Connector supporters defend road plan

Chamber brings county, schools, businesses together

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

On Tuesday, the Charles County Chamber of Commerce held a press conference to advocate for the controversial project, while today environmentalists and concerned county neighbors are scheduled to unveil an alternative in a report from the Smart Growth Alliance of Charles County to stop the plan.

"The purpose of the cross-county connector is to provide a safe and effective connector road," said Commissioner Gary V. Hodge (D) at the chamber press conference. "The road was planned and designed to protect the environment … and it was deliberately planned and designed to achieve those highest of standards."

"We want to send a positive message from business representatives and other agencies in the county that we support [the connector]," said Ken Gould Jr., the chamber's executive director, at the conference.

Organizers of the connector opposition refused to release the report before today.

To date, the first four phases of the connector have been completed, leaving the remaining six miles — or three phases — between Middletown Road and Route 210 designed but not built.

Jason Groth, the county's chief of resource and infrastructure management, said in an interview Monday it will take $47 million to finish the connector, all of which will be paid for by the county.

"The road will connect the vibrant heart of our economy with the western part of Charles County in a decisive way never done before," Hodge said at the press conference.

Numbers provided by the county sheriff's office indicated a yearly average of 92 traffic accidents in the most western portion of the planned connector.

Charles County Chief of Emergency Medical Services John Filer said upward of 200 calls to his department each year receive delayed service due to the treacherous roadway.

Charles Wineland, the county schools' assistant superintendent for supporting services, said the school system also supports the connector for safety reasons.

"This is a perfect storm waiting to happen," Wineland said, "and we do not believe in waiting until it happens."

An updated transportation system and commuter safety might be reason enough to consider the project, but for many local environmentalists, the threat to the seven acres of sensitive area and the impact of development the connector will allow that lie directly in the connector's path means finding another solution.

"The whole purpose of this report [from the Smart Growth Alliance for Charles County] comes down to not when Charles County should grow, but how and where Charles County should grow," said Kim Coble, Maryland executive director of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, anticipating today's press conference. "I believe the goals of the county and mission of the county can be met with alternatives to developing this road."

The concern of the foundation and area conservationists is rooted in the environmental impact of the four-lane road.

"Mattawoman Creek was chosen as one of the country's most endangered rivers," said Jim Long, coordinator for the Mattawoman Watershed Society. "The [alliance] has prepared some specific ideas for how Mattawoman can be saved, using viable alternatives to the ‘business as usual' approach."

The county has openly supported the preservation of the sensitive area, but also taken a stand on the platform of responsible — but inevitable — growth.

Groth said the original 13 acres of wetland that would be impacted by the connector was reduced by six acres over five years.

Besides making the road safer for cars, there will also be a 10-foot-wide hiker and biker path for recreation.

"With or without the road, development is going to occur within that zone," Groth said. "It's all within the development district, and it's all zoned residential."

"Their argument is ‘build it and they will come,'" said Del. Murray D. Levy (D-Charles). "I say, ‘Don't build it and they will come.' If you don't put people here, where do you want them to go?"

Though the environmentalists remained mum on what the report would say before their press conference, in the county's corner there were predictions of what some of the alternatives could be, including shifting development elsewhere, and using rail service between the northern and southern ends of the county.

Groth explained that moving growth around the county would require an overhaul of the county's comprehensive and zoning implementation plans.

Levy said the change would affect not only residents, but infrastructure, business and billions of dollars already planned based on outward growth from the present day.

The transportation rationale for the planned roadway is so the county can be linked east to west. A train running north and south would only help commuters heading to the Washington metropolitan area.

"Southern Maryland is one of the most automobile-dependent states in the United States," Hodge said. "We need to continue to build well-designed and planned roads for efficient and safe transportation, and to bring the county closer together."

Besides addressing testimonials from local environmentalists, the county must also win the approval of the state and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

The former handles issues with any nontidal wetlands, while the corps monitors work around open waterways and wetlands.

Most recently, the county received news in early June from the Maryland Department of the Environment that indicated the state's verdict on the project would be delayed through December, as the state needed more time to review connector information submitted by the county.

msomers@somdnews.com