 |
Q: |
Is this study related
to the Ports to Plains Corridor Study? |
|
A: |
Not directly. The Ports to Plains
Corridor Study analyzed a proposed corridor from Denver,
Colorado, to the Texas Rio Grande Valley. While many of the
same factors will be considered for La Entrada (such as
freight movement, existing and planned infrastructure,
etc.), the two proposed corridors only overlap from the
Midland/Odessa area to Lamesa, Texas.
|
|
| |
Q: |
Isn’t there already a
designated La Entrada al Pacifico Corridor? |
|
A: |
Yes. Effective June 1997, when signed into law by then Governor George W.
Bush, TX House Bill 2115 designated the following roads
as the future roads of La Entrada al Pacifico Corridor:
- SH 349 from Lamesa to Midland,
- I-20 from Midland to
Odessa,
- US 385 from Odessa to Fort Stockton, and
- US 67 from Fort Stockton to Presidio.
The 109th U.S. Congress
(2005-2006) designated La Entrada al Pacifico National High Priority
Corridor #56 as part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient
Transportation Equity Act, or SAFETEA-LU; it also known as Public Law 109-59. It
was signed by President George W. Bush in 2005. View the
official designation.
|
|
| |
Q: |
What are the chances of
another route being designated as the La Entrada al Pacifico Route? |
|
A: |
As the alternative analysis process begins, several
alternatives will be considered, including the currently designated route, other
existing highway routes, new location alternatives and a
rail alternative. The purpose of a
corridor feasibility study is to find the most viable route
within the specified study area. If another route proves to
be feasible as identified through the alternatives analysis
process, it will be included in the Corridor Development
Plan in order to identify improvements to that facility.
This will not eliminate the current state and
federal designation that exists for the La Entrada al
Pacifico Corridor. Instead, the national designation would
remain, and improvements for another corridor would be
recommended, or the designation may change to include the
other route(s).
|
|
| |
Q: |
How will the proposed
improvements be identified and prioritized? |
|
A: |
As part of the feasibility study process, evaluation
criteria will be developed to allow all alternatives to be
screened and compared to one another as a group. These
criteria could consist of such elements as environmental
impacts, travel efficiency, economic impacts, engineering
cost and many more. The alternatives evaluation process
will rank the corridors and ultimately identify a preferred
route.An economics/risk analysis is also part of
this study to identify funding sources to help prioritize
any proposed improvements.
|
|
| |
Q: |
How will you handle projected
corridor traffic increases through cities such as Alpine and Marfa? |
|
A: |
Our study team will consider improvements to existing
infrastructure, in addition to looking at alternative “new
location” facilities. These “new location” facilities could
serve as reliever routes for heavy traffic moving through
the region.
|
|
| |
Q: |
Is this project consistent
with long-range TxDOT plans? |
|
A: |
Yes. The existing designated corridor is already part of the
Texas Trunk System. The Texas Trunk System is a planned
rural, four-lane divided highway network of 10,500 miles that includes and
complements Texas’ rural interstate highways.The State of
Texas also owns the South Orient Rail Line that will be
analyzed as part of the feasibility process. It was
purchased by the state in 1999 to save it from abandonment
and is currently managed by TxDOT.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
Do you know when construction
will begin? |
|
A: |
No. This study is
currently scheduled to be completed in the first quarter of
2008. If the study recommends any improvements be carried
forward, each recommended improvement would still need to go
through the preliminary engineering design process and
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process before final design and construction
could take place.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
How will corridor
improvements be funded? |
|
A: |
As part of the feasibility study process, funding sources will be identified as
part of a corridor finance plan after corridor alternatives have been
identified, evaluated and ranked. Improvements must be identified and
prioritized within the preferred corridor(s) before the corridor finance plan
can be finalized. The plan may include a large range of finance options,
including traditional TxDOT funding or public-private partnerships.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
How can I stay informed
about the project and get involved in the decision-making process? |
|
A: |
You can stay informed about the project by:
- visiting this Web site often, as it will be updated with the latest
information made available by our study team,
- asking to be included on the mailing list database, or letting us know
any of your questions/concerns by
e-mail,
- calling the toll-free hotline at (800) 517-4652, or
- providing written comments or requests to be added to the mailing list
by contacting:
Peggy Thurin, P.E.
Texas Department of Transportation
17111
Preston Road, Suite 200
Dallas, Texas 75248-1232.
Once you are on the mailing list, you will receive the latest project
newsletter.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
How can I be sure my
comments are heard? |
|
A: |
Each and every comment received is provided directly to the project
study team. This includes comments by e-mail, the project hotline and mail. Your
comments will also be included in a project comment database that the team will review
throughout the project to ensure all comments are taken into account as part of
the study process.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
What factors contribute to
potential growth in truck traffic along the corridor? |
|
A: |
There are many factors in Mexico that could contribute to potential growth in
truck traffic through Presidio.
- Improvements to the Pacific Coast Mexican ports,
including the Port of Topolobampo
- The ability of these Mexican ports to handle
large cargo ships from Asia that currently go to the overburdened ports at Los
Angeles and Long Beach
- Improvements to Mexican highway and rail infrastructure between Topolobampo and
Presidio
- Proposed improvements to the Panama Canal
Another factor to be considered is freight diversion
from the border crossing at El Paso. Currently, this crossing is over capacity.
If improvements were made to Mexico’s highway infrastructure that allowed easier
freight traffic access to the Presidio border crossing, it would be possible
some freight diversion could take place.
This feasibility study is tasked with gathering data from Mexico that will
allow the study team to determine the impacts of these improvements and the
likelihood that the infrastructure improvements will be made.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
Is building an improved
road the only alternative? |
|
A: |
No. The feasibility process will include analyzing rail alternatives and
improvements, in addition to roadway alternatives and improvements. A no-build
alternative will also be included in the process.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
Will you
consider using the South Orient Railroad as an alternative
for the La Entrada al Pacifico Corridor Study? |
|
A: |
Yes.
As part of the La Entrada al Pacifico Corridor Feasibility Study, several
different alternatives will be considered, including roadway and rail. Since the
South Orient Railroad does provide the only connection to the Presidio Port of
Entry and provides a connection to Fort Stockton and McCamey, this rail line
would be a likely alternative to be considered. But additional improvements are required before
significant rail activity can occur.
|
|
|
|
Q: |
Are you considering the
no-build alternative? |
|
A: |
Yes. A no-build or do-nothing alternative is always included as part of the
feasibility process. A no-build alternative will be carried forward and
evaluated using the same evaluation criteria applied to other alternatives.Because the purpose of this study is to determine feasibility, a no-build
alternative will be carried through to the end of this study. Subsequent
NEPA
studies will also analyze the no-build alternative during the formal
environmental documentation phase of the project.
While a no-build alternative
will not provide any significant additional capacity, routine maintenance and
safety improvements may be included to bring the facility up to current
standards.
|
|
