What's New

The Maryland General Assembly failed to pass legislation this year that would have reviewed the environmental impacts of the Intercounty Connector or cut its funding.

As the first stages of construction get underway, now is our last chance to cancel this destructive project.

How You Can Help

Gov. O'Malley should perform an honest review of how much the ICC would cost and how much it would increase pollution. Send an e-mail to the governor urging him to reconsider the ICC.

Brief Summary

The Intercounty Connector is a proposed six-lane toll highway that would run 18 miles, connecting I-270 in Gaithersburg with I-95 in Laurel. If built, it would constitute the first link in an outer beltway circling the Washington metro area and facilitating extensive sprawl development. Originally proposed in 1953, this contentious project has been rejected twice based on assessments of the environmental impacts it would have.

The ICC would trigger 5000 more acres of sprawl, severely impacting 20 miles of streams that feed into the Potomac and Anacostia rivers and the Chesapeake Bay.

The state’s own Final Environmental Impact Study shows:

• More cars would drive more miles, creating more global warming pollution. Vehicle miles traveled in the ICC study area would increase by 20 percent.
• The ICC would not relieve traffic on I-95, I-270 or I-495.  More than half of local roads studied would get more congestion or show no relief.

The ICC will cost a staggering $3 billion (including financing). Most of this will be in the form of debt borrowed against federal transport funding to the state for years into the future. If the ICC moves forward, we would not be able to afford crucial projects such as Baltimore’s Red Line, rail on the Wilson Bridge, the Purple Line in the Washington suburbs, or the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of BRAC-related infrastructure needs in and around Ft. Meade, Aberdeen, and Bethesda. 

Two serious and substantial federal lawsuits against the ICC’s flawed environmental process have been filed. Alternatives to the ICC that would reduce sprawl, balance jobs and housing, and improve public transit have been ignored. Nobody has adequately assessed the impacts of toxic and carcinogenic car and truck emissions on nearby communities.

The ICC would be a major step backward for efforts to reduce global warming pollution. Sensible land use patterns and transportation choices are essential to the state’s commitment to long term solutions to global warming.