I-98 Supporters Want Answers On Funding

CANTON - Supporters of a proposed interstate highway are demanding answers from state and federal officials on how the state Department of Transportation could use money they thought intended for the rooftop highway toward Route 11 improvements instead.

"I find it a slap in the face to all the individuals and elected officials that have supported the construction of I-98 that the regional office of the NYS DOT on their own decided that the $6.3 million would be diverted to other uses that the general public in my county do not support," St. Lawrence County Legislator Vernon D. "Sam" Burns, D-Ogdensburg, who represents the county on the Northern Corridor Transportation Group, wrote in a letter to Acting Regional Director Mark E. Frechette. "I ask for an explanation on how a regional office can divert federal funds that were specifically intended for environmental studies for an interstate highway."

The DOT's stance is that it is not diverting anything.

"The money is going to be used as it was intended," DOT spokesman Michael R. Flick said. "We are having a conversation internally to formalize a position with regard to the language, what it means. Our position is what it has been."

Last week, Mr. Flick said the DOT will use $6.3 million earmarked in 2005 to design improvements on Route 11, money that supporters of I-98 believe should be spend on the proposed interstate.

The wording of the 2005 earmark was that the money be spent to conduct design, scoping, and environmental and planning studies for a proposed Northern Tier Expressway.

"We are currently examining the situation to determine if the allocated resources are being used to improve the north country's road infrastructure in a way that is consistent with federal law," said Matt House, press secretary for Sen. Charles E. Schumer, who was in office when the earmark was made.

An expressway may be a divided highway of four lanes with occasional traffic lights and of limited access but is not an interstate, Mr. Flick said.

The DOT unveiled its vision of the expressway in 2008 at public hearings, where it received mixed reviews in St. Lawrence County. The proposal was for small improvements, including passing lanes and roundabouts made along Route 11 that could eventually lead to an expressway.

The earmark was not meant for the DOT's expressway plan, said Jason A. Clark, chairman of the Northern Corridor Transportation Group.

"The $6.3 million in question was mandated to implement the recommendations of the 2002 North Country Transportation Study," Mr. Clark wrote in an email. "Those monies were committed between 2003 and 2005. To suggest that the legislative intent of those appropriations was to implement recommendations made in a study that was not released until 2008 is inexcusable."

The recommendation of the 2002 study, however, could be interpreted as supporting either side.

"The economic development analysis concluded that along the highway alternatives, economic growth opportunities are maximized by an east-west alignment, generally along the existing Route 11," the report stated. "The results further concluded that at the onset, the approach should center on using as much of the existing right-of-way along Route 11, to develop a four-lane expressway, or a freeway standard."

The study referred to Route 17, which evolved from a two-lane to a four-lane expressway and ultimately to a freeway.

"The design standards utilized early on, particularly on the western end of the route, were consistent with interstate standards," the report stated. "In addition to design-related standards, these principles should also include guidelines to limit access to the road and restrict certain types of land use that would infringe upon the right-of-way and adequate setback requirements."

In 2009, the Northern Tier Expressway Study Advisory Group, a collection of representatives from St. Lawrence, Franklin, Jefferson, Lewis and Clinton counties, asked that federal funds dedicated to a four-lane highway effort, under whatever name, should not be used for the DOT's phased improvements to Route 11.

"There has never been a question that the overwhelming desire of elected officials in the five-county region of Northern New York is that an interstate highway be built between I-81 and I-87," Mr. Burns wrote in his letter.