October 13 an article entitled “Thinking Anew About a Migratory Barrier: Roads” appeared in the NY Times addressing the issue of roads and their role in fragmenting wildlife habitat. This is a very real and serious issue relevant to Corridor K; especially considering the area’s significafragmentationnt Black Bear population.
Please take a moment to read this article. After reading the article, we’d like to hear what you have to say, so please feel free to offer your comments.
Filed under: Uncategorized
NC DOT recently released a Draft Supplemental Final Environmental Impact Statement (DSF EIS) that proposes a specific design and route for a four-lane highway between Stecoah and Robbinsville. Comments on this DSF EIS are due by Tuesday, Oct. 14, 2008! We have included some talking points below.
Mail or email comments to:
Gregory J. Thorpe, PhD, Environmental Management Director
Project Development and Environmental Analysis Branch
NC Department of Transportation
1548 MailServiceCenter
Raleigh, NC27699-1548
Background:
A costly, destructive, unnecessary four lane road is on the fast track to completion in rural, mountainous western North Carolina. The four lanes being studied would cut through some of the most difficult and scenic mountain landscapes in Western North Carolina, establishing a new route through the Stecoah Valley and across Cheoah Mountain.
Rather than propose a highway design that will serve the needs of the 21st century and safeguard the mountain values of Western North Carolina, which are home to generations of area residents and bring others for recreation and renewal, the DOT is proposing a four-lane highway that will cut across the mountains and valleys, devastating these irreplaceable resources.
The financial cost of this project cannot be justified in light of its meager transportation benefit. With a total projected cost to taxpayers of $378 million, $38 million per mile, the financial burden of this unnecessary four-lane road cannot be justified. With economic development being the focus of the Appalachian Regional Commission and Corridor K, this four lane road is not the best way to invest in what amounts to $42,000 per Graham County citizen on economic development.
If you are concerned about the integrity of the southern Appalachians-the land, the people, and irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars then take action.
For more background on Corridor K visit:
http://www.stopi3.org/corridor_k.html
http://www.stopi3.org/commonsense.htm
Talking Points:
Impacts to local communities:
The Department of Transportation projects that the road will trigger a surge in the population of Graham County of 26 percent by the year 2030 if the proposed segment from Stecoah to Robbinsville is completed. In addition, it will cause an explosive 79 percent population increase in Graham County if the road is completed all the way to Andrews. Yet the EIS offers no analysis of the implications of this growth to the environment, to the infrastructure of Graham County, or to the quality of life of people and communities in Graham County.
Viewsheds:
Pristine mountain vistas would be spoiled by the proposed route. Large cut and fill banks and cut rock faces would be visible from the Appalachian Trail and other areas in the Nantahala National Forest and surrounding areas, including the Cheoah Bald Roadless Area
Water Quality:
Deep cuts and fills, along with a 2,870-foot tunnel would impact the hydrology and drainage of the area. Potential acid bearing rock along the highway corridor could have long range and long lasting implications to stream health and drainage. Impacts to clear streams and water quality are unacceptable in the one proposed route in the DSFEIS. Trout streams and drinking water supplies would be damaged and mountain streams could be destroyed.
Noise Pollution:
Noise generated by the proposed route would impact the Appalachian Trail and other national forest lands that are important for recreation.
Wildlife:
The highway, as proposed, would impact numerous mature forest communities, impacting wildlife habitat and potentially impacting numerous rare species.
What we recommend:
DOT should consider other alternative routes that would address transportation needs while safeguarding the streams, scenic vistas, and wildlife habitat in this irreplaceable mountain landscape. In particular, upgrading highways 28 & 143 along the current route should be evaluated and considered as a viable alternative. The current route could be retained and enhanced to address current limitations while minimizing additional environmental impacts by routing along the existing highway footprint. Retaining and enhancing the current scenic highway and integrating it into a network of scenic highways around Robbinsville should be considered an alernative to developing a four-lane behemoth designed in and for the last century. We need an alternative that is sensitive to the unique and priceless area it will travel through. A careful reading of the DSFEIS reveals that the proposed route would only marginally benefit travel times; during certain times and situations the proposed route may actually take longer to travel than existing routes. The existing route also will handle projected traffic for decades to come. Furthermore, DOT has not evaluated the added capacity that sensible upgrades, such as redesigning intersections, could deliver at a cost significantly less than the $378 million the recommended four-lane is projected to cost.
It is time for responsible transportation that provides for transportation needs while safeguarding our environment and natural communities. It is past time for the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) and the Departments of Transportation in the region to re-evaluate the old transportation plans developed in the 1960s. New plans should be developed to address the needs, constraints, and opportunities of the 21st century. It is folly to ignore the changing dynamics of fossil fuel prices and availability. It is wasteful to ignore the role alternative transportation, including rail, can play in addressing many transportation needs such as freight transportation. It is foolish to minimize the many environmental impacts of roads that have been documented during the past several decades. It is an insult to the Appalachian region to refuse to acknowledge and incorporate the lessons learned over the past 45 years as the ARC highway corridors have been completed. The promised economic development the roads were intended to deliver have remained largely unfulfilled, bringing instead uncontrolled sprawl, destruction of small communities, degradation of streams and viewsheds and destruction of wildlife habitat.
