The 3-2 vote by the Washington City Council on March 27 to not proceed with the widening of 15^th Street from Carolina Avenue to U.S. Highway 264 is evidence the project — likely in a simpler, less-expensive version — had some support.

The majority of the council rejected the North Carolina Department of Transportation’s project that carried a price tag of $16 million to $20 million. The majority cited the project’s cost and opposition to it from residents and business owners with properties in the project corridor.

Some residents and business owners along the project corridor opposed raised medians, U-turn locations and other elements of the proposed project. Others said they worry the project, if built as proposed by DOT, would hinder response times of emergency personnel, add to drainage problems along the 15^th Street corridor from Carolina Avenue to U.S. Highway 264 and hinder access to businesses.

In making his motion to reject the project, Councilman Doug Mercer said: “The citizens have come forth. They said, ‘We don’t want what you’ve got there. We think there’s a problem on 15^th Street, but this isn’t the solution.’ Therefore, I move we not adopt the resolution as presented.”

Councilman Larry Beeman voted against the motion. Beeman had a simple message for project opponents who talked with him about it. “My reply to them was I consciously could not walk out of that meeting knowing I voted against something that was going to reduce accidents,” he said Thursday.

“The main reason I voted the way I did: I was more in favor of doing the 15^th Street project. The reason was the concern for safety. Anytime we have the opportunity to save a life, prevent an accident, I think that’s the correct route to go. That’s the No. 1 reason why I felt like 15^th Street should be done,” Beeman said.

Although no one spoke in favor of the 15^th Street project at several public meetings and hearings, that does not mean there was no support for it, City Manager Bobby Roberson said. “I received phone calls about that. They (supporters) said the opposition was too great, that the opposition was well organized and they felt like they (opponents) had the votes, and for them to be stepping up … in favor of the plan would be a waste of time. That’s what they told me,” he said. “I took their names down. I think there were five.”

Beeman said he spoke with people who supported the project but decided not to go public with their support. “Obviously, the city was in favor of doing or they never would have put it on the table if they were not in favor of it. … They were in favor of it. They felt like we should do it. They just can’t come out (in favor of it.) Those people are in positions they couldn’t come out for it,” he said.

Beeman, who believes a workable compromise could have been reached, said the NCDOT proved it was listening to opponents’ concerns by acting on them. Beeman noted that Bill Kincannon, DOT’s resident engineer for its Division 2, provided examples of such compromise. “He even said they had removed the median in front of Hospital Pharmacy. One of the complaints was having that median in front of Hospital Pharmacy. So, they (DOT) had already started moving toward working with and addressing the complaints,” Beeman said. “I think the state was willing to work with and address the complaints, try to make it as best as they could and appeasing to the city.”

Council member William Pitt, who voted against the motion not to proceed with the 15^th Street project, asked Kincannon at the March 27 meeting “if there is a more palatable means of dealing with the incidents (vehicle accidents) would come back to the city of Washington.”

Kincannon replied, “I don’t think we have any problem looking at alternatives, if they’re brought to us. However, there are only so many alternatives that are going to correct the situation. We’re not going to put a red light at every single intersection. I have no authority to slow traffic down. We have a speed limit of 35 (mph). I’ve got the crash reports in my notebook here. I’ve read every single one of them. … To answer your question as directly as I can, we will take it into consideration, but a lot of the talk and considerations are not being directed to us. They’re being directed, I guess, internally to groups over here. We’re not getting a lot of phone calls on this. Basically, anything I get new is something that comes out in the newspaper.”

Pitt, citing the need to make the city’s streets as safe as possible, said, “Let’s send a message (to DOT) to go back, to make something work for all of us because we all live in the city of Washington. We need to, once and for all, be one unified body — elected officials, citizens and even those who don’t come (to council meetings) because in the end run, everybody is responsible for our actions up here. It affects every single soul in this county. … We need to do the reasonable, right and prudent thing for every single citizen of Washington and Beaufort County.”

Pitt added: “If everyone is not palatable with it, we’re not going to do it. So, I do understand your right to protest.”

“If this is passed … is this going to hit a wall and you guys are no longer going to be willing to negotiate any, or receive any input, take any input from the business owners and/or residents on 15^th Street?” Beeman asked Kincannon at the March 27 meeting.

“We’re really happy to meet with the business owners and try to modify where we can. … At one point we have to quit planning and we have to quit — we have to come to a compromise. We have to come up with something that people can live with as much as possible,” Kincannon said.

Kincannon said the city’s decision to not proceed with the 15^th Street project would not hurt its chances with other DOT projects in the future.

It’s possible a dramatically modified version of the current 15^th Street project could be requested by the city, Roberson said. Such a request would have to come from the City Council and make at least one stop on its way to DOT, he noted.

“It has to come from the Regional Planning Organization, of which we (the city) are a member. We forward up certain projects that we want inside the city and county. They’re actually sent to them (DOT). They have a scale, a weighted scale, about accidents, traffic control. That criteria sets the tone for the projects to move up in their systems,” Roberson said. “After that, we move over into competition with other counties that are in our region. Based on that system, it moves up. So, on 15^th Street … that is a high-accident area — there’s no question about it. NCDOT is still concerned about personal injury on 15^th Street. Subsequently, they’ll be looking at it, and we, the city, can ask them to take a look at it.”

Roberson reiterated it would be the City Council that would initiate any project involving 15^th Street in the future. “My position is I’m not going to move forward on 15^th Street until the council directs me because the vote said to put the project behind us,” Roberson said. “If they, they meaning City Council, want us to move forward on it, then they need to instruct staff and we can make those presentations to the Regional Planning Organization.”

The city, to some degree, has a history of turning down projects and funding for projects. In recent years, grant funds for some parks and/or recreation projects were returned to the state. Sometimes, according to city officials, returning those grants made it difficult for the city to obtain similar grants over the years.

Roberson acknowledges there could be some validity to concerns that history could surface as state agencies and other groups consider the city for projects and grant funds.

“I would think if I were reviewing the process, I would certainly look at that. It’s a public safety issue with NCDOT. They’re telling us, from their perspective, there’s a lot of concern with traffic accidents in specific locations. They’re asking us to buy into their design and help solve the problem. That’s what they’re attempting to do,” Roberson said, adding he can understand why DOT might be disappointed with the council’s rejection of the 15^th Street plan.

Beeman does not believe the city’s rejection of the 15^th Street project will hinder it getting grants and other DOT projects in the future. “I don’t see that,” he said.

Roberson said there is a specific safety-related road project he would like the city to consider. “It’s a tremendous problem for and a safety issue for me for Highland Drive going to Washington High School. It should be a high priority. It’s next to the hospital. At the peak (traffic) generation times, early in the morning, at lunchtime and after school, Highland Drive — a two-lane road — is just not sufficient to handle that amount of traffic,” he said. “That’s a major concern for me. … It’s a big issue for us, internally, for the city. No doubt about that.”

Beeman said he would take the potential Highland Drive project past the high school, farther out Slatestone Road. He also said taking a look at improving Market Street and Market Street Extension should be considered.