2- the Traffic Projections are based "on faulty data. The projected traffic counts, the number of cars expected to use the road by 2024, are pure fantasy. - Telegraph Editors 11-5-07 here"
http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/traffic.htm

3- The Needs and Purpose Statement used to justify and launch this project is no longer applicable.

4- The Hydrology study is flawed.
http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/TelegraphRunoffTraffic.htm

5- A county commissioner (Elmo Richardson) who has consistently voted to pursue the project and is still drawing a salary from his company, Stantec, who designed the project has had a professional engineering complaint filed against him with the Professional Surveying and Licensing Board.
http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/13WMAZ_Savage1.htm


6- Citizens have not seen the final plan for the road.  Example:  Dr Ron Lemon was twice rebuffed when requesting a copy of the plan.  Finally he paid $30 for a copy which he later learned was not the "current plan"!

7- Citizens have not seen landscaping plan. What we have learned, however, is that the wrong kinds of trees and shrubs are being planted. Native trees were requested by the stakeholder's group, but the trees listed to be planted are Ginkos which are not native, may include some female trees which drop very smelly seed balls in the fall, and do not offer a "canopy" shape which was requested, and desired by the stakeholder's group. The American Beauty bushes, although native, are deciduous.

8- We should get a copy of the "approved" EA as there might be some differences.  Tom remembers in consideration of his complaint about their accident
figures they simply deleted the accident comparisons to the statewide  average rather than admit that the road was 20% safer.