LETTERS: CONCERNS ABOUT HIGHWAY PLANNING

To the editor:

Initially, my family and I were in favor of the southernmost route proposed (by the Missouri Department of Transportation for Highway 34-72 traffic from west of Jackson to Cape Girardeau) as a way to effectively draw heavy traffic from the west, southwest and northwest. However, in viewing the mapping presented at a meeting at the Holiday Inn in Cape Girardeau, we no longer favor that route. We now feel Alternates No. 1, No. 3 and No. 8 would be the most economical, aesthetic and practical in routing the traffic. All citizens of the affected regions need to be aware of the extended consequence of the changes and be able to voice concerns and suggestions in order to establish an impartial decision. We have beautiful, strong communities in our area whose character we need to preserve along with a forward growth, and it can be done with careful planning.

Since that meeting, there have been other meetings where proposals have been made. Is there a location in the Cape Girardeau area where all of these proposals may be viewed and critiqued?

The reasons for the objections to Alternates No. 2, No. 12 and No. 13:

-- These routes are more costly.

-- Presently, persons needing to travel to Jackson, Cape Girardeau, Millersville, Sedgewickville, Patton, Biehle and Perryville are using existing Route K, Highway 25, I-55 or Highway 72, and the segments mentioned do not significantly improve access to Cape Girardeau or Jackson.

-- Those persons traveling from Marble Hill, Marquand, Glen Allen, Grassy, Zalma, Gipsy, Scopus and Whitewater are already using a combination of established Routes U, A, Z and OO and Highway 34.

-- Utilizing Segments D, G and T do not actually relieve any southern or southwest traffic.

-- In other words, the above projected plans for Highway 34-72 or Highway 25-74 study do not have a direct western, southwestern-northwestern route, and there are already existing routes in those directions.

-- The diagonal crossing of property and roadways with the limited access would discourage use due to hardships of moving farm equipment or easily getting to employment, shopping or recreation.

-- Also, the westernmost traffic from the Marble Hill area using Highway 34 would still have to contend with the dangerous Highway 34-72 intersection. Segment R would only be feasible if another tier would be constructed for exclusive I-55 use. And the Segment T consideration of Wolf Lane compared to other historic and long-established residences and property show favoritism.

-- Where a hodgepodge of large, heavy-volume roadways crisscross, the areas decrease in quality aesthetic value.

On the plus side of Alternates No. 1 and No. 3:

-- It would be the most economical to expand existing highway right-of-way. Only the added cost of expanded right-of-way and pavement-widening construction would be needed. In most instances, widening of those highways could be planned so that minimal home frontage would be taken. Only where there is housing and businesses on both sides of the right-of-way would it be necessary to find an equitable compromise in the amount of right-of-way needed.

-- By utilizing those already mentioned established routes, expanding through lanes, turn lanes and signal systems, traffic could move smoothly and quickly to destinations.

-- These are established and direct western-southwestern-northwestern routes with income-producing businesses, which provide a sound tax basis for Cape Girardeau, Bollinger, Perry and Scott counties.

Aesthetically, by using Alternates No. 2, No. 12 and No. 13, some of the most beautiful of the local farms, woodlands, streams and local roadways would be destroyed.

Economically, there would be loss of some of the highest producing farm ground and the connected business incomes that continually provide a stable and higher tax base for Cape Girardeau County and our neighboring counties.

Practically, we understand that the proposed extension of Highway 74 to Van Buren is still part of the MoDOT expansion plans in the foreseeable future. By utilizing the Highway 74 and I-55 overpass as part of Alternates No. 1, No. 3 or No. 8 versus later as preparation for this project, MoDOT would be offsetting the cost of later construction. And at that time a utilization of a combination of Route U, A, Z and OO and Highway 34 could be implemented, also using parts of already established right-of-way.

We would appreciate MoDOT's consideration of the above concerns.

KAREN McCULLOUGH

Jackson