The Transportation Policy Report is being debated before it goes to the County Council. Please voice your opinion on how our region addresses traffic congestion.
Please go to the upcoming public work sessions and fill out a questionnaire.
When and where are the public sessions? All Workshops are from 7:00 - 9:30pm.
Monday, October 1
Tuesday, October 2
Roberto Clemente Middle School
18808 Waring Station Road
Germantown
Thursday, October 4
Paint Branch High School
14121 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring
Tuesday, October 9
Herbert Hoover Middle School
8810 Post Oak Road
Rockville
Thursday, October 11
Casey Center
810 South Frederick Avenue
Gaithersburg
Monday, October 15
Montgomery Blair High School
51 University Boulevard East
Silver Spring
The Task Force has developed a transit-oriented scenario and a road oriented scenario. Here are the advantages and disadvantages of each scenario.
The Transit Scenario has a revised land use plan. It projects traffic improvement by balancing the housing/job imbalance in the county, and expansion of transit with development concentrated at the metro station.
The transit scenario pretty much follows the County’s master plans, but it reduces the need for cars by increasing access to jobs and services by transit, bicycle and walking. It accomplishes this through expanding transit, balancing the location of jobs and housing in specific communities and cross-county, and expanding development near transit stations. The transit scenario is pretty good except that it allocates too much money for new road projects. One example of this is, the eastern portion of the Inter County Connector.
What are specific examples of how this scenario achieves traffic relief? An increase of jobs and housing in Silver Spring where we have already invested in transit and urban infrastructure, and a increase in housing along the I270 corridor where jobs exist. Most of the jobs in Montgomery County are located in the Southern and Eastern portions of the county, so a northern river crossing would do little to benefit commuters?
This balanced land use approach also takes out 18-20,000 houses that are allowed for in the build-out of the county master plan and called for in the Road-Oriented Scenario.
The transit scenario calls for road improvements and widening that are in the current master plan. Also a major expansion of Metro to Metropolitan Grove, and the (inner) Purple line. Heavy rail is combined with light rail and a bus corridor to Shady Grove.
The Road-Oriented Scenario makes no changes in projected land use, and builds more roads and highways than are in the current master plan.
Why does a ‘road only’ scenario not solve our traffic congestion problems? It makes driving conditions worse by, increasing the number of car trips, distance and time spent on the road. It damages more parks, forests, wetlands, streams and rural areas. The only improvement in metro is the Georgetown branch, and it calls for the expensive outer purple line, which doesn’t connect people with jobs.
What roads does it call for?
The full ICC on the Master Plan Alignment (MPA); the ICC Mid-County Alignment from Shady Grove Road to Muncaster Mill Road, where it would join the ICC MPA near Magruder High School; the Montrose Parkway; the "Techway" and significant road widenings to support a new bridge over the Potomac; extending Mid-County Highway to Clarksburg; widening the Beltway; widening I-270 north of Montgomery Village; and widening and extending dozens of other roads.
What do we know about the Road-Oriented approach?
The Chesapeake Bay Foundation did an analysis of ‘techway’ studies. Their report indicates that the river crossing would have little effect in reducing regional traffic congestion because jobs are in the Southern and Eastern part of the county. Depending on where the proposed crossing were built only 4% of the traffic would be diverted from the American Legion Bridge, and additional commuters would be added to the congestion. The additional traffic caused by ‘induced travel’ is estimated to generate 69,000 additional cars daily at the Rte. 7100 alignment. The ‘induced travel’ comes about when current transit users and carpoolers switch over to driving on the new road. The CBF report also analyzes the 1997 ICC EIS, and the Western Transportation Corridor studies, they show that construction of a new highway would increase traffic congestion where local roads are connected to highway interchanges. Finally the Northern VA 2020 Transportation Plan modeled 3 different crossings and showed little benefit at those locations. It also produced little congestion relief on the Capital beltway and increased regional air pollution. Why do the road proponents ignore these facts?
The EPA has declared the air pollution in our region to be in ‘serious non attainment’ status. According to the Washington Council of Governments transportation planning director, Ron Kirby we are heading towards ‘severe non attainment’ status if we don’t change our patterns. We need more affordable alternatives to using the car if we are going to improve the air quality in our region. If we break the 1950’s highway approach to solving traffic congestion then we will have an opportunity to give commuters more choices in how they get around and improve the air quality for the many 1000’s of asthma sufferers in our area. The increase in Nox emissions from increase in miles traveled also has a direct effect on Chesapeake bay nutrient pollution load.
What about the impact on the health of asthma sufferers in our area? Ozone is the primary part of smog. It is a severe lung irritant and prolonged exposures can cause shortness of breath, chest pain, wheezing and coughing. The Washington Region has the 7th worst ozone pollution in the country. According to the American Lung Association 10,000 people under the age of 18 have asthma in the district, as well as 20,000 adults. When ozone levels are high more people suffer asthma attacks.
Why can’t the nation’s capital adopt the new ideas that are being used in other parts of the country when addressing regional transportation problems? Look at what the citizens, state and local government did in Jacksonville, Florida, Portland, Oregon, and Utah. They called on elected officials to come up with new transportation solutions. Let’s call on our elected officials to follow their example by investing in the future of MARC, Metro and VRE and connect Tyson’s Corner to Maryland by building the inner purple line. By adding rail cars, busses and bus lines, supporting affordable transit passes government can keep up with population growth and passenger demand for public transportation.
Points to Make on the Questionnaire:
• I strongly prefer the Transit-Balanced Land Use scenario because it has the benefits of placing jobs and housing closer together and giving more people the option of commuting by transit instead of driving.
• It seems that building big roads and widening freeways and local roads still leaves congestion worse than today. At least the Transit Scenario offers people better options to avoid traffic, and would allow people to live closer to where they work. And every person who rides transit, or walks or bikes to work or to shop, is one less car on the road.
• The Highway Scenario gives us more of the same failed policies. The highways will fill up, destroy communities, make our already bad air pollution worse, and give people no options for avoiding our traffic-clogged roads. It‚s time for new land use thinking and transit-based options that work better.
• Not everyone will want to live in urban areas, but lots of retirees and young professionals do because they want good transit access. Housing close to Metro is already in high demand because it‚s so attractive to so many people. The County should provide more opportunities for people to live and work near transit.
• Montgomery County should invest in expanding bus and rail transit instead of building big, new roads that destroy communities and the environment.
• We value preserving our rural areas, streams, parks and farms. Using parking lots, abandoned buildings and land near transit stations to accommodate new development can preserve the quality of our rural areas & make the urban and suburban communities more desirable places to live and work.
• The small increase in car commuting speed isn’t worth the community & environmental impacts of building roads. It is far more important to protect our communities, have more transit options, and be able to safely walk to see friends or shop at nearby stores.
• Traffic accidents and deaths would probably be reduced in the Transit-Balanced Land Use scenario because people would not have to drive as far or as much.
• Getting companies to provide transit passes and allow telecommuting should be a higher priority than these major new road projects because these measures will give people better options and get cars off the existing roads.
Who to contact if you want to learn more about this issue:
Coalition for Smarter Growth: 202-588-5570 or <
email@smartergrowth.net >Sugarloaf Citizens Association
Tina Brown (301-428-8350)
For a Rural Montgomery <
f.a.r.m@erols,com >