IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF BIBB COUNTY, GEORGIA

Civil Action No.__12CV 58472 __


COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTION AND TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

Plaintiff files this record of Emailed Questions to GDOT's attorney:

Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 18:58  
To: Mary Jo Volkert  <mjvolkert@law.ga.gov>
From: Holliday Dental <teeth@mindspring.com>
Subject: Forest Hill Road -- questions for GDOT
Cc: "Daniel P. Fischer" <FISCHER_DP@mercer.edu>,
 Holliday Dental <teeth@mindspring.com>,
 Charles Brogdon <charjean@cox.net>,
 Susan Hanberry <Susan.Hanberry@stratford.org>


Dear Mrs Volkert,
This email will replace the email sent prematurely to you earlier today.
Below are some questions that arose at our meeting last Friday, March 1, 2013.

1 - Citizen Involvement:
You and Van Etheridge (the MAAI program manager) stated that changes had been made to the FHR plans due to citizen involvement.  Van Etheridge says in his affidavit that the "RIP has implemented numerous suggestions that were appropriate for the design criteria of the project" (p.33)

Please list any changes that were made to accommodate documented citizen's comments from 2001 to 2008. 
All documented Citizen comments are web-posted here:
http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/Comments.htm

2 - Stakeholder's Meetings:
Mr Etheridge (page 8) refers to  a "...stakeholder's meeting at the Holiday Inn on Riverside Drive on May 30, 2002".  These "stakeholders" were hand picked by RIP enthusiasts.  Many people were not allowed to enter the room.  It was suggested that we move to accommodate the crowd, but the moderator would not do so. The  public that was allowed to attend in the room was not allowed to participate, and they were chastised several times by the moderator for applauding in agreement with a few of the "stakeholders".  The moderator threatened to turn off the lights and shut down the meeting.  How can this meeting be considered a "public meeting?"  How can any result from this meeting be considered "public input?"  It can not.

 3- Mediation:
Van Etheridge states (on page 32 of his affidavit) that Mediation was to include GDOT and Macon officials.  Was GDOT present at mediation?  Was anyone from Macon government present at mediation?  Was a mediation ever held according to these specific instructions from the Bibb County Commission? 
 
4 - Traffic Projections:
Refer to webpage -
http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/traffic.htm
How does GDOT plan to defend its record of supremely inaccurate traffic projections in Bibb County?  Refer to the case of Houston Road (Telegraph article 6-12-2005, posted on same page).  Refer to the negative (reversed counts) projections for FHR since 2005.  The database sampled in the chart below was emailed to me following a request at a MATS meeting at Macon-Bibb Planning and Zoning offices.
http://www.macon-bibb.com/FHR/Traffic-Counts-2012.xls
 

The section of FHR north of Northside Drive (the section that is Not in the Project Area) is the only section to grow in traffic volume - a minimal 7%.  All other sections are down.  The down sections are the sections in the Project Area. The Project Area traffic counts show a decrease in traffic from -21% to -8%.  Why does this road with historically decreasing traffic counts need to be supersized?


 5- Road Service:
GDOT purports to design and to build for roads to be of service for the next 20-25 years.  That is why they project traffic counts.   But car traffic is only one type of service provided by urban roads. Other stated goals are bike and pedestrian traffic, safety, etc.
How well does the current plan for FHR compare with the Citizen's Compromise plan for the following GDOT transportation goals:
- Biking
- Pedestrians
- Safety
- Complete Streets
- Safe Routes to Schools
- AARP - Age Friendly Streets
 - Congestion
 - Speeding control
- Traffic Calming
- Context Sensitivity

 6- Congestion?
There is NO congestion on FHR for 23/24 hours.  There is some on Friday afternoon [when nearby schools let out].  Is not all congestion in the southern section of FHR?  Was any Congestion the northern section?   Was it [congestion] not almost all at the intersection of FHR at Ridge Avenue?  Does GDOT deny that a simple addition of a turn lane here would solve all traffic backing up at this intersection?


 7- Attorney General's allegiance:
Is the Attorney General's office conflicted?
The AG is defending GDOT.  But what happens when certain defenses of GDOT will hurt the Citizens of Georgia?  
If the Public Good demands condemning GDOT actions, will the AG take sides?  Which side?
How will this conflict be resolved? 

Thank you,
- Lindsay Holliday, et al.