Dupont road work delayed
Posted by Mike Sylvester - 9/6/08 @ 7:00 am - Filed Under Local Politics
Bob Caylor has a frightening piece in the News Sentinel.
The widening of a 1.8 mile section of Dupont Road has been delayed for two or three years because of the discovery of wetlands along Dupont road in that area.
Per INDOT spokesman for the Office of Environmental Services Toni Mayo:
- The two - three year delay is due to the need to get permits from the Army Corp of Engineers.
- The project cost to widen 1.8 miles of Dupont road was 13.9 million dollars. Toni Mayo was quoted as not being sure if the project cost would increase.
I have some questions and comments.
- Why on Earth do we need to get a permit from the Army Corp of Engineers?
- When the Maplecrest Extension was recently passed a parade of elected officials and consultants told us we had to build it now because construction costs are rising, mainly due to materials. I believe this to be true and this will obviously increase the cost of this project as well.
- Why does it cost 13.9 million dollars to widen 1.8 miles of road?
Mike Sylvester
Comments
10 Responses to “Dupont road work delayed”
Leave a Reply
Not sure what the Corp has to do with this unless it deals with the wetlands. But I thought most wetlands issues deal with the Indiana DNR.
I would guess the major amount of money is once again for redesining and rebuilding of the interchange of 69 & Dupont Road. Currently it is mess outside of the most “off hours” of traffic.
It is quickly approaching of what US 24 & 69 interchange use to be like.
Why not work in phases? It appears to me that there are no wetlands along a portion of the stretch…maybe I’m wrong.
One might as well ask why the State of Indiana has to put in “applications” with the feds when deciding to do DST, or deciding what time zone to do it in. The answer is that the states have become meaningless administrative sub-units in the monstrous, monolithic, welded-together hulk that is the United State (singular intended). The answer is that we live in a tyranny, operated from that swamp on the other side of the Potomac River. Thank you, Abraham Lincoln, by far the worst president … although, in truth, the process was already well underway by the time he arrived.
As I understand it, ACoE has authority over development in/through wetlands. Depending on the nature of the development and wetlands, it may just be a rubber stamp, but they might also make them alter their plan. Either way, IIRC, INDOT guidance for ACoE review turnaround is 2 years.
I need to read up on the wetlands and the possibility that they’re along that stretch of Dupont. Hmmm.
I drove on Dupont tonight and I found three possible areas. Two I do not think are it but the other might me. I looked for “reed” type plants to show that they may be a “wetland.”
One is located is just east of the entry to Parkview off Dupont. I do not think that it one.
The next is about a block or so further east, on the north side of the road. I don’t think that is it either.
However about 1/4-3/8 mile east of the entrance to Dupont there appears to be a possible wetlands on both sides of the road.
Jim,
I think Jeff Davis was an even worse president.
Come on - wetlands are not just “discovered.” The United States keeps a National Inventory of Wetlands. Go to Google and use the overlay from the National Inventory, and you can get an idea of where wetlands are located.
I would say someone tried to slip one through which is par for the course for state-run agencies.
You gripe about the federal government, but if it were left up to the states, the agencies and commissions would develop everything in sight. Didn’t we just go through the development-crazy attitude in reference to Cedar Creek?
How is it many of you who are now commenting against the issue of protecting a wetland were in favor of protecting the environment around Cedar Creek?
Wetlands serve a valuable purpose as filters of run-off and surface water which travel into our aquifers.
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires that anyone interested in depositing dredged or fill material into “waters of the United States, including wetlands,” must receive authorization for such activities.
The Corps has been assigned responsibility for administering the Section 404 permitting process. Activities in wetlands for which permits may be required include, but are not limited to:
* Placement of fill material.
* Ditching activities when the excavated material is sidecast.
* Levee and dike construction.
* Mechanized land clearing.
* Land leveling.
* Most road construction.
* Dam construction.
The final determination of whether an area is a wetland and whether the activity requires a permit must be made by the appropriate Corps District Office.
See http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwo/reg/rw-bro.htm
By the way, here is a link to the definition of just what are “waters of the United States”
http://www.usace.army.mil/cw/cecwo/reg/33cfr328.htm
In looking at the definition, the wetland in question would probably fall under “intrastate” - 328.3(a)(3).
Discovered or correctly identified wetlands may be the real thing here. The property may have been miss identified before (accident or on purpose). But the BIG BAD GOVERNMENT caught it. Government worked.
Having driven Dupont Road for over 25 years I had to go looking for possible areas that “could” be wetlands. I do know what a wetland looks like in general but I am not trained in the field to say with certain that “there is a wetlands!”
But that is not even the “real” reason for the delay. If you can figure it out then it will make for a great election issue. Do your research and do not let the first thing that pops into your mind guide you. But it is there.