Re: Highway 95: Moscow to Lewiston

["Philip Cook" <PCOOK@novell.uidaho.edu>]

Kenton:

Glad to have you back.

The Moscow-Genesee portion of the U.S. 95 widening and 
realignment was specifically included by former Senator 
Kempthorne as a "high-priority" ("demonstration") project in the 
1998 major federal highway bill, TEA-21. (See Section 1601 (a), 
item 1566.)  Apparently, ITD does not have a choice in the matter 
since its federal legislation and dollars.  I agree with you there are 
higher priorities; I guess that's the nature of pork barrel. (In this 
case $16.85 million.)

As for the Genesee-Lewiston Hill portion, it's not mandated by TEA-
21, so I assume ITD had some discretion in proposing it.  It's 
funding source is listed as "National Highway" so I assume it's 
funding is all federal, appropriated to the state.

The Moscow-Genessee portion (project # 7505) is on the State 
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) calendar for FY 2001.  
The Genessee-Lewiston Hill portion (project # 7769; $9 million) is 
on the STIP calendar for FY 2003.  (The entire STIP calendar for 
FY 1999-2003 is available at 
http://www2.state.id.us/itd/planning/reports/stip/stipfirst.htm.)   

I don't know what Idaho law says about protecting the visual, 
aesthetic, and environmental quality of the corridor, but experience 
tells me probably not much.

Cheers,

Philip Cook  



Date forwarded: 	Wed, 22 Sep 1999 16:45:19 -0700 (PDT)
Date sent:      	Wed, 22 Sep 1999 16:43:57 -0700
From:           	Kenton Bird <kbird@uidaho.edu>
To:             	vision2020@moscow.com
Subject:        	Highway 95: Moscow to Lewiston
Forwarded by:   	vision2020@moscow.com

> Dear visionaries,
> I am pleased to rejoin this list after three years in Colorado.  I'm
> slowly getting up to speed on issues, so please forgive me if this topic
> has been previously discussed.
> 
> I have seen several newspaper ads that the Idaho Department of
> Transportation is looking for suppliers of crushed rock in the
> "corridor" from the top of the Lewiston Hill to Moscow, for the purpose
> of constructing a four-lane highway.
> 
> Can anyone tell me:
> 1. Whether this widening of the highway is on the DOT's construction
> calendar, and if so, for what year?
> 2. How this project is/was justified (traffic counts, accident rates,
> etc.)?
> 3. How it will be funded (state/federal mix)?
> 4. Whether this is the best possible use of our state's limited
> transportation dollars?  (For example, would a bypass around Moscow
> provide greater safety and efficiency benefits to long-haul truckers and
> others traveling from Coeur d'Alene to Lewiston than four lanes in the
> rural 20-mile stretch south of Moscow?)
> 5. Whether the Moscow City Council or Latah County Commissioners has
> endorsed this project?
> 6. What safeguards Idaho has to ensure that the Moscow-Lewiston corridor
> isn't forever scarred by gravel pits the way the Moscow-Pullman corridor
> has?
> 
> I drove to Lewiston on Tuesday and didn't see enough traffic to justify
> four lanes, especially since nearly every hill has a passing lane.  But
> perhaps I'm missing something.
> 
> --Kenton Bird
>