stop the legacy highway
Key Myths In The Legacy Highway DEIS
An environmental impact statement (EIS) is required whenever a federal agency takes a major action that might have significant effects of the environment. An EIS is needed for the first segment of the proposed Legacy Highway because the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers must issue a permit (under section 404 of the Clean Water Act) before wetlands can be filled to build the highway, and because the Federal Highway Administration must approve the project.
An EIS is supposed to be a neutral, objective analysis of a problem, along with a fair comparison of the impacts of all reasonable alternatives to solve that problem. It is NOT supposed to justify a decision that has already been made. But that is exactly what the Legacy EIS does. It starts from the preconceived notion that the highway is needed, and that it must be built along alignment C, and proceeds to justify that result. It does so, however, by a series of myths that are readily refuted:
Myth Number 1. The internationally-significant wetlands of the Great Salt Lake will be better off with the Legacy Highway.
This myth is based upon two false assumptions: first, that the highway will affect only those wetlands actually buried under the roadway (about 155 acres for alternative C compared to 114 acres for alternative A); and second, that the highway will serve as a protective buffer for the remaining wetlands. Wetlands need to be protected from the highway; it is foolish to believe they will be protected by the highway. Studies funded by the transportation industry have long recognized that the harmful effects of highway fills extend far beyond the wetlands in the highway corridor itself. Even when equipped with culverts, highways tend to alter salinity, sedimentation and the flow of water, critical factors that determine the health of the surrounding wetlands. The Legacy EIS is completely silent on what these effects will be. It would have us believe that the only difference between alternative A and C is the 41 acre difference in wetlands filled in the highway corridor. But that difference is just the tip of the iceberg. Alternative C will ruin hundreds of acres more than Alternative A. 1. The highway will impact at least an additional 200 acres of wetlands through fragmentation and will compromise the biological integrity of those remaining wetlands.
Myth Number 2. Building the Legacy Highway is the ONLY way to meet the region's transportation needs in the year 2020.
Planning to accommodate a predicted doubling of automobile traffic over the next 20 years will become a self fulfilling prophecy. Other metropolitan areas facing the same predictions have chosen instead to reduce the growth in traffic by focusing on transit development and mixed use, pedestrian and bicycle friendly communities. They have demonstrated that quality of life and the quality of the air we breathe can be enhanced by providing attractive alternatives to always having to take the car. The longer we wait the harder it will be to do. Myth Number 3. Air quality will be better with the Legacy Highway than without it.
A long held myth is that the way to decrease auto related air pollution is to build new freeway lanes, thereby freeing cars from congestion and allowing them to go faster. The EIS, in fact, claims air quality improvement for the build options as opposed to no-build for this very reason. What is wrong with this claim? First, being able to drive faster encourages more and longer car trips, adding up to more cars and more total emissions from cars. Then the new lanes fill up and become congested and more new lanes are built, and so on. Auto dependency becomes further entrenched. If new freeway lanes are the air pollution solution, why is Los Angeles the air pollution capitol of the U.S.? Second, "build and higher speed" versus no-build doesn't include all the options. People driving in congestion have other choices than driving faster on new lanes. Reducing the absolute number of vehicle miles traveled through increased use of mass transit, people living closer to jobs, and other factors improves air quality far more than increasing the speed of cars for a little while. Third, car emissions actually increase at higher speeds. Nitrogen dioxide emissions begin increasing at 45 miles per hour, while VOC and carbon monoxide emissions start to increase at 55 miles per hour. We need to seriously reduce air pollution from transportation, not to stick with a myth. Cars are a major culprit in ozone and PM2.5 pollution. We exceeded the new ozone standard many times this past summer and expect to exceed the new PM2.5 standard in the winter.
Myth Number 4. The amount and type of growth in Davis County will be the same whether or not you build the highway.
A myth that permeates the entire EIS is the idea that the Legacy Highway will have no impact on the amount, type and location of future growth in Davis County. The unsupported assumption allows UDOT to argue that the most significant damage to the ecosystem of the Great Salt Lake and its adjacent wetlands will be the same whether or not the new road is built. The effect of major new roadways on future growth and development, however, has been documented all around the country. New highways stimulate development by making an area more accessible. Already, landowners are anticipating the proposed highway with new developments such as the "Legacy Business Park." If the road is built, there will be more intensive development all along the road corridor, and north of the first highway segment as well. This will result in more loss of wetlands, open space and habitat, and in the long run, more cars and more air pollution as well.
Myth Number 5. It is acceptable to build a major new highway in the floodplain of the Great Salt Lake.
There would be eight miles of the Locally Preferred Alternative built in the floodplain and almost 1,000 acres of the floodplain would be filled by Alternative C or will be isolated to the east of the roadway. Building so far out in the floodplain rips apart the Great Salt Lake ecosystem including the mosaic of wetlands and uplands throughout the area. But it is a financially costly extravagance as well. Have we forgotten so quickly that the lake flooding episode of 1983-1987 is estimated to have caused over $240 million (1985 dollars) in damages. Furthermore, damages could be far worse next time; while the lake rose to 4212 in the 1980s, the Utah Geological and Mineral Survey estimates that the lake may have been near 4217 around 1670-1700 A.D. |