Calendar of Events
 Site Toolbox
In the News
Media Resource Center
Take Action!
Newsletters
Alerts
Sign Up

 Current Issues
Air Quality
Health
Housing Choices
Land Use
Adequate Public Facilities
New Urbanism
Open Space
The Region Divided
Sprawl
Transit-Oriented
Smart Growth
Transportation
Bike and Walk
Car Sharing
Roads
   • Beltway
   • I-66
   • Outer Beltway
   • Battlefield Bypass
   • Intercounty Connector
   • Techway
   • Tri-County Parkway
   • Western Bypass
Transit
   • Dulles Corridor
   • Purple Line
Water Quality

 Issues by Region
Metro Region
District of Columbia
Maryland
Montgomery
Prince George's
Virginia
Alexandria
Arlington
Fairfax
Loudoun
Prince William
National

 About Us
Our Vision for the Region
About the Coalition
Contact Us

 

Back to Press Room

Coalition for Smarter Growth

Coalition for Smarter Growth &
Audubon Naturalist Society

PRESS RELEASE

September 17, 2004

Contacts: Laura Olsen, (202) 244-4408 or
Brian Henry, 301-652-9188 x 18  bhenry@audubonnaturalist.org


Officials Drop Claims of ICC Congestion Relief
Narrow Study Excludes Potentially Better Alternatives

According to Washington Post reporter Steve Ginsberg, “State officials have dropped claims that the Intercounty Connector (ICC) would reduce traffic congestion on the Capital Beltway or other major roads”—severely weakening prior justification for this project.

And now, the state officials have commissioned a study by the Univ. of Maryland making claims on the economic benefits of an ICC. The study is an example of State Highway Administration official’s on-going effort to ignore viable alternatives to an ICC that could have better economic results—and focus narrowly on building or not building a six-lane toll-highway.

Within the confines of the limited study, researchers found over 60% of the total jobs created would be low-paying, retail jobs. At a total cost of $3 billion including financing for the ICC, taxpayers are shelling out $178,000 per job for the nearly 17,000 jobs the report claims.

And, with state officials confirming that an ICC would not reduce traffic on the Beltway or other major highways, researchers found only limited, negligible freight truck benefits.

By looking only at building an ICC or not building an ICC the State Highway Administration has gone out of its way to avoid a comprehensive analysis of alternatives that could better serve the region.

"An ICC would cost $3 billion—including financing. This study fails to analyze what the best economic return is for such a large investment of transportation dollars. It fails to compare the economic benefits of investing in transit in Prince George’s and throughout the region, basic road improvements, and prioritizing home and job development around transit areas, particularly in Prince George’s," said Audubon Naturalist Society's Executive Director Neal Fitzpatrick.

The study also ignores the cost of tolls—which are essential to the financing plan for the ICC—the costs of longer commutes for those outside the study area in Prince George’s County who have access to too few jobs, and the environmental costs of the ICC including impacts on parks, recreation, wildlife, and air and water quality.

###

 

 

 
Coalition for Smarter Growth
4000 Albemarle St, NW, Suite 310
Washington, DC 20016
(202) 244-4408    (202) 244-4438 fax

www.smartergrowth.net

© 1999-2005 Coalition for Smarter Growth. All Rights Reserved.