Letter to Mayor Leppert on endangerment to Dallas's Drinking Water by proposed FM2499

Dear Mr. Leppert:


I am writing this letter to bring to your attention a matter of some grave concern. Just this week, I contacted the Dallas Water Department to inquire about the extent of their knowledge and participation in matters pertaining to a major Dallas drinking water source. I foolishly presumed that the Water Department would be fully informed of activities that might potentially pollute this source. It came to my attention in 2003 that despite the events of 9/11, and the nation’s terrorist concerns, there was very little inter-agency communication on matters that could potentially threaten resources and facilities of our local Cities. I live in Highland Village, which is situated at the southern and western boundary of Lake Lewisville. This community has had an ongoing battle with regard to the proposed alignment of Section 4 of FM 2499, a 4 - 6 lane thoroughfare that Texas Department of Transportation (TxDot) plans to run through our 96 percent owner-occupied residential community. Members of our community contacted the City of Dallas at that time, to ask them about their participation in the selection process for the alignment for this road, since Alignment 3, (there were originally 10) through Highland Village, was the only easement that would take this roadway over Lake Lewisville. We assumed the City would be involved since Dallas owns the water rights. They were not! With the huge outcry at the Public Hearings and considerable media coverage at that time, we presumed Dallas would get involved, especially as TxDot went ahead and selected Alternative 3 over other less controversial and less expensive routes for this road. They apparently did not!


This particular alignment, through our unique and massively “hilly” neighborhoods, through wetlands and over the western boundary of Lake Lewisville is very controversial! It is the most disruptive and THE MOST EXPENSIVE of all options which were available. The environmental threat from this road is huge - to human and wildlife (Lake Lewisville already has a high MTBE content according to EPA reports). Yet it somehow ‘squeaked’ inside the NEPA guidelines and was ‘shoehorned’ under the radar, to fit the need to move this project along. Leadership of Copper Canyon – the neighboring community which was the site for several of the other alternatives, fought this roadway from the very beginning. Leadership of Highland Village did not! That is what is amounted to. Despite the huge citizen opposition, despite being elevated above grade (up to 15 ft. in places), and less than 10 feet from some homes; despite the necessity to build bridges over emergent wetlands along the western boundary of Lake Lewisville – and potential threat to this drinking water source, the project received an assessment of "no significant impact" to the surrounding community, in late 2005. No formal Environmental Impact Study (EIS) was ever done. The conditions for the lesser study were also less than ideal. No ground assessment was ever done for the emergent wetlands evaluation portion, and all areas of promised mitigation to the community (for what they were worth) cannot be fulfilled because the City of Highland Village does not have authority over this State highway. And yet apparently, through all this, the City of Dallas stayed out of this process.



TxDot is preparing to put this construction project out to bids next month. Highland Village families continue to fight the project and have recently been talking to an environmental attorney, to seek advice on how we should move forward at this time. We had hoped to stop the process before now, or at a minimum force TxDot to complete a proper Environmental Impact Study (EIS). This especially in light of the recent USC Medical study published earlier this year in Lancet, implicating automobile pollution as a major source of loss of lung function in children, and more recently the reports about breast cancer from the same source. This agency appears to be determined to push forward with this project however, even with their recent acknowledgement of a $290 million deficit in state funds. We are therefore trying to get as many people involved as possible, in asking the right questions, so that they might reconsider the repercussions of their choices. I called the Dallas Water Department about 11 days ago to discuss this matter, and was instructed that Jodi Puckett, the Director, was out of the office. Earlier this week I received a call from Rick Galceron(sp?) in Ms. Pucket’s stead. Mr. Galceron informed me that he was unaware of any participation or issues with regard to this or any other proposed highway crossing of Lake Lewisville. He told me he would make some calls to find out what he could, and then get back to me. I have heard no more to date, and therefore feel I should bring this matter to you Mr. Leppert, as the newly appointed Mayor of the City of Dallas. I felt you would wish to be informed of this and other matters of such importance. I realize I am a simple “lay-person” in this area, but I find the lack of apparent concern and cooperation in this matter to disturbing to the point of outrageous. We are after all talking about a potential threat to one of the City of Dallas’ largest sources of potable water. A lack of inter-agency co-operation regarding a project of this scale, which has the potential of putting massive amounts of toxins into that source, is absurd. Mistakes are made and accidents happen. That no cooperation is believed necessary is shocking! Whatever happened to the requirements for stepped up security on such resources? Given the recent concerns not that long ago following the spill at Lake Tawakoni, one would have thought there would be more involvement and monitoring of these matters. I have to wonder whether the citizens of Dallas are aware of how little oversight is being given to their drinking water source. I would appreciate hearing from you at you earliest convenience in response to my concerns.


Sincerely,

Susie Venable

Concerned Parent/Citizen/Homeowner/Taxpayer
of Highland Village, Texas

HV Parents Group refutes TxDOTs conclusions

By Faith Chatham - DFWRCC - September 30, 2007
Citizens in Highland Village (Denton County) have consistently opposed the current route selected for section 4 of FM2499. FM2499 is to connect with I-35 near SH121.

Orginally it was to be a two-lane oil top road. Now it is planned as a 4 lane road with plans to expand it to 6 lanes. Much of it will be elevated 11 feet above playgrounds and residents. Over 1000 children in Highland Village will live within 1500 feet of this road. It is anticipated to have traffic counts exceeding 45M cars daily which is the threshold which scientific studies find results in irreserviable lung function in children. Schools, playgrounds, recreation areas, and day cares are located within 1500 feet of this proposed route.

It will cut through residential neighborhood, federal wetlands, recreation areas. The current route is the only one which cuts across three tributaries of Lake Lewisville. Lake Lewisville is the drinking water source for Dallas and Denton counties. The secion of the lake where these bridges will be constructed is the part of the lake which already registers excessively high MTBE. MTBE is a fuel additive which cannot be filtered out of water with currently available technology. Because of Federal Legislation sponored by Joe Barton, manufacturers of MTBE are protected from envionmental liability.

The current route selected is the most costly route. The budget for this project was recently doubled! The most environmentally dangerous route requires doubling the budget because of the necessity of constructing costly bridges over Lake Lewisville's fragile ecosystem.

John Mullens, a resident of Highland Village who has joined with his neighbors (Highland Village Parents Group) in opposing this route responded to TxDOT's attorney.

Ms. Noble (Texas Dept. of Transportation),

Thank you for your response on September 21 (attached) to the concerns of the Highland Village Parent Group. Although your response was not timely, we do appreciate receiving it. As you probably expect, we do not agree with the conclusions of your letter and have commented below.

First, however, we would like to comment on the story in today's front page of the Dallas Morning News describing the financial woes suffered by TXDOT.

TXDOT can save $47 million by permanently canceling the section 4 portion of FM 2499 (probably more as costs continue to escalate). The majority of citizens in Highland Village do not want this highway, and are very vocal about it. At the public hearings there were 3015 written opposing comments submitted, and 1186 opposing signatures on petitions (all voters ).

Only a few politicians want this highway and only God knows why as we have provided them with the USC/Lancet Study (as well as supporting studies/reports), so they are fully aware of the significant lung damage our children will suffer.

We ask TXDOT to direct these scarce funds to more worthy projects where the citizens actually need and desire the transportation improvements, as opposed to wasting the money to satisfy a few. At the very minimum, a full Environmental Impact Study (EIS) should be performed to insure the safety of our children. Most people with knowledge of the circumstances know that a full EIS will result in the project being terminated or re-routed.

Following are our comments about your response (attached PDF file) to our recent e-mails:
1) You state "The Lancet Study is one of several recent studies that come to the conclusion that there are potential health effects from living within close proximity of a roadway. However, the results of the Lancet Study are specific to the study conditions."

We believe you are over-complicating this issue. There are highways in the USC/Lancet Study in California with traffic similar to FM 2499. The vehicles are the same, and emissions actually are significantly reduced in California per their emissions laws. So, you have similar highways with similar vehicles, obviously you would have similar results: average 10%, irreversible, lung damage for children who grow up within 1500 feet of a major road. The study conditions all wash out, we are not that different in Texas than California (these are two of the largest states in the U.S.), and actually we should even increase the 10% lung damage expected in Texas to account for the more dangerous emissions levels (CA has the strictest emissions laws in the country).

2) You state that "The Clean Air Act requires EPA to 'establish air quality criteria for pollutants that accurately reflects the latest scientific knowledge useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identifiable effects on public health or welfare…'". The latest scientific knowledge is the USC/Lancet Study, as well as numerous other studies that validate the common sense that a highway 25 feet next to a house is harmful to children.

Why can't TXDOT be a leader in environmental protection instead of following the EPA who is obviously not able to protect our kids? We ask you to use your own judgment in this matter.

3) You say that "TXDOT takes human health very seriously". We do not believe this when you will not even suggest a full EIS to protect our children from the conclusive results from the USC/Lancet and numerous other studies. To the taxpayers it appears that TXDOT does not take human health seriously at all.

3) You describe the complicated process that TXDOT goes through in conjunction with the EPA to determine effects on human health, but admit these processes are not effective. We taxpayers are not concerned with the reasons why you cannot protect our children, we are only interested in results. We are also not interested in EPA guidelines. If EPA guidelines allow inflicting lung damage on children, then those guidelines must be fixed and not followed. The "I am only following orders" rationale is not acceptable.

4) You discuss a loophole that allows TXDOT to ignore the published policy in your environmental manual that typically requires an EIS in cases of highways of four or more lanes in a new location. We find it completely unacceptable that you would not apply your "normal" standards to a case as serious as this where children's health is at risk.

5) The City of Flower Mound website clearly describes the intention to convert section 4 to six lanes. It states that "Sufficient right-of-way would be acquired to allow for its eventual expansion to an ultimate six-lane divided urban arterial." Here is the link http://www.flower-mound.com/2499_information/index.php

6) We would like the name of the consulting firm that you have hired so we may verify their independence.

In summary, we hope that this consulting firm and the FHWA will reach the correct conclusion that their most important role is to protect our children, and therefore recommend that a full and thorough EIS be prepared prior to any construction taking place. We still are hopeful that TXDOT will step up and take a leadership role in protecting our children.

Regards,
John Mullen
Highland Village Parent Group