Stop The Fifth Interchange
at Mine Lick Creek Road
Cookeville, Tennessee
DEconstructing the Concocted Road Avrice Propaganda IN General
TRANSPORTATION POLICY
Last updated 22 MAR 2010
2:30 A
THE NEWS, OPINION AND COMMENTARY NOT AVAILABLE IN THE HERALD-CITIZEN
Welcome to the TOUR website. (Taxpayers Opposed to Useless Roads) This web site is for those people who want better government policy in road building. It is an exploration of the factors and frustrations surrounding the planning and management of transportation infrastructure in the state of Tennessee. Particular emphasis will be on the Proposed Mine Lick Creek Interchange in Cookeville, Tennessee but,there are many projects like this throughout Tennessee.
Since the justification for the Interchange has changed substantially from a interconnection between two four lane highways to serving a new business park with no four lane intersection, that business park and especially the construction of infrastucture will be added to the content. Besides that, the application for a certificate of need calls for the construction of a four lane down the middle of the park, including a 300 foot long bridge. Unless this is a tourist attraction so people in Nashville can come and see what an empty street looks like, it is just another useless road and bridge. This is going to be our bridge to nowhere. An unused road, business park or auto factory will operate at a low economic efficiency and have substantial long term impacts and consequences for the taxpayer.
If you pump gas, pass through the state or ride the bus, you are going to be effected by the policies and proceedures of the Tennessee Department of Transportation or TDOT. I believe that better transportation policy is achievable through the ethical treatment of all taxpayers and seek to provide the other side of the story that is not known either through ignorance, blind trust or strategic misrepresentation.
Danny L. Newton
1018 Rose Garden Lane 38501
931-432-5345
CORRIDOR K HEATING UP HOUSE GIVES FEDS APPROVAL AND ENCOURAGEMENT IN HJR0754
|
22 MAR 2019, by Danny Newton The ongoing landslide problems along US64 in Polk County have given another push to the pressure construct at least the Tennessee side of Asheville to Chattanooga four lane called Corridor K. No one knows yet the final cost but good estimates of the slide repairs from TDOT support the idea that the amount will be close to $3 million dollars. US 64 has been closed since 10 NOV 2009 and is scheduled to open on 16 APRIL 2010. This corridor was proposed in 1965 but never built because of the massive costs in difficult terrain. The House joint resolution was passed with unanimous yes votes. An ammendment to the bill was used as an accounting trick to change the estimated cost from $900 million to zero. The resolution has no impact because the cost were imputed to the federal government rather than the state. This is totally opposite the usual customary and legal requirements for road costs to be divide as 20% state and 80% federal. This joint resolution seems to be saying that the state of Tennessee is 100 percent ready for this road if the federal government pays 100% of the costs. The bill was sent out of the Senate Transportation committee with unanimous yes votes, even by Jim Tracy who is running for the sixth-district congressional seat of Bart Gordon. There are multiple possible routes for Corridor K but none has been blessed by the environmental process. There is no reason to believe that North Carolina will have any urge to build their end of the road so this portion in Tennessee will end up being a road to nowhere for many decades. One estimate of the cost was $1.4 Billion dollars and that is nearly 90 percent of the entire budget of TDOT for a year. Furthermore, Polk County is a county of only about 16,000 people. This project shows once again that the project selection system is broken. Why should 6 million people spend so much money for 16,000? It would be cheaper to turn the county into a state park and move everybody out. |
H-C FINALLY TELLS THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE FIFTH INTERCHANGE SETTLEMENT
|
City to settle case with property owner Liz Engel Herald-Citizen Staff Tuesday, Mar 02, 2010 COOKEVILLE -- A settlement has been reached in a long-running case between the City of Cookeville, Putnam County and a property owner with land surrounding the planned Highlands Business Park. And the Cookeville City Council will consider approval of the settlement agreement later this week. Norma Faye Pyles Lynch, who had owned a 20-percent interest in more than 70 acres now surrounding the planned park south of Interstate 40, will receive 15 acres in the settlement, per an agreed order filed in Putnam County Circuit Court in mid-February. Both the council and Putnam County Commission must approve that document -- the council will vote Thursday evening and the commission is expected to consider the issue later this month. "We can either accept this or let the court decide how to do it," Cookeville City Manager Jim Shipley told the council during a work session held Monday afternoon. The land, which is divided out in three separate tracts, includes a triangle of 6 acres north of Interstate 40 and bordering Mine Lick Creek Road, 3.5 acres cornered by Stewart Cemetery Road and Bennett Road and 5.5 acres joining Bennett Road and Lee Seminary Road. In the agreement, both parties acknowledge they have no control over what the state may do in regards to roads in and around the business park, and all three parties worked to satisfy Lynch's concerns about access to the properties. For example, parcels that currently have road frontage will continue to have road frontage, the agreement says. The case has been a long-running one for the city and county -- in late 2007, both the council and commission voted to condemn Lynch's interest in the property and filed a petition to acquire the property by eminent domain in 2008. Later that year, Lynch, under a formed LLC, filed a motion to dismiss, saying the city and county had not obtained a certificate of public purpose from the state. The city and county then requested that the eminent domain petition be voluntarily dismissed. In early 2009, the city and county filed notice to dismiss the condemnation petition and soon after voted to reconfigure the park to exclude the disputed tracks. The agreed order was signed by Judge Amy Hollars, county attorney Jeff Jones, city attorney Dan Rader and Lynch's attorney Robert Anderson. In other business Thursday, the Cookeville City Council will also set a date for a public hearing and first reading of a rezoning effort at 1629 McCulley Road in east Cookeville. The Cookeville Planning Commission last month approved a developer's request to change the zoning of a 15.5-acre tract from RS20 to a higher density RS10. If approved as part of the consent agenda, that hearing will be held April 1. The council will meet starting at 6 p.m. at city hall. The public is invited to attend. |
THE DAY THE FIFTH INTERCHANGE NEARLY DIED OF NEGLECT
|
The last item of business at the County Commission was to vote for a resolution to work with the Tennessee Department of Transportation to keep the Fifth Interchange an active project. According to the County Executive, Kim Blaylock, the resolution was cobbled together after a meeting with unnamed TDOT officials who expressed concern that the local community was divided about the fate of the Fifth Interchange. Not told to the County Commission was that Ric Finch and Wayne Pegram, officials in the Cookeville Area Residents Association were asked to come to Kim Blaylock's Office before the County Commission meeting and asked not to oppose the resolution that the City already passed during a meeting that was held before the regular Thursday night meeting. Earlier in the day, Ric Finch sent out a letter alerting CARA and TOUR that a new move to get the Fifth Interchange moving again was in the wind. County Commissioner Greg Rector confirmed, earlier in the day and before the meeting that the plan to seek a resolution had not been in the works very long but that there had been some brain storming on how to fund the project with federal money making up the bulk of the matching funds, perhaps with a federal 75%-25% program, only 25% of the funds as a local government contribution would be required. The Tennessee law still exists and is on the books requiring the requesting government to pay for 50% of the costs. It also forbids engineering expenditures to be made by TDOT on the project until the funds have been deposited. Altogether, the law provides for three discrete stages of disbursement, the engineering, half of the estimated construction cost and the final costs. The current engineering work done is not for construction but for making an application to the Federal Highway Administration for approval. During the final land negotiations in the Pyle Property partition suit, it finally became obvious that the state planned on a low volume diamond interchange and submitted it to the Federal Highway Administration. Kim Blaylock tried to explain the reasons that there seemed to be such a scramble to get approval of the resolution of cooperation between the County, City of Cookeville and TDOT. For the first time, Kim Blaylock told the Commission that they were being pressured by TDOT to pay for part of the connector road. Apparently, this has been known since March 2009. TDOT rejected a letter crafted by both the County Executive and the City manager that says the same thing and now, the issue had to come before the governing bodies of Putnam County and the City of Cookeville. It is possible, but not mentioned that TDOT wanted the city-county partners to pay for the traffic study showing the connector road to the south rather than the north. Bob Luna, CEO of the Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of the project and reminded everyone that they represented 800 businesses and 1600 people. Some of the County Commission was suspicious of the proceeding because of fear that it contained an implied and uncertain financial obligation on future commissions. The County Attorney, Jeff Jones, assured the County Commission that the resolution contained no promise of financial obligation because it was in no way a binding contract. The appearance of an emergency plus the need to act so quickly that the resolution was not on the agenda created some suspicion. County Commissioner, Gene Mullins, from the tenth District, then followed up with the observation that if the resolution had such little ability to bind the governments to future sums of money, then why was TDOT asking for it? Eventually, Kim Blaylock, the County Executive was obliged to tell everyone that without the resolution the Fifth Interchange would die. The county lawyer was also asked about the legal wrangling over the Pyle Property and the county attorney announced that the suit was over and that the county would be required to pay only $25,000 of the $150,000 of legal fees that were requested by the Pyle family. Next, George Halford came forward and announced that he had another secret deal simmering behind the scenes. The details were secret however but they involved a total of $425 million dollars worth of investment in real and personal property. Later on it came out that their "suspect" or "prospect" had made application at seven other locations in the state. There was also a lot of sad stories about how nearly daily chances that slipped through our Industrial Park dragnet because the newest park was not ready. It will take 18 to 24 months to get the park ready, meaning that the infrastructure will be installed. The alleged prospect plans to be in operation by 2014. Gene Mullins told the Commission and the audience that he had reservations about the assumption that you have to have the park ready with infrastructure but moved on to ask Kim Blaylock why there was a business at the end of an interchange in Roane County? Once Again Kim Blaylock was unable to answer this question, even to her own satisfaction. The county executive said that they had some people "helping us with the FHWA." She even told about trying to use her mother, Senator Charlotte Burks, to get information that had been hard to pull out of TDOT. That did not work either. Kim Blaylock wants another access study done to get the connector road connected to the one going through the business park. Commissioner Mullins, clearly exasperated tried to explain to Kim Blaylock, supposedly a CPA, that the estimated cost of the project was a critical factor in determining the benefit-cost ratio. Still, this is unknown. The old Corridor J estimates of the cost of the Interchange was $12.2 million for Route A and $8.7 million for route B. When the interchange was perceived as a gift, the more expensive solution was the preferred option. An approximate cost on the $12.2 million dollar project would be $16 million in current dollars if the consumer price index was used but if a construction price index, targeted mostly on highway historic costs was used, it would be closer to $20 million. Changing the design to the less elaborate diamond interchange will help however. |
CITY AND COUNTY FINALLY ADMITS PROBLEM WITH FIFTH INTERCHANGE
|
CITY AND COUNTY FINALLY ADMITS PROBLEM WITH FIFTH INTERCHANGE by Liz Engle, Herald Citizen PUTNAM COUNTY -- Plans for a fifth interchange in Putnam County have hit a serious snag with federal officials -- bringing up concerns about the future of the project and its potential impact on the development of the Highlands Business Park. The Tennessee Department of Transportation recently issued a letter to city and council officials about the status of the interchange, which would add a fifth Interstate 40 exit at Mine Lick Creek Road. But in recent discussions with the Federal Highway Administration, the letter says, serious concerns have been raised about the lack of development and funding for a northern connector to Highway 70 -- bringing into question the validity of the entire project. Despite the letter, local officials are pledging that the latest news is just a bump in the road and are now focusing their efforts into figuring out exactly how this happened and how to move forward. "We've already had several meetings and at each juncture the issue of the connector has been discussed. And at each juncture it was my understanding that the connector was important to the plan, but it didn't have to be concurrant, or happen at the same time as the interchange," said Rep. Henry Fincher, D-Cookeville. "This is far from being a deal-breaker for the fifth interchange. I think it's a question of finding out how much of this is from the feds or how much of this is what TDOT prefers rather than requires." TDOT anticipates that the latest FHWA comments will now be incorporated into a revised interchange justification study set for resubmission on Jan. 29. The department recommends that "to receive FHWA approval, we believe that this document will need to include written commitments regarding funding and schedule of the connecting road no later than concurrent with the construction of the proposed interchange." Since the connector would be considered a local road, it would be the responsibly of the local government entities to fund its construction -- at last estimate, that cost was around $11 million. TDOT's letter does reference a local interstate connector program for which the city and county may be eligible -- it would provide funding up to 50 percent of the cost. "There's no way we can fund it. It's going to take about all our debt capacity to build our roads into the business park," Cookeville City Manager Jim Shipley said during a council work session last week. "It doesn't make sense to me, the way the economy is, that there's a community that's going spend $14-15 million on a business park to try to provide jobs and all we need is an interchange." Fincher said he, Sen. Charlotte Burks and Rep. Charles Curtiss will all be working to resolve the issue, including a possible meeting with TDOT Commissioner Gerald Nicely in the coming weeks. Meanwhile, leaders at the Cookeville-Putnam County Chamber are also urging community support. The lack of a fifth interchange would have a direct impact on the development of the Highlands Business Park, which continues to take shape in south Cookeville. "The business park will survive without the fifth interchange, but it will impact the marketability of that park land," said former chamber board member Joe Albrecht. "As a community, we need to do everything we can to support this interchange being built. This project is not dead," he continued. "It's just a road block that we've got to overcome." |
|
TDOT ANSWERS INQUIRY ABOUT THE SLIGO BRIDGE Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 10:19:50 -0600 From: Ed.Wasserman@tn.gov To: dnewton@multipro.com CC: TDOT.Comments@tn.gov Subject: Sligo and Hurricane Bridges Thank you for your inquiry of the 12th, subject above. Contrary to your expressed outlook, there is light at the end of the tunnel, but perhaps not immediately. Development of plans to replace the Sligo Bridge and rehabilitate the Hurricane Bridge are well underway, however, funding issues will require several years to be able to let contracts. The Hurricane Bridge was last rehabilitated in 1977 with a repainting in the 1990's. Recent inspections and analysis have found section loss in several members. These, along with a complete re-decking will be required. As to concerns for two businesses potentially closing, it is doubtful that the bridges are the primary reason, as opposed to other dynamics in the economy. For example, the automobile parts company shipping via I-40, would only experience a 26-mile round trip increase for each shipment in bypassing the Hurricane Bridge. nonetheless, we will be addressing these bridge needs as funds become available. Edward P. Wasserman, CE Director TDOT - Structures Division 1100 James K. Polk Bldg. 505 Deaderick Street Nashville, TN 37243-0339 Phone - 615-741-3351 Fax - 615-532-7745 ed..wasserman@tn.gov |
|
NOVEMBER RURAL PLANNING MEETING CONFIRMS TECHNICAL COMMITTEE CHOICES The November Rural Planning Meeting has held on 12 November at the Clarion Motel which is the former Holiday Inn in Cookeville. The Former road priority picks were confirmed from the October technical meeting. The Fifth Interchange was scheduled for Construction in 2013 but technically has no money. For some reason, the Right-of-Way step was skipped over and it went straight to construction. In the last meeting, Chester Sutherland, the Fifth Interchange project manager, seemed to admit that there was a change in the design to a traditional diamond and that the connector road no longer goes northward toward U.S. 70 but south to Lee Seminary Road. This means that the deceleration loop in the southeast quadrant of the modified clover leaf that forced the city to condemn the structures on the Pyle Property is no longer in the plan. This explanation is finally conforming to the cost estimate. The northward connection was estimated at three times the cost. The most disturbing revelation during the meeting is that there is no relief in sight for the Sligo Bridge. This project failed to get an earmark form Senator Alexander and for some reason, Representative Bart Gordon has gotten earmarks all over his district but is uninvolved in this problem. Maybe, he exhausted the earmark money in Cumberland County? On top of that, was the revelation that the Hurricane Bridge would be posted with new and lower load limits. A fully loaded 18-wheeler can weigh up to 40 tons but the new limits are going to be set at 18 tons. This mysterious action by TDOT follows a pavement upgrade that took place near the time that the Minnesota bridge went down. The Hurricane Bridge is similar to the Minnesota bridge over the Mississippi that collapsed on 01 AUG 2007. It has been more than 24 hours since TDOT has been asked to explain this action. Missing from this meeting was Kim Blaylock, Putnam County Executive, state representative Curtis and state senator, Charlotte Burks. On one level,it is too bad the state representatives were not at the meeting but on the other hand, these state representatives are a big part of the problem. This week, TDOT is accepting comments on two projects that are not nearly as important as the upgrade on Jefferson in Putnam County or the repairs on Hurricane and Sligo Bridge. One of the projects is earmarked from the federal level but TDOT is doing these projects in Van Buren County also because of state earmarking of projects associated with the County Seat Connector Program. This is the poorly managed and ill conceived idea of furnishing every county seat a four lane connector to the Interstate no matter how much it costs and no matter how little the benefit. Without Sligo Bridge, there are two industries that might leave Dekalb County. These industries have a total of 1527 employees. Mayor Sam Sallee was at the meeting and with Chairman James Mills tried to make it clear that the City would be experiencing the cost of installing a turn lane on Jefferson to ease the traffic problem for the new 1600 student school on the south side of the interstate. That turning lane would have to be either torn out or in some way modified later during the change from a two lane to a four lane road. James Mills told the panel that this road already has a very high traffic count of 17,000 per day. The Sligo Bridge Fiasco, which is over two years old, and the Jefferson Street rehab in Putnam County is only two examples of the failure of the project selection process. Nothing was said about the Fifth Interchange or Mine Lick Creek Interchange Project except by the TOUR editor. My comment was that the Fifth Interchange should be cashed in for the Jefferson Ave. School road project. It is also totally ridiculous that Putnam County, which sends about $21.3 million to the TDOT Highway Fund every year, cannot get a road project done that costs a lot less than that. An attempt to mention the problem of sharing money with TDOT through the local aid mechanisms was also mentioned and it was mentioned that the Putnam ounty is already using 3 out of 8 dollars of its own sales tax and property tax money because the sharing formula is inadequate. |
|
TDOT RELEASES AMENDMENTS TO STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM LIST OF NEW OR AMENDED PROJECTS |
FIFTH INTERCHANGE TIMELINE 30 SEPT 1988 Herald-Citizen Reports that Vice Mayor Grogan expects Fifth Interchange by the year 2000. Estimate for the interchange is $1 million. The estimated cost of extending Gould drive to the industrial park is $500 thousand. 03 DEC 1998 Cookeville City Council asks TDOT to perform a feasibility study on constructing fifth interchange on I-40 at Mine Lick Creek Road. SPONSOR-JIM SHIPLEY 01 APRIL 1999 The Cookeville City Council asks TDOT to study the Maple Avenue flyover at I-40 as the new Fifth Interchange. 25 OCT 2000 TDOT dates the Interschange Justification Study for Federal Highway Administration Review as part of Corridor J intersection at Mine Lick Creek Road. 20 MAY 2002 Cookeville proposes to move the city limits to the vicinity to surround the Fifth Interchange 21 JUNE 2002 TDOT Advance planning report on the Northern Connector 15 JULY 2003 Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury releases report to the legislature with reccommendations for objective system of project selection. AUG 2003 Final Report of Independant Investigation Sanctioned by TDOT. Studies selection process of 15 problematic road projects in Tennessee, Mine Lick Creek Road is one of them. 24 FEB 2003 City of Cookeville approves alternate "A" as Phase I Councilman Sam Sallee asks that The Northern Connector be Considered as Phase II. 22 AUG 2005 City of Sparta, in White County, throws in $50,000 for the Highlands Iniative 22 SEPT 2005 Herald-Citizen reports Highlands Initiative Kickoff with $2million. OCT 2005 State Transportation Improvement Plan Shows Project #71005 "Construct New Interchange at Mine Lick Creek Road" ROW acquisition marked for 2006 and construction marked for 2008. See Adobe Page 41/99. Estimated Cost is $10.3 million. DECEMBER 2005 TDOT Provides explaination of the Project Evaluation System. 21 JAN 2005 City of Cookeville announces taking an option on property to be in future industrial park. Mayor Doubts that Fifth Interchange will be built. Sam Salee says more industrial properties needed.WARNING! HERLD CITIZEN VERSION OF THE TRUTH 23 MAR 2003 TDOT report reccommends using SR 111, not Mine Lick Creek Road for Corridor J intersection with I-40. 24 MAY 2006 Tennessee Legislature removes protection from land owners when government acts to build roads or build industrial parks. Bill allows transfer of property to private concerns. Charlotte Burkes listed as a sponser. 29 JUNE 2006 Putnam County loans Cookeville $2,452,685 for their share of the Business Park. 14 DEC 2006 TDOT Signs the Environmental Assessment FHWA concures later on 18 APRIL 2008. The connecting road is to have a design speed of 70 MPH and 250 foot wide controlled access right-of-way. 05 JUNE 2006 Tennessee Governor signs bill limiting the ability of the state, county and city to condemn property. PDF FILE HERE 16 JAN 2007 County Commission votes to listen to Mrs Lynch's side of the story and votes down condemnation request. 05 FEB 2007 Center Hill Regional Planning Meeting votes on transportation projects 06 MARCH 2007 TDOT Holds a public Meeting on the Fifth Interchange 29 JUNE 2007 $5 million transferred out of Putnam county Debt Service Fund to buy an estimated 400 Acre Business Park. 01 NOV 2007 Condemnation of Pyle Property on the City Council Agenda. The vote was unanimous. 12 NOV 2007 The County Planning Commission in a voice vote decides to condemn the Pyle Property. 13 NOV 2007 The Cookeville Chamber of Commerce Refused Tour Editor Access to Engineering Report on the Highland Business Park. 14 NOV 2007 The Chamber of Commerce called a little after 5 PM to advise the Tour Editor that they had prepared a copy of the report that is being used to justify the condemdation of the Pyle Property and that it would be available at the front desk.
12 FEB 2008 The Sheriff Served Mrs. Lynch a summons this morning to initiate the condemnation process on her land. 17 MAR 2008 The City and the County ammend their condemnation suit. This will push back the court date into April 2008. 17 MAR 2008 The Herald-Citizen quotes TDOT spokesperson Jenifer Osborne Flynn as saying that the Fifth Interchange and the Northern Connector are "non related." This suggests that the useless road attached to the interchange can be built later. 18 APRIL 2008 Federal Highway Adnistration, Charles J O'Neil, signs Finding of No Signifigant Impact Statement For Mine Lick Creek Interchange Road And Northern Connector Road. 25 APRIL 2008 THE LYNCH FAMILY ANNOUNCE THAT THE COUNTY AND THE CITY HAVE WITHDRAWN FROM LEGAL ACTION TO PRESS THEIR OUTRAGEOUS EMINENT DOMAIN ABUSE UPON THE LYNCH FAMILY 01 MAY 2008 TDOT puts up a partial electronic copy on their web site of the FONSI. This describes the staged construction of the connecting road from two to four lane but on a four lane right-of-way. 08 MAY 2008 The Lynch Family files a petition for Partition in Kind in Circuit Court. Attorneys ask for legal costs and damages. 09 MAY 2008 Herald-Citizen prints Finding of No Signifigant Impact or FONSI claiming that the Northern Connector and the Fifth Interchange are Connected. 18 JUNE 2008 The City Attorney suddenly discovers that he has to go on vaction on the same day that the City and County are scheduled in court to continue their campaign of eminent domain abuse. The Judge rescheduled the next court date to 21 JULY 08. 03 JUL 2008 City announces on the radio that they are paying $16 million to the Upper Cumberland Electric Membership Corporation to compensate them for land annexed in the past few years. 21 JUL 2008 Judge Turnbull permits the city and the county to witdraw from their previous motion to withdraw from the suit. The judge further suggests that the two parties settle the matter out of court in a judicial confrence in November. The Judge allows further delay, until next year for the city and the county to obtain a Certificate of Public Purpose. 03 OCT 2008 The Herald Citizen reported that The city of Cookeville and Putnam County are seeking a certificate of public purpose and necessity from the state Building Finance Committee of the Tennessee Board of Economic Growth. The Cookeville City Council approved a resolution authorizing City Manager Jim Shipley to apply for the certificate during its meeting Thursday. 09 OCT 2008 the Cookeville City Council applies to the Building Finance Committee of the Tennessee Board of Economic Growth for a certificate of public purpose and necessity for the proposed Highlands Business Park." 14 OCT 2008 County Planning Commission approves petition for Certificate of Public Purpose and Necessity at the regular meeting. Kim Blaylock announces that the Business Park is on a "Fast Track." Linda Owens was denied chance to speak at the County Commission Meeting. 23 OCT 2008 The Lynch Family Attorney, Bob Anderson's Appeal to alter the discretionary finding by Judge Turnbull earlier in the year was denied. The Judge also denied a request that the money held in escrow be held in an interest bearing account. 14 NOV 2008 Centerhill RPO moves Fifth Interchange back down to 2011/2012 time frame after voting 11 projects ahead of it in 2010. Project Manager states that this was at the request of local officials. 17 NOV 2008 The county Commission again refused Linda Owens a spokesperson for Mrs Lynch and the family to address the county commission or accept a written summary of her intended remarks. A resolution to issue general Obligation bonds was passed for the county portion of the $14.28 million of infrastructure costs. 20 NOV 2008 The Cookeville City Council approved a resolution to move forward with a PILOT program of tax incentives and to issue General Obligation Bonds to fund the $7.2 portion of the work in the Business Park. The City Council voted to pay the consultants for their work on water, sewer, gas and road design in the new park. 03 DEC 2008 The city of Cookeville let it be know publicly that contacts with TDOT have been made that suggest that use of connector road that was approved by FHWA and shown to the public in the public meetings could be elimiminated and instead, they wanted a road built by the city and the county to be considered as the connector road. The connector road in the original design was originally designed as a four lane that was part of the Corridor J project. It also was a fragment of a half loop around Cookeville that went from SR111, south of Cookeville to SR111 North of Cookeville. 8 DEC 2008 Recently elected state Representative Henry Fincher criticizes the City of Cookeville for lobbying TDOT to alter the plan for the Fifth Interchange. 27 JAN 2009 City of Cookeville and County Officials request secret meeting with the Department of Economic and Community Development to discuss their application for a Certificate of Need. 05 MARCH 2009 Cookeville and Putnam County gets certificate for an industrial park and a business park for a reduced footprint of about 290 acres. This excludes land under contention because of the partition and condemnation suits. 30 APRIL 2009 Deadline for City/County to respond or withdraw from suit passes. State Supreme Court to hear the case and make a decision, possibly in six months. 03 JUNE 2009 Tennessee Supreme Court hears Eminent Domain Abuse case concerning the government land grab at the Fifth Interchange. 24 JAN 2009 Herald-Citizen finally admits that there is a problem with funding the new Interchange. Federal Highway Administration refuses to certify the Project. TDOT demands local payments to get the project back on track. 12 JUNE 2010 Judge Amy Hollars Hears request for the city and county to pay for the legal fees associated with the condemnation of the Lynch Property. .16 FEB 2010 County Lawyer Jeff Jones te;;s County Commission that the Law Suit was settled last Friday and that the defendant was only awarded $25k out of the maximum of $150+k that was submitted to her. 16 FEB 2010 Putnam County Commission votes on a blank check commitment to work with TDOT to build the Fifth Intechanghe. County Lawyer, Jeff Jones assured all that the resolution does not contain a dollar amount and can not be considered as a commitment that can fall on future County Commissions. County Executive, Kim Blaylock predicted that this is the only way to keep the project alive. The vote was 3 against and 21 for the resolution. RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSCONTACT YOUR TENNESSEE STATE TRANSPORATION OFFICIALS House Committee on Transportation REPRESENTATIVE BILL HARMON, CHAIRMAN District 37  Sequatchie, Van Buren, Grundy and Marion Counties Phone (423) 949-5100 Fax (615) 253-0264 Phone (615) 741-6849 CONTACT:Sandy Sain REPRESENTATIVE VINCE DEAN, VICE CHAIR District 30  Part of Hamilton County Phone (615) 741-1934 Fax (615) 253-0271 CONTACT: Joan Achuff REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE FRALEY, SECRETARY District 39  Franklin, Moore, and part of Lincoln Counties Phone (615) 741-8695 Fax (615) 741-5759 CONTACT: Stephanie Peterson REPRESENATIVE JUDY BARKER District 77  Obion, Lake and part of Dyer Counties Phone: (615) 741-0718 Contact: Audrey Jenkins REPRESENATIVE TY COBB District 64  Part of Maury County Phone: (615) 741-3005 CONTACT: Connie Phelps REPRESENTATIVE HENRY FINCHER District 42  Part of Putnam County Phone (615) 741-1875 Contact: Jennifer Murphy REPRESENTATIVE RICHARD FLOYD District 27  Part of Hamilton County Phone (615) 741-2746 Fax (615) 253-0304 Contact: Cheryl Goodson REPRESENTATIVE MATTHEW HILL Phone: 615-741-2251 District 7  Part of Washington County Contact: Carol Burroughs REPRESENTATIVE PHILLIP JOHNSON District 78  Cheatham and part of Montgomery and Williamson Counties Phone (615) 741-7477 Contact: Celeste Thomas REPRESENTATIVE JIMMY MATLOCK District 21  Parts of Loudon and Monroe Counties Phone (615) 741-3736 Contact: Brenda Moore REPRESENTATIVE BARRETT RICH Phone: (615) 741-6890 District 94  Fayette and parts of Hardeman and Tipton Counties CONTACT: B. L. Rhodes REPRESENTATIVE TONY SHIPLEY District 2  Part of Sullivan County Phone: (615) 741-2886 CONTACT: B. L. Rhodes REPRESENTATIVE JOHN C. TIDWELLDistrict 74  Houston, Humphreys, Perry, and parts of Hickman and Maury Counties Phone (931) 535-2619 Phone (615) 741-7098 Fax (615) 741-4324 Contact: Debra Webb REPRESENTATIVE BEN WEST Rep. Ben West Jr. D-HermitageDistrict 60  Part of Davidson County Phone (615) 889-0801 Phone (615) 741-6959 Fax (615) 253-0331 Contact: Mary Adair You can find all bills, fiscal notes, bill histories and co-sponsors, U.S. mail legislative and district office addresses and streaming video of committee and subcommittee meetings HERE RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKSSENATE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKS YOU MIGHT HAVE A USELESS ROAD IF... 1. The road cost more money than it could ever hope to generate in taxes in a lifetime. 2. The local Chamber of Commerce says it will be good for the economy 3. The Chamber of Commerce organizes a pilgrimage to the Governor's office to tell him that everyone wants it. 4. The local paper tells everybody that if you don't want it your are a NIMBY 5. The local Chamber of Commerce is telling everyone that we have to do this because everyone else is doing it too. 6. The local Chamber of Commerce is claiming that we have to do this to get ahead of everyone else who isn't doing it. 7. TDOT says that it will cure the traffic problems. 8. TDOT says it won't cure the traffic problems. 9. The Chamber of Commerce claims that it will be good for the quality of life. 10. The Chamber of Commerce says it will help get the next factory 11. Your State Representative just thinks you are against it because of a pre-existing oppositional character flaw. 12. The Chamber of Commerce is in secret negotiations with the next whiz-bang company that only needs this road to make the whole deal come together. 13. TDOT is building a four-lane road when a two-lane would still have a high life cycle service level. 14. TDOT is building a road that will damage your business but does not go through your business. (No blood, No foul) RETURN TO TABLE OF CONTENTS LINKS
web counter |