Upload
others
View
5
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
NORTHERN BELTLINE FACTS The proposed Northern Beltline north and west of Birmingham has raised serious questions from local communities, taxpayers,
and conservation groups about whether this project is best for greater Birmingham, from an environmental, economic, and
transportation perspective. The 52-mile, 6-lane highway will cost taxpayers $5.342 Billion, or $102.7 Million per mile.1 It will be
the most expensive road project in the history of Alabama, and one of the most expensive (per mile) ever built in the nation.
The road will cross and permanently alter Black Warrior and Cahaba river tributaries in 90 places and wetlands in 35 places
(including impacts to 2 major sources of drinking water). It will destroy 3,078 football fields’ worth of forest. This route is the
most ecologically destructive of the 7 routes initially considered by the Alabama Department of Transportation.2 (See Map #1)
If completed, the road would only relieve 1-3% of traffic on I-20/59 through downtown Birmingham, and it will not reroute
significant truck traffic. In fact, traffic will increase on the heavily-congested section of I-59 through Trussville and Argo.3
Construction of the Northern Beltline has been ranked 36th
in priority by the Regional Planning Commission,4 yet it is being
prioritized by ALDOT and the Birmingham Business Alliance over much-needed fixes for current traffic, safety, and maintenance
problems.
As a result of the 2012 federal transportation bill known as MAP-21, potential future funding considered for this road can now be
spent on other road and bridge projects around Birmingham, and throughout the state, that are critically needed. Map #2 shows a
sample of unfunded projects in metro Birmingham that could all be completed for over $1 billion less than the cost of the
Northern Beltline. These 63 projects include widening I-65, improving Hwy. 280, widening I-59/20, and completing all 50 of the
Regional Planning Commission’s visionary projects in the region. All of these other projects will generate jobs and long-term
economic health, and they now compete directly with the Beltline for limited federal funding.5
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the federal Highway Trust Fund, which provides money for most major
transportation projects throughout Alabama, is “unsustainable.” “Starting in fiscal year 2015, the trust fund will have insufficient
amounts to meet all of its obligations, resulting in steadily accumulating shortfalls.”6 Even without pursuing the $5.342 billion
Beltline, ALDOT already currently has a backlog of traffic, safety, and maintenance projects. The Beltline will make it harder to
meet these ongoing needs.
Public mass transit infrastructure can be funded with future would-be Beltline dollars according to the new federal transportation
bill. Pursuing this missing transportation link in the greater Birmingham area may be a better investment for the region.
To improve regional connectivity for Jefferson County and create jobs, ALDOT should consider more functional alternatives like
extending Corridor X beyond I-65 and Hwy. 31 to I-59, instead of sinking well over $5 billion into the Beltline.
Any development that occurs along the Beltline route will likely not be “new” growth, but rather a redistribution of growth,
capital, and jobs from older developed areas, producing empty homes, storefronts, and blight as has already occurred in parts of
the Birmingham region. Even ALDOT has predicted that the road, if completed over three decades from now, will only attract
2,200 residents and 2,800 permanent jobs in the vicinity of the 52-mile corridor.7
A small handful of corporate landowners in the path of the road stand to gain financially. They, along with road building, mining,
development, and utility interests, are driving the support for this $5.342 billion project along this chosen route, which has little
transportation benefit for the region. (See Map #3 produced by The Birmingham News).
The large price tag of the road does not take into account the significant extra cost of sewer and other infrastructure that must be
installed for the area to be developed. (See Map #4 – Jefferson County’s Sewer Infrastructure). The major costs of extending
water lines, power lines, local roads, public safety services, and schools have yet to be factored into the Beltline’s overall price.
1 FHWA, https://fhwaapps.fhwa.dot.gov/foisp/publicActive.do (as of December 4, 2015).
2 FHWA, ALDOT, Final Environmental Impact Statement (June 26, 1997). 3 Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham. Public Involvement Meeting Documentation for 2035 RTP. April 2010, p. 4-17.
http://www.rpcgb.org/download/mpo/RPCGB-MPO-Public-Involvement-Meeting-Documentation.pdf; Birmingham Northern Beltline Termini
Analysis, September 1993, p. 3. 4 Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham, Birmingham 2035 Regional Transportation Plan, April 2010, Appendix 5D.
http://www.rpcgb.org/download/mpo/RPCGB-MPO-RTP-Appendix-5D-Project-Prioritization.pdf. 5 Spencer, Thomas, Transportation Bill Eliminates Designated Source of Funding for Northern Beltline but Keeps it on Track.
http://blog.al.com/sweethome/2012/07/transportation_bill_eliminates.html; U.S. Congressional Research Service, Surface Transportation Funding
and Programs Under MAP-21: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (P.B. 112-141) (R42762; Sept. 27, 2012), by Robert S. Kirk, et. al.
p.10 http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42762.pdf; See also 40 USCS § 14501; 23 USCS § 133. 6 Congressional Budget Office, Status of the Record; Status of the Highway Trust Fund, April 24, 2013, p. 1.
http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/44093-HighwayTrustFund.pdf. 7 ALDOT, FHWA, Final Environmental Impact Statement Reevaluation, March 2012, Appendix L.
Fivem ile Creek
Mu
lbe
rry Fo
rk
LO
CU
ST
FO
RK
BankheadLake
Turkey Creek
Val ley Creek
Vi l lage Creek
CA
H
AB
A
R
IV
ER
Jefferson Co.
Shelby Co.
St Clair Co.
Walker Co.
Blount Co.
Tuscaloosa Co.
Lick Creek
Val ley Creek
Cunningham Creek
Short Creek
Li t t le B lue Creek
Newfound Creek
Sel f Creek
Lost Creek
Prudes Creek
Turkey Creek
Crooked Creek
Mulga Creek
Rock Creek
Flat Creek
Fivem ile Creek
Cane Creek
Vi l lage Creek
Dry Creek
³±W01
³±W04
³±W05
³±W06
³±W07
³±W08
³±W09
³±W10
³±W11
³±W12
³±W13
³±W14
³±W15
³±W18
³±W19
³±W20
³±W21
³±W22
³±W23
³±W25
³±W26
³±W27
³±W29
³±W30
³±W33
³±W34
³±W35³±W36
³±W38
³±W40
³±W42
³±W43
³±W45
³±W24
³±W41
!(S01
!(S02
!(S03
!(S04
!(S05
!(S06
!(S07
!(S08
!(S09
!(S10
!(S11
!(S12
!(S13
!(S14
!(S15
!(S16!(S17
!(S18
!(S19
!(S20
!(S21
!(S22
!(S23
!(S24
!(S25 !(S26
!(S27
!(S28
!(S29
!(S30
!(S31
!(S33
!(S34
!(S35
!(S36
!(S37
!(S38
!(S40
!(S41!(S42 !(S44!(S47
!(S48
!(S49
!(S50
!(S51
!(S53
!(S54
!(S55
!(S56
!(S57
!(S58
!(S59
!(S60
!(S61
!(S62
!(S63
!(S64
!(S65
!(S67
!(S68
!(S69
!(S70!(S71
!(S72
!(S73
!(S74
!(S76
!(S77
!(S78
!(S79
!(S80
!(S81
!(S82!(S84
!(S85
!(S86
!(S87
!(S88
!(S89!(S90 !(S91
!(S92!(S93
!(S94
!(S95
!(S96
!(S97
!(S46!(S41
0 5 102.5 Miles
U
Legend
!( Stream Impact
") Wetland/Pond Impact
Stream Name
300ft Corridor Analyzed
Highlighted Route
River
Lake/Reservoir/Pond
B I R M I N G H A M(U R B A N I Z E D A R E A )
§̈¦20
§̈¦59
§̈¦65
§̈¦65
£¤78
£¤31
Æÿ79
Æÿ75 £¤11
£¤31
£¤280
§̈¦459Æÿ119
Æÿ269
Disclaimer:All mapped intersecrtions fall within a 300ft. route corridorIntersected aquatic areas are represented with pointsand have been moved slightly to avoid label overlap.
GIS Data Soucres: Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham; US Census Bureau; National Wetlands Inventory (USFWS);National Hydrography Dataset (USGS); Tele Atlas
Last updated: December 11, 2013 | Created by: Jovian Sackett
Æÿ5§̈¦22
Eastern Terminus
Western Terminus
Aquatic Environmental ImpactsNorthern Beltline - Proposed Route
§̈¦20§̈¦59
£¤78
Vance
Jasper
BrooksideCardiffWest
Jefferson
Dora
Sipsey
MountOlive
CordovaSumiton
Colony
Cleveland
Nectar
Pinson
Allgood
CountyLine
Hayden
LocustFork
Kimberly
Morris
Trafford
SmokeRise
Chalkville
Clay
Fultondale
Gardendale Grayson
ValleyTrussville
Warrior
WestBlocton
Wilton
Brent
Centreville
NorthBibb
Helena
Montevallo
LakeView
Maytown
Mulga
NorthJohns
Sylvan
Springs
Adamsville
Brighton
Concord
Edgewater
Fairfield
Lipscomb
McDonaldChapel
Midfield
Minor
PleasantGrove
RockCreek
Hoover
BirminghamCahabaHeights
Irondale
Leeds
Tarrant
Chelsea
IndianSpringsVillage
LakePurdy
Meadowbrook
Pelham
Jemison
Calera
Columbiana
Thorsby
Clanton
Harpersville
Vincent
Wilsonville
Bon Air
GanttsQuarry
OakGrove
Talladega
Springs
Moody
PellCity
Childersburg
Mignon
Sylacauga
Argo
Highland
Lake
Rosa
Ashville
Branchville
Margaret
Odenville
Springville
Oneonta
Tuscaloosa
CenterPoint
Bessemer
Forestdale
Hueytown
Birmingham
MountainBrook
VestaviaHills
Hoover
Alabaster
539
409
629
766
162
139
405
412
414390
418
416
406 420
84
658
660659
78
411
428
436
657
1155
429
537
363
351
6
398
386
361
756
631
132
33
114
67
401
385
399
630
403
383
404
535
1150
271
388
424
387
7
644
9
430431
662645
Sampling of Birmingham-area TransportationProjects Now Competing with the $5.342 Billion
Northern Beltline for Limited Federal Funding
Northern Beltline (proposed route)
Transportation project competing with the Northern Beltline for funds
B I R M I N G H A M
§̈¦20
§̈¦20
§̈¦59
§̈¦459
§̈¦65
§̈¦65
£¤78
£¤31
UV79
UV75
£¤11
£¤31
£¤280§̈¦459
£¤78
UV119
UV269
ALABAMA
Mapped Area
Map created by Jovian Sackett. Updated by Shannon Groff. Last updated: December 09, 2015Data Sources: Regional Planning Commission of Greater Birmingham; USGS; Tele Atlas; & US Census Bureau
UV5
§̈¦22
labeled by MAPID from 2040 Regional Transportation Plan
UV47
UV45
£¤31
0 5 102.5
Miles
"U
1152
434
1153
362
410
§̈¦59
413
183
349
NEWS STAFF/JEFF HANSEN, THOMAS SPENCER AND JODY POTTER
PROPERTY OWNED BY:
LARGE LANDOWNERS ALONG THE BELTLINE
U.S. STEELWhile still a steelmaker, much of the company’s recent activity here has been residential and commercial development. Examples include Trace Crossings, Ross Bridge and The Preserve in Hoover and Grand River in Leeds.
DRUMMOND CO.With one active mine left in Jefferson County, Drummond is also in the real estate business, at Liberty Park on I-459. Bruce Windom, the company's vice president for government affairs, said the company supports the beltline project for the improvements it would make to the road network. He said Drummond doesn't have any immediate plans for land it owns near the beltline.
ALAWESTGene Taylor, the chairman of Alawest and owner of Warrior Tractor and Equipment Co. in Northport, said Alawest land is being managed for timber and the company has a small coal mining operation.
WALTER ENERGYWalter, which is moving its headquar-ters to Birmingham, holds current and former mining land in the county and supports the beltline.
QUAIL RIDGE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANYThe nearly 6,000 acres near Garden-dale owned by the McDonald family was offered for sale to Forever Wild for a nature preserve. Forever Wild declined. A family representative said there are no particular plans for the forested acres.
OAK GROVE DEVELOPMENT COMPANYA subsidiary of Cliffs Natural Resources Inc., Oak Grove mines high-grade coal that is used in the steel-making process.
DUPONTThe international chemical and materials company.
WALKER FAMILY HOLDINGS Land amassed by the Walker family of northeast Jefferson County. Used for recreation and timber. Family members said they have no development plans.
TUTWILERTracts owned by members of the Tutwiler family, which historically was involved in mining and industry.
Source: Jefferson County Board of Equalization
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Northern beltline
65
59
20
2059
459
Corridor X
Planned interchanges
Under construction
The planned Northern Beltline would open former mine lands, much of it now in timber, to development.
Clay
Trussville