Tag: M-83

Testimony: Remove M-83 from County Plans (MoCo Council, July 2025)

Testimony: Remove M-83 from County Plans (MoCo Council, July 2025)

We urge you to adopt the recommendations of the Planning Board and remove the unbuilt northern portion of M-83 from the Master Plan of Highways and Transitways.

M-83 is not the right path forward to provide better transportation options upcounty. The ways of thinking that informed plans for this road decades ago are fundamentally out of step with what we know today about best practices to address transportation needs, and about the vital connections between environmental health, climate resilience, and human health.

TAKE ACTION: The last, most important step to defeat Mid-County Highway Extended (M-83) is here

TAKE ACTION: The last, most important step to defeat Mid-County Highway Extended (M-83) is here

Mid-County Highway Extended (M-83) wouldn’t relieve traffic upcounty long-term—but it would cut a divide through existing communities and destroy farmlands, forests, and sensitive wetlands in its path.

The County Council is finally considering removing M-83 from county plans this month, and we need you to weigh in.

Action Alert: We have power in numbers! Join us to say no to M-83 (MoCo)

We need your help at a hearing this Thursday to finally stop an outdated, destructive highway and to protect sensitive forests and wetlands. If built, the Mid-County Highway Extended (M-83) would cut through farmland, forests and wetlands in its path through the Seneca Creek watershed. 

Action Alert: Montgomery County needs transit and connected communities, not more highways

Dear friend,

Since the 1950s, traffic engineers have told us new highways would solve traffic. We now know that’s not true. We also know that highways divide neighborhoods and pollute our air. We know that more walkable communities linked to transit provide a better, more sustainable approach.

If built, the outdated Mid-County Highway Extended (M-83) would destroy farmland, forests and wetlands in its path through the Seneca Creek watershed. It is time to remove this destructive and unnecessary proposed highway from the county’s official master plans. 

Contact the Planning Board today to ask them to remove M-83 from the Master Plan of Highways and Transit (MPOHT).

Take action: Don’t build this harmful highway

For years, CSG and partners have put forward a transit-based combination of solutions, including bus rapid transit, better street connectivity, and improved bike and pedestrian connections upcounty as an alternative to building M-83.

Analysis by CSG and the TAME Coalition, and later, by the county’s own Department of Transportation—has found that forthcoming transit investments, including bus rapid transit (BRT) on MD-355, will provide significant transportation improvements without the environmental harms of M-83.

Strong support for removing M-83 from county plans

County leadership and community and environmental organizations alike join CSG in supporting M-83’s removal from the Master Plan of Highways and Transitways, including:

  • County Executive Marc Elrich
  • Montgomery County Department of Transportation
  • Transit Alternatives to Mid-County Highway Extended (TAME)
  • Sierra Club of Montgomery County
  • Action Committee for Transit
  • Montgomery Village Foundation
  • Muddy Branch Alliance
  • Seneca Creek Watershed Partners
  • Climate Coalition Montgomery County (including CCAN, Montgomery Countryside Alliance, and MCFACS)

Read our 2015 report and visit TAME’s website to learn more.

What’s next, and how you can help

In addition to using our alert to contact the board, please also consider attending these upcoming community meetings and hearings about M-83 and the Master Plan of Highways and Transit:

October 21, 2024: Virtual Public Meeting, 6PM (RSVP
October 23, 2024: In-Person Public Meeting at Neelsville Middle School, 6PM (RSVP)
November 14, 2024: Planning Board Hearing on MPOHT (sign up to testify)

Contact the Planning Board: Remove M-83 from the MPOHT

Let’s take a step forward for better, more sustainable transportation upcounty, and away from an outdated and environmentally harmful project. 

Testimony: Removing M-83 from Master Plan of Highways and Transitways (Montgomery County, Support)

We are grateful to Planning staff for their attention to the public feedback they have received concerning M-83. Organizations including CSG and Transit Alternatives to Mid-County Highway Extended (TAME) and other community members have been raising serious concerns about the community and environmental impact of M-83 for years. We have documented how M-83 is unnecessary and that local street connections combined with bus rapid transit and walkable, transit-accessible communities would meet future needs.

Transit advocates see midcounty problems

“Even more telling is that in the draft EER (Environmental Effects Report), you can see that with alternative 9, the same intersections in the southern (already built) portion of Midcounty Highway continue to fail. If you open up a new stretch of road that will attract more commuters heading north to south to the same failing intersections, what do you think is going to happen?” Blynn said.

Montgomery chooses route for new road between Gaithersburg and Clarksburg

As with any major transportation project, the Midcounty Highway extension is controversial. Some residents and smart-growth advocates say the road-building money would be better spent on a bus rapid transit system to reduce traffic by allowing people to forego driving. Other critics said it would cause too much environmental damage and run too close to neighborhoods.

Will Montgomery County Fall Into the Zombie Highway Trap?

There ought to be a statute of limitations on highway plans, because chances are, if a transportation project was conceived of at a time when rotary phones were the norm, it is just as outdated.

But these zombie highway projects from another era still hold a powerful allure over public officials, even in places where they really ought to know better.

Montgomery County, Maryland, has a reputation for being pretty forward thinking on transportation, but an undead highway is clawing its way out of the grave.

At Greater Greater Washington, Kelly Blynn reports that local officials are under the spell of a 1960s vision called the Midcounty Highway Extended, or M83. Worst of all, they seem to be settling on the most costly intervention, fiscally and environmentally:

Last night, the Maryland Department of the Environment and the Army Corps of Engineers held a public hearing at Seneca Valley High School in Germantown regarding whether they should grant a joint permit to impact wetlands and streams in the highway’s path. Dozens of highway opponents from the Transit Alternatives to the Midcounty Highway Extended (TAME) Coalition, many of whom have fought the project for years, turned out in force to testify against the project.

MCDOT originally evaluated 11 alternatives, and has since narrowed the field down to just 6, including a no-build option. Alternatives 4, 8, and 9 are the most controversial and involve the most new pavement and right-of-way through environmentally sensitive areas and existing neighborhoods. They also happen to be MCDOT’s preferred alternatives. MCDOT estimates that Alternative 9 would cost $350 million to build, though local activists say it could be double that.

Alternative 2, the cheapest option, would make improvements to Route 355 and use transportation demand management (TDM) to give travelers other ways to get around, while alternative 5 involves widening it. MCDOT did not look at any transit alternatives. Their report contains a footnote saying that the community requested a transit alternative, but says that the county’s Bus Rapid Transit plan is still too nascent to be considered.

The county leaders will decide soon whether to include the money for this project in next year’s budget. Blynn says, “It remains to be seen whether the County leaders will continue their progressive planning tradition by investing scarce local dollars in transit and smart growth, or whether they sink hundreds of millions into a 1960′s-era sprawl highway.”

Elsewhere on the Network today: Mobilizing the Region sheds light on some of the perilous situations faced by pedestrians in south Jersey. Cap’n Transit theorizes that two schools of thought on transit planning emerge from two difference conceptions of the city and suburbs. And I Bike TO criticizes the Toronto police department’s decision to stop tracking “dooring” crashes.

Read the original article at Streetsblog >>