Buncombe Commissioners cancel Tuesday meeting on I-26

A Tuesday, Dec. 23, meeting scheduled to allow the Buncombe County Board of Commissioners to make their recommendation for the I-26 connector design has been canceled, with the board now planning to decide on the matter Jan. 6.

A statement from Kathy Hughes, clerk to the Board of Commissioners, was released today: “An issue has been raised about the sufficiency of the notice for the December 23 special meeting. The Buncombe County Board of Commissioners do not want any legal or procedural question to cloud the decision of the Board concerning the I-26 issue; therefore, the meeting for December 23 is cancelled and the item will be placed on the agenda for January 6, 2009.”

— Jon Elliston, managing editor

SHARE
About Jon Elliston
An Asheville-based mountain journalist: Former Mountain Xpress managing editor. Investigations and open government editor at Carolina Public Press. Senior contributing editor at WNC magazine.

Before you comment

The comments section is here to provide a platform for civil dialogue on the issues we face together as a local community. Xpress is committed to offering this platform for all voices, but when the tone of the discussion gets nasty or strays off topic, we believe many people choose not to participate. Xpress editors are determined to moderate comments to ensure a constructive interchange is maintained. All comments judged not to be in keeping with the spirit of civil discourse will be removed and repeat violators will be banned. See here for our terms of service. Thank you for being part of this effort to promote respectful discussion.

5 thoughts on “Buncombe Commissioners cancel Tuesday meeting on I-26

  1. What’s Really Going On Here?

    http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=6638

    “So why the hurry? What’s their big rush? It’s not simply hearing the frustration from a segment of the public over the length of the process. Folks have been arguing over the I-26 design since 1989. Making a decision right now won’t in any way speed the process to completion. The Chamber of Commerce felt the need to weigh in early as well, first endorsing an alternative that is now off the table and then endorsing Alternative 3. They didn’t bother to look at the Asheville Design Center’s presentation of Alternative 4B either.

    The answer may come from this document, “Governor-Elect Perdue Transition Advisory Group Sessions – Transportation”…”

  2. Jeff Fobes

    Adding some fuel to Gordon Smith’s fire, here’s the report on Gov. Perdue’s Nov. 24 session on Transportation, which looked at NC DOT’s problems

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/8972907/Transportation

    Some key points covered:

    Issue No. 1. Need for Improved Relationship and Reporting among Local, Town, City, Regional, Statewide, and Federal Transportation Agencies and Government (11 votes)
    Recommendation
    Have more frequent communication among involved entities and involve counties more.hh

    Issue No. 3. Allow Each Region More Opportunities to Strategically
    Chart Its Own Transportation Course (9 votes)
    Recommendations
    Integrate with federal government, state government, and others for long-range planninghh
    Compare strategic plan where commonalities exist.hh

    Issue No. 4. Restructure Board of Transportation (6 votes)
    Recommendations
    Eliminate geographic representation and replace with representation based upon function.hh
    Allow public to address BOT in public forum.hh

    Issue No. 6. Refocus Long-Range Strategic Plan for DOT (3 votes)
    Recommendations
    More multimodal choices.hh
    Allow more local/regional decision making.hh

    Issue No. 4. Need to Develop Mass Transit before Need Is Overwhelming (3 votes)
    Recommendations
    Make local land use work (or transportation projects) a condition of funding.hh
    Equalize all transportation modes in planning efforts so roads are not supreme method.hh

    Issue No. 2. Lack of Coordination among Metropolitan Planning Organizations
    (MPOs) and Councils of Government (COGs)—Regional Agencies
    Responsible for Transportation and Land Use (6 votes)
    Recommendations
    Develop better coordination procedures among MPOs, COGs, and DOT divisions.hh
    Try to adjust jurisdictional boundaries of regional agencies so that they better coincide. hh

    Topic Area No. 6: Perception/Public Information and Media
    Issue No. 1. Need a Change of Culture at DOT (21 votes)
    Recommendation
    Change of leadership attitude.hh

    Issue No. 3. Public Does Not Trust DOT to Use Money Effectively (9 votes)
    Recommendations
    Someone needs to be the face of issues.hh
    Make clear and effective case that DOT has new leadership.hh
    DOT should focus more at grassroots level.hh
    The new administration should take the time to listen and communicate with hh
    municipalities as a local level.

  3. Jeff Fobes

    From that same report:

    “While the typical state department of transportation manages 20 percent of the state’s roads, DOT is responsible for 80 percent of roads in North Carolina.
    — DOT’s Chief Financial Officer Mark Foster

  4. Jeff Fobes

    Gordon Smith and Keith Thomson are discussing the commissioners’ delay over at scrutinyhooligans
    http://scrutinyhooligans.us/?p=6638

    Smith: “[The commissioners] can’t declare that making this decision now will in any demonstrable way effect an acceleration of the process of building this road.”

    Thomson: “I agree that the majority was mistaken, and that we should call for a complete evaluation of the ADC proposal through an orderly process.”

Leave a Reply

To leave a reply you may Login with your Mountain Xpress account, connect socially or enter your name and e-mail. Your e-mail address will not be published. All fields are required.