Signatures 462 total
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
-
6
Name: Lia Rushton on Feb 3, 2007Comments: No elevated highway in the western corridor of US 280.Flag
-
7
Name: William Rushton IV on Feb 3, 2007Comments: No elevated highway in the western corridor of US 280.Flag
- 8
-
9
Name: Susan Swagler on Feb 3, 2007Comments: The elevated highway eliminates any future (and better) options regarding this roadway. Think long term!Flag
-
10
Name: John McDole on Feb 3, 2007Comments: The answer to 280 traffic is NOT more roadway but rather mass transit. We cannot afford the upkeep on the roads we have, how are we to maintain this new road Where are all these extra lanes going to feed into once they get to the 'expressway' It is still just three lanes, this bottle neck will just make 280 a double decked parking lot! Has common sense gone out the window Just a little thinking will tell you this is not going to work! We are already under emission alerts, adding more roadways for more cars will only make this problem worse. We NEED mass transit. Who will use it When people get tired of sitting in the 280 parking lot twice a day watching a train speed by they will become instant converts. Let's get real and get some REAL ideas!Flag
- 11
-
12
Name: Livy Abele on Feb 3, 2007Comments: I am strongly opposed to the western part of the elevated highway. I do not feel we should be penalized and pay the price for others' choice of residence. Though I travel 280 myself, I am not willing to sacrifice the environment for this "convenience".Flag
-
13
Name: Faye B. Clark on Feb 3, 2007Comments: An elevated highway is a blight on 280, east and west. I agree that something needs to be done, but the choice should not be elevated highway or nothing. Other options should be explored with the diligence that the elevated highway has been. It is interesting that Fig , a bridge building company, recommended a 10-mile bridge as the solution. What other options did Fig exploreFlag
- 14
- 15
- 16
-
17
Name: Ashley Spotswood on Feb 3, 2007Comments: Please do not let this monstrousity mar our neighborhood ! There are other solutions. We should not have topay for the unchecked developemnet of Shelby County !Flag
-
18
Name: Gary Gorham on Feb 4, 2007Comments: No Elevated Highway ! I live two streets off of Hwy 280 behind Brookwood Mall. Our valuable community will loose all value if this Highway is built. You are penalizing those who made the investment to live closer to downtown because that is where I work. Don't penalize my property value just because someone else chose to live 20 miles outside of town.Flag
- 19
-
20
Name: Catherine Armstrong on Feb 4, 2007Comments: STOP the elevated highway. Mass Transit is the answer to Shelby County's problem, not the elevated highway.Flag
-
21
Name: Lois Chaplin on Feb 4, 2007Comments: Why are we making the same mistake twice If as much study and money had gone into studying mass transit, as has gone into the 280 " fixes", we might have a solution that will work for the long term. All this for only 20 years of "relief", and at what price This is all illogical. Folly. Birmingham deserves a more forward looking solution and bigger vision than our leaders are giving us. I'll be glad to take a seat on the task force.Flag
- 22
-
23
Name: Elton Stephens Jr on Feb 4, 2007Comments: The proposed western section will forever ruin the gate way to Bham thru Homewood, Mt Brook, Vestavia and Bham. This must be stopped.Flag
- 24
-
25
Name: Nancy Long on Feb 4, 2007Comments: I visited the recently completed elevated highway of similar design by Figg Engineers in Tampa, FL, and found it completely incompatible with the wooded ridges and surrounding residential neighborhoods that characterize our western section of 280.Flag
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
-
31
Name: Joe Buffington on Feb 4, 2007Comments: very very bad idea----makes no sense and would be a disaster with no way to get out of once it becomes the obvious boondoggle it is destined to become-----construction and traffic nightmare--not to mention how ugly it would beFlag
-
32
Name: Joe Buffington on Feb 4, 2007Comments: very very bad idea----makes no sense and would be a disaster with no way to get out of once it becomes the obvious boondoggle it is destined to become-----construction and traffic nightmare--not to mention how ugly it would beFlag
- 33
-
34
Name: Matthew Lemak on Feb 4, 2007Comments: I am a property owner in both mountain brook and homewood. No time has been spent exploring alternative ideas other than an elevated highway. This project has addressed no issue other than how it ould "potentially" help traffic patterns, and I have heard no mention of how it would hurt these traffic patterns during its construction.Flag
-
35
Name: Kathryn Gwatney Lemak on Feb 4, 2007Comments: This is a horrible idea! This project is a waste of state funds, and I am willing to fight so that NONE of my tax dollars go toward creating this monstrosity. This is one of the worst things that could happen in irmingham.Flag
- 36
-
37
Name: Suzanne Dickinson on Feb 4, 2007Comments: I am very much opposed to this elevated highway. I have filled out a form with very specific reasons for my opposition and sent it to Ms. Figg.Flag
- 38
- 39
-
40
Name: Beth Young on Feb 4, 2007Comments: Hwy 280 has some problems, but the people at the western end did not cause them and this elevated highway would cost us to make it easier for developers in Chelsea. An elevated highway is not the solution.Flag
-
41
Name: Susan Schor on Feb 4, 2007Comments: Please do not put the elevated highway in the Western Section, through Mt. Brook, homewood, etc. We are opposed to it very strongly.Flag
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
-
47
Name: Leslie Stephens on Feb 4, 2007Comments: This western segment will devastate the beautiful corridor that exists now.Flag
- 48
- 49
- 50