TO DO OR NOT TO DO? THAT WAS THE QUESTIONWe apologize for being late with this story. A couple of us attended the MDT meeting last night to hear Highway Director Jim Lynch give the community an update on the progress of our quest for a better Highway 2. The meeting drew 70 people or so that want to see our northern tier highway improved. The MDT has in place and ready to go a plan to improve about 10 miles of road east of Havre to what they call a “Super 2” which isn’t what the Highway 2 Association has been advocating for since 2001. Lynch said the “Super 2” project will be ready to go to bid by July of this year with the project to be completed in two phases with the first starting this fall. The Highway 2 Association is advocating that we reopen the EIS and “revisit” the findings to see if we can convince the highway commission to change the project to 4 lanes. The problem with that scenario is that it may take, according to Lynch, up to an additional 2 years to get back to where they are today with the planning of the Super 2 but the time could be as short as 6 months extra.
This was a long, drawn out meeting lasting over 2 ½ hours. All three Hill County Commissioners attended, as well as 2 of the three Blaine County Commissioners. Havre City Council members, Woodwick, Brekke, Kaftan, and our good buddy the ever talking Bob Kaul attended. Noticeably absent were council people Tretheway, Long, Hillary, Vies and newly elected Mayor Tim Solomon. Other notables attending were Senator Kim Hanson, Representative Wendy Warburton, and the Harlem Mayor. We found it encouraging that there was a broad show of support by people attending from all points between Fort Belknap and Havre, even former Mayor Rice showed up.
Basically the choices presented to the group were to go forward with the project that is funded and could be started this fall, the Super-2, or re-do the EIS as the Highway 2 Association desires and delay the project with no guarantee that it would be changed to 4-lane. Lynch did say that waiting and re-doing the EIS wouldn’t “make us go to the back of the line” but that he couldn’t speculate about what funds would be available in the future for a later project.
Association President Sivertson is fearful that if we accept this down-sized project as a Super 2 it will set the tone for all future projects on highway 2 which is over 660 miles long. Others are afraid that if we miss this opportunity we may miss out on the funding which is available now. Lynch wants the Corp of Engineers to come to Havre in the next couple of weeks to talk about our "chances" and "problems" associated with going for the 4-lane
What do our readers say? Do you want to take the “bird” you have in your hand and be satisfied? Or do you want to wait and see if we can grab the two “birds” that are in the bush? Comment please
One of our readers “beerogre” was also in attendance and had these observations.
beerogre
I attended. The Jim Lynch 'road show' no wonder this guy works in Helena he is full of hot air.
Summary:
1. Environmental Impact Studies (EIS) rule everything.
2. EIS (4 yrs ago) determined that an improved highway was the way to go.
3. 21 million dollar project right of ways already bought and design finished, 10 -12 miles directly east of Havre.
4. only 2 passing lanes 1.45 miles long - way better than old .75 mile passing lanes in other parts of state.
5. 8 foot shoulders with 6-1 slope ditches - way big improvement at least 15 references to how great this slope is
6. some left and right turning lanes plus bus turnouts especially at turn to new dump
7. In order to get 4 lanes we will have to reopen EIS and may not get Environmentalists to think we need 4 lane so might be waste of time and delay project
8. Highway project funding bill is in continuing resolution if we reopen EIS funding will go to other projects could delay and not have money for this project depending on "current spending climate" as you know is tough
9. Feds will come to meet with us so we can waste more time at overly crowded meeting
10. local government(leaders?) needs to tell MDT to go ahead or not- bids to be open in July.
11. THere is a reason why the MDT avoids doing projects in N central MT
Thanks beerogre, now comments from our readers?
Let's just get started on this project that is set to go out to bid. The reality is that there is 600 miles of highway and only 10 miles of funding. Can't we add a fourth lane later?
ReplyDeleteWow I made it to the main blog page! Do I get a T shirt or something?
ReplyDeleteI vote build it as designed by the MDT who really doesn't want to listen to us....my wife will enjoy that I admit I am now changing my mind from holding out for a 4 lane.
I still believe we wait. Maybe, might, can't wait, has alway shorted us here in North Central Montana. What would be best? A 4 lane highway! Just because the State doesn't want it, they don't live here and I don't believe care if we could get economic improvement in this area. If we could get the truckers and vacationers to come this way it would help our Community. Let's not short ourselves!
ReplyDeleteI attended this meeting but left early (sometime after about the fifth time Bob Kaul waved to get the mic so we could hear his “smarts”) I have attended dozens of these hi-way 2 meetings as well as hi-way 2 association meetings but have gotten discouraged because it seems that all these meetings go on forever with people that just like to hear themselves talk, giving some brilliant opinions but not really very informed. I ceased attending the association meetings when Bob Kaul started attending because I couldn’t stand to sit through his long senseless yakking and also endure Bob’s long drawn out and often repeated “facts” too. I am not complaining and thanks to those that work hard for the hi-way association, but that is why some of us no longer help or attend.
ReplyDeleteI want the 4-lane for sure but I am sick of endless meeting and the droning on of idiots so my vote is to end the stupid long drawn out opinion meetings and go for what’s on the table
ditto Jimbo
ReplyDeleteI agree with my friend beerogre and Jimbo. Even though I desperately want 4 for 2, I think we need to take what we can get. Logically speaking the place for 4 for 2 association to take up the fight is from the state line to Culbertson and then working West. It makes more sense to hook up with ND 4 lane and work. I would love to have a 4 lane stretch that connects to nothing on either side placed right here in and around Havre but the truth is it makes no sense. Lets start at a logical point and work from there. Heck by the time the 4 lane gets to our area the new "super 2" will need replacing.
ReplyDeleteWe nee something done, I mean there was just another accident on that damn highway last night 2 fatalities. The road needs improvement no matter what but I agree I think we need to wait and get the 4 lanes thats what we've been after in the first place 4 for 2 what doesn't the state get about that? Improvements are great but we will never get the state back up here to change it to a four lane in any of our lifetimes unless we wait.
ReplyDeleteI also attended the meeting and I think Director Lynch did a good job of explaining the choices we have. I want a 4 lane road but not at the expense of more lives. Two more were killed last night on that road east of Chinook, how many more need to be killed before we will learn our lesson. We cannot wait, we must act. Mr. Badgley, it's not that the State doesn't want it, in fact it is not MDT's decision. Lynch made very clear at leasy a dozen times that when you use federal highway dollars to build this project, the EIS (environmental impact study) is conducted by the Feds and the decision to reopen the EIS is made by the Feds. They may not even let us reopen the document and according to Lynch, the Corps of Engineers hold the cards on this one and unless they see a significant change from the 2004 findings, we will not get a 4 lane approved. It's is not MDT it is the Corps, the Federal Highway Administration and the U.S. Fish, Wildlife and Parks who make the decision. Let's get to work and then focus on getting the 4 lane on the other area of the this dangerous highway. Call your elected officials and tell them, build it now!
ReplyDeleteIs there any way we could get a "blue ribbon panel", perhaps including Shad Huston and Dave Mahon to push this projrct so that it can be done as quickly as possible, without answering those pesky tax payer questions?
ReplyDeleteSo F.R.E.D....let me get this straight....your are upset that there are lives being lost due to the poor condition of this highway, yet you want to wait until we get our 4-lane highway instead of improving the existing to the proposed super-2. Isn't the 4 lane highway going to take longer to get approved and in place than the proposed super-2 thus potentially costing even more lives??
ReplyDelete