Sand Creek Bypass Proposal Not An Acceptable Solution

In its Final Environmental Impact Statement, the Idaho Transportation Department offers a complete, four-lane bypass up Sand Creek for about $80 million in today’s dollars.

The problem is, it will not solve the traffic problems in and around Sandpoint, and in the process will ruin Sandpoint economically and aesthetically.

For about the same price we can get a West Side Bypass that will beautifully resolve those traffic problems. Funny thing! The ITD presented this proposal 50 years ago. However, due to local fears of Sandpoint becoming another Ritzville, the ITD offered the Sand Creek Bypass instead.

It will be for future letters to the editor to explain in detail the destruction of the aesthetic ambiance resulting from a Sand Creek Bypass and the benefits by selecting a viable West Side route. For now, let’s scrutinize the facts concerning the Sand Creek Bypass.

Consider:

Less than 10 percent of through non-stop traffic will use the bypass. The rest will continue to clutter up Sandpoint streets to connect with U.S. Highway 2 and state Highway 200.

Sandpoint already is experiencing total gridlock during certain periods and when accidents stall highway traffic. Traffic in and through Sandpoint continues to increase at the rate of 5 percent per year.

Even if the bypass existed today with its 9 percent through-traffic, that rate of increase will put Sandpoint’s traffic in the same state of gridlock in about two years, and from then on it’s total disaster. It’s a Catch-22 situation - complete gridlock whether or not the Sand Creek Bypass is built.

As long as U.S. 95 traffic or U.S. Highway 2 traffic moves through the bottlenecks at the northeast or southeast corners of town, traffic through the business district will become increasingly congested.

Highway 95 has proven to be located in the wrong location to serve today’s needs.

ITD district engineer Tom Baker stated that even if a Sand Creek Bypass were to be built, a West Side Bypass would soon be needed. Since the ITD is well aware that route is necessary, many are wondering if the ITD is keeping the pot boiling here to divert funds for highway construction elsewhere.

A large percentage of the downtown businesses probably will not survive the negative impacts caused by the construction of a Sand Creek Bypass; this, contrary to the bland assurances of positive construction impacts.

The Lakeside Inn will be demolished to make way for the bypass.

Loss of the open east end of the Cedar Street Bridge. The proposed two-lane Sand Creek bypass could come as close as 10 feet from the present rear doorway. When it is widened to four lanes, the rear portion of the bridge building will go.

Green paint on the concrete structure will not make up for the destruction of the ambiance to the east of downtown Sandpoint, vital to the tourist industry.

Isn’t there a win-win solution to avoid litigation? Of course there is. When our public officials realize that the preferred alternative fails to fully address the traffic problems and will actually be detrimental to the community, then they will realistically consider other alternatives.

Since this is a local, state, and federal issue, everyone can get involved. Contact your elected representatives (local, Legislature, governor, Congress) to pressure the ITD and FHA.

If we can make this public protest work, millions of dollars will be saved, and a well-planned and workable bypass will be completed in considerably less time is than otherwise possible.