ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1995, Roanoke Times
DATE: Saturday, December 9, 1995 TAG: 9512110019
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-9 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: MARTIN WILLIS
CONGRATULATIONS to the Montgomery County Board of Supervisors for having the fortitude to reverse their recent vote rejecting the ``smart'' road. Supervisors should stay the course and continue their support of the project.
The battle between the NIMBYs of the Ellett Valley and the smart-road proponents is a classic confrontation between irreconcilable interests. The NIMBYs' creative arguments about ecological damage and destruction of quality of life in Ellett Valley are smoke screens for their primary and worthy point: They don't want an interstate highway through their valley.
Who can blame citizens for fighting against a project that will take their land and convert it to public use? Where is the judge, arbiter or politician who can fairly weigh the public's need for a new roadway and the interests of the property owners forced to accommodate the road? If the smart road were built and you were traveling up Interstate 81 on the way to Blacksburg, would you take the smart road or would you go the long way?
The staunchest conservatives and haters of big government grudgingly concede that one of the truly useful federal projects of our time is the interstate highway system. It was a tremendous boon to commerce and citizens alike. It's now overwhelmed by America's prosperity and our love of the automobile. While Ellett Valley is pristine and precious to its residents, the same can be said for 100 miles of Interstate 81 from Roanoke to Winchester. Those farmers and landowners bore no enthusiasm for having their properties cut in half by I-81. They paid the price for the public's convenience and our opportunity to share their scenic views.
As a part of the proposed Interstate 73, the smart road represents a compromise of Ellett Valley property interests to the benefit of the 25,000 motorists per day who will use the road. As a test roadbed for the Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems technology, the smart road pits landowners against Virginia Tech's participation in a lucrative national program of research and development.
Rejecting the smart road would detrimentally affect Tech's academic reputation and prestige. Montgomery County Board of Supervisors' recent short-lived opposition to the smart road, after seven previous votes in favor of it, damages the county's reputation for progressive economic policies. New industry will not favor an area where NIMBYs run the county.
Smart-road opponents condemn it as a wasteful ``pork barrel'' project. The irony is that we send our representatives to Washington in the hope some federal money will find its way into our local economy. The smart road will bring an injection into Blacksburg and Montgomery County of $100 million in federal money, and $300 million in related long-term economic development. There are no savings to taxpayers if the road is killed. That money will simply be spent elsewhere.
In his '30s radio show, Will Rogers proposed a solution to the federal deficit. Since nothing could be done to keep Congress from giving away money like Santa Claus, the plan was for every citizen to send federal money back when they got it, accompanied by an angry letter telling Congress to stop spending money. My favorite pork-barrel project is the Houston Space Center, which was located in Houston solely because then-Vice President Lyndon Johnson wanted it there.
Applicability of the pork-barrel label depends upon your perspective. The most controversial project of recent time was the massive particle accelerator in Texas. Billions of dollars were spent on the "super collider" before it was finally canceled. Records show not a single complaint about that spending from localities surrounding the projects.
Smart-road opponents also denigrate the utility of the IVHS technology. The demise of American rail-passenger service is proof that mass public transit will never be accepted on a national scale because we won't give up the convenience and privacy afforded by our cars.
There's nothing radical about the technology to equip our interstate roads with a laser signal or electronic beam that cars could follow to any destination in America. Cars would travel faster and safer in designated "slots" along the beam. A personal computer in each car would exchange traffic information, and regulate the speed of each car and its distance to the next. Passengers could sleep, read or watch television. If Montgomery County rejects the IVHS technology, that research will continue elsewhere.
Martin Willis is vice president of Rockydale Quarries Corp. in Roanoke.
LENGTH: Medium: 79 linesby CNB