To the editor:
It's good to have discussion about the South Lawrence Trafficway, but let's try to stick to the facts.
Mike Ford (Public Forum, June 27) misinterprets Paul Brockington's conclusions about cultural use of the wetlands. Dr. Brockington found plenty of evidence for their use by American Indians but none that would be permanently damaged by the SLT. Most historical use communicated to Dr. Brockington occurred north of 31st Street or a mile south along the river banks, not along the 32nd Street alignment. The type of use documented is why federal agencies rejected a request to designate the Baker Wetlands a "traditional cultural property."
Mr. Ford also condemns my "manipulation of nature." When Baker legally received this land in 1968 from the Department of Health, Education and Welfare instead of the Department of Interior as Mr. Ford claims (Public Forum, Aug. 10), approximately 75 percent of the land had been cultivated. All of it was effectively drained. No one other than Dr. Ivan Boyd of Baker and Dr. E Raymond Hall of KU believed it had potential of becoming wetlands again. Without our "manipulation" there would be no "Boyd Lake" (wetlands) today.
Several letters give the impression that these wetlands are some priceless, national treasure to never be touched. Our mitigation will not exclude visitors from experiencing nature but will invoke curiosity about this ecosystem that can only be quenched with hands-on experience. The mitigation will improve access for people of all ages through additional parking and a continuation of the hike/bike trail from west of U.S. Highway 59.
Roger Boyd,
Baldwin
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
merrill (anonymous) says…
Yes Roger Boyd has done a 180 from his original position on this matter and that's the way life is. This will not change how our native american friends think nor will it move this process along. This roadway could easily be moved futher south to prevent taxpayers from being subjected to another bypass south of the river which is already being discussed. Yes this matter came up at a county commission discussion not so long ago. How many do Douglas County taxpayers want to pay for? Is it time to raise taxes? Practical thinking says build one and take it south of the river out of the wetlands.
Considering how tight KDOT money is there is nothing written in stone that monies for a "new wetlands" will be available. Why destroy a portion of Prarie Park Nature Center for this obsolete plan?
The first thing that needs to happen is citizens demanding a different route as KDOT studied many. The wetlands route is not the only option available. This matter could be tied up in court many more years.
The wetlands route will affect the Prairie Park Nature Center to some degree in which more than a million total tax dollars were initially spent. Why wreck this beautiful educational venture and waste tax dollars at the same time?
There is a less expensive SOR option that has not been put on the table. The current plan going through a flood zone requires elevation which is a costly endeavor. Staying SOR and completly out of the wetlands/flood zones requiring fewer bridges and connecting to an existing interchange(#1057) could save a few million.
Taking the SLT south of the river to interchange 1057 and K10 could take traffic north to I 70 as well thus providing travel completely around Lawrence more efficiently.
This accomplishes many things.
A. Services JOCO and Douglas County traffic going to NW Lawrence or Topeka
B. Services the Eudora Business Park east of 1057
C. Services East Hills Business Park and the SE Work Center area west of 1057
D. Diverts traffic out around the city as it should
E. Keeps the SLT entirely out of the wetlands
F. HNTB has researched SLT/1057 option but was never put on the table
H. Reduces traffic substantially on 31st
Working with the Kansas Turnpike Authority could save Douglas County taxpayers untold millions of dollars.
Building this road at any cost at this point in time is simply not prudent use of Douglas County tax dollars.
Turnpike fees would pay for the road which is far better than my tax dollars. It is my understanding that Douglas County taxpayers will bear the lions share of this project which is why I suggest bringing in the KTA.
The plan above offers a SOR option as well as a route going north that would connect to I-70 at Tonganoxie which would be quicker for those coming from the east going to Topeka etc.
Actually the Wetlands has a very long history to include burial grounds. Just because a previous letter writer was unaware does not mean it did not exist.
moderationman (anonymous) says…
Nice cut and paste...same old BS.
craigers (anonymous) says…
Merrill, you obviously haven't paid attention from the beginning because Roger Boyd hasn't done a 180 from his original position. And I agree with moderationman, thanks again for pasting your comments over and over and over again.