Al Poplawsky, Moscow

The Moscow-Pullman Daily News 12/29/12

The release of the draft environmental impact statement for relocation of U.S. Highway 95 south of Moscow is imminent, and the preferred alternative is the same, old, problematic, eastern route over the shoulder of Paradise Ridge.

A recent editorial in this paper (Daily News, December 13) erroneously referred to the first document for this project as an environmental impact statement (EIS).  However, it was actually an environmental assessment (EA) – a much less thorough study and document.  The law is clear that an EIS is required for the relocation of a highway to a divided highway.  The attempt of the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) to push this project through without an EIS was a blatant attempt at violation of the law.

Environmentalists have been blamed for the deaths and injuries that have occurred on this stretch of Highway 95 since the favorable ruling in their lawsuit.  However, we were just trying to uphold the law.  We have laws for a reason.  Those who criticize us for our efforts are advocating for the breaking of our laws.  If the majority of us think a law should be changed, then maybe it should be.  But we should not advocate for the breaking of laws that are on the books. Continue reading →

David Hall, Moscow

The Moscow-Pullman Daily News 12/22/12

The original report that the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) produced was an environmental assessment (EA), not an improperly done draft environmental impact statement (EIS) as stated in the Daily News’ editorial on December 13.  An EA is a much less rigorous review than an EIS, which the court ordered.

Safety is the largest issue here and the supposed reason for the realignment/upgrade.  It has not been shown to my satisfaction that the eastern alignment would be safer than, or even as safe as, the other alignment options.  There is quite a bit of testimony that there is increased snow, fog, and other hazardous weather and driving conditions on the shoulder of Paradise Ridge compared to the existing route.  In addition, the eastern alignment might require deer/elk/moose fencing to attempt to keep game off the highway.

With safety of the driving public of primary importance, why has the Idaho Transportation Department done nothing in the past ten years to improve safety along the existing HIghway 95 route?  I am sure there are things that ITD could have done – reducing the speed limits, placing warning signs, and probably some localized realignments.  It makes so much more sense to fix the existing route than to plow through a new area. Continue reading →

Murf Raquet (for the editorial board), Moscow

The Moscow-Pullman Daily News 12/13/12

Realignment, reroute, fix, or upgrade, whatever term you prefer, it looks as if a treacherous portion of U.S. Highway 95 is finally getting the attention it has needed for a long time.

The Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) has issued a draft environmental impact statement (DEIS) for its selection of a new route for Highway 95 between Thorn Creek Road and south Moscow.  ITD has picked the E2 route to the east of Highway 95 on Paradise Ridge.

More than a decade ago, Idaho officials had planned to build a straighter and safer 6.5-mile stretch of the state’s major north-south road.  They had proposed numerous options to the west and east of the curvy part and one that improved the existing section.

An alternative that rerouted the highway over parts of Paradise Ridge was then also favored by the state.  Residents on the ridge and others objected, saying the road would have a disastrous effect on portions of Palouse prairie that manage to exist in patches on the ridge.

A lawsuit was filed in 2003 saying the state did not properly conduct a DEIS for the route.  (Some folks even tried to save the beleaguered prairie by tying it to the giant Palouse earthworm, but the grassroots movement gained little traction.) Continue reading →