This is the official Texas Department of Transportation Trans-Texas Corridor Plan, adopted June 2002.

Search Tip
 

Crossroads of the Americas:
Trans Texas Corridor Plan                     
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
Looking Down the Road - Executive Summary - Action Plan - Planning - Design - Environmental - Right of Way - Toll > Rail - Dedicated Utility Zone - Finance
 

Toll

Overview

The toll component of the Trans Texas Corridor could be developed in four ways:

• Low-bid contract for turnpike improvements coordinated by TxDOT.

• Low-bid contract coordinated by regional mobility authorities.

• Exclusive development agreement (also containing a franchise agreement) with a private-sector developer. TxDOT, a regional mobility authority, or a regional toll authority could administer the project. Proposals for exclusive development agreements would be solicited by requests for proposals or submitted by private entities as unsolicited proposals.

• Creation of regional toll authorities such as the North Texas Tollway Authority or by a county toll authority such as the Harris County Toll Road Authority.

Benchmarks

General

• The Texas Transportation Code allows TxDOT and a regional mobility authority to develop turnpike projects on the state highway system. The code also gives similar authority to a regional toll authority for projects within its jurisdiction.

• Certain counties also are authorized to develop county toll roads.

• TxDOT has rules in place relating to private participation in turnpike projects through an exclusive development agreement.

• TxDOT has proposed rules for the creation and operation of regional mobility authorities. These rules deal with the conversion of state highways to turnpike projects, transfer of projects to a regional mobility authority and TxDOT financing of toll projects under Proposition 15 and Senate Bill 342 (toll equity), 77th Legislature.

• Existing turnpike authorities in Harris County and the Dallas/Fort Worth area have years of experience in building and maintaining turnpike projects and are good models.

Exclusive development agreements

• Statutes allowing for large-scale development of a toll corridor already exist. An example is the authority in the Texas Transportation Code for TxDOT to issue franchises to private concerns to construct, operate and maintain a turnpike project.  Some revisions would streamline the process.

• Texas has capable consultants and contractors with which it can form strategic partnerships. These groups can deliver large-scale corridor projects.

• Expertise is available in the Federal Highway Administration to create public-private partnerships for toll project development.

Regional mobility authorities

• Approval of Proposition 15 by Texas voters on November 6, 2001 allowed for creation of regional mobility authorities to build, operate and maintain toll projects within a designated area. Legislation also is on the books providing for the leveraging of fuel-tax dollars with debt financing and toll revenue.

• Partial funding of toll projects by the Texas Transportation Commission, using state and federal highway funds (toll equity) may be available.

• As with an exclusive development agreement, private sector consultants and contractors would facilitate project delivery and the Federal Highway Administration can be a major source of expertise.

Challenges

General

• No statutory authority exists for TxDOT to finance, construct, operate or condemn property for a rail project. Statutory authority does exist in some circumstances to contract for the use, lease or sale of a turnpike project for various purposes, including installation of railroad tracks.

• Public utilities have a statutory right to use right of way on state highways to install utility facilities. Unlike the transportation commission, a regional mobility authority or a franchisee is not authorized to specify a location for installation or to require utility relocations.

• No statutory authority exists to lease turnpike-project right of way for installing all utilities that would be a part of the proposed Trans Texas Corridor. Further, statutory authority does not exist for TxDOT to enter into franchise agreements with utility providers.

• Under the Texas Government Code, a governmental entity contracting for the construction of a public work is required to obtain performance and payment bonds in the amount of the contract. Such bonds may not be available for large-scale corridor contracts. No statutory authority exists to require alternate forms of security.

[ Editor's Note: Most, if not all, of these 'challenges' have been overcome by recent changes of law, like HB3588 ]

Exclusive development agreements

• Familiarizing the public on the exclusive development agreement process.

• Local access and local business impacts need to be handled with utmost regard for property rights.

• Performance and payment bonding for projects of this scope may not be available.

• Expenditures connected with developing detailed designs and the risks of project viability may require some cost sharing among the parties. In addition, payment of stipends to reduce potential losses may be needed to attract private firms willing to develop a project. No statutory authority exists to pay stipends.

• TxDOT rules on exclusive development agreements describe private development of specific projects, rather than a business plan (possibly including environmental clearance) for developing a segment of the corridor.

• Procedure for advertising a request for competing proposals must be sensitive to the protection of proprietary information.  Time for reviewing proposals needs to be based on the size and complexity of the project.

• If a contractor is responsible for the environmental review of a project, specific rules and procedures are required to ensure federal and state requirements are followed, particularly those relating to conflict of interest.

• Proposed regulations of the Federal Highway Administration relating to design-build contracting provide that a request for proposal should not be released before the conclusion of the process required by the National Environmental Policy Act.  These proposed rules effectively prohibit environmental review and clearance of a corridor project by a contractor under a federal-aid exclusive development agreement.

• Development of mixed-use corridors will require coordination with federal agencies having oversight responsibilities.

Regional mobility authorities

• Public acceptance is needed in regard to the role of regional mobility authorities and tolling as a funding option.

• Regional mobility authorities must plan with a statewide perspective when developing corridor segments.

• Counties must work cooperatively as a regional mobility authority to develop a corridor segment with an independent utility.

• A proposed project must be included in a metropolitan transportation plan and state implementation plan, if applicable.

• Local entities and the private sector will need more information on state and federal requirements applying to development of projects using state and federal funds.

Actions

General

• Seek legislation authorizing TxDOT and certain other governmental agencies to study, develop and contract for development of mixed-use transportation and utility projects, including highways, rail and utilities.

• Seek legislation allowing the leasing of right of way to various utilities and entering franchise agreements.

• Seek legislation authorizing performance and payment bonds in amounts less than the amount of Trans Texas Corridor contracts and to authorize the use of alternate forms of security in corridor contracts. State law could be amended to authorize TxDOT and specified entities to set the amount of bonds based on prescribed criteria.

• Explore the progress of other states developing mixed-use, multimodal corridors.

Exclusive development agreements

• Amend TxDOT rules on exclusive development agreements to delete the financial feasibility certificate requirement. Require TxDOT to review the feasibility and adequacy of a proposal’s financial plan.

• Amend TxDOT rules on exclusive development agreements to include requirements imposed on a private developer when environmental review is part of a project proposal. Require a consultant or contractor hired by the private developer to perform the environmental review report directly for TxDOT.  Clearance of those requirements and environmental review must come before the final design and construction phases of a project.

• Amend TxDOT rules on exclusive development agreements to ensure adequate competition in projects subject to such agreements.  Allow the Texas Transportation Commission to extend the 45-day period to submit competing proposals (when an unsolicited proposal is received) based on the complexity of a project.

• Streamline submittal and approval process for unsolicited conceptual proposals to encourage ideas and competition. Amend TxDOT rules on exclusive development agreement to provide that:

• TxDOT would accept conceptual proposals for the development of a project. Proposals could be limited to a business plan for developing a corridor segment. TxDOT would determine if a proposed project or business plan would benefit the state.

• TxDOT would publish notice of acceptable proposals, allowing other interested parties to submit competing proposals.  The time for submission of competing proposals would be set based on project complexity.

• TxDOT would issue a notice requesting detailed proposals from the original proposer and any entities submitting acceptable competing proposals. The notice would be similar to instances when TxDOT issues a request for proposal for a project subject to an exclusive development agreement, with differences relating to business plans for developing corridor segments.

• Seek legislation to remove the restriction limiting the number of projects financed with constitutionally dedicated funds that may use an exclusive development agreement as the means of project delivery.

• Seek legislation to protect proprietary information submitted in a proposal that is subject to the conditions of an exclusive development agreement.

• Work with the Federal Highway Administration to ensure that a project using federal funds and subject to an exclusive development agreement could include the environmental review and clearance of the project by a contractor.

Regional mobility authorities

• Amend state law to authorize a regional mobility authority to issue debt, condemn property, set tolls, enter into exclusive development agreements, direct utility installations, and exercise other powers held by TxDOT to develop turnpike projects.

• Adopt rules that provide greater flexibility to a regional mobility authority in the development of a segment of the Trans Texas Corridor.

• Provide greater responsibilities to regional mobility authorities in the development of Trans Texas Corridor segments.

• Provide information to the public, local governments and private entities on the advantages of regional mobility authorities and toll roads, including leveraging funds and the use of surplus revenue.

• Market toll projects and corridor concept to regional mobility authorities and counties that could form a regional mobility authority. Show the public how projects can be financed by issuance of debt and how bonds can leverage other funding sources.

• Develop a screening tool for use by TxDOT and regional mobility authorities in determining whether a particular project is feasible for development as a turnpike.

• Develop a flow chart for use by districts and local governments in evaluating corridor segments for development by regional mobility authorities.

• Develop criteria for determining which projects would need TxDOT environmental clearance before transfer to a regional mobility authority.

Looking Down the Road - Executive Summary - Action Plan
Planning - Design - Environmental - Right of Way - Toll - Rail - Dedicated Utility Zone - Finance