Gallery | Comments to Final EIS | Comments to DEIS | Links | Contact Us | Sponsors
Write Your Legislators | Press Releases | Archive of Events & Web Pages | Jokes | Hybrid Problems
Maps | How You Can Help | The Governors Race | The FHA Funding Issue | Take Action | Newspapers
I69 built will be longer and more expensive

Question:

Kevin,

Tonight I am sending comments to Tennessee's DOT regarding I-69.  Looking at a national map, I have noticed that Tennessee already has the NAFTA interstate highway.

I wonder if you  went north east on I-40 from Memphis and took it to I-65 to head up to I-69, would the mileage come out still shorter than Corridor 18, I-69?  It looks like it would be about the same as the I-55 route shown on your GIS-- http://www.i69tour.org/nationalmap.pdf.  This might be a important fact for consideration in Tennessee and Kentucky.

Do we feel strongly that truckers are using I-55 and I-70 to do this route currently?

John Smith
COUNT US!

Excellent point, John

Using the handy Rand McNally mileage map I get these distances:

Memphis-Nashville-Louisville-Detroit = 760 miles [using  I-40, I-65, I-71
qnd I-75]

Memphis-Cairo-Indianapolis-Detroit = 808 miles [using I-55, I-70, I-69 and
I-94]

Memphis to Detroit on proposed I-69 is at least 7 miles longer = 815 miles

So Tennessee's proposed I-69 NAFTA highway would be 55 miles longer than
their existing I-40/I-65 NAFTA highway. I could do a more elaborate GIS
study of this route for a lot less than $9 million, and it would save the
public billions of dollars.

To your other questions; Tennessee proposed I-69 alignment [starting from
the Kentucky state line] mostly uses the existing I-155 and U.S. 51. There
are new terrain bypasses at Union City [SIU 7] and Dyersburg and Millington
[SIU 8]  and Memphis [SIU 9]. The Tennessee DOT environmental and
transportation issues are mainly around the Memphis western alignment
bypass. Air quality and traffic congestion are major concerns in Memphis as
they are in Houston, Shreveport, Evansville and Indianapolis. All these
cities are in noncompliance with EPA air quality standards. A major source
of these pollutants is commuter traffic and congestion problems. The "Build
New Highway" strategy of I-69 is the same strategy that helped create these
existing problems. Rather than fixing existing problems, the proposed I-69
would syphon off scarce transportation funding to create future problems
that will be expensive to fix. The best proactive strategy for future
transportation needs is to invest now in efficient urban mass transit
systems that are safer and less polluting and less expensive.  The old pork
barrel highway spending system needs to be stopped now in order to create a
sensible urban transit option for all these Corridor 18 cities...

Kevin Enright

Monday Sept. 15th after seeing the above posting Kevin wrote:

John Smith,

You should be aware that the thumbnail "55 miles shorter" sketch I did was
of the Interstate routes/I-69 routes between Memphis and Detroit. Most of
the increased mileage that I found in the earlier "84 miles shorter" analysis
occurred south of Memphis. This new way of looking at the existing NAFTA
Interstates may be closer to the range of 100 - 125 miles shorter than the
proposed I-69 NAFTA route. We need to get these facts in order, though,
before they are published on the website.

Kevin Enright

Some of Kevin Enright's comments to me are the result of his reading of comments that I made to the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Tennessee Governor in a separate e-mail sent to him the evening of September 11, 2003.  I have included those comments to the TDOT I-69 comments page below.
 
 

The lost equity of the homes that will remain un purchased by the state, yet close to the new terrain route of I-69 must be calculated as a negative return on investment.  Buyers will not pay premium prices for homes 1000 feet from an interstate highway.  Homes up to 1 mile away can loose substantial value.  Don't forget to calculate these losses against your proposed gains.

A homeowner who loses $70,000 in equity, never can access this money that could be used in final years of life to provide hired support and care.  This loss is a loss to the thousands of homeowners near the highway, but also to the health care industry, and the community that would have benefited from the spending of this equity.

The building of new terrain converts transportation dollars into real-estate dollars.  Money spent to purchase Tennessee Homes will go to real-estate rather than transportation.  Persons who relocate to another state take Tennessee transportation dollars to the new state with no benefit to Tennessee.  Fixing existing roads provide more transportation per dollar than new terrain.  The asphalt industry should oppose new terrain.

Road maintenance costs eclipse construction costs over time.  More roads increase the need for more road funds.  This new need never goes away. Given no increased taxes, the rate of deterioration of existing roads will increase.  Gas tax increases, remove money from the states economy, lowering benefits of this money including sales tax and income tax that would be collected on this money had it been spent by consumers on merchandise.  Private sector jobs are lost to lower disposable income from this taxation.
 

Frontage roads and road maintenance will be real costs that must be deducted from benefits but often are left out.  Fire Stations and ambulance service will need additional locations to serve communities divided.  Those costs must be deducted in an honest cost benefit analysis.  Travel times across the interstate are as important as those on the interstate.  Increased travel time to Tennessee residents crossing the interstate is perhaps more important to Tennessee than the savings of time for Interstate travelers.  Don't forget the increases in travel time in your cost benefit of time analysis.

Given a weak state economy and a national glut of empty high tech real-estate along existing interstate highways, increased state debt for the sake of pie in the sky "jobs" is bad government.  States with low debt and low taxes will be the beneficiary of business growth when the economy recovers.  Inventory Tennessee and the Nation's need for more real-estate of this type before you invest nonexistent funds in this way.

Small towns with single exits, do not benefit.  Shopping will become regional, harming the many locally owned small downtown businesses.  The loss of local businesses, harms local advertising sales, so media supported by advertising becomes more regional too.  This is a common result of intestate highways.  That small towns hope for great growth from an Interstate exit,  only makes this sadder.

The damage to farms, wetlands, businesses, homes and neighborhoods are well known and perfectly predictable.  Don't imagine benefits unlikely in order to ignore assured damages.  The day when farm land has a value equal to that of any development project that can think of profitable use, is the day that only a rich few will be able to afford food.  We should protect our most important resource, farmland.

*********************

I 69, the NAFTA corridor will not bring benefits:

    The NAFTA highway built will be 84 miles longer than the existing interstate highway route from Mexico to Canada.  See this GIS study that documents this claim.  http://www.i69tour.org/maps.html

Proponents of I-69 claim it will bring a positive benefit over no build, but no economic study has been able to support this claim.  Costs estimates for 20% of Corridor 18 have now been completed.  That 20% of the distance equals approximately 100% of the estimated cost for the entire route.  All new interstates have resulted in a negative return on investment since 1977.  That there is no federal pot of gold rewarding states for building this interstate should be a clear warning to fiscally responsible public officials to avoid this boondoggle project that has been often named, "a fleecing" "boondoggle" and project to be cut.

Major Cities no longer need more Interstate Highway traffic, given 2004 air quality standards.  A state wide grid system of well maintained state highways and county roads as well as public transit, will develop local jobs and provide a local based economy that will require less commute time and distance and provide for a cleaner environment and sustainable communities.   The NAFTA and world trade solution for jobs is not resulting in improvements once projected.  In Indiana, proponents of I-69 now avoid the NAFTA label once promoted as an asset, because so many jobs have been lost to Mexico as to create anger in the general population.

The midcontental highway coalition has economic interests not the same as Tennessee's state interests.  Their lobbying funds should not trump the needs of the Taxpayers of Tennessee.  The public will become involved and many reputations will be tarnished as logic and careful analysis conflicts with simplistic pro highway lobbing efforts.

A smart DOT would avoid involvement in I-69 until a surplus of money is identified.  You will end up trying to pay for this massively expensive interstate from your Tennessee  collected gas tax, then you will return to your legislature every year to attempt to raise the gas tax to try to keep up with the demands for more money.

Safety is a bogus issue, since it is your money and you can fix any section of any road as needed!  This massively expensive road through farmlands not in need of interstate traffic will draw funds away from highway projects of Tennessee that are actually needed.  This will leave hundreds of miles of roads in need of improvement currently, in even worse repair.  You can fix any section of any road to Interstate standards with the same money that will come to your state with or without I-69.

The Treasury Department of the USA has called for a Veto of the Federal Highway Administration Budget if bonding issues proposed are included in the bill.  This DOT bonding would be a grave threat to the US treasury because of the loss in trust for all treasury bonds that would result. 

Ask yourself, where is the money, and side step this mistake while you still can.

John Smith
COUNT US!
www.i69tour.org
contact information attached

If you came here from the CARR website, our URL is: http://www.i69tour.org/

© COUNT US! 2002 -'03,'04