____________
Vince Rhea, P.E.
N.C. Dept. of Transportation
1548 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1548
Re: I-26
Connector, TIP No. I-2513
Dear Mr. Rhea:
Now
that work on the I-26 Connector Project has begun again, the I-26 ConnectUs
Group would like to provide the following comments to you and DOT regarding our
hoped for goals for the project and the new EIS. The I-26 ConnectUs Group represents most of the potentially
impacted neighborhoods, including West Asheville, Burton Street, East-West Asheville,
WECAN, and Montford. Though we no
longer have a specific representative for the Emma community, we continue to
consider the interests of that neighborhood. The group also has participation from the Asheville Housing
Authority, Christians for a United Community, the design community and, of
course, the Western North Carolina Alliance.
The
I-26 ConnectUs Project has revised its 2009 goal statement to better reflect
the current status of the project and the need for all parties involved to step
back from earlier, entrenched positions.
Our current goal statement, or vision, for the project appears below, and
we would anticipate being able to support a project that met these goals:
To ensure the long term health and success of the
economy, citizens, and environment of Asheville and the surrounding area, the
final design and construction of the Asheville I-26 Connector should achieve
the following:
·
Safe travel for interstate and local traffic
·
Improved connections for all modes of local
traffic
·
Minimal destruction of neighborhoods, homes, and
businesses
·
Minimal harm to air and water quality
·
Improvements that match the scale and character
of Asheville
In
addition, there are several issues that we request the new EIS specifically
address. Many of these are
standard considerations for EISs, but we want to be sure DOT understands what
we think is most important and provides information that will help Asheville
and DOT make the best possible decisions around this project. Therefore, we request that the new EIS
include the following;
·
Recognition of the importance of the environment
and character of Asheville, their role in promoting regional tourism, and an
analysis of the impacts the various alternatives will have on these.
·
An assessment of the impacts the alternatives
will have on neighborhood and city connectivity via local streets and documentation
of specific impacts to neighborhoods.
·
An analysis of how this project helps advance or
impede the goals and implementation of various plans adopted by the City of
Asheville, Buncombe County, and the region, including the Long Range
Transportation Plan; the City’s 2025 plan, Greenway Master Plan, Transit Master
Plan, Pedestrian Plan, and Bicycle Plan; and the County’s new Greenway Master
Plan.
·
An analysis of whether improvements to local
roads and/or transportation demand management strategies would be effective at
reducing local traffic on I-26.
·
A clear explanation of the traffic forecast and
the resulting recommendation on the number of lanes, as well as the tradeoffs
inherent in the relationship between the number of lanes and the level of
service.
·
A new traffic forecast that uses a revised local
model to see if state and national trends in reduction of VMT is occurring in
Asheville and what impact that might have on the project.
·
An analysis of the application of the NCDOT
Complete Streets Policy and the new NCDOT Public Health Policy to this project and
how this project advances or impedes the goals of these policies.
·
A more complete analysis of the air and water
quality impacts of the various alternatives.
For
purposes of the EIS, we also note the addition of New Belgium to our community
in the vicinity of this project, and we ask that the DOT consider in its design
alternatives providing easier highway access for New Belgium truck traffic that
reduces the impact on surrounding neighborhoods.
Finally,
we encourage DOT to focus the funding available for this project on Section
B. We realize the only currently
available funding is for Section A through West Asheville, but Section A is a
much lower priority and, if funding continues to be limited, should be built
after Section B. In no case should
Section A be built before or apart from Section B, as that would be
unnecessarily destructive to neighborhoods, homes, and the environment and
would not address any transportation need.
Thank
you for your consideration of these comments. As members and leaders of this community, we look forward to
working with you and others to design and chose the alternative that will best
serve Asheville and its citizens and visitors for decades to come.
Sincerely,
Julie V. Mayfield
Executive Director
Cc: Asheville
City Council
Buncombe
County Commission
Paul
Black, French Broad River MPO
Jay
Swain, NCDOT Division 13
Rick
Tipton, NCDOT Division 13
No comments:
Post a Comment