Texas Approves Two 765 kV Transmission Lines
A New Era Demands New Strategies for Landowners
On August 28, 2026, the Public Utility Commission of Texas approved two of Oncor's 765-kilovolt transmission projects: Dinosaur–Longshore, in PUC Docket No. 59315, and Longshore–Drill Hole, in PUC Docket No. 59029. These approvals mark a significant step toward introducing this higher-voltage transmission infrastructure into Texas.
For affected landowners, however, regulatory approval does not answer the most important financial question: What compensation is owed for the property rights acquired and the legally compensable damage to the land that remains? The PUC determines whether to approve transmission projects and their routes. It does not determine the value of a landowner's property or resolve the compensation issues associated with acquiring an easement.
At Cardinell Law, our position is straightforward: these projects deserve more than a routine response. Protecting landowners will require careful investigation, project-specific valuation evidence, and the development of legal arguments that address what this new generation of infrastructure actually does to individual properties.
New infrastructure demands new thinking—not simply a different number on the same appraisal form.
New to Texas Does Not Mean Business as Usual
765 kV transmission technology is not experimental. It has operated elsewhere in the United States for decades. But its introduction into Texas represents a new class of transmission infrastructure for this state. Oncor describes its planned structures as steel lattice towers typically approximately 155 to 160 feet tall, with some approaching 200 feet, and a standard right-of-way approximately 200 feet wide. Actual conditions depend on the project's engineering and the particular location.
The utility's argument for this technology includes its ability to carry substantial amounts of electricity using fewer transmission corridors. Oncor states that one 765 kV line can provide capacity comparable to three 345 kV double-circuit lines while requiring less total right-of-way.
That systemwide comparison does not answer what happens to a particular ranch, development tract, recreational property, or family homesite.
The questions for that landowner are different. Where will the structures stand? What uses will the easement prohibit? What access rights will the utility obtain? How will the corridor affect the property's layout, future use, and marketability?
Those are the questions a landowner's legal and valuation team should be prepared to investigate—not assume away.
The Easement Is Only Part of the Compensation Question
Texas law recognizes that a partial taking can affect more than the property interest acquired. Section 21.042 of the Texas Property Code requires consideration of the effect of condemnation on the value of the owner's remaining property. It also distinguishes injuries peculiar to the property from injuries experienced in common with the general community.
That distinction matters. A compensation case should not stop at identifying the acres inside an easement and assigning them a price. It should examine whether the taking causes an additional, legally compensable loss to the remainder.
Our investigation would ask whether the corridor disrupts a supportable development plan, divides usable land into less functional areas, interferes with improvements, or imposes restrictions that change what a purchaser would pay. Those questions must be answered with the actual easement language, engineering information, market evidence, and applicable law—not a predetermined assumption that every property suffers the same percentage loss.
The objective is not to claim every conceivable impact. It is to identify and prove every compensable impact the evidence supports.
Landowners Need New Theories Grounded in Established Law
The introduction of 765 kV transmission does not create an automatic new category of compensation. In our view, these cases will require the development of project-specific legal and appraisal theories—not because every existing principle is inadequate, but because familiar principles must be applied to infrastructure Texas landowners have not previously encountered at this voltage.
Valuing the Rights Acquired, Not Just the Initial Construction
Our starting point is the proposed easement itself.
What rights does the document grant concerning construction, replacement, access, vegetation management, maintenance, and future changes? Are those rights limited to the facilities presently described, or is the language broader? Does the appraisal evaluate the same rights the utility is asking the owner to convey?
These are not questions to leave until after agreement on price. Our approach is to examine the proposed rights and the valuation together, identifying where the document and the appraisal do not align.
Responsible advocacy requires both creativity and discipline. A theory is useful only when counsel can connect it to legally relevant facts.
Why Cardinell Law Is Built for This Challenge
For landowners choosing counsel, the important question is not simply whether a lawyer knows the condemnation process. It is whether that lawyer has experience confronting difficult valuation questions and developing arguments that can be tested in court.
Erik Cardinell's background includes decades of condemnation-focused litigation involving landowners, businesses, and governmental entities. His experience also includes serving among the landowners' counsel in In re State of Texas, 355 S.W.3d 611 (Tex. 2011), a Texas Supreme Court case addressing competing approaches to valuing condemned property. (Erik Cardinell attorney profile)
The Court granted the State relief on the procedural issue of severing the litigation into separate cases. On valuation, however, it explained that landowners could present a competing economic-unit theory supported by nonspeculative evidence; the State's description of the property being taken did not give it control over the owners' valuation evidence. (In re State of Texas)
That experience is directly relevant to the challenge presented here: understanding the governing rules, examining the assumptions behind an appraisal, and developing a supportable alternative when the proposed valuation does not fit the property.
Cardinell Law is a natural choice for landowners who need more than someone to negotiate a number.
Our approach is to question the proposed rights being acquired, investigate the property's actual and reasonably probable uses, work with appropriate experts, and develop the strongest arguments the facts and law support. Where a legal issue needs clarification, the strategy should account for that from the beginning.
We do not promise a particular recovery. We offer a focused commitment to doing the work necessary to pursue the compensation and protections each case supports.
To discuss a Dinosaur–Longshore or Longshore–Drill Hole easement or condemnation matter, contact Cardinell Law at (512) 927-9009 to schedule a confidential consultation. Based in Austin, the firm serves landowners throughout Texas.
This article provides general information, not legal advice for a particular property or dispute. Each matter depends on its facts and applicable law. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.