Speaking of the Great River Road National Scenic Byway

Filed under:Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse — posted by admin on November 22, 2011 @ 5:15 pm

The WisDOT’s letter today addresses impacts on the Great River Road National Scenic Byway.  They’re not the only entity concerned.  Thus far in the Minnesota and Wisconsin docket, there have also been letters filed by the Wisconsin Mississippi River Parkway Commission, the Minnesota Mississippi River Parkway Commission, and a Resolution from the entire 10 state Mississippi River Parkway Commission regarding the Great River Road National Scenic Byway that you should look at.

From Wisconsin’s MRPC:

Lorenz Letter – WI MRPC 7-23-09

Lorenz Letter – WI MRPC – May 18, 2010

Lorenz Letter – WI MRPC 2-22-11

From Minnesota’s MRPC:

Minnesota MRPC Comment 6-30-11

And from the entire national Mississippi River Parkway Commission:

Resolution of MRPC 12-16-10

The position of the Mississippi River Parkway Commission is pretty clear.

Is this what you want the Scenic Byway to look like?

existingproposed2

WisDOT says “Ummmm… I don’t think so…”

Filed under:Hampton-Alma-LaCrosse — posted by admin on @ 2:23 pm

existingproposed

Just in, an “interesting” letter from WisDOT about impacts on the Great River Road National Scenic Byway of CapX 2020’s proposed Hampton-Rochester-LaCrosse line.  WisDOT says that under Federal Highway Administration (FHWA …  what’s the W for?) rules they don’t think they can issue a permit for the “Q-1” route along the Scenic Byway.   They’ve asked the feds for confirmation on that.

Secretary’s Letter to FHWA – November 22, 2011

From that letter, the punch line:

Therefore, WisDOT believes that it cannot authorize exceptions to issue utility permits in WIS 35 R/W, nor authorize use of, or direct impacts to or conflicts with its scenic easements in the BRRNSB viewshed for a new aboveground electric transmission line.

What more is there to say?  But check out the attachments, the federal rules and some viewshed photos.