Safety isn't only reason to support cross-county connector

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

Ad hominem attacks such as these are usually the last resort of people who lack sufficient evidence to address the substance of an argument. I welcome an open, honest and vigorous debate. And let me make my position perfectly clear. I support the cross-county connector.

I wrote a letter regarding the safety aspect. But that is only one of a number of reasons I support the connector. And no, I'm not in bed with the commissioners. I've actually been one of their more vocal critics. I just happen to agree with them on this issue, despite the fact they are doing a lousy job of standing up for it.

Just about every candidate for commissioner in the past several elections expressed concern over the fact that more than half of our workforce leaves Charles County every day to go to work. They stated that economic development was necessary to bring good quality jobs to the county.

It also seems that every candidate ran on a platform that called for smart growth or controlled growth or some similar growth-related catchphrase. They campaigned that growth was inevitable and it was imperative that we plan for it rather than allow it to happen in a haphazard fashion as has so often been the case in Charles County.

So now (with citizen participation) we have a Charles County comprehensive plan, we have a dedicated development district, we have an expanding airport in the Bryans Road/Indian Head area, we have new technology-driven businesses coming to Indian Head, we have a Bryans Road subarea plan and we have a design to put the infrastructure in place to support and direct any future development that may result.

The linchpin of that infrastructure is the cross-county connector. Imagine that, a road that is designed to focus development into the area where we agreed the development should be.

What a concept.

My previous letter was primarily about road safety.

Of course, I know, as Daniel Keyes pointed out, that because of the traffic volume there are more accidents on U.S. 301 and Route 210 than on Billingsley Road. However, a simple traffic and accident count will still show that you are more likely to be involved in an accident while driving on Billingsley Road than on any other road in the county.

There are simply too many cars driving at much greater speeds than that old winding road can support.

Finally, it seems the common thread that binds together almost all opponents of the connector is their claim that the environmental impact will do irreparable damage to the Mattawoman Creek.

If that's the case, what about Kingsview?

Kingsview is a community of more than 600 residential units that was built right smack dab in the middle of the Mattawoman watershed. The boundary of Kingsview is, literally, a stone's throw from the creek. I've driven through Kingsview and have seen that the residents fertilize their yards, have outdoor pets, seal and powerwash their decks, wash their cars etc. Shouldn't that be devastating to the Mattawoman watershed? Where is the hue and cry?

Better yet, give me some statistics. Exactly what irreparable damage has Kingsview done to the Mattawoman Creek?

I may be wrong, but I would bet the damage, if any, is negligible. That community was designed and built more than 10 years ago. It stands to reason that we can build in an even more environmentally friendly manner today.

I believe we should protect our environment. I also know that we live in a world of inescapable realities, one of which is the fact that the presence of man will continue to expand. We have to plan for it and do it smartly. We cannot be sucked into the nonsense of believing that the only smart growth is no growth.

John Rutherford, White Plains