|
Why We Oppose a Bridge Over
Lake Lavon
Poor
Communication and Coordination
Engineering disregarded
previous engineering study routes:
WHY were the
five proposed bridge routes, on Collin County
mobility maps from
2002 to 2006, dismissed? These routes were part of a map
made by Carter Burges, which were surely paid for with tax payer
money.
Where is the
record of public input that gave Collin County the idea to dismiss
those routes and replace them with the new single blue line?
The single blue
line became the core of the HNTB study area, yet Mr.
Delgado stated that this single blue line “was drawn without the
benefit of detailed engineering” because they thought it was in
the best place.
Who made the
decision that this single blue line become the center of the HNTB
study area?
Collin County Engineering submitted
this single blue line study location to a bond vote without proper citizen
input:
Collin County
published two brochures prior to the vote.
One had no mention of the bridge study the other had
only one line. If this bridge study goes forward it will
account for MILLIONS of dollars of Collin County bond debt.
This bridge study was worth more attention and media than a tiny one
line mention in one brochure.
Decision
to Start the Study and Decision to Continue the Study:
Collin County
has repeatedly told us that the reason they began the Lavon Lake
Bridge Study was because the citizens said they wanted it when they
passed the 2007 Bond Package.
Our surveys show that 95% of the citizens
did not even know the $500,0000 for the study money was part of the
bond package. When they find out about it, they feel duped.
Those few that knew it was there thought it had something to
do with the replacement of the old Lavon Lake bridges on East Lucas
Road, a worthwhile expenditure. NONE knew that it was money
that might go toward a study for a toll road.
It is clear
that Collin County wants to pass the responsibility of the study
expenditure to the citizens, and we accept our mistake for not
watching them closely enough. We will NOT let this happen
again. Still, we have
to wonder, if citizen involvement is the answer, why did Collin
County choose to continue the study after the October 7, 2009 Public
Meeting. We filled the room and clearly told them we do not
want a bridge.
(FYI: The HNTB
contract was written so that Collin County could have given a 30 day
notice of cancellation and paid only for work completed without any
other penalty, yet they would not stop the study when they found out
the bridge cost was estimated at $470 million and they admitted it
was too expensive and would never be built.)
Transportation Committee Issues:
The 2007 Transportation Committee was the origin of the $500,000
earmark for the Lavon Lake Bridge Study. Commissioners each
appoint members to the Transportation Committee. At that time,
Jerry Hoagland and Joe Jaynes were the Commissioners with Precincts
that surrounded the lake. They knew the citizens they
appointed, so they also had to know that there was not one
individual appointed to that committee that was in the area of the
bridge.
Don Dillard was appointed on this Transportation Committee this
committee (page 11). He worked for a Hunt real-estate
company at this time. He did not live in the area near the
lake but Mr. Dillard had been promoting the Lavon Bridge since 2005
while working for the Hunt company.
The citizens
of the lake area, not being represented, could not defend themselves
from any recommendations made by Mr. Dillard or any other member of
the committee.
Engineering
states 100% of the citizens on the
transportation sub-committee recommend this project to the
Commissioner's Court.
(Page 5) We ask Collin County Engineering to show
us a record of a vote that proves this to be true. Our
investigation reveals that they cannot produce a record of a vote,
because there WAS NO VOTE on the subject of the Lavon Bridge Study.
Collin County
Engineering has not properly coordinated their efforts:
On April 27,
2009, a district level representative of the Corps said, "I question
why they chose to bisect the most boat-able parts of the lake.”
On that date, the Corps had NOT been informed of the decision to
drop the five
other proposed bridge routes down to one.
On
October 1, 2009, HNTB presented their feasibility route study to the
USACE team. After HNTB made the presentation to the Corps, USACE
expressed the Corps of Engineers current opinion on this bridge
project. This is a direct quote from Mr. McLane:
"When the project Purpose and Need is defined in the NEPA document,
the description would need to be "tight" for the COE to approve the
project. Currently, the Purpose and Need doesn't appear to warrant
COE approval for constructing a road across COE property because the
road, as it is shown, is not a regional artery and feasible
alternatives exist."
The bridge route connect to
Parker Road that runs through a number of neighborhoods as it makes
its way to Hwy 75. A bridge
or roadway that just
connect city to city (local benefit only) does not meet Corps criteria.
Mr. McLane further explained that the roadway and bridge must be the
ONLY feasible alternative to connect one area to the other. There
are specific guidelines on this issue regarding travel time and
distance. The US Army Corps of
Engineers does not think any of the routes pass the Corps "only
feasible alternative test."
SUMMARY:
The residents were left out when choosing a study area for the
potential bridge routes.
US
Army Corps of Engineers said that Collin County engineering had been
informed about the Corps guidelines but HNTB and Collin County chose
locations that fail two of major guidelines.
They did not adequately inform or include all Collin County citizens prior to the bond vote.
Collin County could not have been more out of touch with the will of
the citizens. March 2009 these are the comment and sentiments
given to us by Collin County;
-
There are no plans for public meetings to
discuss this proposed bridge route because the bridge is such a
popular plan.
-
There is no real opposition
to the bridge.
-
We never hear
complaints against State Hwy 78.
-
Growth is coming and
the bridge is coming. There is nothing you can do about it.
|
