I'm cautiously optimistic but, in response to the many prescient voices that have emerged from the trenches over the past few years, perhaps they're starting to do that. As Paul Fetter of No 2 Bridge Tolls said, "This has been a very long, tiring process, but as I look back, we have achieved many great accomplishments." That getting the requisite heavies to a point of at least considering genuine discourse has been so laborious isn't exactly a source of regional pride. The community strength developed through that labor, though, most certainly is.
Along those lines, more public comment is both requested and necessary.
Straight from the Ohio River Bridges Project:
The Ohio River Bridges Project is currently developing a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. As part of this process, we are seeking comments on key documents being released Aug 10, 2011. One document explores the Range of Alternatives being considered, click here to view. The other compares the 2003 EIS Selected Alternative to the 2011 Modified Selected Alternative, click here to view. Public comments will be received through August 25 at 5 p.m. To submit comments via email, click here or send written comments to:
John Sacksteder
Community Transportation Solutions
305 N. Hurstbourne Parkway, Suite 100
Louisville, KY 40222
Important to note is a change in the descriptions of possible alternatives, even if they're not yet reflected in action.
6 Recommended Range of Alternatives
Based upon funds in the 2003 FEIS/ROD, preliminary studies and staff input, we propose considering the following range of alternatives in the SEIS
*No Build
*Selected Alternative (without Tolls) This alternative is the same as the Selected Alternative approved in the ROD; it does not include tolls. It is not a reasonable alternative because it is not financially feasible; it is being considered in the SEIS as a baseline for comparison with the proposed modifications to this alternative.
*All Alternatives Previously Evaluated in the 2003 FEIS The alternatives, considered in the 2003 FEIS and previously discussed in this document will be reevaluated to the extent necessary to determine if they warrant detailed study as viable alternatives.
*Modified Selected Alternative (with Tolls) This alternative would include many of the elements of the Selected Alternative, with tolls, but would also include reducing the Far East Bridge, and roadway, and evaluate design options to reduce the cost of constructing the east end tunnel; reconstruction of the Kennedy Interchange in Downtown Louisville in-place; and removing a pedestrian/bikeway facility from the Downtown Bridge.
After considering public and agency input on the alternatives presented above, all findings and the bases thereof will be presented in the Draft SEIS. Although TSM as a standalone alternative will not meet purpose and need, it will be evaluated in the Draft SEIS for further consideration a part of any selected alternative.
Have at it, and know that you're at least making it more difficult for narrow if well-connected interests to dictate the terms of debate. That's a step toward real discourse.
Where is my bad legalese decoder ring?
ReplyDeleteLOL, Gina. I thought the same but not quite as eloquently.
ReplyDeleteI suggest part of the strategy for ORBP is to suffuse all public communication with puffy legal bullsh*t so no one can comment. Unless they're a lawyer or Bennie Breeze.
ReplyDeleteThere are only so many ways to say NO.
Good point G.Coyle. Puffy..Bullsh*t, kind of reminds me of Baylor's posts and Gillenwaters effervescent patronage.
ReplyDeleteNA Confidential's mask-free policy on reader comments.
ReplyDeleteNA Confidential believes in a higher bar than is customary in the blogosphere, and follows a disclosure policy with respect to reader comments.
First, you must be registered with blogger.com according to the procedures specified. This is required not as a means of directing traffic to blogger.com, but to reduce the lamentable instances of flaming and personal attacks on the part of the anonymous.
Second, although pen names are perfectly acceptable, senior editor Roger A. Baylor must be informed of your identity, and according to your preference, it will be kept confidential.
To reiterate, I insist upon this solely to lessen the frequency of malicious anonymity, which unfortunately plagues certain other blogs hereabouts.
You may e-mail Roger at the address given within his profile and explain who you are. Failure to comply means that your comments probably will be deleted -- although the final decision remains ours.
Thanks for reading, and please consider becoming a part of the community here, one that is respectful of the prerequisites of civilized discourse, and that seeks to engage visitors in substantive dialogue.