Issues > Transportation > Printer Version
Deep 'Sixed'

Route 6 Expressway (Connecticut)

$432 million

The Route 6 expressway is a proposed 12-mile expressway in eastern Connecticut. The project began back in 1972 as an interstate highway connecting Hartford, Connecticut with Providence, Rhode Island. Rhode Island canceled its section of the road after an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) showed that the proposed highway would cut through Scituate Reservoir, the source of most of the state's drinking water. Connecticut remains determined to pursue a northerly alignment of a new Route 6, despite the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) repeated statements that such an alignment could not receive a permit because of the serious impacts on wetlands and forests. In addition, the Army Corps of Engineers found that the alignments which run south of Route 6 for the eastern portion of the project are less damaging environmentally and the northerly alignment is not the Least Environmentally Destructive Practical Alternative (LEDPA). Route 6 would cost federal taxpayers $432 million, for construction alone. Mitigation for thousands of acres of land will be a huge additional expense.

Green Scissors Proposal
Reject the proposed new Route 6 Expressway, which would cost federal taxpayers $432 million, according to the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT).

Current Status

In 1989, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) denied the state a construction permit because of environmental impacts and the state's failure to evaluate alternatives. The state then proposed an option called "Alternative 133A," which was essentially the same route that was rejected by the Corps and opposed by the EPA and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). In response, the Connecticut Fund for the Environment, Citizens for a Sensible Six, the Sierra Club, the Town of Coventry and other organizations presented a report and preliminary design for an upgrade of the existing Route 6 to the Corps as an alternative to the expressway. A qualified engineering firm provided both the report and the design. In July 1998, the Corps rejected ConnDOT's Alternative 133A, saying it would damage sensitive environmental resources. In July 2000, ConnDOT once again submitted an application in which the preferred route, "Alternative 133B," is the same northerly alignment of Route 6 that has been repeatedly rejected by the Corps, FWS and EPA. In December 2000 the Army Corps of Engineers notified ConnDOT that the northerly alignment is not the LEDPA and could not receive a permit. The Corps offered to work with ConnDOT on two other alignments. ConnDOT has not responded. The Federal Highway has cut off funding for planning of any route that is exclusively north of the Hop River. All of the affected towns oppose the construction of the routes that the Army Corps of Engineers has said could receive permits. The EPA and FWS maintain that an upgrade would meet the transportation needs of the corridor, would be far less costly (by hundreds of millions of dollars) and would be the least environmentally damaging alternative by far.

Project Hurts Taxpayers

Federal taxpayers should not have to pay $432 million for a project that is unnecessary. For less than half the price, upgrades and minor changes on the existing route could adequately address safety concerns and handle expected traffic volumes.

The expressway would not adequately address the safety problems along the existing Route 6. Connecticut's Manchester Journal Inquirer has editorialized, "Why not improve and widen the road that now exists and beef up law enforcement?"

Project Hurts the Environment

It would destroy valuable wetlands and threaten regional forests. Even the most benign alignment contemplated by ConnDOT would fill nearly 40 acres of wetlands, bisect 140 acres of unfragmented forest blocks, cross a river and a brook, and generally destroy the character of the area. The Corps, FWS, and EPA, are all on record as stating that ConnDOT's preferred northerly alignment would be environmentally unacceptable. In September 1995, the EPA stated that "an upgrade of the existing Route 6 would meet both safety and efficiency concerns while causing significantly less environmental damage than any of the freeway alternatives under consideration."

Contacts

• Dana Young, Connecticut Fund for the Environment, (203) 787-0646;
• Mike Williams, Citizens for a Sensible Six, (860) 742-5650;
• Matt O'Brien, Coventry Town Council, (860) 742-1555;
• David Hirsch, Friends of the Earth, (202) 783-7400 x215.