Bridge report leaves some unsatisfied

Panel makes no recommendation, but study is just the starting point, Ehrlich says

Friday, Sept. 1, 2006

E-Mail This Article | Print This Story

by Alan Brody

Staff Writer

Click here to enlarge this photo

Lawmakers and transportation analysts are grumbling that a 15-month examination into the possibility of a new Chesapeake Bay bridge yielded no recommendations, leading some critics to call it a political stunt.

The Bay Crossing Task Force issued a report this week laying out traffic forecasts, environmental obstacles, economic development trends and growth patterns in four areas where a span could be built.

The 28-member panel acknowledges the ‘‘compelling” need for additional capacity across the Bay but suggests more studies.

‘‘Presentations made clear that the congestion is already a pressing issue that must be dealt with, and further delay will only exacerbate an already serious problem,” the 61-page report said.

So, lawmakers were disappointed that the panel appeared to achieve little.

‘‘When you form a task force, you should look at trying to solve a problem, and I think they knew they weren’t going to do anything from the beginning,” said Sen. Roy P. Dyson (D-Dist. 29) of Great Mills. ‘‘All they did was cause a lot of consternation in a lot of communities and said, ‘Sorry, we didn’t mean anything by it.’”

During public meetings on the ideas, an overwhelming number of citizens and local officials opposed a bridge in their neighborhood.

‘‘Everyone agrees we need more capacity across the Bay,” said Mahlon G. ‘‘Lon” Anderson, public affairs director for AAA Mid-Atlantic and a task force member. ‘‘No one wants it in their back yard.”

Sen. E.J. Pipkin, an opponent of a third span between the Upper Shore and the current bridge, said the lack of recommendations is a missed opportunity to make progress on a much-needed project.

‘‘It is obvious to me and should be obvious to everyone that when the task force could have moved us forward in solving the Bay Bridge bottleneck, it chose merely to punt,” Pipkin (R-Dist. 36) of Stevensville wrote in an e-mail. ‘‘Let’s face it, the Bay Bridge traffic problem is well on its way to being studied to death.”

But Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. and administration officials defended the panel’s work and called it a first step in a lengthy process.

‘‘The process has to start somewhere,” said Ehrlich (R). ‘‘You have to build a public record for lots of reasons, not the least of which the federal agencies, the state agencies, all of the constituent agencies who will be part of this, demand that public record as part of the regulatory process.”

Still, others believe the controversy behind a new bridge forced the administration to tread lightly, particularly in an election year.

‘‘They know it’s got to be done,” said Senate Finance Chairman Thomas ‘‘Mac” Middleton (D-Dist. 28) of Waldorf. ‘‘Politically, I think they’re in a quandary with how to do that.”

Task force members called the process a successful launching pad.

‘‘What we’re doing is the preparatory work ahead of time ... because in our area this is almost a crisis situation,” said Sen. Janet Greenip (R-Dist. 33) of Crofton.

The four possible building zones each have potential pitfalls and represent ‘‘political hot potatoes,” said Sen. John C. Astle.

The northernmost crossing between Baltimore and Kent counties would require extensive development of feeder roads that would lead to the bridge, while the two southern zones have environmentally sensitive wetlands and not enough capacity on current roads.

Even building next to the existing spans could create massive backups on the western side of Route 50.

‘‘The problem is not building the bridge, the problems that are going to create the really difficult issues are what you have to do on either side of the Bay to make the bridge work,” said Astle (D-Dist. 30) of Annapolis.

One Maryland-based transportation observer said the report produced valuable findings, but did not yield sufficient results.

‘‘It seems to me they’re making a whole lot of excuses for doing nothing,” said Peter Samuel, an adjunct fellow with the Maryland Public Policy Institute and publisher of TollRoadsNews, an online transportation news service based in Frederick. ‘‘... We need a concrete plan to start with in order to really get some action.”

He believes a six-lane crossing should be constructed near existing spans, which would then allow the ‘‘retirement” of one of the bridges, to be used only for emergencies and non-vehicular traffic.

Committee members emphasized the need to keep the issue of a new crossing on the front burner.

‘‘We cannot put this book in a drawer and let it collect dust,” said Del. Mary Ann Love (D-Dist. 32) of Glen Burnie. ‘‘I think that whomever is [governor], it has to be a work in progress. Now that the door is open, we have to move it forward.”

But some lawmakers, like Del. Sue Kullen (D-Dist. 27B) of Port Republic, want no part of a new bridge.

‘‘There’s the same negative attitude in every community. It’s not the best use of resources,” she said, urging mass transit opportunities be explored. ‘‘Everyone’s going to suffer from it.”