TPB Comment Form

Additional Draft Project Submission for the Visualize 2045 Constrained Element

Comment period open until February 17, 2018

The Transportation Planning Board has released for a 30-day public comment and inter-agency review period, an additional project submissions to be included in the Air Quality Conformity Analysis for the constrained element of Visualize 2045, the region's long-range transportation plan. The following materials were made available for review and comment:

The deadline for comments is 11:59 P.M. ET on Saturday, February 17. 

Comments may be submitted by:

  • Using the online form below (upload files for comments longer than 1,000 characters),
  • Sending an email to
  • Calling (202) 962-3262, TDD: (202) 962-3213
  • Speaking in person at the February 21, 2018 meeting
    • To participate, call (202) 962-3315.
  • Writing to the TPB Chairman at

National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board
777 North Capitol Street NE, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20002-4239

Spell Check

Comments longer than 1,000 characters in length may be submitted by uploading a Word or PDF document below.

Comments Received on the Visualize 2045 Constrained Element

Use the searchable form below to review comments received on the proposed project submissions for the Visualize 2045 Constrained Element and the draft Scope of Work for the Air Quality Conformity Analysis.

Visualize 2045 Inputs and Scope Submissions

This comment is being submitted on behalf of:This comment pertains to:Name of Agency/Business/OrganizationFirst NameLast NameCityStateZip/Postal CodeSubjectFile Upload
An IndividualDraft project submissions for the Visualize 2045 Constrained ElementWilliamMilneLake RidgeVirginia22192I-95 Southbound Auxiliary Lane from VA 123 to VA 294Traffic_Comments2.docx
Text Area:
See attached document.
An IndividualDraft project submissions for the Visualize 2045 Constrained ElementKevinChisholmArlingtonVirginia00000Visualize 2045 CommentNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
Funding (near term and long term) heavily favors (1) automobile usage and (2) suburban projects or projects for citizens outside the beltway. Very little funding is projected to be used to encourage or support non-automotive transportation.
An IndividualDraft project submissions for the Visualize 2045 Constrained ElementLucindaSnowGermantownMaryland20874Comments on Proposals in the Visualize 2045 Constrained ElementNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
Here are my comments: * Regarding the proposed I-270 Toll Lanes from I-495 to I-70/US 40. All these new toll lanes are a fad congestion relief. I-270 should not be widened in Montgomery County and south. Adding a lane in each direction north of Montgomery County may be in order. The real “Traffic Relief Plan” for this region comes from the Brunswick Line MARC Expansion Plan, which should be implemented before any widening is done on I-270. * Regarding the proposed I-495 Toll Lanes from American Legion Bridge to Woodrow Wilson Bridge. Before anything is done on this plan the Purple Line should be completed and it's impact assessed first. If the impacts from the Purple Line on congestion are positive, then extension of the Purple Line should be considered before any 1-495 widening is considered. * I can't comment on the other road proposals in MD, as I am not familiar with them. I do support the list of transit projects, that is where our major efforts need to go.
An IndividualOther Regional Transportation IssueRobertGoldbergGermantownMaryland20876-4422Thank you for not recommending the additional bridge crossing of the Potomac RiverNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
Thank you for not recommending the additional bridge crossing of the Potomac River. Your decision will help to protect our drinking water, farms, and Agricultural Reserve.
An IndividualOther Regional Transportation IssueKathleenBartolomeoGreenbeltMaryland20770Potomac BridgeNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
Thank you for protecting our water by not voting for the new Potomac Bridge. Sincerely, Kathy Bartolomeo
An IndividualOther Regional Transportation IssueAnneAmblerSilver SpringMaryland20902Thanks for prioritizing drinking water: no new highway bridgeNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
Thank you for not including another highway crossing of the Potomac in the long range transportation plan. The focus should be on providing comprehensive mass transit as a large part of improving quality of life while preserving our forests and farms. Another bridge and the highway that would connect it would have seriously degraded our water supply, through both the construction itself and the development and traffic it would bring. Sincerely, Anne Ambler Silver Spring
An IndividualOther Regional Transportation IssueJaniceBrowneSilver SpringMaryland20910Say NO to another Potomac bridgeNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
The proposal to build another Potomac crossing is extremely ill-advised. As this area's primary source of drinking water, the risk of contamination -- both from construction and operation -- is simply too high. The many reasons NOT to do this are the same as the previous times this proposal was defeated. Please refer to the testimony of the Audubon Naturalist Society. Thank you.
An IndividualOther Regional Transportation IssueAnneAmblerSilver SpringMaryland20902NO to another Potomac River crossingNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
I am a resident of Montgomery County who values what this area offers. That includes relatively clean air and water and a nationally recognized agricultural reserve that contributes greatly to preserving that clean air and water. Another bridge and highway do not compensate for their degradation. A major highway bridge increases the likelihood of a chemical spill that could contaminate our drinking water. Accidents are common, and a study of data from 1991-2000 found that the likelihood of a spill in the event of a crash was 50% higher for hazardous materials than non-hazardous. One tanker truck of hazardous material can contaminate an entire drinking water system. Remember Charleston? The amount equivalent to one tanker left 300,000 Charleston WV residents without water for over 10 days in 2014. Is this the future for the DC Metro area? Clearly Third World. Please focus on transit and stop planning more highways as a First World country that values its future should do.
An IndividualOther Regional Transportation IssueBarbaraWayneSterlingVirginia20165Additional Northern Potomac River CrossingNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
In addition to promoting sprawl, increasing congestion and competing with the new metro stations in eastern Loudoun, the Northern Potomac Crossing project will present a clear threat to the region's drinking water supply. The Potomac River in this area is a sole source aquifer depended on by about five million of your neighbors. A bridge in the area will provide an opportunity for disaster which could result in leaving those millions without any drinkable water for an undetermined period of time. Without the river, we have 24-48 hours of drinking water. One spill amounting to one tanker truck could contaminate intakes for Fairfax, Montgomery, Prince Georges and Loudoun Counties, Rockville and the District. All this for a "developer's dream." Please ensure this project does NOT make it onto your plans in any form. It should never see the light of day.
An IndividualOther Regional Transportation IssuePhilip & MaryPadgettKensingtonMaryland20895No Outer Beltway BridgeNo file uploaded.
Text Area:
Dear Chairman, No, do not approve the building of an outer beltway bridge. This is a bad idea that only would exacerbate the bad decisions of the past. When we fly into Dulles Airport, we often approach first over Maryland. Looking down, we see a verdant land of balanced, smart growth. As soon as the plane crosses the Potomac into Virginia, we are over a World War I battlefield of rapacious development. When oh when did "Virginia Mother of Presidents" become "Virginia Panderer to Developers?" Enough is enough. Our region must find and take a better alternative path to the future. If a shock to the system is needed to start that, then saying no to an outer beltway bridge is the right action at the right time - now! Sincerely, Philip and Mary Padgett, Kensington, MD
Results: 56 Comments found.


The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (COG) fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations prohibiting discrimination in all programs and activities. For more information, to file a Title VI related complaint, or to obtain information in another language, visit or call (202) 962-3300.

El Consejo de Gobiernos del Área Metropolitana de Washington (COG) cumple con el Título VI de la Ley sobre los Derechos Civiles de 1964 y otras leyes y reglamentos en todos sus programas y actividades. Para obtener más información, someter un pleito relacionado al Título VI, u obtener información en otro idioma, visite o llame al (202) 962-3300.