The Move Louisville project began as the outcome of massive public input to Mayor Greg Fischer’s Vision Louisville project. A top community priority based on the number of public comments received by the city was for a better metro area transportation system. The mayor’s office of Economic Development and Innovation is the lead department and Metro Government is investing $775,000 ($600,000 federal grant, $125,000 city matching funds, $25,000 from TARC) to develop a comprehensive transportation infrastructure plan including roads, public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian infrastructure. At this time there are over six hundred discrete projects on the candidate project map. The implementation timeline on the Vision Louisville website says <5 years to completion but considering the number and scope of potential projects, implementation is likely to stretch out to 20 years with projects ranging from bicycle lanes to freeway relocations and mass transit. It’s not that any single project would take 20 years but there are so many and with a comprehensive city-wide scope, the requisite public battles over individual plans, and the competition for limited local, state and federal money progress won’t be quick. We will be guided by the Move Louisville plan for a long time. On the other hand, if the city’s intention is to only select projects that can be built in five years then most of the ambitious projects will not make the cut. We will know soon.
The following is a guest post from Clarence Hixson, CART’s Legal Counsel. Oral arguments appealing the 6th District’s dismissal of CART’s law suit will take place before the US 6th District Court of Appeals in Cincinnati on June 25th. We asked Mr. Hixson for a status report and asked him a couple of key questions. Below are his responses.
Why did the Appeals Court agree to hear oral arguments?
The final decisions of Federal District Court, ( in this case Judge Heyburn’s Final Order earlier this year dismissing all 20 of CART’s claims made in the Complaint) can be appealed to the Court of Appeals as a matter of right. The appeal has to be taken in compliance with federal civil Rule 4 and other rules providing a time limit for filing. CART’s appeal is not frivolous and states the jurisdiction and cause of action under the Administrative Procedures Act, NEPA and Title VI. Generally, the Appeal alleges that Judge Heyburn committed error in dismissing all the NEPA Claims and in denying the Motion for a Trial on the issue of intentional discrimination on the basis of race
by the decisions the states made and the subsequent project approval by FHWA.
All through Judge Heyburn’s Opinion he referred to the LSIORBP as an exceptionally significant project: The Court had serious questions as to CART’s standing through member Mattie Jones to make discrimination claims, but, “Again, due to the public nature of this suit and the import of CART’s Title VI claims, the Court will nevertheless address their substance.” Continue reading
The Houston bus transit system is being redesigned to take advantage of inefficiencies in the system. The project is supposed to result in a system that reaches more people, increases headway on more routes and can be accomplished at no additional cost. Can the same be accomplished in Louisville? Is our bus system redundant and are their glaring inefficiencies? Read this article and let us know what you think.
…And after redesign