1
1 PUBLIC HEARINGS
2 IN RE: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL )
IMPACT STATEMENT AND DRAFT )
3 SECTION 4(F) STATEMENT )
4 SOUTH AND EAST BELTWAYS, )
LINCOLN, NEBRASKA )
5 PROJECT NO. DPU-3300(1) )
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 Hearings held April 23 and 24, 2001, at the
Lincoln Berean Church, 6400 South 70th Street,
13 Hearing Room 3, Lincoln, Nebraska
14
15
16 A P P E A R A N C E S
17 HEARING OFFICER: MR. DAVID L. BEHRNS
Program Coordinator
18 The Mediation Center
1120 K Street, Suite 200
19 Lincoln, NE 68508
20
21
22
23
24
25
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
2
1 I N D E X
2
3 WITNESSES: Testimony
4
5 MR. THOMAS JAMES
10400 Holdrege Street
6 Lincoln, NE 68527 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
7 MS. CONNIE K. CHAMBERS
14501 Rokeby Road
8 Bennet, NE 68317 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9 MS. MARVIN B. CHAMBERS
14401 Rokeby Road
10 Bennet, NE 68317 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
11 MR. KEN FLOWERDAY
10941 Rocky Ridge Road
12 Lincoln, NE 68526 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13 MS. MARLEEN RICKERTSEN
8130 Dundee Drive
14 Lincoln, NE 68510 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
15 MR. ALBERT H. FRANCKE
2400 South 176th Street
16 Walton, NE 68461 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
17 MR. PAUL R. LEMKE
13800 Pine Lake Road
18 Walton, NE 68461 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
19 MR. B. D. SOFTLEY
8237 South Cherrywood Drive
20 Lincoln, NE 68510 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
21
22
23
24
25
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
3
1 (At 4:45 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
2 Officer Behrns, Witness Thomas James and the court
3 reporter being present, the following testimony was
4 given:)
5 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Could you state your
6 name and spell your last name for the reporter?
7 THOMAS JAMES: First name is Thomas, last
8 name James, J-a-m-e-s, and I live at 10400 Holdrege
9 Street in Lincoln, 68527.
10 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: And are you here
11 representing yourself or an organization?
12 THOMAS JAMES: I'm representing myself.
13 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay.
14 THOMAS JAMES: My wife and I, as I said,
15 reside at 10400 Holdrege Street. We are as close to
16 the proposed East Close Beltway corridor as you can be
17 without our house being taken. We have 366 feet of
18 frontage on Holdrege Street of which the beltway would
19 take approximately 150 feet, plus or minus. This is a
20 five-acre parcel of land. Doing the math, 150 feet
21 plus or minus removed from the west side of the
22 property would take 40 percent of the land, reducing
23 it to a three-acre lot. My neighbor to the west would
24 be the lucky recipient providing the other 150 feet
25 plus or minus for the 300-foot right of way needed for
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
4
1 the road.
2 Our house has a walkout basement facing to
3 the west. The west end of the house is 195 feet from
4 the west property line. Subtracting 150 feet plus or
5 minus for the roadway right of way leaves 45 feet plus
6 or minus. That would be the distance from our walkout
7 basement door to the east side of the beltway right of
8 way.
9 To mitigate the noise level, a 12-foot high
10 earthen berm would be constructed. Since we have a
11 walkout basement, that should take care of the noise
12 left when you're in the basement. If you're on the
13 main level of the house, you'll probably be able to
14 look out over the top of the berm. By the way, as
15 near as I can tell, the berm would sit right on top of
16 our septic system. We should have a small area in
17 front of the house suitable for a septic system, or
18 maybe we could just run a pipe under the berm and dump
19 it into the east ditch of the beltway. That pretty
20 much takes care of the impact to the west side of our
21 house.
22 Our house faces south with Holdrege Street to
23 the front of our property. Holdrege Street would pass
24 over the proposed beltway. It appears from Exhibit
25 EC1-4 that a 300-foot right of way would be required
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
5
1 to build the overpass. Assuming the right of way
2 would be split from the centerline of Holdrege Street,
3 the overpass would take another 117 feet from the
4 front of our property.
5 Not counting the west 150 feet of frontage
6 already taken by the beltway, another 25,272 square
7 feet would be required for the Holdrege Street
8 overpass. That's another -- excuse me -- that's
9 another six-tenths of an acre. Our original five
10 acres of land has now shrunk to half that size. The
11 overpass would be cut off -- the overpass would cut
12 off our access to Holdrege Street. No one was able to
13 inform us about property access issues at the meeting
14 held at the Lancaster County Events Center. It would
15 appear that access would have to come through the
16 Wenzel farm to the east.
17 Speaking of the Wenzel farm, nothing is
18 mentioned in the Impact Statement about the Wenzel
19 farm. The two occupied houses on this quarter of
20 section of land do not appear on the map at Exhibit
21 EC1-4. Both houses lie on the west side of 112th
22 Street just north of Holdrege Street. Between the two
23 houses is a barn whose main structure dates to the
24 early 1860s. The Wenzels homesteaded this land around
25 1860. It was not awarded historical status by the
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
6
1 Impact Statement.
2 Last fall we made the decision to go ahead
3 and put up another outbuilding for additional storage.
4 That decision was made because your decision was too
5 long in the making. We felt it was time to get on
6 with our lives. We have lived at this location for 11
7 years. For over half that time, we have been -- we
8 have interrupted our lives -- you have interrupted our
9 lives with your indecision.
10 That pretty well sums up the impact on the
11 environment at 10400 Holdrege Street. The Impact
12 Statement declares on page 3 of the summary that all
13 of the beltway alternatives have relatively low impact
14 considering the length of the segments. I would say
15 the impact on us personally is very high. This is
16 partly caused by the beltways meandering, going
17 between houses rather than taking them. This may
18 mitigate cost but will impact people's lives more
19 severely.
20 The impact on our property value is
21 immeasurable at this time, but with the beltway in
22 place and the real estate sign in the front yard, I'm
23 sure the result would be a severe decline in value.
24 A study in general contains assumptions that
25 time has proven incorrect. The actual population
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
7
1 growth over the last ten years was .42 percent ahead
2 of the projected growth rate contained in the Impact
3 Statement, and that's a significant percentage. The
4 Impact Statement does not contemplate urban growth in
5 the Stevens Creek Watershed.
6 We all know from Mayor Don Wesely's
7 announcement resulting from the Stevens Creek Study
8 Committee, that development in the Stevens Creek
9 Watershed is imminent. Again, this announcement tells
10 us that this study was too long in the making. Should
11 the beltway be placed at the eastern most ridge of the
12 Stevens Creek Basin so that development within the
13 basin will be undisturbed by a major roadway? Do we
14 want an East Beltway or a corridor like we have in
15 West Lincoln?
16 An East Beltway is not going to relieve
17 Lincoln's traffic problems. Beltways should be built
18 to move traffic around a city and not move traffic
19 within a city. If you want a corridor, you already
20 have one in 148th Street.
21 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. Thank you
22 very much.
23 (Testimony concluded at 4:50 p.m.)
24
25
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
8
1 (At 5:30 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
2 Officer Behrns, Witness Connie K. Chambers and the
3 court reporter being present, the following testimony
4 was given:)
5 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Give your name and,
6 if you would, please, spell your last name for the
7 court reporter.
8 CONNIE CHAMBERS: I'm representing my husband
9 and myself.
10 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. We're good to
11 go, then.
12 CONNIE CHAMBERS: Okay. And my
13 father-in-law.
14 My name is Connie K. Chambers. I live at
15 14501, Rokeby Road, in Bennet, Nebraska. Our home
16 phone number is 782-6625. This testimony pertains to
17 our house, which is located a very short distance,
18 unknown feet, from the east exit ramp on the proposed
19 far east route of the bypass.
20 We certainly hope that one of the other
21 routes will be used for the following reasons:
22 The Chambers family moved onto this land in
23 1878, and in 1887 our house, the homestead house, was
24 built on the north side of what is now Highway 2. In
25 about 1958 the State of Nebraska took trees and much
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
9
1 property and well usage to widen Highway 2, but the
2 family went on.
3 In 1995 myself and my husband, Terry, were
4 forced to load the family house onto a truck on April
5 25th due to the widening of Highway 2 to four lanes.
6 And we moved it from the north side of the road to the
7 south side and set up back about 700 feet from the
8 road. This was to keep the home away from the highway
9 so that we would not feel the house shake every time a
10 semi went by and so that we could sit on our deck and
11 be able to actually talk and hear each other.
12 After the move we had to completely gut the
13 house as all of the interior walls buckled and cracked
14 from the move. We were not given -- the money that we
15 were given for that move paid only for buying back the
16 house, the demolition cost, and for the actual move of
17 the house. We put our heart and souls and hard work
18 and close to 100,000 into remodelling it and making it
19 livable again. This took us over three years to
20 accomplish. During that time we lived in the basement
21 of the home.
22 Six years ago, April 25th, 1995, our home was
23 moved. And on April 23rd, today, we will be -- we are
24 attending another meeting that could be disrupting our
25 lives again. This bypass has been in the planning for
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
10
1 more than six years, and when we dealt with the State
2 in 1995, nothing was said about the far east route
3 going through the property where we moved our home.
4 Our first knowledge of this was at the informational
5 meeting in March of 2001. We were, at the very least,
6 shocked beyond belief. If we had known this was even
7 a possibility, we would have moved the house to a
8 different location.
9 And now, not only do we see the bypass going
10 between 25 to 35 foot from our home, but also taking
11 our mother and father's home, Marvin and Jean Chambers
12 of 14401 Rokeby Road in Bennet, Nebraska. Most of the
13 66 acres they own on the south side of Highway 2 is
14 being cut up, and the 80 acres on the north side is
15 going to be ruined if the bypass goes through our
16 land, making farming and pasturing almost impossible.
17 We honestly feel that we have done our share
18 to accommodate the State and the highway and that
19 another route, either the north or the middle east
20 routes, will be used. This is a very sad situation
21 for our entire family.
22 I have brought along some pictures if you
23 would like copies of them, showing the home from early
24 times up until today at the present time. Sincerely,
25 Terry and Connie Chambers.
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
11
1 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: If you wanted to
2 submit any written comments --
3 CONNIE CHAMBERS: We did that.
4 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: You did that? And
5 you can mail those pictures too.
6 (Testimony concluded at 5:35 p.m.)
7 (At 5:40 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
8 Officer Behrns, Witness Marvin B. Chambers and the
9 court reporter being present, the following testimony
10 was given:)
11 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: If you'd just state
12 your full name and spell your last name for the
13 reporter?
14 MARVIN CHAMBERS: Marvin B. Chambers,
15 C-h-a-m-b-e-r-s.
16 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: And you're here to
17 represent yourself?
18 MARVIN CHAMBERS: I'm here to represent
19 myself, I guess, mainly. The family.
20 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: And did you sign in
21 also?
22 MARVIN CHAMBERS: Yes, I did.
23 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. Good. Thank
24 you.
25 MARVIN CHAMBERS: Well, I don't have anything
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
12
1 written up or prepared, but I do agree with Connie's
2 letter there, or reading. And she's correct about it
3 being the family farm since 1878. And like she said,
4 we just went through all this about five years ago
5 with the State Department of Roads. And I don't feel
6 they ought to go through the same families so many
7 times in a row. They've got an area a mile and a half
8 west of me that they could cut across and not hit us.
9 This would be all farm ground. And why do they come
10 down and want to make two corridors, or whatever you
11 want to call it -- bypass -- off-ramps and bypasses
12 to -- when they could just make one and get across a
13 mile and a half west of me and hit the same area
14 without bothering any farm buildings?
15 And then the area where we're at, they're
16 going to disrupt, you might say, four homes, at least.
17 And three of them have to be moved, the way I
18 understand it. So I just guess I want to say that I
19 don't feel that they ought to be doing this to the
20 same families over and over, and I do agree with
21 Connie and Terry's message that they had.
22 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay.
23 THE WITNESS: Thank you.
24 Can I add just a little bit to that?
25 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: If you have
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
13
1 additional comments, sure. Go ahead.
2 MARVIN CHAMBERS: We have some -- they're
3 real good wells. There's a shallow well, but there's
4 an unlimited amount of water that we do use for
5 cattle, for our pastures, for our house, garden, our
6 home. And they're on the north side of the road,
7 which I understand is going to be in the area where
8 they'll have the interchange. And if I do move my
9 house back, I would certainly like to keep those
10 wells.
11 And I do have a line and a permit for a
12 waterline underneath Highway 2 now, and I would like
13 to just hook onto that line and go on back to wherever
14 I move that house. And we're using it now. It's
15 for -- I have pasture there, and I have -- you know, I
16 need it for the cattle and the dry years, dry weather.
17 And as it is now, I have pastures on both
18 sides of the highway, and the cattle walk back and
19 forth through the -- I would call it a bridge. I
20 don't know what the State -- it's where the water runs
21 through there. I'd like to have a dry underpass, of
22 course, but they won't give me that. But I would like
23 to continue to use that to get the cattle back and
24 forth from one pasture to the other, if I have any
25 pastures left. And I guess that -- that includes --
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
14
1 or concludes my talk. Thank you.
2 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. Thank you
3 very much.
4 (Testimony concluded at 5:45 p.m.)
5 (At 6:20 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
6 Officer Behrns, Witness Ken Flowerday and the court
7 reporter being present, the following testimony was
8 given:)
9 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: If you would, for
10 our reporter, just state your name and spell your last
11 name.
12 KEN FLOWERDAY: Okay.
13 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: And you also might
14 state who you're representing, if you're representing
15 yourself or an organization.
16 KEN FLOWERDAY: Ken Flowerday,
17 F-l-o-w-e-r-d-a-y. I am here on my own behalf as a
18 homeowner that will be impacted by either the first or
19 second interior options.
20 I think my primary concern is that -- and the
21 foremost consideration is that -- I might have to get
22 my map out here -- but the City, the County,
23 Department of Transportation, needs to stick by the
24 assumptions that most people have been operating under
25 for the last two or three years, and that is the EF-1,
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
15
1 the far corridor, is the one that was going to be
2 used.
3 I know that I, certainly, and many others
4 have purchased land and built since that decision was
5 made -- that vote taken by the Supercom -- that vote
6 made by the Supercom. And I tried to do some
7 research, and I think it was the minutes of the
8 6-27-97 meeting that contained that vote by the
9 Supercom that recommended -- it was a formal vote, as
10 I understand it, and they recommended EF-1, the far
11 corridor, at that time. And certainly I'm not the
12 only one that bought land and built under that
13 assumption, assuming that the recommendation of the
14 Supercom was going to be -- going to be the actual
15 corridor that was going to be used for the beltway at
16 that direction.
17 Additionally, it looks like EF-1, even though
18 the Impact Statement here says that there are two
19 stream crossings, neither of those go across Stevens
20 Creek. Neither of those stream crossings -- and I'm
21 not a geologist, but neither of them look like any
22 kind of a stream to speak of.
23 EM-1 spends a mile in the 100-year
24 floodplain. I'm pretty sure that's against the law to
25 run a roadway in a floodplain, or at least for that
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
16
1 distance. So they'll have to build a one-mile bridge
2 across it. I'm afraid it'll look something like the
3 Florida Keys. It's something they certainly need to
4 take a look at.
5 And EC-1, I'm not -- you know, the process is
6 all fairly mysterious, even though we have meetings
7 and hearings like these. I thought EC-1 was out for
8 sure, and now it seems to be back in the possible --
9 the possibilities. EC-1 seems to be the worst case
10 scenario. You have to have two exchanges near Highway
11 2, actually, one for Highway 2 and one for the south
12 corridor. So that will be an additional expense.
13 EC-1 further swings a mile and a half east. You're
14 choosing the west-most corridor. And then you have to
15 swing in a mile and a half east to connect to I-80.
16 All three -- EC-1, EM-1, EF-1 -- all connect virtually
17 at the same place on I-80 out north.
18 And then, basically, the data is outdated.
19 The data must come from '95 at the latest, I would
20 guess, because the discussions of these corridors were
21 taking place in '96, the decisions were made in '97.
22 Everything has happened in five or six years in East
23 Lincoln, certainly.
24 And then recently the announcement that
25 Stevens Creek will be urbanized, I think we knew that
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
17
1 was going to happen. But I don't know if we knew any
2 of the growth was going to happen the way it has in
3 the east and especially, maybe, the south part of
4 Lincoln.
5 And EC-1 runs dead in the middle of Stevens
6 Creek, or just to the -- just to the west of it. So I
7 clearly think EC-1 is the worst idea. EM-1 has
8 significant, probably, environmental problems and
9 perhaps even some legal hurdles because of the
10 distance it spends in the floodplain. And EF-1, the
11 bottom line is, they need to stick by what they said
12 in '97, the Supercom decision in '97.
13 The other thing that has to happen is, they
14 need to designate that corridor, which they did, and
15 then they need to stick to that. By their own
16 admission in the meetings in '96, they said that when
17 the west bypass was built, Old Cheney was the corridor
18 for the south bypass. Well, again, I mean, everything
19 has happened in about five or eight years on the south
20 edge of Lincoln there. So the city has -- has
21 completely swallowed the original intended corridor to
22 the south for the southern -- for the southern belt,
23 the corner corridor for that bypass. And they need to
24 designate the corridor, you know, the furthest one out
25 is the obvious choice, and then stick to that. I
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
18
1 mean, they've already designated. Now they need to
2 show a little courage and a little vision, perhaps,
3 and stick to what they said.
4 Because a lot of things have happened.
5 People have bought land and built in the area that
6 they thought was then not going to be near these
7 beltways, and now to have all three of them up for
8 grabs again is disconcerting at the least.
9 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Is that the end of
10 your statement?
11 KEN FLOWERDAY: I think it is.
12 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. Good enough.
13 Thank you for coming.
14 (Testimony concluded at 6:25 p.m.)
15 (At 6:25 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
16 Officer Behrns, Witness Marleen Rickertsen and the
17 court reporter being present, the following testimony
18 was given:)
19 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: And if you would,
20 please, state your name and spell your last name for
21 our reporter and state whether or not you're
22 representing yourself or an organization.
23 MARLEEN RICKERTSEN: Marleen Rickertsen,
24 R-i-c-k-e-r-t-s-e-n.
25 My address?
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
19
1 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: If you'd like.
2 MARLEEN RICKERTSEN: I forgot what you'd
3 asked me to say.
4 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Are you representing
5 yourself or --
6 MARLEEN RICKERTSEN: I'm representing myself,
7 my husband, and my parents.
8 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay.
9 MARLEEN RICKERTSEN: Okay. I'm representing
10 the views of my husband Bryan, myself, and my
11 parents -- Dale and Rhoda Retzlaff. We are here to
12 object to the format of this hearing. In fact, we
13 believe that it should not be called a hearing at all.
14 It is good to be able to have the opportunity to see
15 the materials and gather information in an informal
16 manner and have the opportunity to give oral comments
17 instead of written comments if necessary.
18 However, this is not a public hearing. Oral
19 comments are no different than written comments in
20 this situation. We had anticipated spending some time
21 on both days listening to the testimony of others in
22 the community on this controversial proposal, and that
23 opportunity has so far been denied. We understand
24 that there is a court ruling in California that agrees
25 with our concern. The citizens of Lincoln do not have
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
20
1 the opportunity to exchange ideas and understand
2 controversies that may exist.
3 Given the time and money that have been
4 spent, public interest, and the importance of this
5 project, we believe that it is in the public interest
6 to hold a true public hearing before the comment
7 period ends. If a true public hearing has not been
8 planned, it is our formal request that a proper public
9 hearing be held before the comment period ends.
10 Also, we have found numerous substantial
11 errors and emissions in the DEIS, which we will
12 describe in our written comments to the Federal
13 Highway Administration.
14 Thank you.
15 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Thank you very much.
16 (Testimony concluded at 6:30 p.m.)
17 (At 6:30 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
18 Officer Behrns, Witness Albert H. Francke and the
19 court reporter being present, the following testimony
20 was given:)
21 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. Would you
22 state your full name and spell your last name for our
23 reporter?
24 ALBERT FRANCKE: F-r-a-n-c-k-e.
25 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. And are you
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
21
1 here representing yourself or an organization?
2 ALBERT FRANCKE: Me, yeah. I own one of the
3 farms that the east -- that the east route would go
4 through.
5 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay.
6 ALBERT FRANCKE: I, of course -- as you
7 probably know, nobody wants them to go through their
8 farm. But my only comment is that if -- if they put
9 the east route, that's just less than a half a mile
10 from 148th Street. And I would think it would make
11 much more sense to just widen 148th Street into a
12 nice, four-lane highway like they did with Highway 2.
13 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Mm-hmm.
14 ALBERT FRANCKE: That's just about all I have
15 to say.
16 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. Well, we
17 appreciate you coming in.
18 ALBERT FRANCKE: Thank you.
19 (Testimony concluded at 6:32 p.m.)
20 (At 6:35 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
21 Officer Behrns, Witness Paul R. Lemke and the court
22 reporter being present, the following testimony was
23 given:)
24 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: If you could, I'd
25 like you to start by stating your name and spelling
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
22
1 your last name for our reporter.
2 PAUL LEMKE: Paul Lemke, L-e-m-k-e.
3 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. And are you
4 here representing yourself or an organization?
5 PAUL LEMKE: Oh, just me.
6 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay. Good to go.
7 PAUL LEMKE: Well, okay. Well, I don't know.
8 I'll probably stammer a lot. Don't do that when I'm
9 stammering.
10 Okay. This has kind of been said from the
11 very beginning, ever since this was brought up, and a
12 lot of people out in our area still don't understand
13 why, first of all, it's necessary for an east bypass.
14 We understand the south one. That makes perfect
15 sense. But the east -- the traffic flow, it's claimed
16 to take off from 84th Street and 70th, which is so far
17 away it's not going to affect it.
18 Then the other thing they say is, because it
19 will take semi traffic off of 84th and 70th. Well,
20 the roads are there already. They have Highway 50,
21 Highway 43. If they're coming in from the Nebraska
22 City area, if they're going to go north, like to
23 Fremont, they have alternate routes. But even be that
24 as it may, you could ask 85 percent of the people out
25 in -- east of town, they keep saying, "Why isn't it
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
23
1 148th? Just add another couple of lanes, make it a
2 divided highway."
3 Now we have been told -- except for the first
4 time. The first time I asked this question, it was of
5 one of the consultants, and he said no, it wouldn't
6 affect funding. But then someone said no, we would
7 get no funding. Then another one says we get funding,
8 but it would be reduced. I would like to see where
9 it's written down that funding is affected if you put
10 this on 148th instead of going in between the half
11 mile marker, which splits a lot of farms.
12 Now, it also has pitted one family -- well,
13 not one family, but groups of people against each
14 other. You've got -- now, I live close to the 141st
15 one. If it has to go in, I'd be -- you know, 141st
16 would make more sense to me than the others for
17 several reasons. First of all, as I look at the map,
18 a big deal is made about Wilderness Park. We can't
19 miss Wilderness Park, an area park here, and all this.
20 And they keep talking about Stevens Creek, how they
21 want to make this into a Wilderness Park area. Well,
22 if you go on the inside corridor, you're crossing it,
23 where you could possibly, when you get up close, jog
24 over and cross over and connect up onto 70th Street up
25 on the interstate and avoid it all together.
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
24
1 The middle one I would consider to be the
2 least likely one if you were talking about disturbing
3 wetland areas and park areas, because here you're
4 crossing Stevens Creek in two places and you're
5 running awfully close to it. Now, if you're going to
6 have a park that's supposed to be a wilderness area
7 having a beltway close by -- now, I went to Wilderness
8 Park, so I can hear what the traffic is like, and you
9 can hear trucks and everything going by all the time.
10 Now, to me, that doesn't seem to make a conducive
11 wilderness wildlife area.
12 So, I suppose, yeah, the farthest one east or
13 an alternate route on the close one would make more
14 sense. Although, to my mind, we don't need it at all.
15 I would take every single mile road we have like --
16 these aren't marked well -- 112th, I think. Yeah,
17 112th Street, 148th, 162nd. I would have those
18 easements or right of ways made on every road, which I
19 think they have done now. Finally they have widened
20 them out to a hundred feet, I believe. But I would
21 make each of those able to have a two-way divided --
22 or two-lane divided highway on each -- or street. You
23 know what I'm talking about. Not necessarily highway,
24 but -- and limited access to the point where maybe
25 your main entrance into each section would be at the
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
25
1 midpoint of the sections. And you'd have access
2 roads, then, on the inside, of course.
3 And one more point about the three -- the
4 bypasses being proposed in the eastern section. They
5 have voted, I guess, to open up Stevens Creek for
6 development. And it seems a little strange when you
7 open up for development, you're going to take this big
8 swath of land out of potential development. It would
9 make more sense, then, to run it on the outside of the
10 Stevens Creek watershed itself than right through it,
11 which kind of would refer to where it should have been
12 in the very beginning, along 84th Street, where it was
13 originally supposed to be. But I have a feeling we
14 had some political cronyism going on there.
15 No matter -- and no matter what you do on the
16 east side -- and the south, like I say, I think the
17 south is something that's very legitimate because,
18 yes, you have that highway coming into Lincoln. You
19 have traffic from here that's going there. It has to
20 get through. That makes perfect sense. You have
21 traffic coming from Omaha on down. Maybe it wants to
22 go south. That makes perfect sense. But if it's
23 coming from Omaha and is going to go down to the
24 Nebraska City area or anywhere here, there is so many
25 other alternate highways they can take that I don't
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
26
1 think the truck traffic is that big of deal that could
2 not be handled with overpasses like on 148th over O
3 Street and -- well, you know, just an upgrading of the
4 current road systems.
5 And no matter what they do do on either of
6 these, it's not going to affect Lincoln's traffic.
7 Lincoln's traffic flow will not alternate -- or not
8 alternate, but be improved until they change their
9 system in Lincoln itself. If you don't change the
10 roads in Lincoln, you're not going to -- no matter
11 what you can throw -- you can pave everything from
12 here to kingdom come, and O Street is still going to
13 be congested, because you've got a stoplight. You've
14 got a stoplight. You've got a stoplight.
15 And what they would need to do, Lincoln
16 really needs to look into itself and make O Street a
17 more better flowing street going through by
18 eliminating turn-ins for every single business that
19 you have. But make them more like an Eastpark Plaza
20 or Meridian Park or Gateway. In fact, Gateway should
21 maybe lose one of their entrances onto
22 O Street, make one major entrance, not two.
23 You just have too many stops going down the
24 road. If you drive it, you can see the easiest place
25 to drive and where traffic flows quickly is by Wyuka,
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
27
1 you know, where you don't have turn-ins. Or it used
2 to be between 70th and 84th, but now you're adding
3 more and more lights into there. 84th Street, which
4 was very -- I mean, finally they four-laned it, and it
5 was flowing pretty good.
6 Now we got that horse barn they're putting on
7 there, and what's the first thing they're putting on
8 there is they're putting a major entrance onto 84th
9 Street. That should just be onto Havelock, and that
10 should be the entrance going onto 84th. But instead,
11 now we're going to have an entrance here and there,
12 and pretty soon 84th Street is going to end up being
13 stoplight, stoplight, stoplight, and traffic won't
14 flow.
15 Anyway, that's it, I guess. I -- my family
16 does farm out there. I mean, now I just own an
17 acreage which, like I say, maybe it would go close to
18 me. I'm at 138th, where 141st, I could live with it.
19 But I don't like seeing where it's splitting up farms
20 where you've got a little sliver here and you've got
21 the families on the outside who are saying, "Put it in
22 here," you've got the families on the inside saying
23 "Put it out there."
24 I went to both meetings, and I told each of
25 them, I told them, "You guys are just messing
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
28
1 yourselves up. You need to get together and say,
2 'Don't put it here, period, you know." Look for an
3 alternative. Look for ways to make the traffic move,
4 not -- I mean this is rather cliche, you know. I
5 think we've got a big political thing, if Lincoln has
6 a big beltway or a circle, we're a big city. If we
7 don't have it, we're a big town. But, you know, when
8 gas gets up to $4 a gallon, who's going to be able to
9 drive on this thing? And how much is the cost at now?
10 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: I have no idea.
11 PAUL LEMKE: I hear it's like 200 million or
12 something, you know, so it's a lot of money to take a
13 lot of land from a lot of people, you know. But
14 anyway, I guess that's all I had to say.
15 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Any further
16 comments?
17 PAUL LEMKE: Oh, no. Except -- well, except
18 that I have a feeling no matter what the people who
19 have the land -- well, basically -- well, I wouldn't
20 say stolen away, which I guess if you looked in the
21 dictionary it might be the correct word, because it
22 would be taking without -- you know, by eminent
23 domain. They are not going to get the fair market
24 value. They may at that time, but then I think they
25 should be adjusted in if -- well, let's say you come
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
29
1 in -- and I hear talk taking land around Stevens Creek
2 right now, you know, by eminent domain, because you
3 can get it cheap now. But once you get development in
4 there, it's going to be too high priced. Well, so
5 what's happening is they're going to screw the owners
6 who own the land now to take the land away.
7 Meanwhile, when it develops out, the people who were
8 fortunate enough not to be living there, they may make
9 a lot of money while the people who owned that land,
10 they're just going to be stuck with, you know, what
11 they get.
12 You know, so there should probably be
13 something made that if it should occur that either by
14 taking land around the creek or for any of these
15 bypasses, that in the future when, let's say, the
16 major landowners in the area do sell out, that these
17 people should be reimbursed for the difference of
18 money that they had their land taken away from them as
19 opposed to the people who were able to sell it, you
20 know, for maybe a better profit.
21 Because it sure doesn't seem fair that if I
22 should live -- let's say you put it here. I live
23 here, and I'm going to get $10 an acre, just using
24 that as an example. I get -- so where this guy, he's
25 fortunate enough not to live there, and he might get a
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
30
1 hundred now, because his land's going to be valuable
2 because mine got taken away from me. You know, it
3 just doesn't seem fair. So I think something should
4 be set up for a future reimbursement of these people
5 who will have their land taken.
6 But I guess I should quit, because she's
7 getting tired.
8 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Thank you for
9 coming.
10 (Testimony concluded at 7:10 p.m.)
11 (At 7:10 p.m. on April 23, 2001, with Hearing
12 Officer Behrns, Witness B. D. Softley and the court
13 reporter being present, the following testimony was
14 given:)
15 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: If you would start
16 by stating your name and then spelling your last name
17 for us, please?
18 B. D. SOFTLEY: Okay. Name is B. D. --
19 initial B, initial D -- Softley, S-o-f-t-l-e-y.
20 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: And are you
21 representing yourself or a group?
22 B. D. SOFTLEY: Representing myself.
23 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Okay.
24 B. D. SOFTLEY: No one else wants to claim
25 me. My residence is at 8237 South Cherrywood. I'm
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
31
1 just off 84th Street, approximately one block. I'm
2 probably going to be one of the minority of people
3 talking that actually is in favor of this, for very
4 simple. We've got a lot of traffic that is riding off
5 of Highway 2 going north to either pick up and loop
6 onto Interstate 80 or else, entering harvest, a lot of
7 grain trucks coming in to bring in loads to the
8 various terminal elevators here in town. At this
9 point, you are on four lanes when you go through --
10 either come off of Highway 2 or the interstate as you
11 come through and are in a consistent four-lane
12 environment and never a serious motivation to slow
13 down.
14 And so, consequently, we're getting an
15 enormous amount of high speed, high gross weight
16 vehicles coming through, and so far we haven't had too
17 many people get killed. But, unfortunately, I think
18 it's going to take that to really motivate a lot of
19 support to have this speed up.
20 When I bought my place that I'm in now, the
21 intent was that I would buy an acreage somewhere out
22 of town and try to find something. I've been looking
23 east of town in the area where this corridor is, and
24 the people are already pricing the added value into
25 the property that we've been looking at. It's not
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
32
1 hurting the value of what they're asking for. And I'm
2 having very little sympathy for the people that are
3 saying this is going to ruin the property values when
4 they're padding the price, and we're not going to see
5 which one is even decided on for at least another
6 year.
7 Between the three alternatives, I would like
8 it to go on the record that the middle one or the
9 inside one would probably be favorable. The inside
10 one doesn't have a snowball's chance in Haiti. You
11 have too many people that have moved out of Lincoln to
12 buy residential, little baby farms, not real farms,
13 that are going to be just impossible to try to relieve
14 of the property. And I just think that's going to be
15 really sad if the rest of Lincoln ends up being
16 penalized for these people's selfishness.
17 And so just, on the record, I support trying
18 to move forward and don't want to see this delayed by
19 a bunch of people that are against any form of
20 progress. Fifty years ago these are the same people
21 that would be against indoor plumbing and, so far, I
22 think that's benefitted society. End of topic. End
23 of sentence.
24 HEARING OFFICER BEHRNS: Thank you for
25 coming.
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
33
1 (Testimony concluded at 7:15 p.m.)
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
34
1 C E R T I F I C A T E
2 I, Marcy L. Konzak, Registered Professional
3 Reporter, do hereby certify that the within and
4 foregoing complete transcript contains all the
5 testimony requested to be transcribed by me and the
6 comments of the hearing officer, for the public
7 hearings held in this matter; and that said complete
8 transcript is a correct and complete transcript of the
9 testimony requested to be transcribed from the record
10 made at the time of said public hearings.
11 Dated this 27th day of April, 2001.
12
13
14
15
16 Marcy L. Konzak
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Marcy L. Konzak, RPR
JS Wurm & Associates, (402) 475-3376
