On June 23, 2015, I was the 23rd southbound vehicle lined up on MacDuff Parkway north of the first Camden entrance. It took me three cycles of the light and 12 minutes to turn from MacDuff to SR 54.
I sent an email to the City Council reporting the incident and wondering how that delay might have affected an EMT vehicle (a big, boxy ambulance) en route to an emergency room. I contend that an EMT vehicle would not be able to pass a similar line of traffic.
The city’s response was to invite me to a private meeting. I demurred, noting that the city’s response was important enough to be a matter of public record and that a private meeting would not suffice.
On June 27, I sent an email to the city asking for information on a proposal to add a second left turn lane at the MacDuff/SR 54 intersection. (Intersection improvements had been proposed by a developer but, on the recommendation of a member of the city staff, had been declined by council.) The city’s answer was that information had been requested and a response would be sent when accurate information was available. So far? After six weeks or so: no response from the city.
On July 5, I reiterated the situation and my concerns in an email to a city official with a copy to the council.
On July 15, I was behind 12 southbound vehicles north of the first Camden entrance. It took three cycles of the signal, but only seven minutes to make the left turn onto SR 54 from MacDuff. I reported this to the city. I noted that while two anecdotes do not constitute data, they do point to a need to gather data. I noted that given the potentially serious nature of the situation, I felt the city should address it, and that I was waiting for an answer to my email of June 23.
Since then, I have attended a Council workshop that was advertised to address traffic problems on SR 54 West. My concern about EMT egress from MacDuff was not addressed in that workshop.
The council meeting of Aug. 6, while authorizing money to create a plan for the MacDuff/SR 54 intersection, did not mention this concern. The council voted only to pay for an engineering plan, a plan that would take many months to implement — while the traffic on MacDuff only gets worse.
At a workshop Aug. 4, Mr. Rorie and Mr. Imker suggested that any improvements to the intersection of MacDuff and SR 54 should wait until what I call the “pie in the sky” bridge over the CSX tracks was built, and the MacDuff extension to SR 74 was completed.
I find that especially frustrating, since the city has been unable (or has refused) to answer my questions about when the extension will be completed. (The earliest advertised date for completion was September 2015 … yes, that’s next month. Further, even a modification of the MacDuff/SR 54 intersection, expected to take many months, does not solve the immediate problem of EMT egress.)
During the Aug. 4 workshop, Mr. Rorie stated three times that the intersection of MacDuff Parkway would be closed during any construction. (When I asked for confirmation he was less certain, and suggested that we’d have to wait and see.) He was very clear that traffic would be routed through the Wynnmeade neighborhood during construction.
I feel that those statements were designed to influence opinion to delay any improvements to the MacDuff/SR 54 intersection. I believe that the Peachtree City Staff and Council are ignoring the danger to the residents of the 1,454 homes in Centennial, Camden, Cedarcroft, Chatsworth, and Wynnmeade.
The delays and backups of southbound traffic on MacDuff Parkway are only going to get worse as homes under construction are sold and occupied and, just these past few days, as school busses are added to the current mix which already includes oversized SUVs, garbage trucks, and semi-tractors towing flatbeds with construction materials and oversized loads.
I have not received an answer to my concerns other than the initial invitation to a private meeting and a promise to reply when accurate information became available. The failure to address this situation and to respond to many expressions of concern constitutes, in my mind, a serious breach of the social contract between the city and its citizens.
Must someone die on an ambulance, stuck in traffic, before the City acts?
I call on our elected representatives to make a public reply to my concerns. Further, I ask that this response come from the City Council, our elected representatives. I spent a lot of years as a project officer and program manager in the Air Force and later as a government contractor. I was an expert in BS. I know BS when I hear it. And I don’t want to hear any more of that from a city employee.
Paul Lentz
Peachtree City, Ga.
