Sunday, May. 29, 2016    Login | Register        

A dissenting view of the West Bypass: How about some facts?

I occasionally read The Citizen to catch up on local news. As a result, I am aware of the disagreement within the County Commission regarding the West Bypass.

I do not have an opinion on whether the bypass is good or bad, because, despite the many letters published on the subject, many authors typically turn to personal attacks and insults.

I don’t ever recall reading a rational, respectful, “just the facts ma’am,” pro-and-con description of the issues involved.

These attacks may be warranted and effective, but once you’ve chosen this route, I don’t think it is realistic to expect the person you’ve attacked to extend any courtesy.

I find it silly that Commissioner Brown would think that commissioners he regularly attacks would give him the benefit of the doubt on the supplemental materials he provided just prior to a county commission meeting.

I also find it dryly amusing that Commissioner Brown refers to the West Bypass as the “developers welfare bypass.”

Developers are usually going to benefit from infrastructure improvements because they are in the business of developing land. As such, it should not surprise anyone they are highly informed on the issues that affect their ability to stay in business.

For example, if you were a developer would you be more aware of population trends, traffic patterns, zoning regulations, long-term local and regional transportation plans, and the opinion of county land use authorities than a friend who worked in the financial services industry?

If not, then you would not be a developer very long. If so, then how would you use this knowledge?

I think most folks would purchase the land outright or buy options. When? Before the infrastructure was built and prices rose.

I wouldn’t call acting on knowledge gained by studying the factors affecting your industry “welfare.”

I would be happy to read a rational, respectful, “just the facts ma’am,” pro-and-con description of the issues involved. In the meantime I respectfully request that Commissioner Brown quit maligning law-abiding developers and stop acting surprised when people he attacks don’t extend any courtesy.

J. Thomas

Fayetteville, Ga.



What a refreshing article.

I have no particular interest in the West by-pass or East by-pass or the unending debate over these roads.

But it seems to me that roads get built all the time. Someone's property is always impacted and they are compensated. That is how roads are built. And devolopers will build along those major roads. Hello? Is this news?

It seems to me that a few Fayette citizens have objected to the West by-pass and Brown has jumped on this issue for his own politcal advantage.

I say build the West by-pass and the East by-pass and then get on to other issues that will bring Fayette County into the 21st Century.


G35 Dude's picture

Will you still feel this way when your taxes go up? I don't think the core issue here is whether or not a road gets built. I think the core issue is how a bunch of money will be spent. Should it go for a road or for things that will help the current tax base in a time of need? And who should ultimately make that decision? I wasn't at the last meeting but I did watch it on youtube. Steve Brown was not the only person disrespected that night. For the commissioners to decide that they have control over this money and not allow the taxpayers a voice on it is just barely short of criminal.

NUK, Lion, Regardless of your position, don't you think the citizens of Fayette should have a voice in this? After all isn't this our money?

NUK_1's picture

Sums it up very eloquently and without hysterics, something that has been missing ever since the furor over the WFB started. The points author Thomas made are quite accurate and a voice of common sense in the wilderness. I think Thomas' opinions are shared by a significant majority in FC too.

Robert W. Morgan's picture

He/she is correct. Much emotion and accusation, few facts. I see it this way:
Fact: Voters approved a SLOST that gave the commissioners wide discretion with "road improvements".
Another fact: Sales tax was collected from us and others spending money in Fayette County. Years later that money is been spent on engineering, design, property acquisition and construction and many in Fayette are discovering for the first time where the proposed bypass roads are going to be built, although there was no shortage of maps and public hearings on road location.
Very relevant fact: In the years that have passed since the SPLOST was approved, the economy has changed dramatically and everything connected to road projects has changed - commuting, gas prices, employment, cost of material and labor and most importantly shortfalls in city and county budgets because of revenue declines.
New fact: Used to be that city and county governments could not change the projects SPLOST money was spent on. New law this year allows governments to put that question on the ballot and let the voters decide.
Final fact: County Commission voted 3-2 against putting it on the ballot.

Everything else is opinion, emotion, accusation or conjecture. I'm as guilty of those things as anyone, but I readily admit to the mere handful of real facts. Now I do think there are a couple more facts that can be tacked on to the end of this story and they presently unknown, but here they are:
1. Most logical people would not have voted against putting this question on the ballot if they were only considering the facts noted above. The missing fact is why the 3 commissioners voted the way they did. Their silence, stubborness and unwillingness to discuss their vote does not produce any real facts - only conjecture.
2. What will the 3 new commissioners do after they are sworn in January 2013. Will they put this on the ballot in 2013 and if so, will there be any money left to save by then?

Live free or die!

BHH's picture

It seems at this meeting the three amigos at least recognized and tried to address the concerns presented in some reasonable way.

Even though their arguments for the most part do not hold water.

I wonder what the S & P study might say this time next year, since it's the future we are worried about and not the past which this study is based on.

That reference to the vehicles registered in the county is so lame.

Vehicles registered has no relevance what so ever to any need for new roads. Traffic studies would be good.

New roads don't always equal economic growth or generate new construction either.

Just look at South Fulton Pkwy.


It is always good when an occasional reader wants to catch up with local issues. Maybe going to a commissioners meeting and expressing your view would be a good idea. I have read hundreds of letters and gone to meetings over the last three years and the vast majority responding are not name calling but well thought out opinions. You sure sound smarter then all of the AUTHORS but you seem to lean to one side for someone who does not have an opinion. Calling Mr. Brown silly (is that name calling). Mr. Brown attacks policy not other commissioners.

You seem very well versed on how developers work. Do you have some connection to this business? We have a empty school near the bypass. Was this a waste of money or just bad judgement by the BOE. I am sure you must have an opinion.

The commissioners have presented no facts why this west bypass must be built. No traffic studies or anything that will justify what they are doing. Does it help with traffic congestion in Fayetteville? If it does it has been kept a secret.

So J,the county had a chance to end this argument with a referendum. They said NO. The commissioners are answering to some one or group other then the people. That is the facts. There have been no pro (from the commissioners or people like you), but plenty of con from the people of Fayette County.

Brown and McCarty ran for commissioner on an anti-West Fayetteville Bypass ("WFB"), anti-SPLOST, and anti-mass transit platform. They got 55% of the vote when they ousted Jack Smith and Eric Maxwell. Therefore, they represent 55% of the citizens of Fayette County that the other three commissioners want to ignore.

Those who voted for Brown and McCarty are deliberately blocked mathematically from commission representation by the Frady, Hearn, Horgan alliance.

The WFB never had a detailed traffic study indicating there was a need for it in terms of demand.

The WFB does not have a viable destination. It ends nowhere.

The WFB is a two lane road, and will not reduce traffic congestion in Fayetteville. Roads that reduce congestion are more than two lanes.

The WFB will benefit only developers, of whom there are many owning large tracts of land on the proposed alignment.

The WFB is allegedly being built for congestion brought about by the future development it will make possible. Just like Rivers School, the WFB is not needed.

The WFB will cost $30 million that the county cannot afford in a poor economy

Growth in Fayette County will be anemic in the forseeable future.

WFB funds could have been applied to reducing county debt and property taxes

The WFB alignment is "gerrymandered" to give developers free access and curb cuts at taxpayers expense

The WFB is being built over a water recharge area in defiance of the county land use plan

The WFB will fragment neighborhoods and property needlessly.

It's a fact that Rivers Elementary School was built along the WFB alignment to accomodate more than 600 students, but has only 40 students. The family that sold the school property is connected to developers.

One commissioner has relatives that own land in the WFB alignment area who stand to benefit if the road goes through

No letters or articles in local newspapers have been in favor of the WFB

No public comments (out of many hundreds) to the Fayette commissioners have been in favor of the WFB

Only the three holdover commissioners and the commissioners ousted in 2010 have spoken publicly in favor of the WFB

Fayetteville's "rush hour" has been timed at ten minutes or less through town on State HIghways 85 and 54.

There you have just some of the facts ma'am.

mudcat's picture

There is one other fact that we need to add to the list and that is

They are building the stupid thing, spending money every day and there is no way anyone can stop them.
What arrogance out of the county commission or at least the 3 clueless ones.

fayette77's picture

The WFB does not have a viable destination. It ends nowhere.

This is a fine list, but the highlight is the DESTINATION of the bypass. With so many Fayette County citizens working out of the county, how about a bypass from the south part of the county to the Interstate? Not to the other side of the city, dumping me off on a 2 lane road, with no Interstate access.

Imagine how crazy that intersection will be at the WFB and Sandy Creek as a majority of cars will be turning left there to hit GA-74 and get off the road to nowhere.

With a reported 20,000 residents working in Atlanta or Hartsfield, get me to I-85, otherwise, shove your WFB.

BHH's picture

There is a back room plan to have a north side only entrance and exit at this junction and that appears to be part of the urgency of the WFB.

Once WFB is built then a more convincing argument can be made for that access point to I-85.

PTC commuters will love it as an alternative to I-74.

Fayetteville will annex most of it and be rolling in new tax dollars as it develops.

The residents of Christian City and much of south Fulton county get easier access to Peachtree-Fayette hospital.

And a new explosion of growth and development for the surrounding areas.

It's completion will be the catalyst for completely changing the the middle of Fayette county.

There will be sprawl similar to what has happened in Coweta and Henry coujnties.


mudcat's picture

If this is true, why wouldn't Frady say something about it? I would understand that completely as a reason for voting for this otherwise inexplicable road project.
Of course if that were true, would it not be on that list of road improvements funded by the new transportation tax? Or does this come out of the feds, meaning maybe 10 years, maybe never.

suggarfoot's picture

"Fayetteville will annex most of it and be rolling in new tax dollars as it develops"

It may very well be the plan to annex land North West of Fayetteville, but where 92 runs into I85 is well over the county line and into Fulton county.

I could be wrong, but aside from the access point being in another county that we have no control over, it is my understanding that they can't put another access but a certain distance from another and that 74 and 92 are way way too close together. If that were the case, they would have to close the 74 entrance and that would really screw the people from Peachtree city.

If you go up there and look at where 92 goes OVER I85, you will see a heavy industrial park to the right, and then big time, high density housing to the left. Again, I could be wrong, but I can't see how they could legally put an entrance there, nor where they could put one. I don't think Fulton has any intention of buying out either the high density homes on the left or the industrial park on the right, to make Fayette county commissioners happy. At the end of the day, it looks like their access from 92 to I85 is a gamble and a stupid one at that. (If we build it they (Fulton) will put us an access road to I85?) What Fulton would face on land acquisition would be what we are facing here, only on steroids!

As far as their 'plan', it would be nice if they would tell the taxpayers. I resent their acting like they know what is best for us.

I don't know, maybe Frady is eyeballing Christian City as his new home and thinks the commute to the meetings would be easier.

go here for access to Fayette county maps.

BHH's picture

The problem is that when the subject of access at 92 & I85 was discussed, there was no room for negotiating since Fayette couldn't explain how it would help anything.

The only thing it would have done was direct more traffic through Fayetteville's downtown and down Oakley Ind. right back to the soup at 74. With the WFB in place and Fayette's membership in the ARC a better argument can be made for cooperation on this idea.

Another leg of WFB could arguably be built more directly toward 138 & I85 if Fulton county was on board too. With better access to a new hospital to offer there is some room to negotiate either access point.

There is a plan to redo 74 & I85 it could very well include north entrance and south exit at 92 for passenger vehicles only.

With the WFB in place we show good faith enough to bring the powers that be back to the negotiating table.

The whole process is so uncertain that no one will say that's the plan.


suggarfoot's picture

If what they told you is true, that would make sense. But, it still sounds like they are wanting to build the road and then 'hope' someone will help them out.

If they built an access it would work, but it is a very overbuilt area up there and in another county.

The only thing I have know that is concrete and not wishing and hoping is what you mentioned.." direct more traffic through Fayetteville's downtown and down Oakley Ind. right back to the soup at 74."

If they have a real plan, they should tell it. If it is a hope and wish...they should be straight up about that too.

BHH's picture

Our future patterns of land use will be based on that of our growing highway system as surely as
the human body is molded about its skeleton.
- Paul B. Sears
Fayette County is showing the growing pains common to most counties of a rural nature
experiencing rapid growth. From 1980 to 2000, Fayette County’s population grew from 29,043
to 91,263, an increase of 214 percent. This growth has placed large volumes of traffic on rural
roads and two-lane state highways not designed for such capacity. In addition to the growth in
Fayette County, growth in surrounding counties is adding to the traffic volume in Fayette County.
This growth in traffic has increased congestion and created safety problems, particularly at major
intersections within municipal limits during morning and afternoon traffic peaks. Socio-econonic
factors, such as high automobile availability and two-worker households, also contribute to the
increasing demand for transportation services and facilities. As Fayette County grows, its
transportation facilities must be improved to accommodate the increasing demand.
In an effort to address transportation needs in Fayette County, the Fayette County Board of
Commissioners contracted with the URS Corporation to update the Fayette County
Transportation Plan. The update was completed in 2003. The municipalities within the county
participated in the planning process. The plan recommends transportation improvements in both
the unincorporated county and the municipalities. Timing for the improvements range from 2003
to 2025. The total cost for these improvements is approximately $266 million. The
transportation improvement projects defined in the plan are discussed under the section entitled
Assessment of Current and Future Needs.
The following section provides an inventory of Fayette County’s existing transportation system.
It details the county’s inventory of highways and roads, bicycle and pedestrian ways, current
transportation options, and railroad and airports.
Highways and Roads
Six major highways provide access to, from, and within Fayette County.
State Route 85 runs south from I-75, through Clayton County, into Fayette County north
of Fayetteville. This four-lane highway continues south through Fayetteville where it
narrows to two lanes and continues south into Coweta County. This is the most highly
traveled state highway in the county and carries some 44,200 vehicles a day.
State Route 54 is the main east-west highway in the county. It extends from Coweta
County on the west, through Peachtree City, eastward through Fayetteville, to Clayton
County. SR 54 is a four lane, divided highway from SR 74 in Peachtree City to
McDonough Road, east of Fayetteville. The sections west of SR 74 and east of
McDonough Road remain two lanes. The most heavily traveled portions of this highway
carry 33,000 vehicles a day.
State Route 74 is a four lane highway from Interstate 85 south to SR 54 in Peachtree
City. South of SR 54, it becomes two lanes, ending at SR 85. This major access to
Interstate 85 and the Atlanta Metropolitan Area carries 31,600 vehicles a day.
State Route 314 extends southward from Hartsfield International Airport to SR 85 in
Fayetteville. The southern portion of this highway (SR 279 to SR 85) is a four lane
divided highway. The major commuting route for airport workers, this highway carries
22,400 vehicles a day.
State Route 279 runs south from I-285 in South Fulton County, entering Fayette County
at SR 138. It proceeds southwest across SR 314 and ends at SR 85 north of the City of
Fayetteville. SR 279 is a two-lane highway and carries 16,700 vehicles a day.
State Route 92 extends southward from Fulton County, running northwest to southeast
through Fayetteville and Woolsey, and continuing into Spalding County. It is two lanes
throughout Fayette County, except for the section with passing lanes on SR 92 north and
the section in the City of Fayetteville where State Routes 85 and 92 merge. This highway
carries commuter traffic from Griffin and Spalding County north to the airport and the
Atlanta Metropolitan Area. Such traffic totals 13,800 vehicles a day.
The County’s Thoroughfare Plan classifies streets by a hierarchical system based on street
function. This classification system is based on the need to balance traffic movement and
accessability on different roadways. The classifications used by the Thoroughfare Plan include
arterial, collector and local streets. The three categories of street classification are discussed
Arterial Streets - An arterial street is intended to provide swift, safe, and convenient
traffic movement within and through the county. A major thoroughfare, an arterial street
generally moves high volumes of traffic through the county and provides access to the
interstate network. Arterial streets generally accommodate two or four lanes of moving
traffic, often with turning lanes to accommodate traffic flow.
Collector Streets - Collector streets distribute traffic from arterials to local streets and
adjacent land uses. They also collect traffic from local areas and distribute it to the arterial
network. The collector network primarily serves localized areas. The main difference
between collector and arterial streets is the length and type of trip accommodated.
Local Streets - A local street provides access to adjoining properties and circulation
within a limited area. Local streets are usually low volume roads associated with
subdivisions or areas which are primarily residential in nature. They comprise the highest
percentage of total street miles within the county.
The Fayette County Road Department maintains approximately 468 miles of roads of which 61
miles are unpaved. The county maintains all roads in the unincorporated area, Brooks and
Woolsey. The Town of Tyrone, the City of Fayetteville, and the City of Peachtree City perform
maintenance on their roads, but the Fayette County Road Department provides repaving services
to these cities by contract.
The interstate system presently serving the Atlanta Metropolitan Area does not pass through
Fayette County. The closest interstate highway, Interstate 85, is approximately 1.5 miles to the
north. Local access to Interstate 85 is provided through SR 74 and Palmetto Road.
Bicycle And Pedestrian Ways
Fayette County has a county-wide bicycle plan, as part of the Regional Transportation Plan
(RTP), on file with the Atlanta Regional Commission. This submittal allows the county to apply
for any available state/federal funds, such as Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
(ISTEA) funds. The bicycle plan generally provides bicycle path connections between county
municipalities, recreational areas (Kiwanis and McCurry Parks), historic areas (Starr’s Mill) and
adjacent counties (Fulton and Clayton).
The first bicycle path is planned along Beauregard/Redwine Road. It is a joint project between
the City of Fayetteville and Fayette County. It is partially funded through the RTP and
Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) process. The path is planned to eventually connect the
City of Fayetteville with Kiwanis Park in the unincorporated county.
Transportation Options
Fayette County’s residents are dependent on the automobile as the major mode of transportation.
Publicly funded transportation does not exist in Fayette County. Car and van pool use is minimal.
A privately owned shuttle service transports commuters to downtown Atlanta from Peachtree
The Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) completed a Commuter Rail Plan in
September 1995 that recommended the phased implementation of six commuter rail lines using
existing rail corridors. One proposed line would use the existing Seaboard System rail line
through Fayette County with proposed stations in Tyrone and Peachtree City. The commuter rail
service would terminate in Senoia. To date, the development of the Atlanta to Senoia commuter
rail service through Fayette County has not been scheduled.
Railroads and Airports
Railroads. There are two rail lines running through Fayette County: Seaboard System and
Norfolk Southern. The Seaboard System line runs north/south from Fulton County through
Peachtree City to Senoia. Rail service to industrial areas in Peachtree City is provided by CSX
Railroad on this line. The Norfolk Southern line runs east/west from Griffin through Brooks to
Senoia. The Norfolk Southern line is no longer in use although the tracks are still in place.
Airports: Falcon Field in Peachtree City, within the confines of the Peachtree City industrial area,
is the county’s only general aviation airport. This airport is experiencing an increase in the
amount of corporate usage. A 5,200 foot all-weather-lighted runway allows this airport to
accommodate corporate jets and smaller commercial airplanes. There are also a number of small
private landing fields located in the county.
Fayette County will continue to depend on the automobile as the major mode of transportation
within the scope of this plan. Therefore, maintaining and improving the efficiency of the existing
road system is of paramount importance. Projects recommended in the updated Fayette County
Transportation Plan include bridge projects, intersection improvements, and roadway projects
which will maintain and improve the traffic flow.
Needed improvements are expensive and cannot be fully funded from the general fund. In
addition, Fayette County is in competition with other metro counties for a finite amount of federal
and state funds. The county should seek alternative funding sources such as a Special Local
Option Sales Tax (SPLOST) or bonds for local road improvements.
The Fayette County Transportation Plan recommends transportation improvement projects. Each
project includes a description of the need it fulfills, an estimated total cost for the project, and the
cost allocation in terms of federal, state, and local shares. The Plan contains 10 bridge
improvement projects, 20 intersection improvements, 28 roadway projects, seven streetscape and
greenway projects, and six transit projects. The following is a summary of the projects in the
Fayette County Transportation Plan.
Bridge Improvement Projects: Seven of the ten bridge improvement projects are located in the
unincorporated county. These bridge projects are listed in Table T-1.
2003 - 2005 SR 85 at Morning Creek
2006 - 2010 Coastline Road at Whitewater Creek
2006 - 2010 Westbridge Road at Morning Creek
2006 - 2010 Kenwood Road at Morning Creek
2006 - 2010 Inman Road at Murphy Creek
2006 - 2010 McIntosh Road at the Flint River
2006 - 2010 SR 85 at Whitewater Creek
Source: Fayette County Transportation Plan - Final Report, 2003.
Intersection Improvement Projects: Nine of the 20 intersection improvement projects are
located in the unincorporated county. One project, which is located in the Town of Brooks, will
be the responsibility of Fayette County. These intersection improvements are listed in Table T-2.
2003 - 2005 Signal modification at SR 314 and SR 279
2003 - 2005 Intersection improvements at SR 54 and McDonough Road
2006 - 2010 Installation of signal at SR 92 and Gingercake Road
2006 - 2010 Install turning lanes and signal at S. Jeff Davis Drive and County Line Road
2006 - 2010 Intersection improvements at SR 92, Harp Road, and Seay Road
2006 - 2010 Intersection improvements at Antioch Road and McBride Road
2006 - 2010 Add left turn lanes where Kingswood Drive and Hilo Road intersects with SR 92
2006 - 2010 Realignment of intersection of SR 85 Connector and Woolsey-Brooks Road in the
Town of Brooks
2011 - 2015 Realignment of intersection of Sandy Creek Road, Sams Drive, and Eastin Road
2011 - 2015 Realignment of intersection of Goza Road and Antioch Road
Source: Fayette County Transportation Plan - Final Report, 2003.
Roadway Improvement Projects: The Transportation Plan lists 28 total roadway projects.
Thirteen of these 28 projects are located solely in the unincorporated County. Three are in both
the unincorporated county and a municipality; one is a multi-jurisdictional Corridor Plan, and the
remaining projects are located solely within a municipality. A summary of the projects is listed in
Table T-3.
2003 - 2005 SR 74
Corridor Plan
It is recommended that a multi-jurisdictional master plan be
developed for the SR 74 north corridor. The jurisdictions include
Fayette County, Fulton County, Fairburn, Tyrone, and Peachtree
City. The issues include traffic growth, congestion and safety, level
of vehicular access, and corridor management.
2006 - 2010 SR 74 Widen SR 74 to a four lane divided highway from SR 54 south to SR
85. This is a GDOT project. The project is located in the
unincorporated county and the City of Peachtree City.
2006 - 2010 SR 54 Widen SR 54 to a four lane divided highway from McDonough Road
east to US 41/Tara Blvd. in Clayton County. This is a GDOT
2006 - 2010 McDonough
Road (SR 920)
Widen McDonough Road to a four lane divided highway from SR 54
east to US 41/Tara Blvd. in Clayton County. This is a GDOT
2006 - 2015 East
This project will create a eastern bypass around the City of
Fayetteville through a north-south connection from SR 92 to SR 85
and SR 279 to relieve congestion in downtown Fayetteville. This
project supplies a connection from south SR 92 through Inman
Road, County Line Road, a new road connecting County Line Road
with Corinth Road, and Corinth Road to SR 85 and SR 279. It is
proposed that the portion from South Jeff Davis Road north to SR 85
and SR 279 be a four lane roadway.
2006 - 2015 Northside
This project will provide a continuous east-west route through the
northern section of the county from SR 85 to Palmetto Road.
Operational improvements on Kenwood Road which involve various
intersection and turn lane improvements between SR 92 and SR 279
will facilitate a connection to the East Fayetteville Bypass.
Intersection improvements are recommended at Lee’s Mill Road and
Sandy Creek Road and Jenkins Road and Sandy Creek Road, and the
reconstruction of turn lanes along Jenkins and Sandy Creek Roads.
The extension of either Jenkins Road or Sandy Creek Road to
Trickum Creek Road will provide a connection to Palmetto Road.
This portion of the project is in the unincorporated county and the
Town of Tyrone.
TABLE T-3, continued.
2006 - 2015 West
This project will create a western bypass around the City of
Fayetteville through a north-south connection from SR 92 to SR 85
to relieve congestion in downtown Fayetteville. This project
provides a connection from SR 92 to Sandy Creek Road through a
new road which runs south from Westbridge Road to Tillman Road.
A new road runs south from Sandy Creek Road across SR 54 to
Lester Road. The last portion of the connection utilizes two
alternatives. Alternative one would consist of extending Lester Road
south across Ebenezer Road to Harp Road Alternative two involves
extending Ebenezer Church Road east across Redwine Road to Harp
2011 - 2015 SR 314 Widen SR 314 to a four lane divided highway from SR 279 north to
Norman Drive in Fulton County. This is a GDOT project.
2011 - 2015 SR 85 Widen SR 85 to a four lane divided highway from SR 92 to SR 74.
This is a GDOT project.
2011 - 2025 SR 92 This project involves the installation of turn lanes and intersection
improvements from McBride Road south to the Spalding county line.
This is a GDOT project.
2011 - 2015 Hampton
This project includes the relocation of Hampton Road creating a new
intersection with SR 92 and providing a new roadway connecting to
Woolsey-Brooks Road. This project is in the unincorporated county
and the Town of Woolsey.
2021 - 2025 Tyrone and
Widen Tyrone and Palmetto Roads from SR 74 to I-85 to four lanes
to accommodate future demand as this roadway provides a
connection to Interstate 85. This project is in the unincorporated
county and the Town of Tyrone and will require coordination with
Coweta County.
Source: Fayette County Transportation Plan - Final Report, 2003.
School/Hospital Access Road Project: The Land Use Plan Map indicates a proposed access
road to be located on the north side of, and parallel to, SR 54 between Tyrone Road and the
hospital property. Access will be provided to the future high school site. The proposed further
eastern extension of this road to the West Fayetteville Bypass (see Table T-3, above) would
provide alternative access to the hospital as well as offer additional traffic circulation options.
MacDuff Parkway Extension: The Land Use Plan Map indicates the extension of MacDuff
Parkway from its current terminus in Peachtree City connecting through a portion of the
unincorporated county to Kedron Drive, also in Peachtree City.
Streetscape and Greenway Projects: The Redwine Road Multi-Use Path is the only streetscape
and greenway project in the Transportation Plan located in unincorporated Fayette County. A
portion of this project is also located in the City of Fayetteville.
Transit Projects: The transit projects identified in the Transportation Plan involve Dial-A-Ride
reimbursements and the previously mentioned Atlanta to Senoia commuter rail service. Dial-ARide
reimbursements are used to provide transportation services to senior citizens.
In addition to the improvements identified in the Transportation Plan, pedestrian and bicycle
routes should be expanded and developed as alternative transportation opportunities. The county
should consider requiring sidewalks or walking paths in residential subdivisions. The county
would have to develop criteria as to the size or zoning category of residential subdivisions which
would require sidewalks or walking paths. Efforts should be explored to maintain the right-ofways
of rail lines which someday may be abandoned. These right-of-ways could be purchased and
used for recreational trails until such time as they are needed again. Property acquired through
the Fayette County Greenspace Program could provide pedestrian and bicycle routes. The county
should continue to seek ISTEA funds for pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
According to the 2000 Census, approximately two thirds of Fayette County’s workforce drives
out of the county for employment. As the County continues to grow, the feasibility of
transportation options for commuting should be investigated.
At this time, rail and airport transportation appear to be adequate. Existing rail lines serve
industrial areas located in Tyrone and Peachtree City. Falcon Field is located in the Peachtree
City industrial area where the greatest concentration of corporate users are also located.
The following goal, objective, and policy statements presented in this section emphasize the need
to maximize the efficiency of the existing and future Fayette County transportation network.
Following the goal is a listing of objectives and policies which address specific issues.
Recommendations or guidelines which suggest courses of action for addressing these issues, are
also provided.
Goal for Transportation: Growth should be balanced with the supporting transportation
infrastructure. Fayette County will continue to develop a transportation system to move people
and goods efficiently while minimizing the environmental impact and community disruption.
Further, the county should establish a framework to ensure the improvement and further
development of the transportation system. Sidewalks and trails should be developed as an
enhancement to transportation facilities.
Objective T-1: Fayette County should provide a road system that provides adequate
local access and capacity for through movements, consistent with the
financial, social, and environmental constraints of the County.
Policy a. Ensure that the street network is planned, designed, and operated in
adherence to the Functional Classification System described in the
Transportation Element.
Policy b. Provide a street network level of service as high as practical: the collector
and arterial street system should operate at no lower than Level of Service
“C” on an average daily basis, or lower than Level of Service “D” on a
peak hour basis. (Note: Levels of Service are “A” (free flow of traffic),
“B” (stable flow, some speed restrictions), “C” (stable flow, restricted
speed ), “D” (approaching unstable flow), “E” (unstable flow) and “F”
(forced flow), reflecting factors such as speed, travel time, traffic
interruptions, and delay.)
Policy c. Continue to provide new roadway construction and other facility
improvements which meet Georgia Department of Transportation
(GDOT) standards for inclusion in the State highway system.
Policy d. Pursue advanced acquisition of land for future roadway rights-of-way in
order to minimize project costs and impacts on established neighborhoods.
Policy e. Consider funding intersection improvements when highway funding is
insufficient to permit the improvement of full segments, or if the level of
service is low, or if there is a high accident occurrence rate.
Policy f. Provide for the synchronization of traffic signals where appropriate to
improve traffic flow and reduce pollution associated with idling vehicles.
Objective T-2: A comprehensive network of trails and sidewalks should be provided
as an integral element of the overall transportation network.
Policy a. Consider the provision of matching funds for pedestrian, bicycle, and
hiking trail system components in accordance with the Fayette County Bike
and Pedestrian Plan element of the Atlanta Regional Commission’s (ARC)
Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). In addition, establish pedestrian,
bicycle, and hiking trails in conjunction with road improvements,
abandoned railways and stream valleys.
Policy b. Provide nonmotorized facility improvements in accordance with standards
delineated by the GDOT and the American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
Policy c. Consider the provision of bicycle and pedestrian features, including clearly
marked sidewalks and trails, and marked crosswalk and pedestrian signals,
in the construction and reconstruction of roads and bridges.
Objective T-3: The programming of improvements to the transportation system
should be sensitive to the county’s identified land use goals and
Policy a. Recognize anticipated future levels of demand based on the land use plan
and operating conditions, as well as existing conditions, when making
programming decisions.
Objective T-4: Transportation facilities and services should be provided in a manner
that minimize community disruption and adverse environmental
Policy a. Use all reasonable means to minimize adverse impacts of existing and
planned transportation facilities and services on environmental and historic
resources and neighborhood stability.
Objective T-5: Fayette County should work to ensure adequate financing for
maintaining its transportation system and for its transportation
system’s improvements.
Policy a. Develop and implement a responsible financial plan that identifies existing
and new funding mechanisms to achieve the County's transportation system
Policy b. Pursue increased state and federal support for road improvement projects.
Policy c. Supplement state and federal funding of secondary roadways and other
high priority projects, and continue local funding initiatives.
Policy d. Increase funding for pedestrian, bicycle and hiking trails, including state
and federal sources with the realization that state and federal funding will
require a County match ranging from 20 to 40 percent.
Policy e. Seek multi-jurisdictional funding sources for transportation facilities and
Objective T-6: Ensure public safety for the users of transportation facilities and
services and for the general public.
Policy a. Incorporate medians and separate turning lanes in the design of roadways
having four or more travel lanes.
Policy b. Upgrade existing roadways to correct unsafe conditions along segments
which have substandard geometries such as horizontal and vertical
alignments with inferior sight distances. Upgrades could include side
clearances, shoulder widenings, and guardrail installations. Incorporate
safety features into new transportation facilities both for the users and for
the general public.
Policy c. Reduce conflicts among pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists and correct
unsafe conditions for walking and bicycling, where feasible. This could be
accomplished by providing separate pedestrian and bike paths, walk/don’t
walk signalization, etc.
Objective T-7: Fayette County should, to the extent consistent with other county
goals and objectives, maximize the efficiency with which each facility
within the transportation system fulfills its assigned function.
Policy a. Maximize the efficiency of existing roads through low-cost strategies to
increase capacity such as channelization, turning lanes, signalization, and
Policy b. Preserve and enhance the efficiency of the arterial network by reducing and
consolidating private entrances, median crossovers, and similar disruptions
to traffic flow. Also improve intersection efficiency by providing
appropriate turning lanes and signalization.
Policy c. Increase neighborhood safety on subdivision streets. Work with local law
enforcement agencies, county departments, and neighborhoods to
implement Traffic Calming and other measures where needed or practical.
Examples of Traffic Calming techniques include deflecting the vehicle path
by adding curves and/or traffic circles; changing the pavement surface,
which demands driver attention and reduces the comfortable driving speed;
and adding standard traffic control devices such as STOP signs, turnmovement
prohibitions, traffic signals, and reducing the posted speed limit.
Objective T-8: Preserve land needed to accommodate planned transportation
Policy a. Establish right-of-way requirements and preserve the land for future
roadway improvements.
Policy b. Prepare engineering plans for future transportation improvements as soon
as feasible in order to clarify and secure right-of-way requirements and to
develop improved cost estimates.
Objective T-9: Periodically review and update the transportation plan.
Policy a. Monitor changes in travel patterns, traffic, and the provision of
transportation facilities and services. Evaluate the transportation plan’s
ability to address future travel needs as part of the periodic review process.
Policy b. Conduct major corridor level and community-wide transportation planning
studies in an effort to refine the plan and comprehensively address systemwide
transportation needs within the County.
Policy c. Consider regional travel patterns when formulating and implementing the
County’s transportation plan with consideration of ARC and Georgia
Regional Transportation Authority ( GRTA) transportation policies.
Fayette County should address the transportation challenges associated
with continuing trends in intra-county commuting patterns.


The amount of traffic on a particular road is meaningless unless a detailed traffic study is made considering road capacity, destinations, number of passengers, number of vehicles,number of traffic signals, trends, economic forecasts.etc.

Our esteemed leaders never did conduct a study that can prove existing traffic patterns make the current alignment of the WFB our only salvation from the eternal parking lot. They did one that will show what traffic the WFB can handle. You or I could do the same thing with a Tyrone-Woolsey tollway, but that doesn't mean we would need it.

BHH's picture

what they used to justify the WFB.

This is the only thing I can find and the WFB is way down the list of needs even in this plan.

Originally the EFB was to be built first but when it became obvious the SPLOST would not bring in enough funds to build it the commission was determined to build the WFB instead.

That was just one of the earliest signs that the economy was headed south but it wasn't recognized as such by the commission.


I find it quite pertinent, inasmuch as the current commission has generally ignored what I'm sure was an expensive report and done as they damn well pleased!
All I can say is I hope voters are happy with what they voted for when they chose to throw Greg Dunn & Company out of office! I feel quite confident that if that group was still in office, this current spending situation would never have happened.

Hoover, Nixon, Bushs', etc.

Cyclist's picture

and I'll add Obama to that list.

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

Why add him to the list?

A little over 2 years there and most of the important banks and auto companies were saved. A Depression may have been prevented.

The wars are coming to an end with, IMO, evidence that they were useless!

Most of our debt was Reagan's and Bush's! The lap over into President Obama's 2 years was due to the previous 8!

We will now finally get a health bill for everyone.

Social Security and Medicaid will be saved.

You will need to wait until 2016 at least to judge his performance and at least ten years after that to be accurate!

I'll even bet by then we will have solved our water, bridge, dam, etc., problems! The New Interstates for trucks will have been started, and railroads (high speed) will be running.

We will be on Mars with missiles pointed where necessary!

Cyclist's picture

[quote=roundabout]A little over 2 years there and most of the important banks and auto companies were saved. A Depression may have been prevented.

So TARP was an Obama success?

Caution - The Surgeon General has determined that constant blogging is an addiction that can cause a sedentary life style.

BHH's picture

and nothing positive will have been attributed to Obama.


It might take a hundred years if the conservatives had anything to do with it!
It hurts their brain to think about such stuff.

Observerofu's picture

Roundie your myopic view of events astounds even me.

In your view Obama has:

1. Cut the deficit
2. Saved the Healthcare system
3. Finished all Wars.
4. Accomplished his mission.

The Reality is that:

1. He has spent more then Presidents Washington to Bush combined in just two years.
2. Created a Federal monstrosity that even it's supporters are now saying they went to far.
3. Started two additional Wars in Libya and Yeman while ignoring his own Generals advice in the War in Iraq.
4. I guess we will give you this one if by accomplishing his mission involves crashing the economy and demoralizing our Armed Forces to the point of distraction.

"Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt"
-Samuel Adams
Illegitimi non carborundum

Blessed is the county that incurs no trespass of Interstate highways. Take a look at the other Metro Atlanta counties, all of which are crossed by Interstates, and you can see a difference in living conditions none of us would want.

Which county would you rather live in? Fayette County is an oasis. What people don't realize is that I-75 and I-85 actually direct traffic away from Fayette County rather than to it. That's why we're not Gwinnett South.

We have less traffic than any other county in Metro Atlanta for being no further out than we are. North Fulton and Forsyth Counties are nice, but THE TRAFFIC?? And what about those 1 1/2 hour commutes from Cobb and Cherokee counties that I-75 and Ga. 400 built?

Doggone stubborn, these high density development bloggers.

Let's go back to "cord" roads as super highways and of course gravel and clay roads like south Georgia has!

No Corvette, Lexus, or Mercedes allowed.

Start the stagecoaches again and a few trains for transportation.

of a position. I am sure you are the only one around who has ever driven a stagecoach. Trains, i am sure, are much too modern for you.

I rode shotgun out of Denver for awhile for Wells-Fargo!

Why do we need a Columbo or a Castle or any of those amateurs when it comes to having Palladin in our very midst? Why don't you use all those wonderful powers you have and get this mess straightened out for us. Palladin used to do it in a half hour--I am sure you are up to it.

What mess? I don't see a mess in PTC or Fayetteville.

Banks, developers, AND WALL STREET, YES.

small area. I meant for you to settle all the problems of the world. You should be able to do that and still have time to settle down with a Rum and coke and rum and rum in time for the 5 pm news.

What is the 5 PM news? I know what rum is.

Is the 5 PM news where they tell you about how many robberies and rapes and fires set and cars stolen and tests cheated on and superintendents getting rich by cheating and two people at work for every one job and sitting in dump trucks all day until time to check in, and people escaping from jails after they kill a few, and fires, and fires, and fires?

All we have here is loving judges, stripper judges, broke banks, broke developers and builders, unneeded roads built, porno Chiefs, drunk managers, 23rd generation Irish settlers, and excessive budgets!

to know everything---I think you are making most of the news. Who are the stripper judges, porno chief and drunk mangers, also 23rd generation Irish settlers--aren't you one?

BHH's picture

Thank God I'm not the only one.

Yes, no expressway is a blessing.

Only fools would attract one or anything resembling one.


BHH's picture

If a study were to begin right away it could ready by early 2012.

Even this plan indicates there should be updates and revisions along the way.

There have been few if any revisions in 8 years since this began.


Commissioner Brown isn't maligning developers. Commissioners Frady, Hearn and Horgan are maligning the taxpayers! The people are screaming, "STOP WASTING OUR MONEY!"

The local government doesn't have an obligation to build roads for the developers. Let the developers build their own road.

mudcat's picture

Roads cost a lot of money. Developers have to buy the land and put in all the streets and utilities and that's expensive enough. No developer in his right mind would take on the expense of building roads that go nowhere and only provide access for your neighboring and competing developer. So, that leaves the county - a few who are not quite sane and sober and the unlimited money provided by the taxpayer.

Some developers support certain candidates and even contribute to their campaign funds and sometimes their personal funds and occasionally a condo in Panama City if they get decisions like this made and those expensive roads built, according to Mr. Brown. Hope he pursues that line of thought and gets some proof this time. It would be great to actually prove some of those allegations. Maybe Cal can help. Stories about stuff like that would be good for The Citizen. Follow the money!

ginga1414's picture

In fact, most of the developer land along the WFB is owned by large families. Hundreds and hundreds of acres are owned by two old Fayette County families. They have owned the land for many generations. Some of those family members just happen to be developers. Those two families have been sitting on the land just waiting for the opportunity to cash in when the time is right.

I attended one commission meeting where Chairman Frady made the comment that a developer had told him that if the county would pave a certain dirt road the developer would get busy and develop the property along that road. During the discussion, Commissioner Steve Brown said that he couldn't go along with spending money needed for more important projects to pave a road with only two houses on it. At the next commission meeting, the road was approved for paving with a vote of 3 to 2.

Having known and talked to members of both families with vast acreage along the WFB, it is my understanding that the families couldn't afford to develop the property without the county's help. The City of Fayetteville and Fayette County want the larger tax base the development will bring.

So, Fayette citizens paid over $100,000,000 into the SPLOST funds, and county officials seized that opportunity to build a road that would enable developers.

The fact that Commissioner Bennett Lee Hearn and his cousin, Addison Lester, are members of a much larger family and that larger family partnership owns property along and has sold property along the WFB is inconsequential?

The fact that Commissioner Hearn's cousin, Addison Lester, also sits on the Fayetteville Development Authority, Fayetteville wants the revenue from the developed property, and the Lester Family Limited Partnership has already sold property along Phase I of the WFB is inconsequential?

Lastly, Commissioner Hearn has said for years that the WFB is his "baby." Now, Commissioner Hearn has gone so far as to say that "nothing" will ever change his mind about building the WFB and he doesn't "care" what the citizens have to say about it.

mudcat's picture

inheriting land is much cheaper than buying it. Guess the developer families now have a choice of reimbursing the taxpayers for the fortune they spent increasing the land's value or just sitting on their hands and making a much larger profit. No wonder Steve Brown has these conspiricy theories - they might even be more than theories. Wonder how much one has to pay for a condo in Panama City nowadays. Let's watch where the 3 amigos vacation when they leave office.

Mike King's picture

It is my belief that your sarcasm, regardless of how eloquently penned, is wasted upon those possessing the cognitive skills of a stop sign.

mudcat's picture

I still feel the need to please an appreciative audience - no matter how small.

I must admit that for the first time I seriously see some credence in Mr. Brown's never ending harangue against developers and possible under the table payments. Nothing else explains the unrelenting support for this ill-conceived and poorly planned boondoggle. What else can account for the attitudes of these 3 fools?

Mike King's picture

As difficult as it is I also see credence in what the Commissioner is doing, but until the 'carrot' is exposed(assuming there is one) nothing changes.

Have a great 4th!

Well now I wouldn't consider a condo in Panama City as tell-tell evidence of stolen vast sums!

If they end up in one in Hawaii on the beach, then we will know.

Odds are however they will move to a cabin in Blairsville!

Or, where ever the last few Transportation Commissioners from Georgia now reside! Tahiti, maybe. Isn't Sonny also worth millions more now than when he took office at about $90gs?

Didn't he deepen the channels in Savannah so he could put more trucks on the road to the docks?

Hey, even President Bush, jr., is worth many millions more now than when he took office--he gets $150,000 per speech and 10 mil for a book.
Even President Obama is now a millionaire from books! He will have to beat off offers with a stick when he quits!

Now Newt-----well Newt rakes it in by the shovel full from those he helps.

Good jobs if you can be devious enough to get them!

suggarfoot's picture

"I attended one commission meeting where Chairman Frady made the comment that a developer had told him that if the county would pave a certain dirt road the developer would get busy and develop the property along that road. During the discussion, Commissioner Steve Brown said that he couldn't go along with spending money needed for more important projects to pave a road with only two houses on it. At the next commission meeting, the road was approved for paving with a vote of 3 to 2."

It is developer welfare!

My father started his own business over 60 years ago back home. If he had gone to the county commissioners and said "I need you to build a road for me to start up...I just don't have the money"..they would have laughed in his face and told him to go get a loan like everyone else has to do! And they would have been right in doing so.

There is no way in this world you can justify taking the masses(taxpayers) money and using it for a few to get rich.

These people are ignorant and should never be in office.

suggarfoot's picture

"Some developers support certain candidates and even contribute to their campaign funds and sometimes their personal funds and occasionally a condo in Panama City if they get decisions like this made and those expensive roads built, according to Mr. Brown. Hope he pursues that line of thought and gets some proof this time. It would be great to actually prove some of those allegations. Maybe Cal can help. Stories about stuff like that would be good for The Citizen. Follow the money!"

So many of us have wondered how the shell game is played. I had thought possible shares of stock in some small company that would benefit directly by the actions of the elected official.

Or, it could be something as simple as a new car.

ginga1414's picture

that one of our highest paid county employees is spending a week with his family in Panama City condo. I know who the employee is, but I don't know who owns the condo.

I also know that most of the commissioners and some employees were wined, dined, and entertained in Savannah by "favorite son" companies that do business with the county.

NUK_1's picture

They usually foot the bill in Savannah during the GMA annual conference for local govs to eat at an upscale restaurant downtown.

PTC Observer's picture

It would take some really dumb politicans to sell their vote for a condo in PC and fine dining in Savannah. I would say that they not only had bad judgement, but poor taste. LOL

"Some developers support certain candidates and even contribute to their campaign funds and sometimes their personal funds and occasionally a condo in Panama City if they get decisions like this made and those expensive roads built, according to Mr. Brown."

Wasn't it just a few years ago that someone with direct ties to a local PAC accused Steve Brown of getting a 'good deal' on a condo in Panama City from a local developer?

Don't you find it strange that local developers only seem to buy local politicians condos in Panama City?

If you don't remember this story going around perhaps "dead guy" remembers.


Ad space area 4 internal