Settle w hat 5x7 high-res.jpg

John came to Shreveport in January of 1977 when he was transferred to Barksdale AFB.

He’s been active in Shreveport politics since deciding to make Shreveport his home.

John practiced law for 40 years and he now monitors local politics. He regularly attends Shreveport City Council and Caddo Parish Commission meetings.

John is published weekly in The Inquisitor, bi-monthly in The Forum News, and frequently in the Shreveport Times.

He enjoys addressing civic groups on local government issues and elections.

 

PROGRESS VERSUS PROPERTY RIGHTS—THE RED RIVER EXPRESS CONUNDRUM

The proposed Red River Expressway will be a privately funded toll road from the terminus of LA 3132 at Flournoy Lucas Road that will traverse the Red River and connect to the Arthur Ray Teague Parkway and La. Hwy 71.
 
The developer has purchased easements from the needed property owners with the exception of a small parcel owned by the City of Shreveport on Flournoy Lucas Road across from the end of LA 3132.
 
Travel on the nine-mile corridor will be free, but a toll will be charged to cross the new bridge to be constructed over the Red River. The road will be two lanes, with enough right-of-way to expand to four lanes.
 
Nearby property owners are concerned with depreciation of property values, noise/air pollution from the road that will be built within 200 feet of Milbank Park in 12 Oaks, and lack of speed enforcement of the proposed 35 mph limit.
 
Legally the developer can build his road passing through Esplanade subdivision and skirting 12 Oaks subdivision IF the City of Shreveport grants the needed easement. The property owners in the two subdivisions have NO legal basis to stop the proposed construction.
 
Councilman Grayson Boucher wants the final approval of the City easement to be conditioned upon the following.
 
1.      Only 2 lanes
 
2.      35 mph speed limit
 
3.      No jake brakes
 
4.      No hazardous material to be transported on road
 
5.      Sound protections such as berms or other attractive screening
 
The developer indicated he would agree to these conditions. Actually, he will have NO choice if the final ordinance approving the easement contains these conditions.
 
But will these conditions be enough to allay the concerns of the property owners in the two subdivisions? Probably not.
 
This is the classic case of “progress” that infringes upon “property rights”. It's one of those “I love the proposal as long as it's not in my backyard.” In the perfect world there could be a reasonable compromise that would provide for the expressway and not harm nearby property owners. Unfortunately, that is not the reality.

NO CITY ORDINANCES REGULATE TRICK- OR- TREATERS

REMINDER: Flashing yellow left turn arrow installations continue in NW region