Duke should find new Needmore route
To the Editor:
When my Needmore neighbors and I began working in 2000 to protect 4,500 acres from development, we never imagined that 26 years later we would be fighting Duke Energy over our own private property.
Duke Energy acquired 4,500 acres along the Little Tennessee River when it bought a local independent utility in 1988. The land had originally been purchased at low prices from residents of Swain and Macon counties for a dam project on the Little Tennessee that was never built.
In 2004, the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commssion and its partners bought the tract for $19 million.
Duke Energy now plans to extend a new transmission line, known as the Almond 66-kV line, from Highway 19/74 up Needmore. The line would connect the planned Almond Substation at Needmore Road and U.S. 19 to an existing 66-kV line across the river through a right of way Duke retained through part of the 4,500 acres when it sold the property to the N.C. Wildlife Resources Commission in 2004.
Three routes were reportedly considered, and two would have affected private landowners less. Yet Duke chose the route which follows the Needmore Road corridor that has the greatest negative impact on private landowners. Duke Energy proposes a 68-foot right of way within a study area as wide as 400 feet, according to Duke’s map.
Related Items
Walters hydro plant turns 100: Dam, powerhouse withstood Helene’s onslaught
Local groups fill gaps in ‘roadless rule’ conversation
Duke rate hike proposal is insulting
Join Farm Bureau in Raleigh for farmland preservation
Those are the facts as I understand them. Now I have some questions.
I would like to know why and how Duke Energy chose the site for the future Almond Substation. It has been rumored that one of Duke’s subcontractors bought the property and then resold it to Duke. If true, that raises serious concerns about conflicts of interest and insider knowledge.
Why choose a route that affects so many private landowners when other options meet the same need without disrupting a populated community of generational landowners?
Duke says, and I quote, “many factors were considered during the route study and siting process, including land use, engineering, natural resources, safety, reliability and community input collected during two open house meetings and during the public comment periods. Your responses helped the Duke Energy team understand public interests and concerns.”
That’s what Duke says on their website, but I do not believe the people of Needmore changed their minds. They did not want this line to come up Needmore Road then, and they do not want it now. Duke has chosen the cheapest and easiest route over the people who live here.
Although I am grateful that the Needmore Tract was preserved for future generations, I have always been saddened that the residents who lived there were essentially forced to sell for almost nothing. They were never given a chance to buy the land back, parcel by parcel. This is one more example of the unfair treatment Swain County residents seem to face again and again.
Less than 15% of Swain County is privately owned. Just like the residents who sold their land years ago, we will not get back the right of way land Duke wants to take. I believe Duke Energy can find a better route for this transmission line, one that does not cut a 68-foot swath through our front yards, cemeteries and churches. There is also the risk that, 20 years from now, an even larger project could expand into more of that 400-foot study corridor. They need to take a different route.
Cheryl Taylor
Mountain Neighbors for Needmore Preservation
Bryson City
