Project History
go back to Forest Hill Road
Macon-Bibb.com
Project History
| Citizen
Comments |
||
| Over
1000 citizen comments against the GDOT design for FHR |
||
| Request for Injunction | ||
| GDOT's 1st Reply |
||
GDOT is being defended by the Georgia Department of Law, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Volkert. |
||
| GDOT. |
|
Below are links to documents from
GDOT:
http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/GDOT-files-opposition-briefs.pdf Wherein GDOT presents - - DEFENDANTS DEMAND A TRIAL BY A TWELVE (12) PERSON JURY ON ANY ISSUE OF FACT NOT CAPABLE OF RESOLUTION AS A MATTER OF LAW. - DEFENDANTS' SPECIAL APPEARANCE VERIFIED ANSWER - lists their 11 point defense strategy. - DEFENDANTS' SPECIAL APPEARANCE MOTION TO DISMISS GDOT's Motion to Dismiss the suit: http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/GDOT-Motion-to-Dismiss.pdf Wherein GDOT presents - - DEFENDANTS' BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL APPEARANCE MOTION TO DISMISS - FACTUAL BACKGROUND - ARGUMENT AND CITATION OF AUTHORITY of SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY (however, they admit that their immunity fails in the case of arbitrary and capricious actions. We can also demonstrate with video where some DOT reps have acted in bad faith at 3 different meetings) - DEFENDANT CLINTON FORD MUST BE DISMISSED (but they do not suggest any individual to put in his place. Is no one responsible as they imply?) - PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS THAT THE PROJECT WILL RESULT IN VIOLATIONS OF STATE AND FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW MUST BE, DISMISSED BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT RIPE FOR ADJUDICATION - THE COMPLAINT AGAINST GDOT SHOULD BE DISMISSED DUE TO FAILURE OF PROCESS,IMPROPER SERVICE OF PROCESS, OR INSUFFICIENCY OF SERVICE OF PROCESS. (GDOT was warned months ago they would be sued if they let this contract. This should be a sufficient process of service) http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/GDOT-opposes-Complaint-TRO.pdf Wherein GDOT presents - - DEFENDANTS' SPECIAL APPEARANCE BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTION AND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER - STANDARDS OF REVIEW FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDERS AND INTERLOCUTORY INJUNCTIONS - A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER IS IMPROPER WHERE THERE IS NO LIKELIHOOD OF SUCCESS ON THE MERITS OF PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS. - BECAUSE GDOT HAS NOT BEEN SERVED PURSUANT TO __ _ THIS COURT DOES NOT HAVE PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER GDOT. - THE COURT MAY NOT INTERFERE WITH OR SUBSTITUTE ITS JUDGMENT FOR GDOT'S JUDGMENT ON WHETHER TO USE THE CURRENT PROJECT PLANS OR Plaintiff'S ALTERNATIVE PLANS. - SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY BARS AN INJUNCTION AGAINST THE STATE WHERE GDOT HAS NOT ACTED OUTSIDE OF ITS DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY. - PLAINTIFF'S'S CLAIMS THAT THE PROJECT WILL RESULT IN VIOLATIONS OF STATE AND FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW ARE NOT RIPE FOR ADJUDICATION. - A TRO OR INJUNCTION WOULD BE OPPRESSIVE TO GDOT'S AND MACON-BIBB COUNTY'S RIGHTS TO IMPROVE THE LOCAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/GDOT-Answer-Thomas-Howell.pdf Wherein GDOT's witness (Thomas Howell, GDOT District #3 Engineer) explains why he believes the Project Engineer should not have been listed in the suit: - AFFIDAVIT OF THOMAS HOWELL Typical "Gang of Bullies defense" wherein each bully individually claims to not have the kid's stolen ball. Each bully claims that he is not responsible, because he had only a tiny part in the robbery. http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/GDOT-Affidavit-of-Van-Etheridge.pdf Wherein GDOT's sub-contractor MAAI's Program Manager, Van Etheridge spins their version of the FHR project: - AFFIDAVIT OF VAN ETHERIDGE |
| |
| State: Forest Hill Road lawsuit is
in appropriate, unlikely to succeed
Published in Macon Telegraph on Wed., January 23, 2013
|
||
http://www.macon.com/2013/01/22/2326271/state-forest-hill-road-lawsuit.html
By MIKE STUCKA mstucka@macon.com The Georgia Department of Transportation wants the courts to throw out Lindsay “Doc” Holliday’s efforts to stop a Forest Hill Road widening. In documents filed in Bibb County Superior Court, state officials said Holliday can’t sue them, that they haven’t done anything wrong and that Holliday is trying to stop what the public has wanted for decades. “City, county, and GDOT officials have bent over backwards to try to satisfy the community’s concerns,” wrote Denise Whiting-Pack and Mary Jo Volkert, senior assistant attorney generals. Holliday “just will not be satisfied” until the project is “completely thwarted or his alternative plans are used,” they wrote. “What about the citizens of Macon who have been heard and responded to?” Holliday said in a Monday e-mail to The Telegraph he had just begun analyzing the state’s filings and wasn’t ready to respond with a comment. The state’s lawyers note Holliday is the only plaintiff in the lawsuit, but the road widenings have attracted strong opposition from individuals and members of the CAUTION Macon group. The state already has accepted a bid of $8.4 million to widen Forest Hill Road to three lanes between Wimbish Road and Northside Drive. A four-lane section, from Wimbish Road to Forsyth Road, is still on the drawing boards. In their response to Holliday’s lawsuit, state officials say the state has to have exceeded its discretionary authority to be sued, and it hasn’t done so. Holliday also didn’t properly serve the lawsuit to the agency and can’t sue on grounds of potential future environmental harm, the state’s attorneys said. Holliday sought a temporary restraining order, saying the road widening would cause “irreparable and immediate harm” if tree cutting began. More silt would also wash into nearby streams, polluting them, he said. The Georgia Department of Transportation response to the lawsuit said “the law and facts are so adverse to (Holliday’s) position that a final order in his favor is unlikely.” The state also noted the widenings were originally proposed in 1983 by then-Macon Mayor George Israel and were part of a sales-tax referendum passed in 1994. After criticism in a public hearing in 2001, the projects were revised in 2002, and later presented again in 2005. Mediation failed in 2008, according to an account by Van Etheridge, who manages Bibb County’s Road Improvement Program. Etheridge wrote in an affidavit, “There were 404 accidents along the road from 2004 through 2010 -- 64% were from rear-end collisions and left turns.” Construction of the three-lane section is expected to be completed by March 2017. To contact writer Mike Stucka, call 744-4251 |
||
Telegraph Online Comments |
||
Mark Quackenbush - Wow 404 accidents is almost 6 accidents a month or over 1
accident per week. I just wonder why I have not seen any
accidents in many, many years since I drive up and down
these roads multiple times a day and at all different
times of the day. I just hope some smart lawyer does not represent a class
action type lawsuit Carpepm - Dr. Holliday DID NOT refuse to comment. He told Stucka that the information countering (as it so happened, everything Stucka wrote) was on the FHR website and he had not yet had time to respond or study the 40 page document from GDOT's answer to his lawsuit., but that he would do so the next day. STucka insisted on writing the story when he wanted to write it. Crappy reporting, if you ask me. The Telegraph is regurgitating the same old untrue statements from their archives, without attempting to gather the truthful information about this extremely wasteful of taxpayer dollars project. Of all the things this community needs to spend money on, this 'ain't' one of them. What a waste of resources. The direct route to the Shoppes from North Macon is Wesleyan Drive, not Forest Hill Road, duh! You're correct that was the stated goal in the EA, BUT, a letter from GDOT's Harvey Keepler, AGREED with citizens and Dr. Holliday, that, in fact, the road was not 10% more dangerous than comparable state roads, but was, indeed, 20% more safe than comprable state roads, just as Dr. Holliday's research had discovered. That's a 30% mistake on GDOT's part...one of many. cherrypie - So Macon Mall has been almost abandoned due to crime, etc. so we needed another place to shop. Some one told me the reason the officials want to get this road widened is so shoppers from South Macon can get to the Shoppes at River Crossing quicker. In my opinion, the traffic flow at the Shoppe's of River Crossing is awful especially in front of the small shops. It's especially bad during the Christmas season. SoSezYou - Nope... In the original study the road widening was to prevent accidents AND make easier access to Macon Mall for the North Macon shoppers... Mark Quackenbush - Problems (1) The study completed 20 years ago showing these roads need to be widened is outdated. (2) The 20 year old study was completed by the same company that has the contract to widen the road so of course this company is going to go overboard in road widening project. It is in their best interest. Fixes. (1) A new study completed today. (2) The company who does a new study should have no future income based on the outcome of the study. This is not that hard of a fix. Any reasonablely correct new study will see that there are a few spots on these two roads that need to be corrected but the needed adjustments does not require additional lanes running the entire length of these roads projects. The Georgia Department of Transportation should want and desire to get this correct and should never base road projects on 20 year old studies as traffic patterns do change but not always the DOT anticipates. gburdell20 - What is article does not mention is Macon/Bibb officials gave the project to the state to oversee in return for more money. Had they used the penny tax we paid from back in1994 without being greedy for more state and federal funds, FHR would have been fixed years ago. bluiewest1 - Bent over backwards??? This project has been crammed down the throats of residents who rightly don't want it. To say that the citizens of Macon have been heard and responded to is delusional. Cherrypie Thank God for the whistle blowers like Lindsay Holliday! Even though Mr. Holliday is the only person named in the lawsuit, he has a lot of supporters. As for the stats about the accidents, why not blame the people that rear ended the vehicles instead of the road. Maybe they were following too closely or texting, etc. As for left turn lanes, look what happened at Tucker
Rd/Forsyth Rd a few weeks ago when a 17 old student was
killed. We still don't know who was at fault. My guess
would be someone was speeding, trying to beat the light,
not paying full attention because they were on their cell
phone or texting.
Kay34 - All needed is some left hand turn lanes at intersections. But no, GDOT thinks that might be too simple. "State: Forest Hill Road lawsuit is in appropriate, unlikely to succeed" What school did this journalism major graduate from? And did they teach English or even spelling? |
||
go back to Forest Hill Road