Back to Press Room

For Immediate Release: August 31, 2006
Contact:Stewart Schwartz, 202-244-4408 ext 3# / 703-599-6437 cell
Roger Diedrich, Sierra Club, 703-352-2410

BRAC - Land Use and Transportation Problems Difficult to Solve

Cancellation of Proposed Moves Should Remain One Option, Alternative Land Use and Transportation Scenarios Should also be Evaluated

At today's Congressional hearing on BRAC, hosted by Congressman Davis and Congressman Moran, numerous elected officials recognized the massive traffic problems that would be generated in the Fort Belvoir area, and wrestled with the challenge of finding solutions.

"We believe that the combined BRAC moves represent one of the worst land use decisions yet made in the Washington, DC region, and one that creates problems which we will be hard-pressed to solve" said Stewart Schwartz, Executive Director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth.

Estimated costs for transportation infrastructure in the Fort Belvoir area alone are nearly $700 million and could be much more, at a time when existing needs cannot be met. The shift in jobs will cause land speculation to increase far south on I-95, transit and carpooling trips will decline significantly, and additional land clearing and road construction in hilly, forested, and stream woven areas near the Potomac will set back Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts.

"We are very encouraged that Governor Kaine, Congressman Davis and Moran, and local officials all spoke today about seeking solutions that will link land use, design, and transportation to reduce driving demand. But we are not sure the traffic and environmental problems created by the move to Fort Belvoir and even to Quantico, can be solved," said Roger Diedrich, Chair of the Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club.

The Coalition recommends that officials be open to reconsideration and cancellation of a significant share of the BRAC moves if reasonable and affordable solutions cannot be achieved. Traditionally the National Environmental Policy Act requires a "no build" alternative, but this may have been overridden by Congress in Base Realignment legislation. Schwartz stated, "We recommend that in addition to a 'no build' alternative, that the Army and state officials evaluate land use and transportation alternatives that minimize auto trips and maximize, transit, carpool, walking and bicycle trips to and around Fort Belvoir and Quantico."

Measures which should be considered in alternative scenarios include:

• Testing different locations for facilities in the Fort Belvoir and Quantico areas.
• Redevelopment of the GSA site and other areas next to Springfield Metro to support a significant share of the facilities, including the hospital.
• Maximizing on base housing for uniformed, and perhaps even civilian employees, to increase the share of walk to work and shuttle bus trips to work.
• Fort Belvoir already hosts an award winning new community with a town center which can serve as a model for on base mixed-use development.
• Linking Metro station and VRE stations in as close proximity as possible to new DOD facilities.
• Ensuring that defense contractor facilities are located next to rail transit and in mixed-use, pedestrian-friendly environments.
• Investing in local street interconnections, not simply large highways, in order to support mixed-use and avoid overloading interchanges.
• Adding light rail or bus rapid transit facilities to Route 1 in conjunction with nodes of transit-oriented development.
• Developing carpool/slug-line and express bus services from new directions.
• Traffic modeling should be completed for all alternative scenarios.
• Transportation investment costs should be evaluated for a wide region extending to Caroline County in the south.

Moving tens of thousands of jobs to non-transit accessible locations and unraveling established Metrorail, VRE/MARC, express bus and carpooling networks, can only increase traffic and fuel consumption. Adding this to what could easily be over $1 billion in infrastructure burdens on already stretched public treasuries, and one could argue that the BRAC decision reduces our energy and economic security. "There is no question that we need to take a harder look at these proposals," concluded Schwartz.

NOTE: The Coalition for Smarter Growth evaluated the traffic impacts when the BRAC moves were being proposed in 2005, and found that it could take 6 hours to clear afternoon rush hour traffic from the Fairfax County Parkway, even with the completion of all planned road improvements.

See Press release and Report