| |
Greening of Louisville
Email Archive
EBlast # 14 - 9 April 2011
Jefferson Community and Technical College shows great leadership in increasing their investment in the heart of our community. Many thanks to JCTC board & Tony Newberry, President.
JCTC wants downtown enrollment to rise to 20,000 students - plans $200 million expansion downtown
Courier-Journal - Apr. 8, 2011 - by Nancy C. Rodriguez
Defying a national trend that has seen community colleges abandon downtowns and move to the suburbs, Jefferson Community and Technical College unveiled a $200 million expansion plan Friday that calls for the school to construct a new student center, new classroom buildings and a new technology center downtown in the next two decades. The plan calls for the college to more than double the size of its downtown campus and to expand its current enrollment from about 8,000 to 20,000 students.
“We are signaling our commitment to continue to invest in the future of downtown Louisville,” JCTC President Tony Newberry said at a press conference. “Across the country, in many urban cities, community colleges are moving out of downtown and shifting their programs to the suburbs. … We are excited to be part of the revitalization of downtown Louisville.” Newberry said the plan will be rolled out in three phases, and will largely be funded with public money, although the college also will look to raise some money through private donations.
The first phase of the plan is already underway, with the college's purchase of a little more than 3 acres along South First and Second streets and East College Street. The properties cost $3.1 million and were paid for with $10.5 million authorized by the General Assembly last year, Newberry said. College officials said they plan to acquire additional property in the area in the coming months. Last year the college abandoned talks to acquire the former Holiday Inn at 120 W. Broadway that is now owned by Wayside Christian Mission. That building does not figure in its new expansion plans. Initially the newly-acquired property will be used to alleviate a parking shortage at the college by adding 150 spaces, officials said.
Student Keira Woods, 20, said more parking was definitely needed because it was “hectic” trying to find it. “You get a lot of students coming to class late,” she said
The plan's second phase calls for the college to lobby for $28.6 million from the General Assembly to renovate the Hartford Tower and Seminary Building, which it already owns....
EBlast # 13 - 29 March 2011
Floyds Fork Park makes great sense only if it does not encourage the destruction of farms, fields & forests. But alas, The Courier-Journal article confirms it: unsustainable development drives Floyds Fork Park and Floyds Fork Park drives unsustainable development.
The picture in the C-J article speaks volumes as to who benefits. (See story here:
http://www.dnj.com/article/B2/20110329/NEWS01/303240103/Real-estate-deal-could-help-pay-Floyds-Fork-park-land )
Brownfield redevelopment and reinvestment in our existing neighborhoods is smarter.
* Buy the parkland.
* Protect the parkland.
* Conserve the farms, fields and forests around the parkland.
* Limit our asphalt, concrete and rooftop footprint to it's current size.
EBlast # 12 - 24 March 2011
from the Oil & Gas Observer, 10 March 2011 ...
"Of all the modes of freight transportation, air freight has the highest energy consumption levels, due to the high speeds involved. Increasingoil prices are threatening to dent the demand for air freight services from shippers and freight forwarders due to higher fuel surcharges.... The margin impact will be felt across the air freight industry, with the top players in terms of freight ton kilometers flown, such as FedExExpress, UPS Airlines, Korean Air Lines, and Cathay Pacific Airways, being impacted the most."
That was before oil hit $106/barrel on 23 March 2011.
While we see no significant action from the mayor's office to create a more fuel independent public or economy, Metro Council's Energy & Energy Committee canceled its meeting, again!
from Courier-Journal, 20 March 2011...
"Suburbs lead Kentucky growth in 2010 Census...Within Louisville's metropolitan area, bedroom communities such as Shelbyville in Shelby County and Shepherdsville in Bullitt County saw population increases of more than 30 percent. And Oldham County's Crestwood grew 127 percent, faster than any other city in Kentucky."
from Courier-Journal, 24 March 2011...
"Mayor Greg Fischer has named more than two dozen people to the recently created Food Policy Advisory Council, which will identify and propose innovative solutions and policies toward creating a healthy food system that will spur economic development."
“It’s important for local entrepreneurs, farmers, community food advocates, faith-based organizations, educators and others in the community to work together to create more opportunities for our citizens to access fresh, local food and encourage a robust, sustainable local food economy,” Fischer said.
Yet there is no action taken to curb the destruction of the local farms in Jefferson, Shelby, Bullitt, Oldham,...
Local food requires local farms.
Energy, transportation, land development and food are interrelated. Louisville's elected leadership is still not moving toward sustainability in any of these areas. Call your elected leaders.
EBlast #11 - Feb 28, 2011
This time high gas prices are the result of fear and uncertainty stemming from the demand for freedom by the people of a north African country, Libya, the fifteenth largest global producer of oil, oil that is not purchased by the U.S..
This time high gas prices are not the result of actual chaos in the Arab Gulf States, not the result of a 2008-style run away economy, not the result of peak oil, Chinese competition, hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico, climate instability fallout, military blunders in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, another mega-offshore oil spill, one of the ninety Alaskan earthquakes in a four day period last month, a court decision holding oil companies responsible for environmental damage, or the sabotage of Congo oil facilities.
The next time, high gas prices could be the result of any of the above, or some other unforeseen event or combination of events. The next time could be any time. The next time could signal the last of cheap fuel. This time could signal the end of cheap fuel.
Meanwhile, Louisville produces no energy. Louisville’s land use policies are energy intensive. Louisville’s economic anchors such as UPS and Ford are dependent on cheap energy. Louisville has a weak public transit system. Louisville is still obsessing over building more and wider interstate highways and bridges. Louisville streets and neighborhoods are not pedestrian and cyclist friendly. Louisville pays a half million dollars to have the Iron Quarters replaced with a surface parking lot. Louisville produces less than 1% of it’s food locally.
Meanwhile, Louisville’s economy and the wealth of Louisville’s people is being diminished by sending our local dollars out of the region to buy fuel (petroleum, ethanol, coal). Louisville’s business leadership, political leadership, civic leadership, educational leadership, faith leadership, etc. need to step up. Louisville needs transportation, land use and energy reformation, now.
EBlast #10 - Feb 11, 2011
Before Metro Louisville asks the The Brookings Institution to produce another study on Louisville, Greg Fischer should read and follow the advice of the Brookings Institution 2002 Louisville study. Excerpts from that study follow.
Beyond Merger: A Competitive Vision for the Regional City of
Louisville
From the Executive Summary:
“...rapid low-density development is occurring around the urban edge and beyond—a dynamic that will further erode the fiscal, economic, neighborhood and social strengths of the core....is beginning to grow in ways that will not help it retain and attract the highly educatedworkers it needs. The region, most notably, is decentralizing—”hollowing out” as the “hot zone” of new residential development shifts to the suburban subdivisions of eastern Jefferson County. This shift has seen modest population growth consume vast amounts of open land. And it has also exacerbated other counter-productive trends. An outward migration of employers is beginning to weaken the Regional City’s economic preeminence. A “thinning out” of population into smaller, farther-flung households may be increasing per capita housing demand and driving up the costs of service delivery. And finally, the spatial orientation of these movements has opened a rather stark social divide....This pattern leaves in its wake concentrations of poverty, social isolation, and disinvestment near the core of the region, and may be hastening the middle-class exodus that can destabilize neighborhoods, lengthen commutes, and worsen traffic. Together, these unbalanced growth trends could seriously erode the Regional City’s livability—and hence its economic competitiveness—in the coming decades....Still compact,
it can avoid the vast suburban “sprawl” that has “blown out” Raleigh-Durham and Atlanta. Still vital at the center, it need not “hollow out” in the catastrophic way that has hurt St. Louis and Baltimore.”
On Employment:
“...the widening dispersal of people around the region’s relatively compact job core could expand the area’s commuter shed and raise other challenges to transportation and land-use planning....Job dispersal may also weaken the old center city and create difficulties for central city jobseekers. Ultimately, the drift of jobs away from the urban core and into suburban areas means that the economic strength of Louisville’s core is dissipating.”
On Land Use and Development
“...the Louisville region is consuming a lot of land despite low population growth. In fact, by one measure—the extent of land consumption relative to population growth—the Louisville area has been dispersing outwards more severely than many major metro areas in the country, including competitor regions. Louisville’s land consumption outpaced its population growth over the 15 years by a factor of ten. This ratio of land consumption to population growth greatly exceeded those logged in the Indianapolis, Columbus, Charlotte, and Jacksonville metro areas, where land consumption occurred at a rate only double that of population growth. Population density in the Louisville region is dropping. Overall growth in the region is moving out across the landscape rather than congregating within existing communities.... Rapid, low-density development in the new City of Louisville may unravel the regional city’s strength as the region’s core....If left unaddressed, this pattern of growth will undermine the centrality of the new Regional City and undermine the new municipality just as it has weakened other American metropolitan areas. Low-density, poorly planned development puts strains on roads, sewers, schools and government finances. Most obviously, low-density suburbanization puts enormous pressure on the infrastructure of the places where it occurs. Decentralization is already requiring, for starters, that large swaths of the Regional City of Louisville and the outer counties (which were essentially rural before 1980) make significant investments in infrastructure—whether it be in new schools, new intersections or new sewer and water lines—simply to accommodate the movement of people outward. Study after study has demonstrated the strain such demands place on regions’ ability to maintain themselves. In fact, the Louisville and Jefferson County Metropolitan Sewer District “has spent more than $500 million in the past ten years addressing infrastructure deficiencies related to poor or misaligned planning and zoning policies.”6 Quite simply, the per capita costs of providing infrastructure and many services to sprawling communities exceed those for denser communities. Low-density decentralization also hurts the future Regional City’s competitiveness and quality of life. While growth is good, quality growth is better. Rapid, low-density expansion of the Regional City and ultimately the larger region, however, could undermine the area’s urban, rural, and natural assets. First, the “de-centering” of commercial and residential life could destabilize efforts to strengthen the Regional City’s downtown and older neighborhoods. Second, unplanned low-density development will hurt the Regional City’s ability to create healthy urban, suburban, and even rural communities to optimize residential choice for families. Third, the region’s development patterns are widening the region’s “commuter shed,” thereby lengthening the distance many Louisvillians must travel to work. Finally, the impact of unplanned development on the region’s natural assets threatens to erode the integrity of what is “uniquely Kentucky,” and so impact the region’s “quality of place,” which is increasingly important in attracting and keeping talented new workers and companies.”
On Transportation:
“The region has been building a lot of roads lately. The number of new lane miles in the Louisville urbanized area increased by 20.1 percent between 1990 and 2000, resulting in a 15.8 percent increase in roadway miles per capita. The region’s per capita road construction far outpaced that of key peer regions. Consequently, the number of miles being driven in the Louisville urbanized area far outpaced population growth in the 1990s. Population grew by 3.7 percent in the urbanized area between 1990 and 2000. However, the total vehicle miles driven(VMT) in the region increased 34.4 percent over the same period. This contributed to a 29.6 percent change in miles driven per capita in the Louisville urbanized area.
% Change in Lane Miles per Capita 1990–2000
Nashville -13.3%
Jacksonville -13.2%
Columbus -9.9%
Indianapolis 3.0%
Louisville 15.8%
Source:Texas Transportation Institute
The increase in VMTs translates to greater traffic congestion. The percentage of congested lane miles in the region remains moderate in absolute terms, but it increased from 36 to 55 percent between 1990 and 2000. During that same period, the number of “rush hours” (the time during the day when the roads are congested) nearly doubled, increasing from 3.8 hours per day to 7.0. As a result, the total costs due to congestion increased by 509 percent from 1990 to 2000 to over $335 million per year, which is among the highest total costs for any medium-sized metro area in the nation.Substandard road conditions and safety shortfalls also reveal stress. Recent data from the Federal Highway Administration shows that nearly half (45 percent) of the Louisville urbanized area’s major roadways are in poor or mediocre condition. That suggests that while new road construction continues rapidly, roads that have already been built are falling into disrepair. At the same time, roads in the Louisville area now rank among the most dangerous in the country. An analysis of National Highway Traffic Safety Administration data reveals that of the top 50 urbanized areas, only eight had a higher rate of traffic related fatalities per 100,000 residents than Louisville. This includes automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian deaths....The region’s aggressive road-building strategy may not necessarily improve mobility. Granted, the Louisville transportation system remains less snarled than troubled systems in cities such as Atlanta. But rising congestion and increasing VMT combined with deteriorating road conditions are clearly making it harder for Louisvillians to get around. Meanwhile, transit remains a limited option for most residents thanks to the region’s intense focus on freeways and arterials. Taken together, these trends pose a serious threat to the region’s quality of life. Current transportation patterns could also exacerbate growth and environmental imbalances across the region. Aggressive road building—coupled with proposed large-scale transportation corridor projects—can redistribute business and residential development. Recent evidence suggests that new highways and interchanges become conduits for decentralization. In this fashion, proposed transportation improvements in eastern Jefferson County could weaken older sections of the new Regional City, further isolating the western corridor.14 Pollution tied in part to motor vehicle exhaust emissions, at the same time, continues to complicate economic development planning. From 1998 to 2000, the counties with the worst ozone air pollution in the states of Indiana and Kentucky were both in the Louisville metropolitan area. Clark County, Indiana and Oldham County, Kentucky each offer the most unhealthy air in their respective states. Oldham recently replaced Jefferson County as the worst in Kentucky. And these ratings have impacts beyond their undesirable health effects, including the possible loss of federal transportation funds.”
EBlast #9 - Feb 07, 2011
Has Louisville's obsession with the Ohio River Bridges Project buried this important initiative?
Riding the rail: Transit plan unveiled
The State Journal, Frankfort KY
13 January 2011
By Paul Glasser
If Ralph Tharp, Frankfort’s new industrial recruiter, had his wish, commuters in Louisville, Lexington and locally could be traveling to work next year in double-decker trains with leather seats and Wi-Fi access. He is championing a rapid transit commuter rail system with 11 stations in Lexington, Louisville, Shelbyville, Midway and Frankfort. Tharp, executive director of the Kentucky Capital Development Corporation, estimates the project could cost as little as $75 million and be completed by October 2012.
Tharp has been on the job since October and said the proposed rail system would help make Kentucky and Frankfort more attractive to employers and investors. The plan calls for two trains with four cars to travel from Louisville and Lexington three times a day, seven days a week. It’s called “the Thoroughbred Rail Link,” and the trains would be named Secretariat and Northern Dancer. The diesel-powered commuter trains would travel the existing rail lines from CSX and RJ Corman at speeds up to 80 or 90 miles per hour, Tharp said. The tracks can’t accommodate high-speed trains like those in Europe that reach up to 180 miles per hour, Tharp said.
He has experience with planning and designing rail systems in St. Louis, Las Vegas, Chicago and Baghdad, Iraq. Normally, a project would cost between $500 million to $1 billion, but much of the equipment and infrastructure is already in place, Tharp said. It would cost about $35 million to buy the two trains and eight passenger cars and about $40 million to improve the existing railroads and build stations, Tharp said.
A commuter rail system in central Kentucky has long been a pipe dream for regional leaders but Tharp said he’s 98 percent confident his plans will come to fruition. Using existing rails will not require any land purchases or environmental impact statements, he said. There won’t be any “not in my back yard” obstacles, Tharp said.
Other amenities would include a café onboard each train selling coffee and newspapers in the morning and cocktails in the evening.
“People could sit on the train, use their laptop, drink some coffee or read the paper all in the time they would normally be driving,” Tharp said. Average travel time would be comparable to driving to Frankfort – about 30 minutes from Lexington and 50 minutes from Louisville, Tharp said.
There’s no hard figure on how much a one-way ticket would cost but Tharp offered a ballpark estimate of $5 to $6 from Lexington to Frankfort. Purchasing a monthly pass could cut that figure in half – less than the cost of commuting by car, Tharp said. “We would work to keep it very reasonable,” he said.
A small station would be built in downtown Frankfort between the tunnel on High Street and the farmers market at Wilkinson Boulevard, Tharp said. It would include a ticket office, security area, waiting lobby and two restrooms. Other proposed stops would include Keeneland and Rupp Arena in Lexington and the St. Matthews Mall in Louisville. A train would leave Winchester at 7 a.m. every day and travel west while another train would depart Louisville International Airport and travel east. The same pattern would be repeated at noon and 6 p.m., Tharp predicted. The schedule could be adjusted for weekends, he said.
Each train car could hold up to 150 passengers – 75 on each level. Total capacity could be increased from about 600 to 900 passengers by adding two more cars. If demand increases beyond 900 on each train Tharp said additional trains could be added.
Tharp said he will begin holding public meetings to discuss the project in March. He hopes to apply for federal funding in nine months and to complete construction by October 2012. It’s important to move quickly because there is only a two-year window of opportunity, Tharp said. President Barack Obama has offered up to $9 billion in federal funds for railroad projects and it’s unclear what will happen to that money after 2012, Tharp said. “I’m calling it an opportunity surge and to get this done as quickly as possible,” he said. Federal grants usually require a 20 percent match for state and local government but Tharp said he hopes Kentucky could receive credit for the existing rails and land. He said Kentucky could only be required to contribute $7.5 million. Despite slow economic recovery and tight government budgets, Tharp said the project is a good investment. “It’s probably the biggest bargain we will ever have in the commuter rail system anywhere in the world today,” he said. A commuter rail system would also help reduce Kentucky’s carbon footprint and cut congestion on Interstate 64, Tharp said.
A study will also be completed to determine the exact location of stations and what improvements need to be made, Tharp said. The project got unanimous support from political and business leaders in Lexington, Louisville and Winchester, he said.
It would cost about $8 million to $9 million to operate the rail system and revenue would be generated through tickets, advertising and fees from vendors.
EBlast #8 - Jan 26, 2011
In November of 2010 we began compiling a list of initiatives Louisville should adopt. The first initiative in the Solid Waste category was“Elevate a clean, litter free ethos”.
Lexington is acting on this ethos....
Task Force to Fight Cigarette Litter in Lexington
Brenna Angel (2011-01-20)
LEXINGTON, KY. (WUKY) - Members of the recently formed Keep Lexington Beautiful Commission want to tackle cigarette butts in the group's first major project. The commission detailed plans to form a cigarette litter task force at a meeting Thursday. Commission chair Patricia Knight wants to see a group of 15-20 people appointed by the end of the month.
"The goals of the task force will be to reduce the amount of cigarette litter on the streets currently as well as keep it off in the future. As part of our initiatives we'll be distributing pocket ash trays and informational literature." The Keep Lexington Beautiful Commission was established by last fall through a city ordinance. Knight says tackling cigarette butts on the ground is a priority.
"Cigarette litter goes into the streets and then when it rains those cigarette butts go into the water system and eventually make themselves out into the streams. They cause a lot of problems along the way that are very expensive problems for us to clean up."
Once the task force is organized, members will identify target areas around Lexington. Mark York, who represents Lexington's Division of Environmental Policy, says the program's message will be positive. "We understand smoking is a choice. We're not trying to get people to stop smoking. The message is if you are a smoker, we'd like for you to dispose of your waste material in an environmentally responsible manner so it doesn't end up on the ground and gets washed into a storm drain and into a creek or stream."
York says target areas for the cigarette litter project will likely include hospitals and large businesses or campuses.
EBlast #7 - Jan 24, 2011
It is time for Louisville to build a world class public transit system.
Revamped Ohio River bridges plan could face new review
By Marcus Green • January 18, 2011
A plan to trim $500 million from the Ohio River Bridges Project could trigger a broad federal review and revive alternatives to the two-bridge effort that previously were dismissed, environmental law experts say. Because “there's a significant set of proposed changes to the project,” and the studies that serve as the basis for the project's approval are nearly a decade old, federal law will “almost certainly” require an additional review, said Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, a Chicago advocacy group....Learner said the additional review, called a supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, or EIS, …would “fully consider the alternatives,” he said....The project's earlier study was released in 2003. It weighed and dismissed a number of alternatives, including building only one bridge, building no bridges and adding mass (public) transit improvements....The prospect of additional studies has also breathed new life into project critics, who have long argued for different approaches, including expanded public transit.It also raises questions about how quickly new environmental work can be finished....”Whatever the state is saying is of less importance than what ultimately the feds say about all of this,” said Pat Parenteau, environmental law professor at Vermont Law School....Earlier projections about traffic would likely need to be considered in light of changes in gas prices, for example, said Tom Buchele, managing attorney and professor at the Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center at Lewis and Clark Law School in Portland, Ore. “Certainly assumptions about increases in traffic and things like that would be difficult to say that those aren't completely stale in light of the things that have changed,” Buchele said. When the previous environmental study for the bridges project was complete, gasoline prices averaged about $1.50 a gallon nationwide, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Those prices now average more than $3. “We've always had a position that the transit alternatives were given short shrift anyway in the analysis. This is an opportunity for that not to happen,” said Ron Schneider, board president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Regional Transportation.
EBlast #6 - Jan 14th, 2011
Maryland county passes carbon tax. Only greenhouse gas emitter impacted is Mirant Corporation, owner of coal plant. Mirant promises to sue. Bill will help finance residential energy efficiency projects. Stay tuned.ery County MD Passes Carbon Tax
Its official: today, the Montgomery County Council passed a carbon tax bill- the first of its kind in the United States! The bill, proposed by County Councilman Roger Berliner, taxes stationary emitters in Montgomery County that release more than one million tons of co2 into the atmosphere annually. Currently, there is only one such emitter- a coal plant owned by Mirant Corporation. At a hearing yesterday, Mirant Corporation officials spoke against the legislation claiming it would only lead to rate hikes for consumers. However, Councilman Berliner said the $5/ton tax would not have an impact on ratepayers for numerous reasons. This amount is marginal compared to the profits Mirant makes from the facility. The tax revenues will go to funding clean energy and other programs that are facing funding cuts during tough budgetary conditions.
EBlast #5 - Jan 07, 2011
Ft Knox and ORBP
"The new Human Resource Center in Fort Knox...built bicycle racks at every entrance to the buildings in the HRC complex."
Not surprising. The Pentagon is anticipating fuel shortages in 2014.
Is Louisville placing bicycle racks at every entrance to city facilities?
Is Louisville building the public transit system?
The Courier-Journal reported on the Ohio River Bridges Project (ORBP) Authority action of 6 January 2011....
`The revised plans announced this week will require an environmental “re-evaluation,” but the federal government must determine how thorough that will be, said Gary Valentine, Kentucky’s project manager. All of the alternatives included in the project’s initial round of studies will be revisited, he said.'
The Coalition for the Advancement of Regional Transportation (CART) was successful in getting a public transit alternative in the initial round of studies. (Unfortunately the public transit study conducted by the ORBP consultants was designed to fail.) Will the new round of studies include another public transit alternative? (This time designed to succeed?)
EBlast #4 - Jan 06, 2011
The Louisville Downtown Development Corporation established twelve catalyst projects LDDC plans on accomplishing in 2011.
Not one word about Public Transit !?!?!?
1. Expand Downtown into an urban retail marketplace, particularly South Fourth Street
2. Development of a Bourbon Experience as trailhead to the Bourbon Trail
3. Implement a comprehensive development plan for U of L's Nucleus Life Science Urban
Research Park, the VA, and NuLu.
4. Develop more market rate, affordable housing units for young professionals and
empty nesters
5. Support the development of Museum Plaza and Center City
6. Continue to develop the Arena District, especially the 100 Block of West Main Street
7. Make it easier for businesses to invest in Downtown by helping to streamline
regulations
8. Engage colleges and universities in Downtown development partnerships to expand
learning and increase economic development
9. Create more opportunities for local incubation of small businesses in Downtown
10. Complete funding for the Bridges Project
11. Begin work on the new 10 year development/vision plan for Downtown to be
completed in 2012
12. Implement the new Commercial Loan Program to assist smaller, infill development
along with the Downtown Housing Fund.
EBlast #3 - Jan 04, 2011
Indianapolis has public transit, but not Louisville
On the back of the Metro page in the Courier-Journal, 24 Dec 2010
“Indy leaders unite on mass (sic - should be public) transit...Coalition pledges to ‘take next steps’...elected officials, business leaders, Mayor, Senator, Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce, US Rep,...$2.4 billion...private business sector is taking the lead...”
Where are our business leaders? Our elected officials?
We are loosing ground.
We are becoming less competitive.
We are becoming less sustainable as a community.
Time for a course correction.
One of the responsibilities of the Office of Sustainability should be to put together the Louisville coalition for public transit.
EBlast #2 - Dec 04, 2010
A third greenfield development is being planned beyond the limits of TARC
1 - Tyler Town Center - 123 acres I-265, Taylorsville Rd, Tucker Station Rd, Rehl Rd, east of Blackacre Nature Preserve
2 - Habitat for Humanity - 20 acres north of Westport Rd at Oldham County line
3 - Now, Tyler Town Center - 165 acres
This summer the Land Development and Transportation (LD&T) Committee of the Planning Commission passed the Tyler Town Center development project on to Metro Council for approval. Metro Council approved the 123 acres project beyond the limit of TARC service.
Now developer Hollenbach-Oakley with attorney Bill Bardenwerper (Fischer Transition Team member) representing them wishes to develop another 165 acres. This parcel was designated ‘Neighborhood’ in Cornerstone 2020 but now developers wish to change the 165 acres to industrial Suburban Workplace allowing, among other projects, the construction of 470 apartments (beyond the limit of TARC service).
Please communicate to Louisville government that:
1 - development beyond the current limit of TARC service is unacceptable
2 - greenfield development hurts existing neighborhoods.
Send comments to:
1 - your Metro Council Member http://www.louisvilleky.gov/metrocouncil/
2 - Brandon Coan, Special Assistant to Mayor Fischer - brandon@gregfischer.com
3 - Michael.Hill@louisvilleky.gov. For Michael’s use, the subject is Case 11642 Blakenbaker Station IV or Case 11642 BS IV.
There is a Public Hearing December 9, 2010 at 6PM at St. Michael Catholic Church, 3705 Stone Lakes Drive. Do what you can to attend and please, spread the word.
EBlast #1 - Nov 15, 2010
News of Louisville Council’s consideration of transferring $2 million to help development of 20 wooded acres raises many questions.
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20101112/NEWS01/311130012/City-may-direct-2-million-to-support-Habitat-project
Why build in 20 wooded acres?
Why not build in brownfields instead?
Does the Louisville and Jefferson County Landbank Authority, Inc. have properties we could exchange with Habitat for the 20 wooded acres?
Can the 20 wooded acres be placed in a conservation program?
Why use the $2 million “to develop roads, sewers and other utilities for the first phase”?
Do we have lots in Jefferson County already on roads and serviced by MSD and other utilities that Habitat can use?
Does Jefferson County have neighborhoods with decaying housing stock, roads, sewers and other utilities who could profit more from $2 million and Habitat’s influence?
Is this site in Jefferson or Oldham County? Google Map: Lake Louisvilla Drive, Louisville, KY
Why build one mile beyond the limit of TARC service?
http://www.ridetarc.org/systemmap/tarc-map0710.pdf
Why build Habitat for Humanity homes one mile beyond the limit of TARC service?
Why build at all along a TARC line that is only serviced hourly on weekdays?
http://www.ridetarc.org/RouteTable.asp?line=55
Why build at all along a TARC line that is only serviced every hour and a half on Saturdays?
http://www.ridetarc.org/RouteTable.asp?line=55SA
Why build at all along a TARC line that is not serviced at all on Sundays?
http://www.ridetarc.org/SearchByRoute.asp
What is the participation of private developers as cited by the Courier-Journal?
Are the private developers using Habitat for Humanity to “sell their their project?
These questions and others need answered before moving forward with this proposal.
Go Green Campaign News
|
Video
Video
Audio
Video
Video
