Pellissippi impact not adequately studied

Dear Editor:

In July of 2002, the Maryville City council refused to adopt a resolution calling for “a full, accurate, and comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement” about the extension of the Pellissippi Parkway from the Old Knoxville Highway to U.S. 321.

Only Councilman Tom Taylor voted for the resolution, which came before the city council after the Blount County Commission had adopted a similar resolution.

Unlike the Maryville City Council, County Commission wanted to know what the effects would be on our community of building an interstate highway through the northeast quadrant of the county. I could not understand in 2002 why public officials would take a position on such a large project without knowing its consequences, and I cannot understand it now.

This still does not seem to be a problem for the Maryville City Council (except for Mr. Taylor, who voted “no”) for it just adopted a resolution advocating the completion of the highway as “vital to the future of the city of Maryville and Blount County.” It offered no evidence of how that might be the case and based its resolution on the fact that it “has supported and endorsed the Pellissippi Parkway from it’s (sic) inception.” Almost everyone who thinks about this at all acknowledges that the PPE will encourage urban sprawl, increase pressure on Blount County’s roads, schools and tax base, divert some traffic away from downtown Maryville, and forever destroy a lot of open space and several working farms. Anyone who attended the Tennessee Department of Transportation’s “Public Alternatives Workshop” on October 25 also knows that by TDOT’s own analysis there will be little if any improvement to current traffic congestion if the interstate is built and that TDOT has no idea how much it will cost.

The council’s endorsement was “subject to a positive Environmental Impact Statement.” This raises the question of why the council felt the need to express itself in the middle of the EIS being completed instead of waiting to see what it says; it also betrays ignorance of what an Environmental Impact Statement is. An EIS is neither “positive” nor “negative.” It is a study which examines the impact of several alternatives (including “No Build” and upgrading existing roadways) on the area. It provides information which public officials then can evaluate. It is not a “yes or no” analysis, but Councilmen Swann, White, and Hunt apparently do not want to be bothered by the details.

This resolution was not on the council’s agenda, so the public (and Mr. Taylor) had no advance notice of it. Who is in such a big hurry and why was this done with no notice? Why did the council’s resolution state that the PPE project has been suspended “due to the need to comply with certain project administrative procedures,” instead of acknowledging that a federal judge stopped it because TDOT had not done an Environmental Impact Statement in the first place? Five years ago, Maryville City Council did not want to know what the effects of this project would be before endorsing it, and they still do not.

Sincerely,

Doug Gamble
4210 Sevierville Road
Maryville, TN 37804