 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
An abridged version of this statement was presented by Ethan Goffman at the Maryland Department of Transportation's Public Hearing on the I-270/US 15 Multi-Modal Corridor Study at Gaithersburg Middle School on June 16, 2009.
The plans for widening I-270 reflect a business-as-usual philosophy, a throw-back to a 1950s "roads first" approach rather than a forward-looking one that emphasizes transit and traffic relief. We know now that increasing road capacity inevitably leads to greater car use, and then to car-centric residential and commercial construction alongside the new capacity. If we ignore the lessons of the past, and expand I-270 as far away as Frederick, we are dooming ourselves to more and, especially, longer, car trips.
The Montgomery Sierra Club does support a pair set of HOT lanes to Frederick, which is necessary and unavoidable due to current and projected levels of traffic. Widening I-270, however, would cause extra growth where we don't want it, away from DC, our region's major population center, which already provides transit options.
We support building the Corridor Cities Transitway (CCT) before any additional road widening. Indeed, we urge adoption of a general "transit first" policy, where upgrades to transit get priority over new or improved roads. Too often, transit is considered secondary to car travel. A look at the estimated cost of these projects bears this out: $4.6 billion on highway improvement (2.6 billion for the Montgomery County section) versus $450 million for the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) version or $770 million for the light rail version of the CCT.
We believe that now is the time to put transit in the driver's seat. This will help our region realize its Smart Growth goals of adding transit convenient to the city, particularly putting jobs near existing residential development. It follows that we support the current Master Plan and corridor study version of the CCT, rather than a rerouting to serve a projected Life Sciences Center with 60,000 employees. We wish that Biotech jobs could be added where they serve the needs of the community, such as in Langley Park, which has many residents but few jobs and is located on the proposed Purple Line route.
Rerouting the CCT through Belward Farm has the additional disadvantage of delaying a long-planned project by at least a year. Due to the need for a new environmental study, we also support extending the CCT to the heart of Clarksburg, where development is densest and so will boost ridership. Indeed, such transit options will allow families to live with fewer cars. The current need for so many vehicles places an enormous, almost hidden tax on families.
In addition, we support a BRT rather than a light rail option for the CCT since BRT is far more cost effective. This must be a full, complete BRT with priority over cars, raised platforms, and other amenities that will draw passengers who would not take a regular bus. We do support light rail only for the densest, most permanent, Smart Growth friendly areas.
We also support study of the Action Committee for Transit alternative to the CCT, the J-shaped route with two legs—a shorter one to Kentlands or Metropolitan Grove, and a longer, direct route that would better live up to the intent to serve the corridor cities with efficient transit.
A Corridor transit system should become a vital part of a more extensive BRT network of which the CCT would be a leading component. This would be part of a true revisioning of the transportation network needed to support Maryland's—and Montgomery County's—objective of reducing greenhouse gas emissions 25% by 2020 and 80% by 2050.
With a growing population, we cannot afford the business-as-usual expansion of roads. We simply will not be sustainable regarding global warming, local pollution, or reduction of runoff to facilitate clean water. We in the Sierra Club request that Maryland and Montgomery County finally take seriously their rhetoric about sustainability and Smart Growth and begin a true rethinking of transportation and its impact on lifestyle and land use.
