State sees less harm in latest ICC study

Impact statement stresses damage can be minimized

By Michael Dresser | Sun Staff

November 23, 2004

The Ehrlich administration has concluded that Maryland can build a proposed highway in the Washington suburbs with far less environmental damage than a similar study showed under former Gov. Parris N. Glendening.

In a summary released yesterday, the Maryland Department of Transportation said its draft environmental impact statement for the Inter-County Connector has concluded that by stressing "environmental stewardship" the state can minimize the road's harm to water quality and public parkland.

The study shows the state is planning "an environmentally friendly ICC," said Transportation Secretary Robert L. Flanagan. "The ICC will meet the highest environmental standards."

Environmental groups quickly rejected those conclusions, which run contrary to those of a mid-1990s environmental study that prompted Glendening to withdraw support for the highway connecting Interstate 95 with Interstate 270 in Montgomery County.

"They're saying they're going to be real good at trying to mitigate the environmental catastrophe, but there's going to be an environmental catastrophe," said Dru Schmidt-Perkins, executive director of the anti-sprawl group 1,000 Friends of Maryland.

Opponents were reacting to a 24-page summary of the findings of the draft impact statement, a required step toward federal approval of the ICC - Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s top transportation priority.

State officials said the full statement - 1,465 pages, not including attachments - will be posted online today at www. iccstudy.org.

Flanagan and Neil J. Pedersen, who heads the State Highway Administration, said they were able to avoid some of the objections raised by Clinton administration environmental regulators by working closely with federal agencies to develop the proposal.

"What we're emphasizing today is the successful collaboration that has taken place between state and federal agencies under President Bush's streamlining executive order," Flanagan said. "As a result, we've produced a better product than ever before."

Flanagan said the current statement was prepared in 18 months compared with the five years devoted to the last study before Glendening called it off.

Glendening acted after a 1997 Environmental Protection Agency analysis said the original ICC route would destroy at least 145 acres of parkland and cut through 22 acres of wetlands, damaging their ability to filter out pollutants that otherwise might reach the Chesapeake Bay.

The new study compares the impact of two proposed ICC routes - the so-called "master plan" route through the Colesville area and a northern route through Burtonsville - and the option of not building the road at all. It projects that by 2030 the southern route would cut 33 minutes off the time of a trip between Gaithersburg and Laurel, while the northern corridor would save 31 minutes. The highway is expected to cost up to $2.1 billion to build.

The summary shows that neither route would entirely avoid environmental damage. For example, the report says that the southern route has the potential to affect trout spawning in Paint Branch, while the northern one could risk contamination of Rocky Gorge Reservoir. That reservoir provides drinking water for Howard, Montgomery and Prince George's counties.

Pedersen said state planners have been able to "minimize" the environmental impact by incorporating such modifications as lengthening bridges and avoiding the use of fill in some places. Flanagan said the longer bridges would reduce the impact on streams and brown trout habitat.

Steve Caflisch, transportation chairman for the Sierra Club of Maryland, expressed skepticism about state's mitigation efforts.

"The basic thing is that you can't run a six-lane highway across stream-valley parks without causing substantial harm," he said.

Flanagan said he was confident that the environmental statement would hold up in court if challenged by ICC opponents.

"We have been very careful and thorough in our work on the ICC and feel very confident that the work will withstand the closest scrutiny," he said.

The next step in the process will be three public hearings in Montgomery and Prince George's counties in early January. After that, the public will be able to submit comments on the ICC and the proposed routes through January.

Anti-ICC groups complained that the administration's timing - releasing the report just before Thanksgiving and holding hearings just after New Year's - was designed to stifle public input.

"We just think this is being railroaded through," said Chris Carney, a Sierra Club conservation organizer.

Carney said his organization would seek a 60-day postponement of the hearings and an extension of the comment period to give the group time to prepare but was not optimistic the request would be granted.

After public hearings, the next likely step is that transportation officials would select a route sometime in the spring and complete a final environmental impact statement, which would go to the Army Corps of Engineers and Maryland Department of the Environment for issuance of permits.

Pedersen said the state expects to break ground in late 2006 and open the highway in 2010.