perry’s TTC. Telling farmers that certainly some of their land would be destroyed but:
To the losers, any compensation would not make up for these agriculturists losing their most prized possession.
Still, with rising expenses in an already risk-laden enterprise, I wonder how many farmers would object to their land being sold at the highest reasonable value possible. And if negotiated right, those who would be hardest hit by eminent domain (yet another Taylor dirty word; I’m on a roll here!) may end up with incredibly valuable commercial real estate as businesses would clamor to snatch up land adjacent to the highway.
The premise that farmer/ranchers are willing to abandon the land that has been in their family for generations if the price is right, when the cost to TX agriculture – taking all that black land out of production – is far greater in comparison. And, as an aside, belittling their livelihood will get you nowhere. One of the first problems many had with the TTC, as stated by former TxDOT chair Ric Williamson, was the extremely limited access there would be to the new highway:
Toll roads would be built first and would probably begin with the special truck lanes, the state’s report said. Roads would have fewer ramps than interstate highways to cut down on development near the corridors. (Emphasis added).
“This is extremely limited access,” said Commissioner Ric Williamson. “We will not allow cities and villages to crop up along the route.”
Although I would be remiss if I left out the concept of “participation payments”, mentioned later in the above link and here by soon-to-be-former Rep. Mike Krusee, from 2003.
TxDOT does not now have authority to do what we call “corridor participation payments†– sometimes they’re called royalty payments for right-of-way acquisition. And it grants TxDOT additional exclusive development authority powers.
Participation payments are one of the added touches of HB 3588. It’s not just limited access that’s a problem with the TTC, but also the fact that all the concessions – gas stations, hotels, stores – will be inside the corridor, with all the money going to the state. (See here and here). That combined with the “extremely limited” access will deny the “boon to the city’s economy” which the Op-Ed points to as the trade off for the losers whose farmland would be destroyed.
Hopefully Mr. Jankowski will take this information into consideration and see that those opposed to Gov. Perry’s TTC are not a bunch of NIMBY rubes, solely opposed to progress. We’ve been immersed in this fight for years and while we may see the TTC as vile, and TxDOT and eminent as dirty words, we are not opposed to listening to someone who wants to make a case for the TTC. It just comes off better if they are well versed on the issue before trying to tell us how it is.
Oh and speaking of progress, I was able to turn up all the information to rebut this Op-Ed with simple web searches that took a few minutes. Which means that Mr. Jankowski either wrote this article with a pre-determined outcome or just didn’t want to take the time to find the facts to back up his argument. Either way it doesn’t reflect back well on the TDP.
remerson said,
July 24, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Jankowski also made some mumbo-jumbo argument that Taylor has been lagging behind in growth visavis the western Williamson towns of Cedar Park and Leander, first assuming that Taylor residents desire to duplicate that growth (not a proven!) and then arguing that such growth had come about as a result of roads being built, a premise with no basis in fact. Proximity to Austin is the major factor in west Williamson growth in the Cedar Park/Leander area; the roads did not create that growth, they followed it.
TTC, ultimately (and here is where he really missed the big picture) will not bring any sort of growth to the area. On the contrary, it will stultify it! But first it will destroy the existing community and culture and sharply divide and isolate the area.
Then who will buy Mr. Jankowski’s newspaper? And what would there be to read about, anyway?
jhvance said,
July 25, 2008 at 10:41 pm
Jankowski’s introductory article when he joined TDP earlier in the year noted that he had recently graduated from UT with a journalism degree and lived in SE Austin, so was going to commute back-and-forth to his new job in Taylor. It would seem his support for a new TTC-generated highway could be influenced by that daily pattern of commuting across the region’s eastern side.
I don’t know if he’s read Linda Scarborough’s book “Road, River and Ol’ Boy Politics”, about how Taylor’s economic fortunes relative to those of Georgetown and the western part of the county changed greatly as a result of two key decisions in the 1950′s and 60′s: 1) to construct the Laneport dam which now forms Granger Lake and 2) to place the alignment of I-35 where it now exists between Georgetown and Round Rock rather than an alignment which would have been more close to Taylor (at that time still the largest city in the county).
I view his argument with great personal distaste and professional distrust, as it is one which is fundamentally based in the worst elements of mid-20th Century thinking about transportation and land development. In reality, it simply feeds the extant political machine that controls County government which intends to see all of the agricultural lands of the Blackland Prairie converted into non-agricultural uses. The “multi-corridor transportation plan” and both road bond issues of the past decade were designed to produce Williamson County’s transition into the 21st Century’s clone of Orange County, California.
wcnews said,
July 27, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Thanks for the comment, and the historical context you bring to the discussion. I still haven’t Scarborough’s book, but all the reviews I heard are good.
One thing I did leave out of my post, that I meant to put in, is the fact that the TTC isn’t, and never was, a commuter highway. The limited access, etc., meant it was being built as “long-haul” highway, a bypass of major urban areas, to move goods, through Texas and the US. This is not a commuter highway.
wilcowatcher said,
July 28, 2008 at 1:46 pm
You really should read Scarborough’s book – it seems an exercise in deja vu. Speaking of deja vu, here’s a little op ed from a small town newsaper in Purcellville, Virignia, part of a way-too-fast growing county in Northern Virginia that reprinted my testimony at a public hearing on growth there from back in 2005. It applied there, then, and seems to apply equally here now. The original can be viewed at http://www.thepurcellvillegazette.com/d/archive/2005/July_15_2005.pdf.
It Seems to Me
The Will of the People
By Joseph LaFiandra
If you missed the public hearing at the
LVHS on Wednesday, July 6th concerning the
two options for the new Loudoun County
zoning plan, you missed a real example in
democracy in action. With over 100 speakers
signed up to comment on the two options and
a packed audience, it was a thrilling
experience to see the little guy stand up for his
rights. What rights? Well, his right to determine
how he and his family were going live in
Loudoun County. Speaker after speaker let the
Board of Supervisors know that they rejected
massive residential development and wanted
to maintain the rural nature of the county. The
developers were there, but they were in the
minority, in about a 1 to 50 ratio.
There was such an outpouring of
eloquence that is was really interesting to see
and listen to the show, similar to the way a
good movie or novel grabs you. I thought that
some of the speakers beat Jimmy Stewart’s
performance in “Mister Smith goes to
Washington†easily.
If I had to pick the person who that
summed the tone of the meeting to me, it was
Gary Oldham of Round Hill. With his
permission, I have repeated them below.
“I lived in Orange County, California, during
the early 1980s, when it held the dubious
distinction of being the fastest growing county
in the nation. I saw firsthand what unbridled
greed, rampant, unchecked development, and
unresponsive elected officials could do when
the needs and the will of the people are
ignored in favor of pandering to the deeppocketed,
well-organized, campaign-financing
developers. Where orange groves and
strawberry fields once grew, there are parking
lots and high rises. Traffic moves at a crawl 20
hours a day, and violent crime is widespread.
You won’t find anyone living in Orange County
today who was there in the 70s and 80s who
will say that it’s a better place now than it was
before unrestrained growth took place. We
can’t let that happen here!
Developers have lots and lots of money to
throw at the opportunity to make even more
money. They have the political machine to
spread disinformation, spin, and confusion.
The citizens merely have passion and love for
their county. The citizens don’t seem to have a
voice, when we are so clearly brushed aside
when the message isn’t what some want to
hear. What we do have is votes, and those will
be heard.
I support “Option 1,” as we are now calling
the Clem-Burton proposal. It is a sound,
fair, and reasonable compromise to manage -
not eliminate – growth in our county. To
do otherwise would be irresponsible and
demonstrate that developers do control
this county.
Please, please listen to the clear will of the
people of this county — your true constituency.
See past the patent falsity of buzzwords like
“snob zoning,†past the “money trail†as we
call it in law enforcement, and take this
opportunity to do the right thing – if you’re not
going to readvertise the Comprehensive Plan -
and approve Option 1. Thank you.”
Well that’s it in a nutshell. I hope the Board
of Supervisors gets the message, the people
sure do.