Would this be a bridge over the Potomac?

It could be either a tunnel or a bridge. Bridges are much cheaper to build than tunnels, but tunnels offer advantages, such as obviating noise pollution and allowing for land to be reclaimed over head.

A tunnel also permits a crossing with NO impact on the C&O Canal National Historical Park, which runs entirely along the
Potomac River in Montgomery County.

Where would a second crossing be built?

We don't know for sure. All we want is a river crossing between the Legion Bridge and Frederick County line. We believe
that a river crossing, particularly one that would support rail service or busways, must serve the communities that mostly need
it -- mainly, Montgomery, Prince George's, Howard and Fairfax and Loudon Counties.

Are there any plans for a second crossing, any studies under way?

1. Metropolitan Council of Governments Transportation Planning Board Regional Mobilityand Accessibility Study.
   COG is the metropolitan planning organization for the D.C. area. Thanks to our efforts and that of allied groups -- which sent COG more than 4,300 comments last fall -- we now have a study of new Potomac River crossings in the COG fiscally constrained long range plan. This was approved unanimously by the TPB in November. The study also will look at a transit component of new river crossings and the impact of new bridges on land use
   .
   
2. Montgomery County Transportation Policy Task Force:
   This 35-member task force represents various views on transportation and land use. The panel was convened by the Montgomery County Planning Board of the Maryland National Capital Park and Planning Commission. The TPR is examining several scenarios for future land use and transportation in Montgomery County, looking at the years 2025 and 2050. In preliminary modeling of one scenario, which includes a limited- access Techway, the TPR staff showed that such a second crossing would carry about 102,000 cars in 2025.
   
   Check out http://www.movemontgomery.org
   
   
3. Virginia-Maryland-District of Columbia Joint Legislative Commission on Interstate Transportation.
   This committee of Maryland and Virginia legislators and D.C. city council members met last fall to begin a dialog on regional transportation planning. The group has sent comments to the Transportation Planning Board in favor of the Potomac River crossing study in the constrained long range plan. With passage of bills in both Maryland and Virginia legislators (HB 10/SB 341 in Maryland), this panel will now study the creation of a Regional Transportation Authority Study for the D.C. area, which could help raise bond money to build new Potomac River crossings, among other projects. The Commission will submit an interim report by December 2001 and a final report by December 2002.
   
   For more details, contact Maryland co-chairs Delegate John Hurson or Sen. Jennie Forehand.
   

Were there ever any plans for another crossing besides the American Legion (495) bridge?

The last time there were plans for river crossings other than the Legion Bridge was the Outer Beltway, which would
have used the current Intercounty Connector alignment from Laurel, through the North Potomac-Darnestown area, with a
crossing at Seneca Creek State Park. This alignment would have connected to the existing Fairfax County Parkway, which is
the only segment of the old Outer Beltway that has ever been built. It was removed from the Montgomery County master plan in 1980 because the state of Maryland had begun project planning for the ICC and Rockville Facility, and neither road featured a Potomac River crossing.

Part of the Rockville Facility had been the first Outer Beltway. It would have extended from Northwest Branch Park, across Connecticut Avenue and Viers Mill Road, where it would pick up on the now Montrose Parkway right of way, then crossing I-270 south of Montrose, across Falls Road and through the Marwood property and on to Great Falls. In 1973, Montgomery County removed the section from Falls Road to the river from the master plan

In 1967, there also were plans for an "Outer" Outer Beltway that would have placed the Potomac crossing just south of
Edwards Ferry Road southwest of Poolesville. The only segment of this road is Route 32, which runs from I-97 near
Annapolis, east to Clarksville in Howard County. This beltway was never placed in an approved and adopted master plan.

The 1957 and 1953 Montgomery County Master Plan of Highways show "standalone bridges" tied into existing roads, such as Edwards Ferry Road. There also was a Northern Bridge, inside Beltway, to connect Langley, VA, with Glen Echo via an extension of Wilson Lane, plus another bridge planned north of Great Falls Park in Virginia to meet with an extension of Montrose Road in Montgomery County.

What happened to all of these plans for river crossings?

COG had a "Year 2000" Plan, approved in 1966 by all the local governments in D.C., Virginia and Maryland. The same plan gave us the Metrorail system, which was completed with the opening of new Green Line stations in winter 2001.

The Year 2000 Plan called for three Beltways in the D.C. region, continuation of I-95 through the District; a North Central Freeway between Silver Spring and I-95 (which dead-ends near Union Station), plus a Northern Parkway connection to Howard County. All of these highway projects AND many other arterial highway projects were killed by elected officials, largely due to opposition from people complaining about the proximity of their properties to these projects. In several cases, highways and bridges were laid out on master plans before these developments were built.

This is how 30 years of planning has been conducted. Study, Talk, Talk and more Study. Today the officials are still talking
and studying. They are no further along than 30 years ago in completing significant projects! In fact, it could be said that we
are worse off because 30 years ago many of these projects were approved and were slated for completion.

Check out the Takoma Park Highway Design Studio for a history of the canceled North Central Freeway.

What is the "Western Bypass" and the "Techway?"

These are two different projects. The "Western Bypass" is actually a connection between I-70 west of Baltimore, crossing
through Frederick County and winding around Loudon and Prince William Counties. It is also called the "Western Regional
Parkway" by the Greater Washington Board of Trade, or Western Transportation Corridor.

The "Techway" is a Board of Trade proposal for a river crossing to connect the ICC into the Fairfax County Parkway. There
are no details for either alignment because the 1990 Washington Bypass study has not been embraced by the state of
Maryland, but only the state of Virginia in its "2020 Plan."

Our group takes NO position on the Board of Trade or Virginia's 2020 plan.

Won't a second crossing be exorbitantly expensive to build, let alone a connecting road to the I-270 Corridor?

Actually, a second crossing could cost the taxpayers nothing.

That's because such a project could be built with toll financing. We believe there is enough demand for a second crossing that
the project could pay for itself entirely with tolls -- no need to use highway trust fund monies.

The Maryland Transportation Authority, which built the Baltimore Harbor Tunnel, JFK Highway (I-95 north of Baltimore),
Bay Bridge and other projects, has a AA-rated bond rating. It has pretty much paid back all the bonds on these various
projects. It could sell investment-grade bonds on the open market and pay back investors via tolls. New bonds sold to
finance a new crossing of the Potomac should be non-recourse bonds, which means that toll revenues from the crossing are
the only security, and that Maryland's Transportation Trust Fund and General Fund would not be at risk. MdTA has never
failed to pay its bondholders in the more than 40 years it has operated toll facilities.

A six- to eight-lane bridge would cost only $300-500 million to build, a tunnel could cost three times as much, according to experts. Montgomery County's TPR Task Force prices the Techway at about $2.5 billion.

Using the TPR traffic projections, because they are the first ones conducted by a Maryland-based governing body, we estimate that if 100,000 cars were to use the Techway in 2025 and a $3 round-trip toll were charged, it would reap about $100 million a year, meaning $1 billion over 10 years. This assumes that weekend traffic will be only half as many cars (a major assumption. Given the fact traffic is always higher than projected for new roads, we estimate the Techway could pay for itself in less than 20 years.

Extra funds from the project could be used to expand open space along a connecting road, purchase open space for
conservation or add rail or busways on such a crossing.

Private partnerships, such as the Dulles Greenway, can build the second crossing, too.

Click here to learn more about MdTA…http://www.mdta.state.md.us/

Won't a second crossing create sprawl?

No. Our group opposes ANY river crossing or connecting parkway that would violate the master plans of any given region
by promoting unplanned development. We'd much rather see a wide right of way to rob developers of space to develop in
order to preserve greenways and parkland.

Additionally, if there is no access to the crossing, except from I-270 (and perhaps MD 28, depending on the route of the
approach from the Maryland side), then there will not be any highway-related sprawl. Besides, Maryland has a long record of
not permitting "sprawl"-type development along some of its oldest freeway corridors. Consider the total lack of gasoline
stations, hamburger establishments and convenience stores near the interchanges of I-270 and MD109 in Hyattstown, Upper
Montgomery County, and at U.S.50 and MD 424 in Davidsonville, Anne Arundel County (both of these freeways have been
open to traffic for more than 40 years).

One must also distinguish between what some groups call sprawl and what is, in fact, planned development. Most of the
development in Montgomery County was planned, but the region just never built the highways that the development was
predicated on, including more than one river crossing to Virginia.

When groups call development sprawl, ask them if they consider your house to be located in a sprawl development, and
where they would have preferred that you live instead.

Won't a second crossing destroy the Agricultural Reserve of Upper Montgomery County?

First, a second crossing does not even have to traverse this region. Second, if there were a connecting road to a second
crossing, it could be built with a wide right of way in order to PRESERVE open space.

That's the stated goal of Montgomery County's "Legacy Open Space Program," which is going to require $100 million of
taxpayer money over the next decade in order to buy up land that is slated for development. A recent analysis by the Maryland Building Industry Assn., however, shows the true cost of this program at about $300 million. The County Council this year funded $33 million, but the remaining funds could come from the purchase of land for a connecting parkway between the I-270 corridor and the Potomac River. A right of way wide enough could effectively take this land out of development. Not having any exits in the Ag Zone would squash chances for this region to be developed. Hence, toll financing could kill two birds with one stone -- provide commuters a means to get to jobs on either side of the Potomac and preserve open space in Montgomery County.

Would a second crossing connect with I-370 and the ICC?

Our group takes no position on the ICC, whether the ICC should connect with a Potomac River bridge, or whether some
other alignment should be used for the second crossing.

Unless the ICC is built first, a second crossing would only help Northern Virginia and Dulles Airport, and hurt BWI Airport, no?

A bridge works both ways. A second crossing helps Virginia commuters avoid backups on the Beltway coming to Maryland in the morning. About 40,000 Virginians commute into Montgomery County each day, and 90,000 Marylanders commuting to Virginia. A second crossing helps commuters in BOTH states.

Besides, the poor (and deteriorating) access from the I-270 Corridor to BWI and Dulles Airport is only damaging to the jobs base of Montgomery County.

In addition, Montgomery County and the Maryland State Highway Administration are finally building the extension of Norbeck Road (Route 28 Extended). This road, plus the combination of a widened MD 198 to four lanes, would form a four-lane cross-county connector that can be built in less time than the ICC." "This kind of improvement offers traffic relief
now - not 10 or 20 years down the road," Council President Michael Subin said at the June 12 groundbreaking ceremony for
Norbeck Road extended.

It will take three years to complete Norbeck Road Extended, a road that was first placed in the capital program in 1993.
Then, the state will pay to widen it to four lanes and widen198 to four lanes.

This means BWI-bound traffic will now have a new route to take, unless the state of Maryland decides to go forward with the
ICC (which is still on hold).

Many members of the County Council are confident that the "28-198 Connector" will replace the need for the ICC. Hence,
we do not buy the argument that a much-needed bypass of the Legion Bridge is going to hurt BWI usage when the 28-198
Connector opens.

If anything, BWI is the cheapest of the three area airports and is growing exponentially, according to the May 19 Washington
Post. (BWI Airport website also highlights its growth records)

You say a second crossing would compliment "Smart Growth." How?

In a recent AAA poll, 58% of Maryland residents and 61% of Virginia residents said they would move in order to be closer to their jobs because traffic has gotten so bad. Half as many Virginians commute to Montgomery County as Marylanders commuting to Virginia.

This means that the people most likely to move are Montgomery County residents, thereby populating outlying areas that
already have river crossings (i.e., Point of Rocks in Frederick), or Loudon County, which is where there is much job growth
(i.e., America On-Line)

Montgomery County lives up to the Smart Growth concept much, much better than Northern Virginia, but without providing
suburb-to-suburb connections, Montgomery County stands to lose residents and employers to areas that have sufficient
transportation infrastructure. This is what some groups might consider "sprawl."

You say a second crossing would "reduce environmental pollution." How?

Traffic congestion breeds poor air quality. D.C. has had numerous "Code Red" days due to air pollution. Much of this
pollution is people sitting in traffic jams.

We estimate that a second crossing would cut the commutes of 90,000 Virginia-bound Montgomery County residents by 1
hour a day, 30 minutes each way. This is a tremendous saving in pollutants, but also money on gasoline (which is rapidly
approaching $2 a gallon in this area).

Environmental activists will say that we need more transit to get people out of their cars, or
more carpooling, telecommuting, etc. Why don't we do these things first?

There's no question more has to be done in these areas, but we also need new roads and bridges.

The D.C. area is No. 2 in transit ridership after New York City. However, only 2% of all daily trips in the D.C. area and only 15% of all commuter trips are handled by transit (bus, vanpools, Metrorail). Even in New York City, only 27% of all commuter trips are undertaken by transit.

The cheapest way to offer transit is via bus service. However, in a recent study, diesel-powered buses are considered a prime
culprit in D.C.'s air pollution problems and increase in asthma cases.

In addition, Metrorail is going to need $6.5 billion in repair funds over the next 25 years, according to the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. The recent fires you've heard about are signs of a system that is showing wear and tear.

Ride-On buses in Montgomery County carry only 68,000 passengers a day, but cost taxpayers $40 million yearly in
subsidies. This means that projects such as the "Purple Line" around the Beltway to Tysons Corner -- which would remove fewer than 0.82% of Beltway traffic and carry only about 64,000 passengers -- are dubious, at best.

However, a second crossing could facilitate cross-river transit ridership. The Germantown-Gaithersburg region could become
more transit-oriented with the advent of the Corridor Cities Transitway, which could provide bus-rapid transit between Clarksburg to Shady Grove Metro via the King Farm and Kentlands development. What better way to facilitate development in this region than with a new Potomac River bridge (or tunnel) that carries both cars and rail (or express buses)?

As for telecommuting, the D.C. area is No. 1 in telecommuting, but only about 250,000 people telecommute. A study by the
Virginia Telework Association shows that telecommuting would only reduce vehicle miles traveled by 3%. Furthermore,
telecommuting will not work for everyone, notably teachers, delivery people, retail workers, clerical workers, maintenance
personnel and a variety of other professions.

Montgomery County leads the nation in car and vanpooling, but as one can see by our congested roads, this is only a small
piece of the solution.

Plus, car pools come at a price for road demand. Take the Woodrow Wilson Bridge replacement as an example.

Only $900 million is for the actual bridge. The remaining $1.5 billion is for exit ramps to segment carpool lanes from regular
lanes, and express lanes from local lanes. Congressional leaders have refused to allot more than $900 million for the bridge,
and the governors of Maryland and Virginia have limited each state's investment to $200 million.

The Wilson Bridge also is an example of how difficult is to build a bridge of this size without tolls -- 12 lanes, plus a draw
span for boats passing underneath).

Compare the estimated cost of the Wilson replacement -- $2.5 billion -- with the newly opened Öresund Fixed Link
connecting Sweden with Denmark. The latter project is 10 miles long, involves 2.5 miles of tunnels, yet cost only $3 billion to
build! And yes, it carries both cars and trains.

The Öresund Fixed Link has greatly improved access to the large Kastrup International Airport (just outside of Copenhagen,
Denmark) for residents and businesses located in southern Sweden - what was once a slow ride by ferry is now a 20-minute
trip across the bridge tunnel. Better yet, the Fixed Link was completed with NO environmental damage to the Baltic Sea
estuary.