Skip to main content

VAR's I-73 appeal was dropped due to agreement with FHWA

A few weeks ago, I blogged about the dismissal of an appeal by Virginians for Appropriate Roads in regards to Interstate 73.  The dismissal came before any hearings on the matter took place.

Since then a few more details about the dismissal have come about and the Martinsville Bulletin is all over it.

VAR is more than happy to drop the appeal because in their mind, "...there is no certainty this project will ever move forward."

The key part of the agreement that caused VAR to drop their appeal is "...that if a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement is done for the project, Virginians for Appropriate Roads may raise road improvements and access management alternatives with respect to U.S. 220 in any judicial review challenge that the group might bring..."

Story Link:
Appeal on I-73 case dismissed on settlement decision ---Martinsville Bulletin

Commentary:
What appeared when first reported as a blow to VAR appears to be more of a victory for them.  If any future studies occur for Interstate 73, and there will be, VAR will be able to challenge any of those studies.  VAR's viewpoint is that improvements to US 220 is the best solution for the area as compared to Interstate 73 on a newly built alignment.

VAR has positioned themselves to continue to be a watchdog, and possibly and obstacle, for the completion of Interstate 73 in South Central Virginia.  Time to bring in Lee Corso, VAR just said "Not so fast, my friends."

It is interesting that VAR is consistently speaking of their doubts for any part of Interstate 73 to be built.  Though I disagree with them and support an Interstate 73 being built in Virginia, I do agree that it will be a long time if ever before we see any dirt being moved for Interstate 73 south of Roanoke.

Comments

Ron said…
I was wondering what happened to the final steps to begin I-73 across Virginia but I must agree that a new alignment was not what the plans called for. Most of the origonal idea was the reasoning for the bypasses (US 220) at Rocky Mount and (?). This was Virginia's crazy idea anyway. They don't need to confuse the NCDOT no more than necessary.

Popular posts from this blog

Signed County Route J37; the last Signed Tulare County Route and the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road

Recently I drove the entirety of Signed County Route J37 located in rural Tulare County.  Signed County Route J37 is notable in that it is the last Signed County Route which actually has field signage left in Tulare County and was intended to be part of a Trans-Sierra Highway known as the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road.


While researching California State Route 190 and more specifically the gap in the highway over the Sierra Nevada Range it became quickly apparent that there was far more to J37/Balch Park Road than initially thought.  The previous blog on California State Route 190 can be found here:

California State Route 190; the Trans-Sierra Highway that could have been 

On the above blog I attached an article from 1926 written by the Los Angeles Times detailing the route of the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road which was slated to begin construction in 1927.  The route of the Lone Pine to Porterville High Sierra Road would have followed Carroll Creek southward out…

Former US Route 99,US Route 466, and California State Route 65 through Famoso

This past weekend I explored the alignments of US Route 99, US Route 466, and California State Highway 65 through Famoso.



Part 1; The history of State Highway service in Famoso

Famoso is a ghost town and former Southern Pacific Railroad siding located in northern Kern County on Poso Creek.  The site of Famoso is located roughly at the junction of CA 99 and CA 46.  Famoso was founded as a Southern Pacific Railroad siding known as "Poso" during the early 1870s when the Southern Pacific Railroad was building it's main freight line through San Joaquin Valley.  The name of Poso was changed in 1888 to Spottiswood when the community received a spur line of the Southern Pacific and Post Office Service.  The community name of Poso was already in use by a mining community to the west in San Luis Obispo County which required a new name be chosen to establish Post Office Service.  The name of Spottiswood was changed to Famoso in 1895.

Famoso was an important early highway junction in…

Old California State Route 65 on; Famoso-Porterville Highway, Sign County Routes J35/J22/J29

Earlier in March I traveled down to Famoso of Kern County to take the original alignment of California State Route 65 north to Lindsay in Tulare County.


This blog is a spin off of the below entry on the Southern Segment of current California State Route 65.

California State Route 65; South Segment

Part 1; The Stockton-Los Angeles Road, the East Side Line, and early California State Route 65 on Legislative Route 129

The corridor of CA 65 is closely aligned to the Sierra Nevada Foothills which first became a popular route of travel as part of the Stockton-Los Angeles Road.  The Stockton-Los Angeles Road came into use after the 1853 Kern River Gold Rush began.  The Stockton-Los Angeles Road was a replacement of the earlier El Camino Viejo.  Unlike El Camino Viejo the Stockton-Los Angeles Road avoided the dense Tule Marshes in San Joaquin Valley.  The Stockton-Los Angles Road stayed close to the Sierra Foothills near the new claims on the Kern River watershed.  The earlier El Camino Vi…