![\"\"](\"http:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/03\/Turnpike-Authority-Cartoon-300x240.jpg\" "\\"Turnpike")
<\/p>\nWith the closing of the F.E.I.S. comment period for the Mid-Currituck Bridge, the North Carolina DOT and the Turnpike Authority are answering some tough questions from appeals court judges\u00a0regarding another controversial Turnpike Project, the Monroe Connector Bypass, near Charlotte.\u00a0 Southern Environmental Law Center and other environmental groups have challenged the environmental studies and their conclusions on the Monroe project.\u00a0 The outcome of the appeals court decision could have major implications for for the Mid-Currituck Bridge project.\u00a0 Below is an\u00a0article from the Charlotte Observer.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Appeals court in Va. hears challenge of NC bypass<\/strong><\/p>\n By STEVE SZKOTAK<\/p>\n Associated Press<\/p>\n By STEVE SZKOTAK<\/p>\n Posted: Wednesday, Mar. 21, 2012<\/p>\n Modified: Wednesday, Mar. 21, 2012 RICHMOND, Va.<\/p>\n \u00a0\u00a0A federal appeals panel on Wednesday heard a challenge of a proposed toll road in the Charlotte, N.C., area, with opponents claiming state transportation officials used a flawed process to assess the environmental impact of the $800 million project.<\/p>\n \u00a0Attorneys representing conservation groups want a three-judge panel of the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn a lower court ruling last October allowing the Monroe Bypass to move forward.<\/p>\n The court typically rules a few weeks after hearing arguments.<\/p>\n \u00a0The 20-mile road southeast of Charlotte would stretch from U.S. 74 near Interstate 485 in Mecklenburg county to U.S. 74 between Wingate and Marshville in Union County. The bypass is intended to ease congestion on U.S. 74, a highway lined with shopping plazas and restaurants that slows to 30 mph or less during peak traffic.<\/p>\n \u00a0Attorneys for the Southern Environmental Law Center want to return the proposed bypass to the drawing board because they contend the North Carolina Department of Transportation concluded the four-lane bypass would have virtually no impact on development patterns, the Yadkin River watershed or air quality from increased commuting.<\/p>\n \u00a0Conservation groups such as the North Carolina Wildlife Federation counter that the highway would harm water quality and wildlife habitat in the Yadkin River watershed, encourage sprawl such as strip malls and subdivisions in the rural area, and contribute to air pollution in the Charlotte area.<\/p>\n Many of the arguments heard Wednesday focused on the state’s environmental analysis of the project.<\/p>\n Critics contend an environmental impact study was titled toward building the road and overlooked alternatives.<\/p>\n \u00a0Under federal environmental law, major highway projects must undergo an environmental review that compares the impact of a project being built versus a no-build option. Opponents said the state used the no-build option in both scenarios, then vastly overstated traffic levels on U.S. 74 if the bypass was not built.<\/p>\n \u00a0Judges sharply questioned attorneys representing North Carolina on that approach, which was found to be “immaterial” by a lower court that found the environmental review proper.<\/p>\n “Are you saying there was no error?” Judge Diana G. Motz asked Scott T. Slusser, an attorney for the state.\u00a0<\/p>\n “I would disagree there was an error,” Slusser responded.<\/p>\n \u00a0The line of questioning apparently referred to an official statement published in the Federal Register in 2010 in which North Carolina transportation officials denied the faulty environmental review.<\/p>\n \u00a0“So you made an error and did not correct that error?” Judge Dennis Shedd later pressed Slusser.<\/p>\n He responded in the affirmative.<\/p>\n After the hearing, a senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center said the record is clear.<\/p>\n “The transportation agencies compared not building the road to not building the road, and then denied it,” said David Ferren. He said the 4th Circuit’s finding could influence other planned road projects in the South.\u00a0<\/p>\n Besides the Wildlife Federation, the groups challenging the bypass also include Clean Air Carolina and the Yadkin Riverkeeper.<\/p>\n \u00a0Copyright 2012 . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.\u00a0Read more here: http:\/\/www.charlotteobserver.com\/2012\/03\/21\/3114563\/appeals-court-in-va-to-hear-nc.html#storylink=misearch#storylink=cpy<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" With the closing of the F.E.I.S. comment period for the Mid-Currituck Bridge, the North Carolina DOT and the Turnpike Authority are answering some tough questions from appeals court judges\u00a0regarding another controversial Turnpike Project, the Monroe Connector Bypass, near Charlotte.\u00a0 Southern Environmental Law Center and other environmental groups have challenged the environmental studies and their conclusions […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-845","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/845","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=845"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/845\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":850,"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/845\/revisions\/850"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=845"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=845"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nomcb.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=845"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}