9/7/2016 – Letter to Board of County Commissioners on Lake Pickett North

From: rj@rjmueller.net [mailto:rj@rjmueller.net]

Sent: Wednesday, September 7, 2016 10:03 AM
To: ‘mayor@ocfl.net’ <mayor@ocfl.net>; ‘district5@ocfl.net’ <district5@ocfl.net>; ‘district1@ocfl.net’ <district1@ocfl.net>; ‘district2@ocfl.net’ <district2@ocfl.net>; ‘district3@ocfl.net’ <district3@ocfl.net>; ‘jennifer thompson’ <district4@ocfl.net>; ‘ted.edwards@ocfl.net’ <ted.edwards@ocfl.net>; ‘Scott.Boyd@ocfl.net’ <Scott.Boyd@ocfl.net>; ‘byron.nelson@ocfl.net’ <byron.nelson@ocfl.net>; ‘victoria.siplin@ocfl.net’ <victoria.siplin@ocfl.net>; ‘pete.clarke@ocfl.net’ <pete.clarke@ocfl.net>
Subject: Lake Pickett North Community Meeting

Mayor Jacobs and Commissioner Edwards,

Another check box checked!  I think that is how the residents of East Orange County feel about the community meeting last night.  Despite every person in the room strongly against this project because of the roads and environmental concerns, Commissioner Edwards pushes on and supports the developers.  I had to leave early but someone told me that Commissioner Edwards said we, the residents, can’t make up our mind about traffic.  First we want it fixed then we don’t.  That is absolutely not true.  We want traffic fixed, period.  But what we don’t believe is that these improvements will fix traffic.

I listened to the developers traffic planner tell us how these road improvements will fix our traffic problems.  I also listened to Commissioner Edwards tell us how development is tied to road improvements.  He said road improvements are tied to development and if the road improvements are not made then the development can’t proceed.  The big problem with that is I, as well as many others, are convinced the improvements won’t fix our traffic problems and is only temporary relief.  So if a road is improved such as 4-laning McCulloch the developer can proceed only to find in 10 years we are worse than we are now with the developer long gone leaving us with a worse mess and limited options.

These restrictions on the development is just simply not enough. 

 I want to emphasis that we are against this development, the bridge and the McCulloch extension and the demands below is only if this moves forward.  

I have 700 petitions against the bridge to prove it. http://savetheecon.com and Save Orange County has over 10,500 petition signatures.  What more do you need?

If you decide to move forward, then there has to be stricter requirements on development. First, here is what the residents of University Estates want.  We want a light at McCulloch and Worchester.  Especially if McCulloch is to be 4-laned.  We will never be able to get out into traffic without a light.  We are not requesting a light; we are demanding a light.

I am also demanding this.  Development needs to be tied to Level of Service (LOS) and not just LOS but trips; not just road improvements.  We know that an “F” on a 4-lane road is 2,000 trips during peak times.  If you decide to 4-lane McCulloch and that brings the road to a LOS of “C” then if the road falls to a “F” or greater than 2,000 peak hour trips, development stops until remedies are put in place to raise the LOS out of “F”.  Readings need to be taken every 6 months.  This way, the residents are protected against McCulloch becoming over-capacity in 10 years.

If the developer and the county is confident these traffic improvements will fix our traffic problems as was portrayed to us last night, then the county and the developer should gladly agree to this demand.  We want protection if things go wrong.  We are owed this as residents of Orange County.  The county has the obligation to maintain the roads at an acceptable LOS which is just not the case now and will not be in the future unless we demand it.  Orange County is not meeting its obligation to its tax-paying residents.

Contrary to what Commissioner Edwards said, we want our roads fixed but we want them fixed right.


RJ Mueller

Please follow and like us:
Posted in McCulloch Road.