How LADOTD Arrogance And Ramrodding The Elevated Option Could Kill The Connector Freeway Project

I just recently read this morning’s article from the Lafayette Advertiser by Claire Taylor over the ruckus that took place yesterday at the latest I-49 Connector Community Work Group meeting…and it has me fuming.

It is getting more and more obvious that the LADOTD, through their consultant group Lafayette Connector Partners, is insistent on ramming a bare bones Elevated Option freeway down the collective throats of Lafayette citizens, with little if any concern or respect for those citizens who would be affected, or those who actually want to make the Connector freeway work the best for Lafayette.

Ms. Taylor’s article documents the tense and often heated arguments that took place between LADOTD Project Manager Tim Nickel and some members of the CWG, concerning questions they had about the Tier II analysis of the four alternatives put forth.  In the end, Nickel ignored their questions, finished the presentation over their heads, and abruptly dismissed the meeting, leaving many members in shock.

More from Ms. Taylor’s article:

When Interstate 49 [C]onnector committee members asked questions and voiced concerns Thursday about the planning  process and level of public input, the state highway department’s project manager ignored their questions and adjourned the meeting.

Tim Nickel with the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development appeared to become frustrated with questions by members of the I-49 Lafayette community working group. As committee members asked questions near the end of a two-hour meeting, Nickel returned to a PowerPoint presentation, speaking over over their questions, then abruptly adjourned the meeting.

“We’re citizens who were invited to attend and participate, and DOTD shut us down with questions still to be asked,” CWG committee member John Arceneaux said afterwards.

Margaret Trahan, executive director of United Way of Acadiana and a CWG member, added, “Tonight’s meeting was very frustrating. I’m not leaving with a clear understanding of why I’m here.”

The main frustration that the CWG members had was with the analysis of the Concept 6 series of alternatives, in particular the Concept 6-2 “Cut-and-Cover” alternative that called for a full 1-1/2 mile covered tunnel with jet engine ventilation. That alternative was vetted to be the most expensive for the downtown section between Pinhook Road and the Louisiana & Delta Railroad spur crossing, at more than $800 million dollars. By contrast, the Series 4 Elevated Options, which call for an continuously elevated freeway throughout the corridor, was vetted to cost less than $430-450 million dollars….but that did not include any consideration of a “signature bridge” or alterations for neighborhood connectivity or pedestrian/bicycle accessability.

The meeting also exposed the conflict between the LCP team authorized by LADOTD to design the project and the Evangeline Thruway Redevelopment Team (ETRT), the group empowered by Lafayette City-Parish Consolidated Government to develop means to incorporate the Connector project with all the neighborhoods affected. The ETRT, through their Evangeline Corridor Initiative, had created their own separate design concepts for meeting that need; one each for the two concept design series that had advanced to the Tier II study analysis process. As a result, the ETRT had developed their own Cut-and-Cover proposal that ended up radically different than the Concept 6-2 “Cut-and-Cover” tunnel that was ultimately proposed by LCP/DOTD.

The main frustration from the CWG members was about why LCP didn’t allow for consideration in their cost analysis of the conceptual alternatives for additional funding for the “signature bridge” and other CSS design/connectivity components; and also why ETRT’s partial Cut-and-Cover proposal wasn’t given a better vetting or a chance to be altered.

Nickel’s response was that the LCP and consultant team couldn’t give an answer at that point because the process was still ongoing; and that the decisions would be done in January when final “hybrid” alternatives for the entire corridor would be created for Tier III and Supplemental EIS analysis and final selection.

In an earlier article for the Advertiser, Ms. Taylor summarized the situation nicely:

The tunnel version proposed by ETRT after meeting with residents near the interstate route wasn’t intended to be a 1.5-mile long tunnel, Blanchard said, but a partial cut and cover to reduce noise and provide connectivity. Instead of a cost estimate for a partial cut and cover, consultants provide a price for a 1.5-mile long tunnel with a large embankment and jet engine turbine. It includes all the bells and whistles, he said.

The elevated version is a bare-bones model that doesn’t include the cost of a signature bridge, pedestrian and bike lanes, or improvements along Evangeline Thruway such as a grand boulevard. Blanchard said it was a surprise to the ETRT Nov. 30 when Tim Nickel, project manager with the Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development, said he couldn’t commit to paying for bike and pedestrian paths even if they are inside the project right of way.

The group asked for a more limited cost estimate for the partial cut and cover design that would include less tunnel and less embankment than a large tunnel.

“The concern is the 4 series cost estimates, because they don’t include the cost of components such as the signature bridge, are artificially low, while the costs of 6.2, because they may include all the ‘bells and whistles,’ are artificially high,” Blanchard wrote.

The ETRT, Blanchard said, also raised many questions about the signature bridge, which has substantial community support but was not included in the four designs the consulting team advanced in the planning process.

Nickel also, as did his predecessor Toby Picard, dismissed a bit causticly the ETRT’s role in analysis of the conceptual alternatives, stating that they weren’t “an equal partner” in the consideration for a final Connector freeway alternative. Never mind that the ETRT is fully empowered by the original Joint Collective Agreement signed by LADOTD, FHWA, and LCG to provide direct feedback on the project’s impacts on the abutting neighborhoods.

When ETRT member Kevin Blanchard asked Nickel if he would commit to saying that the Series 6 alternatives — especially the Cut-and-Cover alternative — would be allowed to be altered by ETRT or would be eliminated in favor of the Elevated Series 4 concepts, Nickel was noncommited, saying that that decision would be reached by then.

CWG members also expressed frustration with the limited public feedback allowed at their meetings; public comment was limited to only notes on cards, with no time given for verbal discussion. In addition, the membership of the CWG has significantly dwindled down from its initial 60 members down to around 11, and most feedback from the Open House Meeting was limited to comments from other committee members or submitted from attendees at that meeting.

The only compromise that Nickel would give to the ETRT was to allow their objections to be put in the public record at the meeting; but there was no commitment by him to even discuss any of their concerns.

And, it’s not the first time that the LCP has been frosty to the ETRT; when the ECI originally introduced their alternate concepts for the freeway back in August, then Project Manager Toby Picard dismissed them as irrelevant to the process. After an uproar by Lafayette Parish Govermment Councilman Bruce Conque, Picard backed off and reluctantly allowed the ETRT/ECI alternatives into consideration.

But, it appears that LADOTD is still under the impression that only the cheapest, bare bones Connector project will be able to get funding in these austere fiscal days, and that they are driven to push the Elevated option down the throats of Lafayette without any consideration for what may be better.

This is playing with fire, because if LADOTD can’t handle the friendly criticism and analysis of those who do want the Connector built but done right for the citizens of Lafayette, then how will they react when the community revolts in opposition and joins the Teche Ridge Bypass lobby with their ultimate lawsuits and obstruction? The resulting delays could potentially kill not just the best chance to build I-49 through Lafayette, but possibly kill the entire I-49 South extension to New Orleans.

DOTD really needs to take heed and listen to the people for a change before they lose everything.

Chicot Aquifer Found To Be Partially Contaminated At Former Railyard Site: A Potential Setback For The Connector?

Updated…scroll to bottom.

This is a development that could have huge ramifications for the Connector freeway down the road; enough so to further inflame and incite support for the Teche Ridge Bypass if officials don’t resolve this quickly.

The Advertiser just reposted an article from KLFY.com (the local Lafayette CBS TV affiliate) on an ongoing lawsuit being litigated against the Union Pacific Railroad over the former Southern Pacific Railroad distribution yard facility near Johnston Street. The lawsuit claims that the former railyard site is now a source of potential contamination of the Chicot Aquifer, which is the sole source for Lafayette’s drinking water. This directly impacts the Connector freeway because the approved alternative from the 2003 Record of Decision and the modifications proposed during the current Conceptual Design Study and Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement processes all traverse some portion of the former railyard property between Johnston Street and Taft Street.

On Wednesday, one of the lawyers mitigating the lawsuit announced in a press conference that he had confirmed that some contamination of the Aquifer did indeed take place at the railyard, and that some of the contaminating substances had made their way into one of Lafayette’s water well intakes.

Here is some snippets from the KLFY article, that was also reposted over at the Lafayette Advertiser:

Water well 16 in Lafayette has tested positive for contamination, and now the city is being advised to take action to keep contaminated drinking water from reaching residents.

Lawyer William Goodell gave a stern warning to the city and its residents Wednesday night, KLFY reports.

“Me and my co-counsel are here to get this aquifer cleaned up, and to protect the environment, and we are not going to go away till it’s cleaned up,” said Goodell.

Goddell did note that the contamination was not serious enough as of now to warrant danger, but without immediate remediation and cleanup, things could get worse.

The ramifications for the Connector freeway are huge, and potentially even fatal, due to the ROW of the potential freeway traversing the SP rail yard property. Environmental regulations require that “brownfield” sites found to have induced contamination must be fully remediated and cleaned up before any construction of a facility can begin; or, if remedial steps to prevent contamination can’t be found, alternative routes that avoid the contaminated area must be sought. The original 2003 ROD for the Connector does acknowledge the possibility of contamination of the SP/UP rail site, but states that standard practices, special construction techniques, and direct consultation with the federal EPA and the state Department of Environmental Quality (LaDEQ) can be used to protect the aquifer from contamination.

Nevertheless, opponents of the Connector project have cited the protection of the Chicot Aquifer as one of the main reasons for opposing the freeway project and re-routing the freeway around Lafayette, mostly supporting the Teche Ridge Bypass alternative running east along St. Martin Parish. One of the plantiffs in the current lawsuit is the Greater Lafayette Sierra Club, which has been one of the principal leads in opposition to the Connector project.

What could make this a possibly fatal blow to the project is that if it is found that contamination has reached the level of the aquifer, which is based nearly 40 feet below ground level and protected by a clay layer, it would make it less effective to merely remove and process elsewhere contaminated soils. The standard procedure for minor contamination is either to dig up the contaminants, or dig down to a certain level (usually 15 feet), cap with a concrete or other barrier, then replace with clean soils. Special techniques for drilling for pilings that would hold the piers needed to maintain the elevated structures required for the freeway would protect against future contamination.

The problem is, though, if the contamination is so severe that it is directly penetrating the aquifer levels, then merely digging out becomes impossible, and only an “in place” remediation is possible. In that case, the project would have to be moved or adjusted to avoid entirely the contaminated site.

It is possible that a full cleanup can be done for the SP/UP facility prior to construction of the Connector facility, avoiding the need for moving the facility. Indeed, the regulations for constructing the facility requires a full remediation before one inch of soil can be turned.

However, this development does give a huge hammer to those who oppose the Connector, and probably clinches the likelihood of a second lawsuit against FHWA and LADOTD to block the expected approval of the refined RR-4 alternative and for restarting studies to include Teche Ridge. The first lawsuit was filed in 2003 after the initial ROD, but was thrown out in Federal court, including an appeal that was turned down.

As always, more on this development here as it breaks.

UPDATE (1-14-2017):

I recently discovered this press release from attorney William J. Goddell, Jr., who is the lead attorney for the plaintiffs filing the suit against Union Pacific Railroad among others over the contamination of Lafayette water supply from the former Southern Pacific Railroad rail yard property. It details the level of contamination that Goddell’s research found at the former rail yard site, and the expectation for further documentation from both the state Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and Lafayette Consolidated Government’s Lafayette Utilities System (LUS), which oversees the local protection of the Chicot Aquifer. Again, this is important because the rail yard site cuts directly through the approved alignment of the Connector freeway, and the fear of breaching the protection for the aquifer through driving piles for the proposed alignment is one of the principal objections by those opposing the project and supporting alternatives such as the Teche Ridge or Lafayette Regional Expressway bypasses.

The original document was released by Goddell at a December 14, 2016, press conference that was covered by KATC-TV; their report is here. The report also includes a snippet of Goddell speaking at the press confrence.