Exit408

TDOT is proposing a new exit in Sevier County; the details are on their site at https://www.tn.gov/tdot/projects/projects-region-1/interstate-40-exit-408.html

In the public comments, they had two primary questions...these are my responses.

What do you like and/or dislike about the No-Build Alternative?

I have mixed feelings about the No-Build Alternative.

What I like about the No-Build Alternative

The primary advantage of the No-Build Alternative is that it would avoid many of the immediate impacts associated with the proposed Build Alternative.

It would avoid or significantly reduce property acquisitions. Local families would not be required to give up their property for a project whose overall benefits and traffic impacts remain uncertain.
It would avoid introducing a major new roadway into the Kodak community. This would reduce the potential for additional development pressure and the resulting demands on water, electric, schools, emergency services, and other infrastructure.
It would avoid creating a new traffic corridor that may simply shift congestion to SR 139 and Highway 66. Based on the information currently available, I am not convinced that the proposed Build Alternative provides a sufficiently effective alternative to the existing Exit 407/Highway 66 route.
It preserves the opportunity to consider better alternatives. Choosing No-Build now does not necessarily mean that the transportation problems in this area should be ignored. It allows TDOT additional time to evaluate alternatives that may provide greater transportation benefits with fewer impacts to local residents.

What I dislike about the No-Build Alternative

The existing transportation network in the Kodak area has legitimate problems that should not simply be left unaddressed.

Traffic associated with Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, Gatlinburg, and the surrounding communities continues to grow, and Exit 407 and Highway 66 experience significant traffic volumes. Simply maintaining the existing system indefinitely is unlikely to be a satisfactory long-term solution.

The No-Build Alternative also does not address the underlying transportation issues that prompted TDOT to study an additional interchange in the first place. If the existing roadway network is projected to become increasingly congested, I believe some improvements will eventually be necessary.

However, I do not believe that the choice has to be limited to the current Build Alternative or doing nothing.

A better approach

My preference would be for TDOT to continue evaluating alternatives that address the legitimate transportation needs of the area while minimizing impacts to existing residents and property owners.

In particular, I would like to see additional analysis of alternatives that:

Provide a meaningful alternative route for traffic traveling between I-40 and Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, and Gatlinburg.
Reduce the dependence on Highway 66 and the existing Exit 407 interchange.
Minimize the amount of property that must be acquired from local families.
Avoid creating new bottlenecks on SR 139 or other two-lane roads.
Consider the capacity of existing water, electric, school, emergency-service, and other infrastructure.
Account for the additional development that a new interchange would likely encourage.

Therefore, while I recognize the No-Build Alternative does not solve the area's transportation problems, I currently believe it is preferable to proceeding with the proposed Build Alternative without further consideration of other options.

I would encourage TDOT to use the No-Build Alternative as an opportunity to continue studying the transportation needs of the area and develop a solution that provides a measurable regional benefit without unnecessarily burdening the families and infrastructure of the Kodak community.

What do you like and/or dislike about the Build Alternative?

I have several concerns regarding the Build Alternative and would appreciate additional information and consideration of other alternatives before this project moves forward.

Impact to local property owners and families. The Build Alternative appears to require a significant amount of property acquisition from families in the Kodak area. I would like to see more detail regarding which parcels are expected to be acquired, the extent of those acquisitions, and the number of families and property owners who would be directly affected.
Additional development and infrastructure demands. A new interchange would likely encourage additional commercial and residential development in the Kodak area. The existing community is already experiencing challenges in keeping infrastructure—including water, electric service, schools, and transportation infrastructure—in line with current growth. I am concerned that the additional development encouraged by this project could place further strain on these systems without corresponding infrastructure improvements.
Questions about whether the project will accomplish its stated purpose. I have concerns that the Build Alternative, as currently proposed, will not fully accomplish the stated purposes of the project. I would like to see additional traffic modeling and supporting data demonstrating how the proposed interchange will improve traffic flow throughout the surrounding area rather than simply shifting congestion from one location to another.
Other alternatives should be evaluated. I believe there may be alternatives that could accomplish the project's goals while reducing property impacts and providing more meaningful improvements to regional traffic flow. Two possibilities are discussed below.

The current plan may not achieve the stated purpose of the project

Improve System Linkage

While the proposal provides a north-south connector between East Dumplin Valley Road and SR 139, the proposed four- to eight-lane divided roadway would ultimately connect to two-lane roads at both ends. I am concerned that this could simply move the traffic bottleneck from the new interchange to the existing roadway network.

Traffic using the new interchange to travel toward Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, and Gatlinburg would ultimately use SR 139 to connect back to Winfield Dunn Parkway (US 441/Highway 66). To accommodate the additional traffic, improvements to SR 139 and its intersection with Highway 66 would likely be necessary.

I would like to see:

Current accident and traffic data for the SR 139/Highway 66 intersection.
Projected traffic volumes at this intersection resulting from the proposed Exit 408.
An analysis of how the additional traffic would affect safety and congestion at that intersection.
Any planned improvements to SR 139 and Highway 66 that would be required to support the additional traffic generated by Exit 408.

Improve Traffic Operational Efficiency

The vast majority of traffic currently using Exit 407 appears to be destined for Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, and Gatlinburg, with Winfield Dunn Parkway (Highway 66) serving as the primary route to those destinations.

The proposed Exit 408 does not appear to provide a significant alternative route to these destinations. In particular, eastbound travelers would be required to travel approximately five additional miles to reach the new interchange, while the proposed route would remove only approximately two miles of Highway 66 from their trip.

Additionally, concentrating additional traffic at the intersection of SR 139 and Highway 66 could negatively affect traffic traveling to and from the existing Exit 407 interchange. This raises the concern that the project could shift congestion to another point in the transportation network rather than providing a meaningful improvement in overall traffic efficiency.

I would like to see the traffic modeling supporting the conclusion that the proposed interchange will improve overall travel times and traffic operations for the region, particularly for traffic traveling between I-40 and Sevierville, Pigeon Forge, and Gatlinburg.

Other Options Should Be Considered

If other alternatives were considered during the development of this project, those alternatives have not been sufficiently presented in the public information available to me. I believe additional alternatives should be evaluated and made available for public review.

Exit Directly to SR 139 West of Exit 407

One potential alternative would be to locate the interchange directly on or adjacent to SR 139 west of Exit 407.

I-40 already crosses SR 139 at this location, potentially eliminating the need for a substantial additional north-south connector road.
This could reduce the amount of new roadway construction and potentially reduce the amount of property required for the project.
This would provide improved access to the popular flea-market area along West Dumplin Valley Road.
SR 139 would still require improvements to accommodate the additional traffic, but those improvements could potentially be more focused than the extensive connector construction proposed in the Build Alternative.

I believe this option deserves further study, including an evaluation of property impacts, traffic operations, safety, and projected development patterns.

Route the Connector to Highway 338

Another potential alternative would be to move the southern terminus of the proposed connector so that it aligns with Highway 338 rather than Kyker Ferry Road.

This could provide travelers with a more direct alternative route toward Sevierville and allow traffic to remain off Highway 66 for a greater portion of the trip. It could therefore provide a more meaningful alternative to the existing Exit 407/Highway 66 route.

I recognize that this alternative would require the acquisition of additional property. However, the additional property impacts should be weighed against the potential benefits of providing a genuine alternative route for traffic traveling toward Sevierville and the surrounding communities.

Conclusion

I support the goal of improving transportation access and traffic flow in the Kodak area, but I am not convinced that the proposed Build Alternative provides the best solution.

Before moving forward, I would encourage TDOT to provide additional information regarding property acquisitions, projected development, traffic volumes, accident data, and the expected effects on SR 139 and Highway 66. I also encourage TDOT to evaluate and publicly present additional alternatives that could accomplish the project's goals while minimizing impacts to local families and providing more effective alternatives to the existing Exit 407/Highway 66 corridor.