Posted on 12/21/2006 10:52:33 AM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
WASHINGTON - Environmental groups filed two court challenges Wednesday aimed at blocking construction of Maryland's Intercounty Connector, a highway that officials say will ease commutes and take vehicles off local streets.
The 18-mile, six-lane highway connecting Interstate 270 in Montgomery County with Interstate 95 in Prince George's County has long been championed by regional business groups, but faced stiff opposition from environmentalists as well as concerns over its cost. It finally won federal approval in May.
In one lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, Environmental Defense and the Sierra Club claim the air quality analysis conducted by federal and regional officials was inadequate because it gauged the potential pollution from the ICC by using monitors that were more than 1 1/2 miles from major highways.
The second lawsuit - filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, Md., by the Audubon Naturalist Society, the Maryland Native Plant Society and a family whose property is on the proposed route for the ICC - says federal officials failed to consider reasonable alternatives to the road and the full environmental impact of the project.
The ICC "would bring 125,000 vehicles per day into quiet residential neighborhoods and scenic parks and in close proximity to five schools where children ... will be exposed to dangerous levels of toxic and particulate matter air pollution," the groups said in the Washington suit.
Maryland Transportation Secretary Robert Flanagan said the environmental impact studies were done "exceed the requirements of state and federal regulations."
"Now and until the ICC is built there will be congestion on neighborhood roads in Montgomery County that is more harmful than any emissions emanating from the ICC in the future," Flanagan said in a telephone interview. He said studies indicated that moving traffic onto the ICC would reduce the number of serious accidents by 340 a year.
AAA Mid-Atlantic was quick to condemn the lawsuit, as was the Greater Washington Board of Trade.
"The environmental work was very carefully put together in anticipation of these lawsuits," said Bob Grow, director of government relations at the board. "I'd be surprised if have any traction whatsoever."
PING!
PING!
Hey---I live right on this road site---I hope and pray these environmentalist get their way--This time at least--all politics is local
I suspect the environazis will have allies in the incoming O'Malley administration. The RATS have consistently opposed the building of this much needed highway. It got traction only when Governor Ehrlich got behind it, and with him leaving office, I wouldn't hold out too much hope that it will ever go forward.
Do you oppose freeway projects in general because of eminent domain concerns, or just this one because YOU live on or near it's path?
My Mama always said, "NIMBY is as NIMBY does."
Anyone have a map?
There is a small map and a link to a larger PDF at this link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/11/AR2005071100869.html
By the way, I live with roommates right next to I-270, which is scheduled to be widened (again) in 2010 or so. If I'm still here, I will move out gracefully.
Even the Cato Institute supports eminent domain to build roads.
There is nothing wrong with eminent domain to build roads, unless they are toll roads, in which case it's the government handing over the power to a third non-government party and is no different than a contractor taking your home to build a shopping center.
They need a bridge up Rt. 28 in VA and across the river and one bridge at the Fairfax County Parkway into MD. Then they need a new bridge inside the beltway across the river. This will relieve the traffic in the area. Until they do this is won't get better.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.