Identity Theft Nos |
Equifax:
1-800-525-6285 |
Experian
(formerly TRW)
1-888-397-3742 |
Trans Union:
1-800-680-7289 |
Social
Security Administration
(fraud line):
1-800-269-0271 |
|
Questions and Actions Requested by Concerned Citizens
Submitted to
Jacksonville City Council
March 8, 2005
Material provided by concerned citizens:
Citizens are concerned or opposed to this proposed Relief Route of Hwy 69, not
merely because their properties, homes and land, or business will be bulldozed
by it -- but also because they feel that Jacksonville will not be served by it
either. It will be too costly, in many ways -- financial, bypassing all
businesses in town, and it will reduce the livability of Jacksonville on the
west side, thus reducing greatly its tax base, it will add unacceptable noise
levels to Lon Morris College, city recreational areas, city cemeteries, and
homes nearby the route, etc.
We ask the city to answer these questions, or
respond to the following points by writing in the Jacksonville Daily Progress or as a presentation at the
next City Council monthly meeting. If answers are to be given at that next city
council meeting, we expect the City to advertise that meeting, more than a
regular city council meeting, and let the public know that their answers will be
the agenda for that meeting. The following are questions:
- Please estimate the economic impact on Jacksonville of this proposed Hwy 69
“Relief Route”, since all traffic that takes it will bypass many of the town’s
businesses. With the existing Hwy 69, or even a regular loop as most towns
have, truckers and HWY 69 travelers could normally stop, eat or shop in
Jacksonville
- Please publish in the paper the Cost of the proposed Relief Route, and how
it will be paid for. Please include the project costs of the
construction, and include an estimate for the purchase of condemned land,
homes and businesses, and de-valuation of homes and land nearby this traffic
way due to noise levels, dangers involved in hazardous cargo near homes, etc.
Provide the City and County costs of the project, the cost to city and county
and state taxpayers.
- We understand that the city and county would each have to pay their 10%
share of the TxDot recommended Turnpike like traffic way.
If this 10% share figure is accurate, how much would this cost amount to for
the city and county? How would the city and county pay for their share?
If increased taxation, how much would taxes increase for city and county?
The projected $142 million cost for the turnpike-like traffic way does not
count the purchase of land, and compensation for devaluation of land near
the traffic way. Ten percent of the total for this project will be considerably
more than the cost for the city to complete the eastern loop. (Schaumberg and
Polk estimated that at $20 million dollars.)
So why involve TxDot???
Why not let the city complete the less expensive
eastern loop, rather than request the more expensive turnpike-like traffic way
from TxDot?
- By contrast, what would it cost the city to complete the existing
eastern loop. (Schaumberg and Polk estimated $20 million.). Hasn’t some of
the cost of completing this eastern loop already been paid – feasibility study,
etc.
- Are BOTH turnpike western traffic way AND the eastern Loop envisioned?
Won’t increased traffic from the east side of town, when Lake Columbia is
built, necessitate that the eastern loop be completed? Won’t the construction
of both turnpike, limited access road on the west AND a traditional loop on the
east amount to a lot of money for a city the size of Jacksonville, and for
Cherokee County?
- Has the feasibility study, and/or other components, already been paid for
completion of the Eastern loop? Was this done at the time that the
southern portion of the eastern loop was built? Is there already in
place some arrangement to ensure that land along that loop not be sold?
- Was the county involved in the process to request a feasibility study, and
other decisions concerning this proposed Relief route? Explain the
nature of their involvement. Is this required by law to have their
involvement, since so much of the route affects county residents and
businesses?
- We are concerned that this expensive proposed Relief Route for Hwy 69 will
not accomplish what it is designed to do. It does not address Hwy 79
traffic, and does not take into account the increased traffic that will occur
from Lake Columbia when built on the eastside of Jacksonville.
Since it alleviates traffic on mostly a ten block congested area of South
Jackson/Hwy 69, it seems that an extremely costly ten-mile solution is
unacceptable for Jacksonville. It will ruin the western side of town for
residential development, and rural development in the country where it is
already occurring.
- Will the public voice be heard in this decision? Schaumberg and Polk
told the public at the first meeting about the Relief Route, that is the
public did not want this road it would not be built. Over 400 citizens
have signed a petition saying that they do not want this “Relief Route” for
Hwy 69 built.
- The TxDot feasibility study says that by the
time the proposed Hwy 69 Relief Route is built, it will only be 20% efficient.
The proposed “Relief Route” would only serve a portion of trucks using Hwy 69.
Highways 69 and 175 are already connected, by Alexander Street. This existing
linkage already allows traffic to go from Hwy 175 to Hwy 69 without passing
through Jacksonville’s busy Hwy 69 area.
So this expensive “Relief Route” being considered
seems to serve mainly/only traffic going north on Hwy 69 to Hwy 175 (or going
south from Hwy 175 to Hwy 69) or continuing north on Hwy 69. Trucks going north
from 175 to 69 already bypass Jacksonville via Alexander Street.
We don’t even know if trucks would choose to use
the relief route rather than going much more directly through town on the
existing Hwy 69. Isn’t this a very high cost for ten miles of a roadway that
would benefit only a small percentage of the truck traffic? Based on growth
projections in the Feasibility Study by TxDot, in 10 years, the improvement of
traffic by addition this road would be neutralized.
Isn’t this an expensive ten mile turnpike, if it
only accommodates that small a percentage of the truck traffic?
- Please read and respond to the attached letter that was signed by hundreds
of citizens who oppose this proposed highway project. (Since this
writing, we have learned that the proposed Relief Route of Hwy 69 does not
involve Hwy 79 at all, and so would not relieve any of traffic from this
highway.) This letter was signed by many concerned citizens,
homeowners, land owners, business owners of Jacksonville and Cherokee County,
and it was mailed to the following officials: U.S. Senators Kay Bailey
Hutchison and John Cornyn, State
Representative Chuck Hopson, County Commissioners Mary Gregg and Moody Glass,
Jr., TxDot Tyler District Engineer Mary Owen, and Allan Ross, Schaumberg and
Polk. Copies were hand delivered to the City Manager/City Commissioners and the
Chamber of Commerce.
- We call to the city’s attention the e-mail results of a poll taken by
the Jacksonville Daily Progress to get citizen sentiment about the proposed Hwy
69 Relief Route:
87.4% AGAINST 11.5% FOR 1.1% undecided.
The participation in this polled issue was the highest ever reported on any
issue in the Progress, and the vote was overwhelmingly opposed to route. (While acknowledging that this is not a scientific poll, still it is
significant and a voice from the citizens you represent.)
How could this issue be added to the spring ballot, or be put on the ballot
for citizens to vote on?
- Read and respond to the attached letters to the editor about towns
whose business and downtown were killed by a similar loop, turnpike in
Taylor and Mount Vernon, Texas.
-
Schaumberg and Polk said at the citizen’s meeting that it is very rare
that a city of Jacksonville’s size would build this type of limited access,
turnpike-like highway. It is also rare to fund a study when there is no
money designated for the road. The Chamber made the argument in a recent
letter to their members, that most nearby have one, so Jacksonville should.
But most cities have loops, not this type of limited access “turnpike.”
Why did the city choose to pay $500,000 to
research this style turnpike,
through our residential areas, bypassing our businesses?
-
Schaumberg and Polk said that 6 overpasses will be built, as this proposed
route crosses any city or county streets, Hwy 175, etc.
We ask the city to ask the engineering firm to estimate the cost of building an
approximately ten- block overpass over South Jackson/Hwy 69 so that truck
traffic could flow OVER the limited area of congestion on Hwy 69. Surely
such a short length overpass over the existing Hwy 69 would not cost as
much as the proposed route would cost.
-
Respond to the concerns expressed by a homeowner in the path of this
proposed route. (He spoke at Feb 16 meeting with Schaumberg and Polk
engineer and the public).
“It is not right to have a cloud over our
property for this long.”
Homeowners cannot sell homes without disclosing that this 4 land truck
turnpike may go nearby, and selling them with people knowing this will
diminish their real estate value. Homeowners and businesses do not know
whether to build, improve property etc. without knowing if this turnpike
will destroy or affect their investments.
-
FROM A TRUCKER'S PERSPECTIVE -- Would A Trucker go 10 miles out of the way
to avoid a busy 10 blocks or of Hwy 69 in Jacksonville?
Would a trucker choose to pay a toll to go 10 miles, when he could drive
directly through an existing Hwy 69 with some congested traffic for maybe10
blocks.
A trucker said that truckers would not take, and could not be made to take a
toll road, if an alternate route exists. The trucking companies pay $5,000 -
$6,000 per motorized unit (truck) annually, to operate on the highways. This
is a "road use" tax. This fee is to build and maintain the roads that the
trucks travel on. They do not want to pay a toll to travel on roads that they
are already paying for.
If it is to be a toll road, can the city make trucks utilize that “Relief
Route,” when there is the more direct, existing Hwy 69 already there to travel
on? If trucks cannot be made to travel on this proposed “Relief Route” will it
pay for itself?
If truck traffic cannot be made to travel on this
road, A) is it realistic to think that truckers will use a road they have to pay
a considerably high cost for, rather than a road that they have already paid for
in their truck fees? B) is it realistic to think that trucks would take a
ten-mile journey rather than a ten-block trip through the existing Hwy 69 with
light to medium congested traffic?
-
HWY 69, even near very busy truck traffic area of BIG CABIN, Oklahoma, goes
right through busy areas of their city traffic, with used car lots and
hamburger stands close to the 2 or 4 lane highway (with not even divisions
between lanes). Big Cabin is a major truck traffic hub in the center of
the country, with gigantic numbers of trucks, cross-country as well as
north south traffic.
So if an area as busy as Hwy 69 in and near Big Cabin, Oklahoma, has no loops or
provisions for trucks to avoid city traffic, why does Jacksonville need
one?
-
Will other new interstates and roadways planned in Texas accommodate truckers’
needs and therefore make the need for this Hwy 69 Relief Route less necessary?
There are many new superhighways, Trans Texas corridors, and other highways
planned for Texas and its truck traffic. Surely many trucks counted in the
estimates that now go through Jacksonville or that may in the future go through
Jacksonville, will travel the planned Interstate 69, going from Mexico to
Canada, which in Texas runs from Houston to Lufkin, then north east to
Texarkana.
-
It has been said that the proposed “Relief Route” for Hwy 69 would be paid for
as a toll road. Then the engineers said no, probably it would not be a toll
road.
Yet Schaumberg and Polk current maps contain a drawing which include the
“Gantry toll tag reader” and the “Conceptual Exit Ramp Design” contains lanes
for “exact change” for the toll road, etc.
Please indicate what plans there are for financing this proposed turnpike for
truck traffic as a toll road. Who makes that decision? If it is a toll road,
who would own the toll road, and share the profit or loss of it?
What would be the tax burden on citizens of Jacksonville and Cherokee County if
it were a toll road. What if it did not pay for itself as a toll road?
What would be the tax burden if it were not a toll road, for citizens of
Jacksonville and Cherokee County?
-
We have read two very different descriptions of the project. One was in the letter the Chamber
sent its own members: “This new highway will also allow us to channel heavy
trucks, industrial machinery, manufactured houses, and hazardous materials around our community
instead of through it.” Of course
the proposed routes do go through the west side of our community, not around it
(despite the engineers attempts to avoid homes, etc.). We are surprised that
the city or Chamber would consider putting such a turnpike, carrying dangerous
cargo through or near homes, schools, colleges, city recreation areas, city
cemeteries, new developing homes, etc.
The route has also been described as being “for the greater good of the city of
Jacksonville and business and pleasure travelers of U.S. 69 throughout the
state.” Yet it bypasses Jacksonville businesses, so it is hard to know how
it will be good for them. Please explain how you view the “Relief Route” and how it will help or hurt
Jacksonville, economically for businesses, tax base of the city and county
(considering condemnation and de-valuation of properties due to proximity to the
turnpike), the livability on the west side of the city, etc.
-
In a letter from the Chamber to its members Chamber members it was
mentioned that the Chamber perceives that the west side of Jacksonville is
“industrial” in nature. Please list what industries you refer to?
How does this number of industries on the west side compare to the number of
industries on the east side of the city. Please list those industries.
Also, please indicate which of these industries will need truck deliveries/
pick-ups, and therefore truck traffic coming to and from them would not utilize
the proposed “Relief Route” for Hwy 69.
Doesn’t the Old Tyler Highway, provide a “relief roadway” of its own already?
Running parallel to the existing Hwy 69, doesn’t this allow for truck traffic
going to the business they serve. Surely trucks going to serve those businesses
would not benefit by using the proposed “relief route.”
-
Please list industries that exist on the eastern side of Jacksonville. Do Trucks
need to come to those Jacksonville based companies for deliveries/ pick-ups?
If so, wouldn’t they avoid using the proposed “Relief Route,” and go directly to
their destination business?
-
In a letter that the Chamber sent its own members, they said that the
west side of Jacksonville was “industrial”. We want you to state publicly
that you are aware how residential the great majority of the west side is -
containing city cemeteries, Lon Morris College, Jacksonville Baptist
College, schools, homes from a wide price range, rural areas, newly
developing suburban areas in the rural areas, etc.
-
Are the projections for traffic increase, and population increase valid for
Jacksonville Texas?
If Jacksonville
population has not grown in twenty years, are their projections right that
traffic will increase enough for the need for this “Relief Route”?
-
Please discuss how or if this proposed “Relief Route” for Hwy 69 around
the west side of Jacksonville relates or does not relate to the proposed
Interstate 69, the Trans Texas Corridors, etc.
-
Please discuss your or TxDot reasons for deciding on a study ONLY of
the western route, rather than all of the most feasible ways to alleviate
traffic congestion in Jacksonville.
-
Recently the Love’s Lookout Visitor’s Center was opened. Surely it was
not envisioned as a truck stop. Yet if the “Relief Route” re-enters Hwy 69
near Love’s Lookout, won’t the Visitor’s Center begin to serve as a truck
stop. It would be the first chance trucks would have to stop anywhere around
Jacksonville.
-
Will only two lanes be built initially? Will they be built to “Super 2”
highway specifications? Is the estimate of $142 million (without the cost
of
purchase of condemned homes, land and businesses, and without the reimbursement
for homes, land and businesses de-valued because of proximity to this truck
turnpike) for the two or four lane roadway?
-
WHO PAYS FOR THE PURCHASE OF CONDEMNED PROPERTY? (Schaumberg and Polk’¹s
estimates of the cost of the project do not include cost of purchase of land,
homes, and businesses, or the cost of land and homes and businesses de-valued as
a result of being located near this noisy, limited access,
truck traffic turnpike.) What do you anticipate these costs to be? How
will the costs be paid?
-
It has been described as a “Relief Route” for truck traffic, yet there
will be no relief for trucks going near Jacksonville. They cannot stop to
get off for anything truckers need or like to stop for, not for these ten
miles. No Relief on this route.
Read responses.
Number of visitors:
|
|