Should the permit for the bypass be reopened to consider changes?

Call 356-2550 all day Saturday and Sunday and leave your comments on our machine. You may fax your response to 356-8360 or send E-mail to DailySun@mountwashingtonvalley.com. Results will be published Tuesday.

There were 22 responses to this week's Tele-Talk question. Many favor moving forward with a bypass, but without the widening of Route 16. Several said the permit should be left alone and that people should stop getting in the way of the project and let it be finished.I think it's a bad idea and I don't appreciate their widening the road.Let's keep going on this bypass, but let's forget all about widening Route 16 a Conway taxpayer.I'm from North Conway and I don't feel the Conway bypass should be reopened because this was all settled at public hearings several years ago. I also heard on N.H. Public Radio yesterday if the bypass is canceled, the state will have to pay back all the money that the federal government has already invested in this project.No, this is Dave in North Conway.Let's just go on with things as they are and see what happens. We need the bypass around Conway and North Conway. It must make Jac Cuddy happy to think the bypass may be killed. It's what he has been for for many years. Not in the best interest in the town, just for his not-in-my-front-yard attitude. Thank you. I think the Conway bypass and all the things connected with it should be left alone and let the DOT do its work. They are professionals. Ham Greene isn't. The people who have become involved at this late stage in the game, many of them lived here from the 70s when this was considered in the beginning and should have stated their objections long ago. I think they are just making a bigger problem for the whole area.I feel the permit should be reopened and I feel the bypass should start at the Kancamagus. Route 16 should be widened and the almost empty mall should be Home Depot.I say reopen it and find someone who actually knows how to design a traffic flow pattern. We don't need to widen. We can't get across one lane of traffic, let alone two on each side. Most of our visitors don't know what a turn lane is for and stop in the traffic lane to get across. Picture that mess in your mind. If they had designed the strip widening with reverse ears for traffic to reverse direction like in Nashua it could have worked, but not the way it is now designed. We do need the bypass for folks going further north and for heavy trucks which waste a lot of valuable time sitting in traffic. Why would the state want to spend widening money when they can save it and get on with the bypass? Yes, the federal permits should be reopened as should some eyes and ideas. This is Judy from Conway.I think the permits should be reopened because first of all we don't need a strip widening in North Conway. We need a bypass because the traffic problem is coming into Conway. I don't know why people don't get it. The traffic problem is Route 16 in Conway Village. That 's where it is and that's where it should be done. I can't believe the bypass hasn't been done. People are laughing at us. This is silly and stupid and it's costing us a lot of money.No, it definitely should not be reopened. We should finish the darn thing. People should stop getting in the way and let the project be finished. It has been taking too long.The permit should not be reopened. It would create more problems than would be solved. If reopened, priority No. 1 Build a connector from the entrance of the Kancamagus to West Side Road around the high school to relieve some congestion through Conway. No. 2 Open local roads such as Stark, West Side Road, Kearsarge Road to truck traffic and advertise alternate bypass routes. No. 3 Extend the North-South Road through the center of Whitaker Woods. Also, consider option 8 bypass route through the Green Hills area around the opposite side of Puddin Pond. These are just a few of the effects that would be created if you reopen this permit. And another one would be is the federal government going to require the state to pay for what has already been done?This is Crow Dickinson and I want to make it perfectly clear that we do not need to reopen the bypass permit in order to stop the widening of the strip. And, obviously, if there are other things that need to be done, we do need to reopen the permit, but not to stop the widening. Please, please understand that all of you. My husband and I think the permit for the bypass should be reopened. We urge serious consideration to Crow Dickinson's plan to eliminate the widening and to reconsider building the northern half of the bypass from Redstone to Kearsarge. Crow's proposal makes good common sense and saves wetlands. Ray Burton's vote at the Executive Council made us wonder if Ray was listening to his constituents. To the best of my knowledge on the permit, it expires December, 2003. Assuming the state won't reopen it, they'll extend it. If they can do that, there's no reason why they can't delay the widening which does nothing to relieve the traffic in North Conway or Conway. I will say this, please Conway selectmen and DOT, listen to the voters and get on with the bypass. This is Dick O'Brien. No. The permit should not be reopened and they should go ahead with the widening. They are being silly. Crow Dickinson should remember who voted him in because the next time we'll vote him out. Hi, this is Larry from Bartlett. If reopening the permit for the Conway bypass affords us the opportunity to improve the overall plan and better serve the needs of the valley, then by all means we should do so. Much of the thinking behind the plan was conceived a generation ago. It is not sacred. It is obsolete. No one then could have anticipated all the issues or envisioned all the ramifications that have risen since then. In light of the current upgrades and with 10-year hindsight. I believe we could improve the plan to address current needs and concerns. There has been a lot of rhetoric about jeopardizing the permit, yet no one seems to know for sure if repermitting would actually be denied. It is only conjecture. There are two possible scenarios for reopening the permit. One, we improve the plan and the permit stands, everybody wins. Two, repermitting is denied because the plan does not pass muster with today's regulations, in which case why we want to proceed with a plan that jeopardizes our quality of life? What's more important the 10-year-old plan or a balanced reassessment of our transportation, recreation, environmental and economic priorities? Let's get it right. We should reopen the permit.No, the widening of Route 16 was such a poor idea that everyone could see the damage it would do to business and how badly it would disturb the lifestyle of the town. Worse, for all the trouble we would have a zero gain in traffic flow. It made no sense! It must be something else, other than "traffic flow" that motivated some of our "leaders." They sold out local businesses and those of us who work here. Sounds to me like they wanted to guarantee that they would get their benefit at the expense of everyone else. I smell a rat and I smell big money! Joe Sullivan.I oppose the widening and favor the bypass. How should I vote on your question? H. Greene of Glen ( A Conway taxpayer)No way. Not necessary. Everyone with a sound mind knows that the bypass is necessary. Even all of the state of New Hampshire and federal officials at the meeting in Concord on May 15, 2000, acknowledged that the bypass was necessary (Check the valley video coverage). So, let's get on with the bypass. DOT Commissioner Murray, our Councilor Burton and Councilor Spaulding would be leagues ahead if they had wisdom of the three other councilors who bravely recognized that the court finding on the lawsuit now in the system needs to be respected, as well as the federal regulations that have been ignored.Not only is the reopening of the long hallowed permits as unnecessary as building 5-A, if the government regulations are closely checked it, may surface that the permitting process does NOT need to be reopened, just modified. The DOT spin doctors allowed us to hear and see in print the word "jeopardize" more times than we needed in our lifetime. Local "officials" used this crutch to sell the Conway voters, and the media, down the tubes too many times. There is little question that 5-A is harmful to life, limb and the economy. The Conway bypass is needed, sooner, not later. To save $6 to$8 million does not seem to influence the bureaucrats...but it does the taxpayers. The current District 1 councilor needs to listen and follow the three councilors' wisdom that voted down the approval of the 5-A contract at the last meeting.I think that the extension to the North-South Road is not a very good option at this point. Just ask yourself, how it will impact the goings on in North Conway Village? I also see problems with it running so close to John Fuller Elementary, and The Catholic church, not to mention blocking the trails that lead from Whitaker Woods, the railroads mostly closed-door dealings, (nice pad for the shopping shuttle) and Im sure this list goes on and on. By taking the bypass underground through that area may make some sense, but the whole thing would be a nightmare for the folks living on either side of the North-South Road in North Conway and create another big dig not to mention the buying up of some additional residential properties. As far as the Route16 issue? I remember a plan not so long ago that included putting the utilities underground and increasing the walk ability of the portion affected by the widening. I was enthusiastic about those points as the strip's beauty is important to our economy and I sign on to these things, as you may have guessed. What I see now is an area which has been abused over the years and does not fit in. I would recommend a review of any plan and increasing the green belt through that area to fit in with the areas north of the widening area. At one time I was glad that we were going to have a residential community at the old drive-in property. Now that has appeared to go away. How about a cottage community back there with higher densities and lower costs? Allow a builder the opportunity to build smaller cottage type places as specified in Figure 5-12 of the Master Plan Draft. If they can build them for 50 grand each then sell them for 80, that would be a good thing. Am I dreaming? Dave Robinson I really do believe the entire thought process should be reviewed and the permit process should be included. After the North-South Road was opened, the nature of traffic on the strip has changed for the better. Maybe a similar, less costly, road around Conway Village would allow traffic to reach the present North-South Road without being delayed trying to get through Conway Village. Starting near Bill's Place and then ending in the area near Route 302/ Route 113 intersection would do that. I really still feel the North-South Road should be extended to near the Scenic Vista. And I also feel the road should not be restricted to passenger cars only. This road seems to be designed for trucks as much as Route 16 is. The plan is 10 years old and much has changed. Let's look at it again! Dave Dempsey, Eidelweiss Village