CHANGE MY LOCATION
Local
California News
Multimedia News
Opponents cite global warming in attempt to halt construction
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: BALTIMORE
BALTIMORE (Map, News) - Area lawmakers are among a group pushing to halt construction of the InterCounty Connector highway project that is under way in Montgomery so the state can study how it will affect global warming.
Del. Dana Stein, D-Baltimore County, said the 18-mile toll road that would connect Interstate 270 in Montgomery with Interstate 95 in Prince George’s, is too expensive and could significantly increase the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.
The effort is the latest in years of attempts to kill or at least indefinitely postpone the controversial highway. But it appears to lack critical support among legislators, Montgomery leaders said.
Stein’s bill, which has 27 co-sponsors, would require the state to produce a report evaluating the highway’s effect on global warming and submit that report to the governor and the legislature by December.
While the study is being completed, no further work would be done on the project, which is in its second phase.
“It will generate 700 million miles of new driving in a year, in addition to the substantial sprawl which will result as well,” Stein said.
“We need to know how it will affect greenhouse gas emissions. More broadly from a transportation point of view, it is hugely expensive, and the funds that will be spent on this could be better used on mass transit or other highway projects throughout the state.”
State Sen. Rona Kramer, chairwoman of the Montgomery Senate delegation, said these claims have been made for decades.
“And the same people who have been opposed to the ICC ... have signed on to support this bill. It’s not like there is a new group out there opposing it,” she said.
State transportation officials said the state has committed close to a billion dollars to contractors.
Greg Smith, a grassroots coordinator who opposes the ICC, said he thinks the state is “playing a game” with ICC funding.
“It’s like they want to spend as many tax dollars as quickly as possible to make sure the project is inevitable,” Smith said.
kmiller@dcexaminer.com
Comments from Examiner Readers
12:37 PM MST on Mon., May. 5, 2008 re: "Residents try to halt Intercounty Connector"
Report as inappropriate
8:18 AM MST on Tue., Feb. 19, 2008
re: "Green groups appeal judge’s connector ruling"
Report as inappropriate
6:54 AM MST on Tue., Jan. 8, 2008
re: "Green groups appeal judge’s connector ruling"
Report as inappropriate
7:36 AM MST on Wed., Dec. 5, 2007
re: "Officials worry Intercounty Connector could be roadblock for other projects"
Report as inappropriate
11:55 AM MST on Sun., Dec. 2, 2007
re: "Audubon gets taunting e-mail with ex-GOP leader’s address"
Report as inappropriate
9:26 AM MST on Fri., Nov. 30, 2007
re: "Audubon gets taunting e-mail with ex-GOP leader’s address"
Report as inappropriate
3:16 PM MST on Fri., Nov. 9, 2007
re: "Connector gets green light"
Report as inappropriate
7:46 AM MST on Fri., Nov. 9, 2007
re: "Montgomery council grills highway officials on Intercounty Connector"
Report as inappropriate
3:42 AM MST on Fri., Nov. 9, 2007
re: "Judge rules long-planned Maryland highway can go ahead"
Report as inappropriate
3:31 AM MST on Fri., Nov. 9, 2007
re: "Montgomery council grills highway officials on Intercounty Connector"
Report as inappropriate
1:44 PM MST on Thu., Nov. 8, 2007
re: "Judge rules long-planned Maryland highway can go ahead"
Report as inappropriate
4:55 PM MST on Sun., Nov. 4, 2007
re: "Archaeologists find clues to history in planned highway's path"
Report as inappropriate
6:32 AM MST on Tue., Oct. 30, 2007
re: "Groups decry smog analysis in connector court case"
Report as inappropriate
7:34 AM MST on Fri., Oct. 26, 2007
re: "More funds, staff green-lighted for Intercounty connector"
Report as inappropriate
9:55 AM MST on Thu., Oct. 25, 2007
re: "Critics say artifacts are another reason to quit connector project"
Report as inappropriate
1:39 PM MST on Wed., Oct. 3, 2007
re: "ICC would add pollution, environmental groups say"
Report as inappropriate
9:31 PM MST on Tue., Oct. 2, 2007
re: "ICC would add pollution, environmental groups say"
Report as inappropriate
6:27 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 28, 2007
re: "Residents decry Intercounty Connector"
Report as inappropriate
1:44 PM MST on Fri., Sep. 28, 2007
re: "Montgomery council grills highway officials on Intercounty Connector"
Report as inappropriate
9:17 AM MST on Wed., Aug. 15, 2007
re: "State pushes ahead with Intercounty Connector work"
Report as inappropriate
10:40 AM MST on Fri., Jul. 20, 2007
re: "One judge will hear both suits against new toll road project"
Report as inappropriate
6:34 AM MST on Fri., Jul. 20, 2007
re: "One judge will hear both suits against new toll road project"
Report as inappropriate
9:27 PM MST on Thu., Jul. 19, 2007
re: "One judge will hear both suits against new toll road project"
Report as inappropriate
7:44 PM MST on Thu., Jul. 19, 2007
re: "One judge will hear both suits against new toll road project"
Report as inappropriate
8:00 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 18, 2007
re: "One judge will hear both suits against new toll road project"
Report as inappropriate
6:36 AM MST on Tue., Jul. 10, 2007
re: "Officials worry Intercounty Connector could be roadblock for other projects"
Report as inappropriate
Gaylord said:
The NIMBY folks are at it again. This ICC will benefit all and will help relieve traffic.
2 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Ditto said:
Over the top, frivilous up roars that could cost them millions. Someone will pay a pretty penny.
71 agree | 69 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This appeal is another attempt to obstruct progress using fabricated reasoning. These greenies are a perfect example of unskilled, irrational fools with money donated by more irrational fools. They think it is progress to waste taxpayer money fighting their insane claims.
109 agree | 113 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Wacko Enviro said:
Let's all leave and make the world a better place. That's what the wackos want. The ICC is obviously needed but the enviro wackos have never seen a road they like. Unless the roads allow them to drive to commission hearings so they can complain about the ICC. What a bunch of hypocrites.
125 agree | 118 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
WILLIAM J. ROBERTS, ESQ. said:
To: "Too Conservative" Against my better judgment, I feel compelled to respond to your drivel. First, correct-- I served as Councilmember Nancy Dacek's Treasurer for about 8 years. Also-- 2 terms as a Rep member of the Charter Review Commision, and a Rep member of the Redistricting Commission following the 2000 Decenial cencus. I was quoted in the subject article because I became aware of what I thought was a childish, stupid and unprofessional communication from Reinheimer's email address to Audobon, and I told him exactly that by my email to him of 11/13, with a copy to the Central Committee of that same date, to which I have never received any response. I, for one, believe the Rep party could be well-served by seeking at least a modicum of common ground with environmental groups. Whether you agree or disagree is irrelevant. What is relevant is the maintenance of civility and professionalism in the context of disagreements and public discourse. Those are my thoughts.
111 agree | 106 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Too Conservative said:
The article claimed some county Republicans were angered yet only named one, Bill Roberts. Roberts has not been involved with county Republican efforts since before 1998 except for being Nancy Dacek's treasure. Dacek lost because she opposed the ICC. Reaching out to environmental zealots like Audubon is like Christians reaching out to the Taliban!
123 agree | 121 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
ICC makes financial sense said:
The ICC is going to pay for itself in no time with tolls, whereas the Purple line would suck away tax dollars forever. Just look at the "Silver" line to Dulles. It would be cheaper to build bus lanes out of actual silver! The ICC toll money can support other projects later, the way drivers on the Dulles Toll Road (which paid for itself long ago) are being exploited to benefit Tysons Corner.
120 agree | 144 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
495 will more of a parking lot with the ICC than it would be without it. The state's own studies show this increase in predicted Beltway traffic. Further, the SHA will be the first one to tell you that the ICC was not intended to relieve Beltway, I-270 or I-95 traffic and they do not project any relief in those areas. Only a few local East-West roads and intersections will get relief. Not much for $2.4 Billion, in my opinion.
155 agree | 166 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I am a Sierra Club member and I donate money to support it. In this ICC project, Sierra Club is anti environment. I withdraw my membership and donate my money to the Red Cross instead .
110 agree | 118 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Without the ICC, the beltway I 495 will be a big parking lot in the next five years. It is already very crowded even on Sunday and Saturday. Imagine thousands of cars parking on the beltway to produce CO2 and pollute the whole region with toxic gas which affects millions of DC metropolitan residents. With ICC, half of the traffice will be diverted to I170 without merging into I 495. Those who oppose ICC are selfish. They think about themselves more than anybody else. I own property in Derwood, I am fed up with the anti ICC neighborhood .
165 agree | 182 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
BostonRay said:
The Environmental moonbats try to hold up every positive project in pursuit of their plan to return the world to "ideal nature". Whatever that means to them. What they create is human misery as in Katrina and the California Fires - all caused by their moonbat beliefs and use of courts.
126 agree | 116 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"But the artifacts from that era have been too mixed with modern trash, Budweiser bottles next to 19th-century glass, to tell scientists much." Excuse me, but the difference between the ancient artifacts and the modern trash is only the length of time they have been in the dirt.
120 agree | 125 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Julie Martin-Korb said:
I have been very pleased with the amount and quality of coverage of the ICC in the Examiner. With all due respect, I believe the reporter misheard what was being said in the argument. The question was: What must the State and Federal agencies do to make sure that the ICC does not cause a violation of the Clean Air Act? The State and Federal agencies were arguing that all they had to do was a "qualitative analysis" of the effect that the ICC would have on air quality. That is, would the amount of fine particulates in the air generally in the metropolitan region be higher or lower with the ICC? The Environmental Defense was arguing that the agencies were required to perform a "quantitative analysis" of the ICC effects on air quality. That is, the State would have to measure the current level of fine particulates in the air where the road will actually be located, and then use math to predict how much more of fine particulates will be generated by the ICC.
169 agree | 172 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
More hidden costs of the ICC that Montgomery County is forced to pay. The State should have to pay for this.
178 agree | 178 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Well, now. Was this historic site covered in the Final Environmental Impact Statement? I think not. I love Valerie Edgar's spin: “If there weren’t an ICC, we wouldn’t even know what was there. We wouldn’t even have known that the site was there." Oh, I see, the ICC is a *good* thing because it allows us to discover the Indian burial ground--even though when we find it, we're just going to pave right over it.
157 agree | 160 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Transit Rider said:
"The ICC will have a minor impact, if any, on the health of people living near or attending school near the project,” said Wells Burgess, attorney for the Federal Highway administration. If the impact is minor, why was there so much costly effort to protect habitat in the design, even though those impacts aren't credible or effective? The answer is to make a boiler plate ICC impact statement but actually circumvent the worst part: to ignore air particulate matter standards and pollution runoff into the streams and yards of people right next door. No amount of "comprhensive and copius" studying and research can cover for the real health risks ignored by the agencies acting more out of political greed than interest in the environment. This is early 20th century paving and concrete mentality from the robber baron era, not 21st century forward thinking. Burgess should volunteer to come live and breath next door to the ICC and traffic to prove his own point.
206 agree | 202 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
i live in germantown near middlebrook and 270 and i welcome the ICC because i drive to baltimore a lot. Many times I make that drive during the afternoon rush hr and going around the beltway during that time takes forever, so if the ICC was built it would cut down on the travel time. BUILD IT now stop trying to find ways to delay it.
185 agree | 200 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
In the literature posted on his gubernatorial campaign website, O'Malley mocked Ehrlich for his expensive "one-road solution" (the ICC) and neglect of transit. Among other quotable quotes: "The Ehrlich administration’s singleminded pursuit of the ICC has jeopardized the future of Maryland’s highway and transit system by committing an annual debt payment composed of federal dollars that would have funded projects all over the state." Now the only thing O'Malley is going to build is the ICC. There will be no Purple Line, no Corridor Cities Transitway. If O'Malley were not spending $1.2 billion of MdTA funds, $264.9 million out of the General Fund, and $180.0 million out of the Transportation Trust Fund to build the ICC, as well as $160 million annually in debt service costs on the GARVEE bonds, then he wouldn't need to raise taxes, now would he?
228 agree | 207 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader who's FOR the ICC said:
Build the ICC! I'm sick and tired of reading letters to the editor of the local paper (take your pick) from people bemoaning the "unnecessary" ICC who do not live on the major east-west roads (for example Bel Pre Road, where I live) that would see measurable relief in traffic volume. I'm also sick of our nanny-state County Council doing likewise. I'm not certain, but if I had to guess, none of them live near Bel Pre Road either.
194 agree | 195 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Hmm... This story didn't even mention the lawsuits--and there's really no news here. It looks like the examiner just printed what the State Highway Administration wanted to put out: that they consider it a done deal. With any luck, the courts will decide that this wasteful project should be stopped.
237 agree | 204 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This lawsuit is much ado about nothing. Cars are not going to dissappear any time soon and if we did run out of gas, it is likely that the car would get a battery or other "bio" fuel source. The argument to stop building roads because we are going to run out of fuel is silly. FYI Jim Fary's house backs up to a SHA owned "open space" that was probably a part of one of the ICC master plans. Also, if you go the Montgomery County Sierra Club website there is not one outdoor "outing" sponsored by the club that is located in Montgomery County. All are in places remotely located from Montgomery County. This is a prime example of individuals hijacking a special interest group for their own gain.
236 agree | 224 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Has anyone with any financial sense bothered to do a cost-benefit analysis on the ICC? If someone did, the government would realize that this project is not worth it! I want my taxes spent more effectively - and if O'Malley proceeds with this financially irresponsible project, I and others will remember it at the polls.
242 agree | 243 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
In addition to the ICC being environmentally destructive, it won't provide congestion relief. The State's study of the ICC finds that ....."an ICC would not be expected to provide relief to the Beltway" .....and traffic on I-270 and I-95 "is not expected to be helped by the ICC."
246 agree | 239 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
The ICC makes no sense in light of Peak Oil. America's oil production peaked in 1970. World oil discoveries peaked in 1964. We've been burning more oil than we discover since 1980. Many oil experts believe we are now at the peak of global oil production. We depend heavily on imported oil. But we can only import what some other country exports. And they will only export what they don't need. So after a nation's production peaks, their exports quickly disappear. Britain went from record high exports to no exports in just 6 years. Mexico's production peaked a couple years ago. Last year their production fell by 5%. Their exports fell by 10%. Our challenge won't be congestion for much longer. Soon our challenge will be providing mobility with less energy. The ICC takes us in the wrong direction - supporting sprawl, long distance commutes and taking money away from transit.
294 agree | 219 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Give it up, Sierra and Audobon. Real environmentalists are in favor of a road that will promote building closer in, resulting in reduced mileage driven by residents, higher density (better use of available real estate), and a bike path that offers a zero-emission alternative to cars. That is nothing to say about the increased safety of people crossing the county.
232 agree | 257 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Don;t worry. maryland governor o malley has money to pay college tuition for illegal immigrants but has no money for PC hospital, the purple line and the intercounty connector . His most important agenda is to support illegal immigration to maryland.
502 agree | 229 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree