PTC sues GRTA over 4-lane TDK ruling

Tue, 02/13/2007 - 5:04pm
By: John Munford

The Peachtree City Council has decided to take the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority head-on.

Friday the city filed a lawsuit in Fulton County Superior Court challenging GRTA’s power to require the city to make transportation improvements on the TDK Boulevard Extension that are tied to the McIntosh Village project in the neighboring county.

The city argues in the suit that it shouldn’t be forced to pay for the improvements because McIntosh Village is located entirely in unincorporated Coweta County and thus Peachtree City has no control over the development. The city is asking the court to set aside GRTA’s notice of decision or issue a restraining order that would keep GRTA from enforcing the notice of decision.

In the alternative, the city wants the court to order GRTA to amend the notice of decision by removing the transportation requirements GRTA wants to happen in Peachtree City.

One of GRTA’s requirements is for Peachtree City to design the bridge over Line Creek to be four lanes wide. The city has resisted doing so, as it only has right-of-way for two lanes on the road path from the creek to the current terminus of TDK Boulevard. The current bridge design is to accommodate just two lanes of traffic; a redesign will cost the city more money and so far the City Council has not authorized spending any more funds on the design.

Under Georgia law, GRTA is allowed to withhold state and federal transportation funds for future projects in Peachtree City if the city doesn’t comply with its requirements.

City officials worry that GRTA might apply that power to Peachtree City if it resists making the TDK Extension bridge four lanes. GRTA also wants the city to install a traffic signal at the intersection of TDK Boulevard and Dividend Drive when there’s enough traffic to require it.

GRTA officials have said the agency has not yet withheld transportation funds from any jurisdiction under similar scenarios. In the suit, City Attorney Ted Meeker argues that the law outlining GRTA’s authority and powers does not allow the agency to impose conditions on Peachtree City when the project is located outside the city’s jurisdiction.

The suit also argues that GRTA is usurping the city’s powers to construct and maintain streets, roads and other transportation fixtures. The case was filed in Fulton County because that’s where GRTA’s headquarters is located.

The city appealed GRTA’s initial ruling but the requirements were upheld by the GRTA board.

The city is responsible for design and right-of-way acquisition while Fayette County will construct the road to Line Creek. Coweta County is responsible for all construction on its side of the road.

There are also concerns that if the TDK Extension were four-laned, it would allow Ga. Highway 74 South to be clogged with drive-time traffic as that would be the main route to and from Interstate 85 for residents in the proposed 3,000-home McIntosh Village.

Meanwhile, the clock is ticking as the city must complete the road project by October 2009 or the city will lose its right of way for the TDK Extension, which would revert back to possession of Pathway Communities unless Pathway officials agree to an extension.

Another problem with making TDK four lanes all the way to Hwy. 74 is that the current bridge over the CSX railroad would have to be replaced, county officials have said. The county has not identified any funding for such a project.

In the suit the city notes that items required by GRTA for the McIntosh Village project were not in the overall transportation plan for Fayette County, thus they are considered “new projects.”

Also named in the suit are Coweta County and McIntosh Partners LLC, the developer that has proposed the 3,000-home McIntosh Village project in Coweta County that would be located off the TDK Extension just across the county line in unincorporated Coweta County.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Spear Road Guy's picture
Submitted by Spear Road Guy on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 8:35pm.

How much more screwed up can this issue get? Somebody, anybody, please go read Mayor Logsdon's letter about TDK and tell us why we should build the road.

The mayor can't justify TDK, period.

Vote Republican


Submitted by PTCGA1 on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 10:08pm.

Mudcat is very anxious, because he and his developer friends have been outed once again. The problem with these cats - - they just can't stay in the closet very long. Mudcat, there is no conspiracy theory about TDK - - this thing is freakin' out in the daylight for all to see. The Mayor went ALL OUT to dedicate the R-O-W QUICKLY and practically in SECRET (24 hours public notice? practically on Christmas Eve). He wants TDK, and he WANTS IT BAD!! Ditto Boone and Rutherford? Why? You tell me? Maybe they just think it is really cool to have tens of thousands of cars from Coweta driving here..or maybe there is some other reason...hmmmm. Inquiring minds want to know. Oh yeah, to help out the 93 people that drive from Coweta to work in PTC at a few local plants - -that's it!!

Submitted by new2ptc on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 5:42pm.

Would you go to a surgeon who has a history of failures and only one success? I don’t think so. The City Council under Mayor Logsdon has a proven record of failures with the citizens of PTC on the TDK issue and I believe a little paranoia is justified.

The slight of hand excuse “Two lanes or none,” is one very good reason to be suspicious of the Mayor’s intentions. Just in case you have not had the opportunity to read or hear the resident’s opinion on TDK let me see if I can spell it out for you “N-O T-D-K.”

I have said in the past that if the Mayor and Council take no action to stop this madness then they are demonstrating their support of the project with passive acceptance. Citizens of Peachtree City deserve better than to have the people elected to serve their best interest serve the interest of others.

mudcat's picture
Submitted by mudcat on Tue, 02/13/2007 - 8:04pm.

The "Developer has the politician in his pocket" charges seem less likely now that the city has taken this action and done the right thing ----- and aggressively, I might add.

Good for you, Harold and others. GRTA is overbearing and obnoxious and even though our very own Joel Cowan was the founder or first chair of GRTA (pssst -- he's a Democrat, by the way) I think they overstep their bounds and I am glad PTC is fighting them.

Maybe what we should do here is get behind the lawsuit, support it and do our best to keep the road at 2 lanes. Killing it is totally unrealistic, so let's support the effort to limit it to 2 lanes.

meow


Submitted by PTCGA1 on Tue, 02/13/2007 - 11:20pm.

Let me explain the lawsuit to my fellow citizens who may be fooled by this ruse. Harold and his friends want TDK to happen, but they have run into a buzz saw of opposition, so they are going to plan B. Plan A would be a nice modern 4 lane highway, but that can't happen at this time. So they are PRETENDING to stand up for the city with this stupid lawsuit. If we "win," Harold and his friends build their 2 lane road (WITH A 4-LANE BRIDGE). This should handle the City of Mcintosh traffic for a few years. When things get REALLY bad, a future Council will go ahead and 4-lane the road. The future Council doesn't even need to be in the pocket of the developers, because by that time many citizens will be begging for relief from the 2-lane nightmare. So the Coweta landowners win either way!!

IF we lose the lawsuit, Harold and his buddies can feign how really upset they are, but gee whiz, I guess we have to go and ahead and build a 4-lane highway...or at least the bridge, and start the additional right-of-way acquisition.

I have a much better idea. We citizens band together and stop TDK altogether and vacate the right-of-way. There will be no bridge, because there will be no right-of-way. This will happen after the upcoming election. We will have wasted design engineering money, but that will be a small price to pay to save this city. No 2-lane road, no 4-lane road. Let Coweta County develop as the citizens over there desire, but not at the expense of PTC.

Submitted by ptcjenn on Thu, 02/15/2007 - 8:11am.

Certainly not commuting PTC residents, the more of a bottleneck that road becomes, the shorter our commute will be in comparison to theirs. The only residents that would be affected much by the narrowness of TDK would be the citizens of that new development. They would have to wait forever to get out in the am, back in the afternoon. We'd have more traffic on the Parkway as those who used to go down 74 to get home took that instead, but other than that I don't see how it would be our problem. Our problem would occur during the day, when people used TDK/Crosstown/Ebenezer to get across the county (throwing trash out the window and endangering kids leaving Oak Grove while they did).

I really agree that we need to stop that road altogether. Let the developer figure out how to cram all those houses in there. Let the developer take the heat for selling houses in an area that has no good access to the interstate, or let Coweta figure out how to get their citizens to the highway through their own county. We don't need that road, anyone that desperate to shop in the new retail over there can wait in traffic or shop on the internet. Or stay here instead, maybe buy stuff locally and keep all the stores from looking like the sad and empty Crosstown shopping center.

Submitted by tikigod on Thu, 02/15/2007 - 1:40pm.

i cant see how you could argue with ptcjenn. If TDK is built, this will undoubtedly be one of those things you look back on and say "what the hell were they thinking!?"

Submitted by PTCGA1 on Thu, 02/15/2007 - 9:55am.

Twenty-five years ago, a bridge might have made sense. Given the development mania about to explode in eastern Coweta, this would be catastrophe for PTC to build this bridge now. BTW, the few people I have met that support the TDK bridge are some local business owners...they think the increased traffic counts will be good for their businesses. Let me warn them - -you might get what you pray for. What if some regional or large scale businesses (large vet clinic, jeweler wholesaler, etc.) comes to the new City of McIntosh one million square ft swanky retail complex, and TAKES many of your PTC customers?!! You may end up losing more than you gain. Then what?

Submitted by truth monger on Thu, 02/15/2007 - 12:11pm.

that the TDK should be stopped at once. Can you imagine living in one of those communities that backs up to that road? Did the city offer them some kind of compensation? I hope so. Those people will never be able to sell their houses now. Who would buy there? If they were not offered some kind of compensation for what is going on there they should get a really good lawyer and sue PTC! Often, peoples' biggest investment is their home. What kind of gains are they going to make on that proprty now?

borntorun's picture
Submitted by borntorun on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 8:10am.

Wow, are you really that cynical or just off the meds? Seems to me that no matter what Mayor/City Council propose, they can't win with the conspiracy theorists floating around here in blogland.

Don't do anything, "in the developers back pocket"....file a lawsuit to prevent the four laning, "well, they don't really mean it".

Let me ask you a serious question....forget how we got to this point since we can't change the past and nobody's going to change their mind about this issue anyway:

Just what would you propose Mayor/City Council in their roles as city leaders do to stop the four laning?

And by the way, I am not in favor of four laning TDK so spare me the DirectPac/pro-development accusations.


Submitted by Doug on Thu, 02/15/2007 - 10:31am.

It seems Borntorun has bought into the mayor's "we're doing TDK whether the citizens want it or not" position. I've never seen an issue in PTC receive such a negative response from the citizens.

What is the benefit to PTC for building TDK at all?

ptctaxpayer's picture
Submitted by ptctaxpayer on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 6:55am.

Just like the tennis center lawsuit. This legal thing will drag on, the lawyers will bill a couple hundred grand, but it will never go to court. Then Harold will say "Gosh, we need to to the right thing" and it will all go down as planned, paid for and funded. Funny thing is he will fool a lot of people along the way.


mudcat's picture
Submitted by mudcat on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 6:16am.

Even if your convoluted conspiricy theory were true, there's a piece of the puzzle missing. Who (after the next election) will lead us out of the wilderness and champion the abandonment of the right of way? Presumeably a new mayor. So who will run against Logsdon on that issue and win?

Also, I think the right of way reverts to Pathways if the road or bridge is not completed before the election, so how does that work? You think we will abandon it after construction has begun?
meow


Submitted by loanarranger707 on Tue, 02/13/2007 - 5:36pm.

Imagine for a moment that you're the judge.

What do you make of this?

It is pretty obvious that a four-lane bridge is or will be needed. If only a two-lane bridge is built, it will have to be widened shortly thereafter, at much greater expense.

It is not a matter of a four-lane bridge not being needed. It is a matter of who pays for it. Should it be the city where the bridge is located? Should it be the county where the bridge is located? Should it be the state at large?

When Peachtree City receives county sales tax money, either SPLOST or LOST, it boasts of the fact that "visitors pay this tax." So it becomes hypocritical to argue that it's Peachtree City residents alone who pay for the bridge.

The Superior Court judges of Fulton County are already overwhelmed with criminal cases. They don't have the time and possibly not even the wisdom to decide what ought to be done with this.

But I'll tell you who should help decide what's to be done here. It's people like Dan Lakly, Ronnie Chance and Mitch Seabaugh, if they had one ounce of real political leadership in their body.

Personally, I consider them all brain-dead, so the job is being dumped on the judges once again, and I predict that after a great deal of taxpayer money has been wasted on this case we won't have a satisfactory solution, anymore than we got one out of the Georgia Supreme Court in the case of the county versus the sheriff about accepting prisoners from the county marshals.

Submitted by ptc_golfer on Wed, 02/14/2007 - 11:39pm.

5 years ago the widening of TDK was necessary primarily because of Photocircuits and NCR. Now that Photocircuits is gone and NCR has let everyone go... why do we still need this corridor? PTC does not have a traffic problem, but Coweta soon will. Why make their problem our problem. We sure won't be traveling in that direction for anything!

Unless someone in PTC is going to get rich from this, I see no other explanation for opening up TDK.

Sorry new to the Citizen and the whole Blog thing! My thoughts and comments may be outdated by now!

tortugaocho's picture
Submitted by tortugaocho on Tue, 02/13/2007 - 7:36pm.

.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.