| MINUTES
OF THE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION of the Greenbelt City Council held Wednesday,
March 20, 2002, for the purpose of receiving a briefing on the Goddard
Space Flight Center (GSFC) Master Plan. 
Mayor Davis started the meeting at 8:08 p.m. It was held in the Senior
Classroom of the Community Center.
PRESENT WERE: Council members Edward V. J. Putens, Rodney M. Roberts,
Alan Turnbull, and Mayor Judith F. Davis. Councilmember Thomas X. White
arrived at 8:30 p.m., and Mr. Putens left at about 9:55 p.m.
STAFF PRESENT WERE: Michael P. McLaughlin, City Manager; Kathleen
Gallagher, City Clerk. Kristin Ward arrived a little later in the meeting.
ALSO PRESENT WERE: Kim Toufectis, Facilities Planner, Walter Daly,
Project Manager, and Nina Harris, Public Affairs, Goddard Space Flight
Center; Frederick M. Heider, Vice President of Athavale, Lystad & Associates
and consulting environmental engineer to Goddard; Sheldon Goldberg,
Advisory Planning Board; Amy Boyes, the Gazette; Charles Jackman, and
Judy Bordeaux.
Mr. Toufectis introduced Mr. Heider, who said their purpose was to
describe Goddard’s current analysis of the possible alternative
routes for redirecting traffic from Soil Conservation Road (SCR). He
provided detailed maps and began with a description of the three routes
under consideration, one that would run west and two that would run
east of SCR.
Proposed Alternative Routes
Route W-1: Going southbound, this route ends on Greenbelt Road just
opposite the entrance to Chelsea Woods. There is already a road in
this position but the gates are usually closed. A new employee entrance
would be located on the west side. The security perimeter would be
changed to allow location of a private development and partnership
zone between Greenbelt Road and the new security perimeter. This road
would connect with Soil Conservation Road at the north end by a route
that would partly use an existing road and partly require a new exit
road from SCR that would pass through existing property of the Beltsville
Agricultural Research Center (BARC).
Routes E-1 and E-2: These routes would run almost due east over the
northern edge of the east campus and curve down to Good Luck Road.
The northern edge is the same for both routes and is dictated by the
operating parameters of the facilities and equipment located on the
east campus. They differ in that E-1 ties to Good Luck Road in between
the two entrances to the Countryside Apartments, while E-2 cuts somewhat
farther east, circumventing all the facilities on the east campus,
and intersects Good Luck Road farther north.
E-1 and E-2 would both require an improved intersection with Good
Luck Road. The county would also require the widening of Good Luck
Road to four lanes from the intersection to Rt. 193; this widening
would all occur on the NASA side and be paid for by the federal government.
The state would require improvements to 193 at the intersection with
Good Luck Road, including double left turn lanes, and lane improvements
may also be required on westbound 193 at the intersection. W-1 would
require turn lanes and additional storm water management at Greenbelt
Road, as well as changes to the BARC property at the northern intersection
with SCR. The alternate routes would all be two lanes with a 45-mph
speed limit, except for W-1 from Explorer Road south to Greenbelt Road,
which would require four lanes. Both the eastern and the western routes
require using property currently owned by BARC.
Wetlands Issues
In response to a question from Mr. White about impact on wetlands,
Mr. Heider said there was a study of the area around the BARC pond
that would be affected by W-1, and the opinion of the Corps of Engineers
is that the road would not affect anything that qualifies as wetlands.
On the eastern routes, they are awaiting results of a study of Beaver
Pond. Mr. Heider said there is no existing mitigation area in this
location.
Mr. Roberts asked about the wetland located on the east campus. Mr.
Heider said it was not portrayed on the map but, in effect, runs down
through the middle of the campus. Mr. Roberts asked if they were planning
to mitigate for putting this new road through a wetland, and Mayor
Davis asked if there would be a need to bridge a stream. Mr. Heider
said that what would be needed was more on the order of a culvert,
since the water stream in question was very shallow. Mayor Davis asked
if they could be sure that would be enough if it floods, commenting
that although the waterway might be small now, the balance was probably
delicate, and the water management might be challenged by a new roadway.
Mr. Heider responded that the wetlands are all under the authority
of the Corps of Engineers. Mayor Davis said if there were to be a need
for mitigation, Greenbelt would want to know what was proposed, since
the City’s experience has been that mitigation is often unsuccessful
and may even be located in a different watershed. Mr. Heider said they
will definitely be required to have a storm-water management plan and
would be dealing with all these issues.
Traffic Flow Projections
There was considerable discussion of traffic flow issues. Mr. Heider
said a survey of vehicles showed that the heaviest use of SCR is by
193 westbound traffic taking it north to proceed westbound on Powder
Mill Road. He added that use of W-1 would increase travel for these
drivers by about a mile. He said they assume choosing W-1 would result
in a big increase in traffic on Springfield Road.
The origin-destination survey data showed numbers of vehicles surveyed
during peak-hour volumes, not the total numbers of vehicles over a
day. Mr. Roberts persisted in trying to determine a total number of
cars using SCR. He questioned whether there is really enough traffic
on SCR to require creating any new roadways if GSFC were simply to
close the road. Mr. Toufectis said it was their assumption that not
providing an alternative would be unacceptable to the surrounding communities,
especially on the east side, since that would place a great deal of
stress on existing roads. He said their goal was to minimize the amount
of new road needed and mitigate the impacts, while concentrating their
operations in the middle of their property rather than sprawling the
campus. Mr. Heider emphasized that they want to concentrate their operations
in part for security reasons but also in order to organize their functions
more efficiently. Mr. White said he still thought that, with some creativity
and ingenuity, it should be possible to achieve those goals without
closing SCR to the public. Mayor Davis suggested that the purpose of
this meeting was simply to review the locations of these three routes,
not to re-open discussion of the justification for the project.
Mr. Turnbull pointed out a problem in the traffic projections on the
maps. Although there is an assumption of NASA growth to its approved
ceiling of 1,100 in the traffic projections for the three alternative
routes, the map based on "no action" includes only projected
growth for other entities. Mr. Turnbull pointed out that GSFC is doing
itself a disservice by presenting the projections this way, since they
make the scenarios for all the alternative routes look worse in comparison
with the "no change" scenario. Mr. Toufectis agreed and said
they would respond with another analysis on this.
Mr. Roberts asked if the Purple Line of Metro was taken into account
in the traffic projects. Mr. Heider said it was not, since there is
no confirmed approved route for the Purple Line yet.
Mr. Turnbull stressed maintaining easy points of entrée for
pedestrians and bikers in order to increase non-automotive access to
the campus.
Some additional information was presented on the worst-case impacts
of traffic on noise and carbon monoxide for the different routes, but
the differences among the alternatives did not appear significant.
Next Steps
Mr. Toufectis said that the director of GSFC will soon state a preferred
route. There will then be an opportunity for public comment before
the director decides which route they will proceed to try to implement.
Mr. McLaughlin asked if any City action was needed at this time. Mr.
Toufectis said, no, they will accept comments at any time and will
hold meetings during the formal comment period.
Mayor Davis said she would prefer that one of the eastern routes be
selected. Mr. White said he would prefer an eastern route as well,
if no way could be found to keep SCR open. It was suggested to Mr.
Toufectis that a preliminary briefing of the Advisory Planning Board
might be advisable. Mr. Toufectis also encouraged participation by
Greenbelt residents in the Community Council that is advising Goddard
on community impacts.
Other Business
Fire Department - Mayor Davis said Chief Krob had his meeting with
the county and that it is currently proposed that Greenbelt will lose
all four of its career firefighters, as will Branchville. This would
mean Greenbelt would have no coverage during the day, since Berwyn
Heights has a ladder truck and ambulance but no fire engine. The closest
fire trucks will be at College Park and Glenn Dale. She added that
the County Fire Department had been warning county government for some
time that this funding impasse was approaching, and they have encouraged
pressure from elected officials.
House Bond Hearings - Mayor Davis said the testimony at the bond hearings
today had gone well.
The meeting ended at 10:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kathleen Gallagher
City Clerk
|