Roads
Zombie road rises from the dead in upcounty Montgomery
Montgomery County DOT has resurrected an expensive and environmentally destructive extension of Mid-County Highway in Gaithersburg from a dotted line on a 1960's map.
Codenamed M-83, the highway would waste scarce money from the county's Capital Improvement Program (CIP), destroy valuable parkland and wetlands, take people's property, and induce more traffic congestion than it solves.
The proposed highway extension would go all the way to Clarksburg. It would run roughly parallel to MD 355 and I-270.
This area is currently built out with car-dependent subdivisions and strip malls. Consequently, the road wouldn't induce much new tax revenue through greenfield development in the county. It would simply be yet another attempt to make it more convenient for drivers from Clarksburg and points north to drive to Rockville, Bethesda, and DC.
In reality, the existence of another through-road would increase the pressure to open up the county's Agricultural Reserve for more car-dependent sprawl.
M-83 would become congested like every other new road due to induced demand while being very expensive to maintain. More money will be taken out of the county's general funds that could go to transit, police, schools, etc. We'll be paying for environmental destruction yet again.
Just like the zombie outer beltway in Virginia, M-83's route was selected years before planners began taking environmental issues into consideration. Over the years, local residents have killed plans for this road multiple times.
The Army Corps of Engineers and the EPA have denied federal funding in the past because many of the alternatives would pave over protected, undeveloped parklands that contain tributaries to Great Seneca Creek.
Because each alternative includes widening existing sections of surface roadway to highway standards, local residents would lose private property. The Coalition for Transit Alternatives to Mid-County Highway Extended (TAME) has arisen to oppose the misguided plans to build M-83. TAME comprises mid-county and upcounty environmental groups, religious organizations, and civic associations.
While presenting to the August 9 Action Committee for Transit meeting, a representative of TAME described how some people attending the public meetings on M-83 originally angled to have someone else's yard taken for the road widenings. The representative noted that once the different stakeholders began talking with each other, they came to a consensus that no one's yard should be taken for a road that is expensive, environmentally destructive, and unnecessary. Stakeholders also agree that M-83 should be eliminated from the county's Master Plan and CIP.
Currently the M-83 project is funded exclusively with county money. Why is there money for M-83 when the county executive's office refuses to add boulevardizing Rockville Pike in White Flint to the CIP? Likewise with adding a second entrance to the White Flint Metro Station or funding the Corridor Cities Transitway?
This current mentality, where the county happily pays for any road project yet requires outside funding sources for transit projects, is selling our future short and must stop.
Just like TAME's vision, I implore Montgomery County to defund the cost-ineffective and environmentally destructive M-83 project in favor of projects like White Flint's urban retrofit, the Corridor Cities Transitway, and possibly the county's BRT vision.
Comments
- VDOT ignores own data, pushes widening I-66
- Understanding can help cyclists, drivers better share the road
- Half-hour Metro headways are not acceptable
- "Degree density" maps show region's east-west divide
- Give up your seat on the bus or train to those in need
- Planners are the new public health officials
- Anti-transit ideology endangers Silver Line






by Ben Ross on Aug 19, 2011 2:08 pm
by Reza on Aug 19, 2011 2:49 pm
What's been built since then isn't perfect, but some of it is decent (Germantown Town Center in particular has a walkable, if small downtown area). And both communities are bounded by greenbelts (Germantown is surrounded by a series of state and county parks) and the Ag Reserve, which may face "pressure" to develop but there's absolutely no political support for doing so.
So maybe a new highway in the Upcounty isn't the best use of funds (I agree that it should go to the Corridor Cities Transitway, BRT, and MARC expansion), but characterizing this area as "sprawl" isn't really fair.
by dan reed! on Aug 19, 2011 2:52 pm
by Cavan on Aug 19, 2011 3:01 pm
by BS_Dawg on Aug 19, 2011 3:05 pm
by Miriam on Aug 19, 2011 3:12 pm
Answer is because the county leaders still think it's the 1970's
by Mike on Aug 19, 2011 3:19 pm
Building transit instead of new roads here reinforces previous design and planning choices made in these communities, whereas building new roads undermines them.
by dan reed! on Aug 19, 2011 3:38 pm
If you'd like to re-post it without insulting the author of the post and by giving him the full respect he deserves, please feel free to do so. Thank you for understanding.
by Matt Johnson on Aug 19, 2011 8:20 pm
As for the comment about adding an ICC interchange at the south end. In some of the earlier ICC master plans they had basically already designed the interchange. However somewhere along the line the road alignment changed and I am not sure it would be possible anymore.
by Matt R on Aug 19, 2011 10:28 pm
by Mark on Aug 19, 2011 10:48 pm
by Jim on Aug 20, 2011 10:07 am
by PaulaBienenfeld on Aug 21, 2011 4:55 pm
http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2011/02/inter-county-connector-to-be-open.html
by Douglas Willinger on Aug 21, 2011 8:04 pm
by WRD on Aug 21, 2011 9:23 pm
By the way, what strip malls? Clarksburg can't get a grocery store built. Perhaps you are speaking of Gaithersburg which has been pretty much the same for 40 years now. The only new development I am aware of is Milestone which hardly qualifies as a strip mall. The fact is that there is almost no new retail in the new up-County residential developments.
by Tim Barry on Aug 22, 2011 8:14 am
by Michael on Aug 22, 2011 10:02 am
The official ICC plans have an interchange with M-83 designed into the project, but constructed at a later date, hence the extra tunnel lanes and placement of sound barriers, however the interchange will require additional property aquisition.
Finally, the majority of the right of way along the master planned alignment is already dedicated, making this a very affordable road for the billions in economic development created. Like the ICC, I have walked the entire M-83 MPA route and there are environmental challenges, but pale in comparison to the ICC that is due to be completed next winter and is already resulting in billions in investment in Science City, White Flint, and East County. The time is to build this roadway to the future.
by Cyrus on Aug 22, 2011 10:15 pm
Add a Comment