Jump to content

Port of Dallas Developments


2112

Recommended Posts

And to get back on topic, the Texas DOT was doing a study on inland ports (not at all related to Dallas) in 2002 and first thought it was important to give the definition of an "inland port":

I can't find my TXDOT Oxford English Dictionary...if someone has it, please return it-no questions asked. :lol:

B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 361
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Jason, your a riot! :lol: Since the time I first began reading your post's ( & 713 to 214's) on this forum, you have continually acted as if your all business and us stupid Houstonians can't fend for ourselves. To summarize all your posts.. We've got chips on our shoulders, were unable to carry on educated discussions like Dallasites and were afraid of how the mighty big D is so proggressive, while measly little Houston is falling off the earth.

What's interesting to me, is that what I just posted is a microcosm of the difference in attitudes of Houstonians VS Dallasites. Houstonians are more down to earth and humorous, while Dallasites take themselves very seriously and are much more into how people view there city.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This port is the Dallas Intermodal Terminal by Union Pacific, right?

This port is why Dallas ISD chose to get Wilmer-Hutchins ISD.

ALSO: This will mean that Seagoville, Combine, Red Oak, Lancaster, ETC will probably no longer be sleepy towns. Wilmer and Hutchins may rise out of the pits because of this port.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't we already train/truck alot of stuff to Dallas from our port anyways? I am not sure I get what this whole "Port of Dallas" thing is?

Oh I see...

Dallas will store the containers... Containers from Long Beach, because this new fleet of chinese ships can't fit threw the Panama Canal. Because, its not like California couldn't ship its containers anyways...? right?

"houstonians(2112) do not want to feel like Dallas is evening the score."
"But, While this is not totally like the Port of Houston It will be just as Successfull for DFW as the Port of Houston is for houston."
"So to be realistic about the situation"
"In other words"Dallas' "Train Yard" as some will say,will never be like the port of Houston because it has no water ".Which is entirely true,but it will be just as successful or even more."

* * *

Its a little annoying that Dallasboi thinks this "Port of Dallas" will be equally and/or more important then the Port of Houston... :blink:

"The port (of Houston) is ranked first in the United States in foreign waterborne commerce, second in total tonnage, and sixth in the world." - Source

So how is building a warehouse going to add up to become what our port(and ship channel) has since 1837? Don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its a little annoying that Dallasboi thinks this "Port of Dallas" will be equally and/or more important then the Port of Houston... :blink:

I'm not sure that's what he meant, but I can see how you'd come to that conclusion and now I see what the previous "don't bite the hand" comment was about. If that is what he meant, I rather doubt it anytime this century. I think if you were even going to try to compare that in say 25 years he'd have to do a better job at laying out criteria for successfulness.

On the question of what the whole thing is (which is much more than a warehouse) I'd recommend studying Alliance and its wide ranging effects. In the past it would have been illegal for Dallas to build an airport like that, (violation of Wright) but now that its been done and wright will be gone soon anyway, it looks much more likely.

Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading this post, I couldn't help but feel like my mother was lecturing me about playing nice. 713, you're attempt to sound above the fray is nice, but no one on this board who has read your previous posts is buying it.

It's helpful to know that you speak for over 1,800 people on this board. :D I'll just address you from now on. . .Yeah right!

Here's the deal. We're Houstonians. We live here. We post on a Houston board. Sometimes we crack jokes, like the one about Dallas having a port. Often, we are brawlers. But, remember, this is a Houston Board populated by Houstonians. If you throw out bait to see what will eat it, don't be surprised if someone does. Frankly, several of the Dallas based posters exhibit trolling behavior. We don't get upset. We make fun. If you cannot handle the fun, either don't post the thread, or don't respond to it.
Spoken just like a true lawyer.
I, for one, am not going to stop posting jokes or legitimate comments just because a Dallas poster might get offended. I ESPECIALLY will not stop posting because a Dallas poster thinks it might be childish. I spend my entire day dealing with serious crap in a criminal courtroom. I'm not going to get serious here. When the mods kick me off, I'm gone. Until then, you guys are just going to have to deal with my jokes about "The Port of Dallas", because....dammit, it's FUNNY! :lol:

From one attorney to the next. . .I've been to criminal court many times before. Criminal Court is what's funny. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know Dallas has a nice website?. . .Have you been lurking there?

Glad you asked.

HAIF had a member who was provoking the sort of Houston vs Dallas, tit-for-tat discussion we're currently having - but on a much more vicious level. A moderator from the Dallas site (was it you?) had the courtesy to confirm that this person had been a problem on their board as well. As a moderator (he said, blushingly) I felt it was my duty to view the Dallas site. It's very good. Perhaps I should examine it again at more length. I also visited it again to be sure that my info was current before posting my reply to you. That's the extent of my lurking. I trust that the editor and moderators of the Dallas site will deal with obnoxious posters (whether from Dallas, Houston or elsewhere) as they see fit. If their editor or moderators ever want to compare notes with HAIF, we'll be happy to help in any way we can.

Until then, you guys are just going to have to deal with my jokes about "The Port of Dallas", because....dammit, it's FUNNY! :lol:

That's the whole point...this silly rivalry between the two cities. "Houston has a Port, so dammit, we have to call our trading facility a port, too!"

It reminds me of when I was a kid, and my mother made a special trip to the store to get something for my sister. I was mad, because she didn't get something for me, too. At the time I didn't understand that a five year old boy probably didn't need a box of tampons. I just felt excluded.

So, Dallas, enjoy your port. It's not a box of tampons, but it'll have to do. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure that's what he meant, but I can see how you'd come to that conclusion and now I see what the previous "don't bite the hand" comment was about. If that is what he meant, I rather doubt it anytime this century. I think if you were even going to try to compare that in say 25 years he'd have to do a better job at laying out criteria for successfulness.

On the question of what the whole thing is (which is much more than a warehouse) I'd recommend studying Alliance and its wide ranging effects. In the past it would have been illegal for Dallas to build an airport like that, (violation of Wright) but now that its been done and wright will be gone soon anyway, it looks much more likely.

Jason

The Wright Amendment has no application to cargo carriers, and thus no relevance or application to an airport like Alliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I probably shouldn't even waste my time writing this, but I will. The point here is not that some of us here are making fun of Dallas or it's residents, but rather the civic booster types who come up with these over-the-top names for their projects. Making fun of "The Port of Dallas" moniker for an admittedly large scale freight facility is not unlike the fun we had at a Houston developer's expense who insisted on trying to rename Midtown to "SoDo". Anyone who regularly reads this forum knows the withering assault on THAT stupid name. It does not mean that we do not like Midtown, because we do like it. It was just that we were making fun of the guy that thought the name was more important than the development.

The same applies here. No one disputes that this may be a huge development, but the name invites scorn and derision...not at Dallas, but at the clowns who came up with the name. If some residents take that as a personal insult, well, what can I say. I am not even asking anyone to stop being offended. I am merely suggesting that silly names made up by self-aggrandizing civic boosters will ALWAYS be ridiculed on this forum, and those that are offended should understand it.

By the same token, those of us who sling the mud also understand that we must take the return mudslinging. That is the price we pay for our sarcasm. So, fire away. I for one, enjoy it. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Wright Amendment has no application to cargo carriers, and thus no relevance or application to an airport like Alliance.

You will find no such text in the amendment. Alliance fully qualifies as "competition" to DFW. In fact that part has even been admitted, but the excuse to get around it was that Fedex wouldn't have considered DFW for a hub so its not really competition. That wouldn't stand up in court.

If that were a valid excuse Southwest would be free to fly anywhere from Love because they've said the same thing. :o

Jason

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See my post #2 in this thread. The Port of Laredo is just as stupid of a concept as the Port of Dallas.

Whoever came up with this should be put to pasture.

Under this standard, the Wal-Mart shipping facilty under contruction near Baytown would be considered a "Port".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You will find no such text in the amendment. Alliance fully qualifies as "competition" to DFW. In fact that part has even been admitted, but the excuse to get around it was that Fedex wouldn't have considered DFW for a hub so its not really competition. That wouldn't stand up in court.

If that were a valid excuse Southwest would be free to fly anywhere from Love because they've said the same thing. :o

Jason

But you will find these words "...to provide the transportation of individuals, by air, as a common carrier for compensation or hire between Love Field, Texas, and one or more points outside the State of Texas,"

So, for two reasons, your statement that Dallas' building of an Alliance-type airport would be illegal was incorrect.

(1) a new Alliance-type airport would not be Love Field, and

(2) a new Alliance-type airport would not involve the "transportation of individuals, by air, as a common carrier"

And of course the Wright Amendment is irrelevant to all of the business about FedEx not really being competition to DFW. The Wright Amendment does not apply anywhere but Love Field and does not apply to cargo carriers (event though the word "cargo" indeed does not appear in the language of the Wright Amendment.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact that part has even been admitted, but the excuse to get around it was that Fedex wouldn't have considered DFW for a hub so its not really competition.

FedEx DID consider DFW for a hub ops base. Ross Jr. offered a better deal. And cargo routed through AFW DOES NOT terminate in the DFW area (all FedEx cargo terminating in the Dallas Fort Worth metroplex is off-loaded at DFW).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bringing up the airport issue raises a couple of questions. The concept of creating a rail yard/truck intermodal away from the Port of Houston makes sense, given the congestion on both the rails and the freeways near the port. Placing it in or near Dallas makes sense too, given the freeway and rail infrastructure, as well as it's central location for distribution purposes. My question is why a cargo airport would be needed. Shipping by boat is cheap, but slow. Shipping by rail is also cheap, but slow. The rails only go so many places, necessitating truck transport to get goods to their final destination. Air cargo is fast, but expensive. So, if you are shipping goods slowly but cheaply, why would you suddenly want to pay to air freight those goods? Wouldn't you just air freight them to begin with?

Secondly, why would a second cargo airport be needed? Alliance seems to be large enough to handle this added cargo, and it is only 30-45 minutes from the proposed rail yard, all interstate. Could this be a Dallas versus Fort Worth competition?

Lastly, does anyone know how seriously the air cargo component is being discussed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Secondly, why would a second cargo airport be needed? Alliance seems to be large enough to handle this added cargo, and it is only 30-45 minutes from the proposed rail yard, all interstate. Could this be a Dallas versus Fort Worth competition?

Pretty much. AFW has plenty of room for this and better access to rail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FedEx DID consider DFW for a hub ops base. Ross Jr. offered a better deal. And cargo routed through AFW DOES NOT terminate in the DFW area (all FedEx cargo terminating in the Dallas Fort Worth metroplex is off-loaded at DFW).

Wow, Jason sure shot a hole through the heart of his credibility with these posts about the Wright Amendment, didn't he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, would it be your opinion that the 'inland port' might actually be better located near Alliance?
Absolutely. In fact, the infrastructure is already there and exists in form that is only proposed for S. Dallas. So you could say that "The Port of Cowtown" already exists. In fact, some of the land around Alliance is designated as "freeport."

Designating Alliance as a "port" is probably incorrect in that the commonly held connotation of the term necesitates sea vessel access. Alliance, and what is proposed in Dallas would better be described as intermodal transport hubs - which I guess a sea port is as well. In the end, I do not think that you would find anyone in Fort Worth claiming Alliance as a port in any manner other than tongue in cheek.

Lastly, does anyone know how seriously the air cargo component is being discussed?

It is being discussed seriously (and has been for over 10 years). The question is whether or not the talk leads to action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


All of the HAIF
None of the ads!
HAIF+
Just
$5!


×
×
  • Create New...