|
SDEIS in Spring 2002.
The government released its Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for public comment in April, 2002. It was open for comment until June 7, 2002. The outcome has yet to be seen. There is much vagueness in that document and it cannot be taken at face value.
About The Options Put Forth by The State/NRPA
Over the space of two public meetings on January 11, 2001, the West Virginia Department of Highways and NRPA pre-released/discussed the draft of the supplemental environmental impact statement for the Parkway plan. The statement proposes four vague preliminary options for land acquisition. Below, we will provide the text of each option, followed by a level-headed explanation of concerns. WE
DO NOT ENDORSE ANY OF THESE OPTIONS AT THIS TIME, except the missing option.
WE ARE HOWEVER ENCOURAGED THAT THE WVDOH and NRPA have moved away from support for OPTION 4. This is a step in the right direction, if they can be trusted to follow-through (trust has been a central issue of late).
OPTION 1:
Government Proposal: Acquire only the right of way needed for the construction of the Parkway.
Concerns: While this may seem at a glance as victory for New River Friends, we have concerns as to the definition of "needed", so it probably is not really a victory after all. Also, state government officials have been quoted as saying that right of way may need to be as much as 150 feet wide. Such a right-of-way could be used to "aim" the road to clear out all "undesired" landowners/parcels, whether they are willing sellers or not. Gee, we didn't know they needed 150 feet to build a two lane road - besides, in some places the space between the river and the hillside is only 35 feet (and the state claims it does not want to cut into the hillside). Are they going to put fill in the river?
OPTION 2:
Government Proposal: Acquire right of way needed for construction of the Parkway and purchase property and conservation easements from willing sellers.
Concerns: The same as those stated in option one plus:
- We're not sure there are really any willing sellers.
- Unless carefully crafted, conservation easements can have serious dangerous effects to the rights of the home owner.
OPTION 3:
Government Proposal: Acquire right of way needed for construction of the Parkway, purchase property from willing sellers, and purchase conservation easements on key properties.
Concerns: The same as those stated in option one plus:
- We're not sure there are really any willing sellers.
- Unless carefully crafted, conservation easements can have serious dangerous effects to the rights of the home owner.
OPTION 4:
Government Proposal: Acquire all land between the Parkway and the New River (between the proposed 2A bridge and Brooklin) and purchase conservation easements on other key properties.
Concerns: Our rights, lives, dreams, and places, will vaporize!
THE MISSING OPTION:
There is an option missing from the list. THE "NO BUILD" WAS NOT INCLUDED, NOR WAS IT LISTED OR INCLUDED AS AN OPTION! This is in TOTAL VIOLATION OF NEPA LAWS!! If a suitable agreement, and environmental impact cannot be found, this option must be considered.
FAIRNESS? The government has taken over a year to prepare SDEIS, yet we get less than a month of time to comment.
Other Agendas
 | We jump through all these hoops and attend these meetings, but does our government really represent us? At the 11 January a WVDOH representative is reported to have said "I DON'T CARE WHOSE LAND IS TAKEN, I'M HERE TO BUILD A ROAD!" Are they really that out of touch? |
| The plan is supposed to benefit the town of Hinton economically? Yet we understand from the meeting that the long-term plan of the National Park Service is to wipe out all the business along Route 20? |
A Small Bit of Hope?
At its meeting on January 16, 2001 the NRPA passed a resolution saying that it no longer supported Option 4. If this vote is followed up by actions in terms and in spirit, we see hope on the horizon (not here yet). However, we have concerns that this vague statement by the NRPA still leaves open the door for selective forced acquisitions to target existing property owners not directly in the path of the road, whether or not they are truly willing to sell. Time will tell.
Potential For a Form of Political Blackmail
The timeline put forth for the road by the West Virginia Department of Highways at this meeting is as follows:
| Issue Supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement Spring 2001 |
| Issue Final Environmental Impact Statement Early Fall 2001 |
| Issue Record of Decision Late Fall 2001 |
| Initiate Agreed Upon Acquisition Discussions Late Fall 2001 |
| Begin Final Design Spring 2002 |
| Begin Right-of-Way Acquisition* Fall 2002 |
| Begin Construction* Fall 2003 |
* Note - contingent upon availability of federal funding!
WARNING: The key here is the last two lines which are asterisked, the availability of federal funding. In other words, the NRPA is tied to the position of the Federal Government. If the federal government doesn't like the choices made by the NRPA, it can just simply withhold funding 'til it gets what it wants. That's the scary part - because the National Park Service has already stated in the media that it wants all land in the "View shed." So much for the ability of states to have self-determination.
