In the last two editorials, Ken’s Korner examined who is pushing the US 20 FREEWAY from Ashton to SH 87. In the first editorial, the evidence seemed to indicate that the Federal Highways Administration was not pushing this FREEWAY but the Idaho Transportation Department (District 6) was pushing for the FREEWAY. In the second editorial, the evidence showed that the Governor recognizes the growth in Idaho and the need for highway improvements and upgrades. There was no definitive evidence that the Governor is pushing for a FREEWAY in the island Park Caldera. However, in a campaign stop in Ashton last spring, he did indicate a four lane would be coming. There was no clarification if he was referring to US 20 Chester to Ashton or Ashton to SH 87. This week we will examine what the ITD leadership says about US 20 Ashton to SH 87.
The new Chief Operations Officer for ITD is Dan McElhinney. He came to Idaho in 2020 from California where he was employed by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). At an ITD Board meeting on February 18, 2021, Mr. McElhinney provided the following information to the Board: “While District Engineers have discussed corridors and individual project needs with their respective Board Members, the purpose of this workshop is to provide the board with a statewide overview of the identified safety and capacity needs and to present mitigation strategies for each corridor or project.” US 20 Ashton to SH 87 is part of a corridor. At a Board meeting on January 21, 2021, the notes include the following statements: “in an effort to improve safety, he (Jason Minzghor, ITD District 6) is requesting Board Unallocated funds to install rumble strips from milepost 363.3 to 406.30 and to widen the pavement markings from 4” to 6” lines………. “Member Hoff acknowledged the safety concerns on this highway and expressed support for this project. Chief Operations Officer Dan McElhinney added that this is a short term solution. Ideally the highway should be widened to four lanes.” The notes indicate the Mr. McElhinney has already made a decision that US 20 Ashton to SH87 “should be widened to four lanes”. This is referred to as “pre-decisional”. In other words, ITD has already decided on the solution before the National Environmental Policy Act process begins and even before the Planning and Environment Linkages process began. Many in Island Park, who attended the public meetings, suspected that ITD had already made a decision to support only a four lane FREEWAY. “The National Environmental Policy Act requires federal agencies to undertake an assessment of the environmental effects of their proposed actions prior to making decisions.” “NEPA: Generally, a preferred alternative (PA) is not identified until after the draft environmental document (DED) has circulated and public comments have been taken into account. However, when a proposed PA has been identified at the DED stage, it must be disclosed.” ITD should have disclosed to the public and the stakeholders that they already had a preferred alternative. ITD should have also disclosed to the public that they had a two lane alternative, developed by JUB Engineers, which met the purpose and need to 2042 and beyond. Over $3M of taxpayer money was spent on this alternative development. Who is pushing for the FREEWAY? ITD management certainly is!
0 Comments
Submitted by Ken Watts
Last week Ken’s Korner revealed an email from the Idaho Transportation Department, District 6, that may have indicated that the National Highways Administration is not pushing the FREEWAY in the Island Park Caldera. The email certainly shows that ITD, District 6, may be pushing for the FREEWAY. ITD has many levels. Starting from District 6, to the ITD Director, to the ITD Board, and then on to the Governor who appoints the Board. This week, let’s look at the Governor’s Leading Idaho with Transportation initiative. This is what ITD says about it: “District 6 Corridors – What projects will be funded by the leading Idaho TECM (transportation expansion and congestion mitigation) Program? – Governor Little’s Leading Idaho Vision allows ITD to take a deliberate approach to advance projects within the corridor that will enhance safety, mobility, further strengthen Idaho’s economy and positively impact communities across the state for years to come. Focusing on corridor advancement will give the Transportation Board the flexibility to approve project that address Idaho’s rapid growth issues with either the Transportation Expansion and Congestion Mitigation (TECM) funds or other state and federal funding that becomes available in the future.” If this statement is true, one could conclude that the Governor may be pushing for the FREEWAY. There are things that should be examined in statement above. For example, what does “deliberate” mean? Does this mean ignore the public and the numerous stakeholders in the area? Ken’s Korner has reported on several occasions, that based on ITD data, accidents are not increasing. In fact, US 20 accident rates in the Caldera are below the state average and about 1/3 the national average for a road of this type. This is documented in a JUB Engineers study. Mobility is a vague term. What does it mean in this context? 70 mph is better than 65 mph? If we look at “strengthening Idaho’s economy”, how does moving tourists to Yellowstone faster or moving trucks back and forth to Montana, strengthen Idaho’s economy? And what on earth will be the “positive impact”, on the Island Park community, of a 4 lane, high speed, limited access FREEWAY through the middle of Island Park. Seems like a negative impact. There is no “rapid growth” in the Island Park area and Yellowstone visitation is much lower much lower (~20%) for a host of reasons. Even the campgrounds in the area are seeing less use. The causes could be fuel prices, inflation, and the recession. All these factors blow ITD’s traffic projections out of the water! If Yellowstone National Park implements a reservation system, traffic will be even lower in the future. By the way, a FREEWAY is no longer a FREEWAY but rather a “full control” access highway, according to ITD. This is much like wildlife overpasses are to be called “multiple use crossing structures”. More manipulation of the public and the stakeholders. Submitted by Ken Watts.
Who is pushing for the US 20, 4-lane, high speed, limited access, FREEWAY in the Island Park Caldera? Two possibilities are the National Highways Administration and the Idaho Department of Transportation. If you read the email below, you would likely conclude that this FREEWAY is NOT being pushed by NHWA, but rather ITD. Within ITD you have to look all the way from ITD District 6 to the Governor to find who is pushing the FREEWAY. (The investigation will continue.) As you read the email below, note the confrontational tone and also be aware that NHWA provides the vast majority of funding for Idaho highways. Submitted by Ken Watts
“Planning and Environmental Linkages, or PEL, is a collaborative and integrated approach to transportation decision-making that considers environmental, community, and economic goals early in the transportation planning process.” “The PEL process will screen alternatives based on the following environmental criteria: visual, agricultural and forest resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and transportation planning, noise, social and economics.” If we look at the first alternatives screening meeting for the US 20 Ashton to SH 87 highway project, were all these criteria represented by subject matter experts (SMEs)? The answer is clearly no. The meeting only included employees of the Idaho Transportation Department, ITD’s engineering contractor, Horrocks Engineers, ITD’s public relations contractor, HDR, and the Federal Highway Administration. There were clearly no SMEs for agricultural and forest resources, biological resources, cultural resources, water quality, land use, and social and economics. Without this required representation, ITD down-selected design alternatives from many possible options. The down selection appeared to be based almost entirely on engineering considerations. This is not unexpected when you consider most of the attendees were engineers. It is very concerning that local stakeholders were not present to represent the interests of the public. The concerns multiply when we see ITD marching to a single solution for the highway design. Of course, this single solution is a 4 lane, high speed, limited access freeway through the Island Park Caldera which will cause incredible environmental damage to this ecologically sensitive area. It will cause profound social and economic consequences also. It is obvious that ITD had already decided on the freeway option long before the public was engaged at the first public meeting in October of 2021. It is obvious because ITD had abandoned the two lane highway upgrade (documented by JUB Engineers) as far back as early 2020. Down selecting to a single solution, a 4 lane, high speed, limited access freeway, appears to violate the purpose, intent, and spirit of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Multiple concepts should be included in the NEPA process to assure the best concept is chosen. Our environmental and conservation friends should be outraged by this process that circumvents NEPA. We will see if they stand tall in protecting the Island Park Caldera or have some other objectives in mind. Time will tell. |
Making Sense of It All
This blog will help you make sense out of all the information on the website, how it affects IP, our history, and how efforts continue to put IP into various forms of conservation status. Archives
May 2023
Categories |