ber of persons now utilizing all transit modes in the Silver Spring corridor near the D.C. line has increased 40%. Ridership at the Silver Spring Station has been so great that only 2 months after the Station opening, modifications had to be made to increase the station capacity because of the unexpected crowds. Usage of the station is now approaching 20,000 riders per day, the 4th most heavily used station in the system. Also, just as the opening of the downtown D.C. segment 2 years ago generated the unanticipated "lunch bunch" ridership pattern in midday, so too the extension to Silver Spring is generating an unexpected travel pattern of suburban-to-downtown movement: a growing number of County residents who never before utilized public transportation for their travel into the District of Columbia. Persons far beyond the expected service area of the Silver Spring Station are using Metro rather than driving into D.C. in order to conduct personal business, attend college, or take advantage of the cultural and historical attractions of the Nation's Capital. Also, a frequently overlooked group of users are the elderly and handicapped, who, by means of Metrorail service, have unparalleled access to the center of the region for a wide variety of employment, cultural and medical services.

FINANCIAL IMPACT ON MONTGOMERY COUNTY

The Subcommittee Chairman's invitation to this hearing suggested that the tax burden of our jurisdiction be described in terms of the impact of financing remaining Metro capital and operating costs without additional federal funds. We have not been able to develop a precise estimate, given the uncertainty over the Administration's attitude toward the Metro program, and given the various approaches being considered for additional State Government support. This information will be developed as part of the August 31st Metro financial plan submission. What we can state categorically at this time, is that Montgomery County does not possess the resources to finance these costs without a continuation of federal support from either Interstate Highway Substitution funds, direct Congressional appropriations, or a combination of the two. We question the logic of the Administration's current position that the federal financial interest in Metro be limited not by previous Congressional intent for a 100-mile rail system, but by the amount of dollars which would have built 17 miles of freeway. This logic is as faulty as the earlier plan of meeting the region's transportation needs by constructing freeways in the heart of D.C.

We view Metro's needs for continued public subsidy as a natural outgrowth of a vital and needed public service. Toward that end, we are supportive of current efforts to build a regional understanding of the need for earmarked tax sources for Metro's share of debt service and operating subsidies. At the outset, this effort is focusing on tax sources which can be developed and administered at the subregional level. Later, when Metrorail service is more uniformly provided throughout the region's jurisdictions, it may be feasible to consider such a tax to be levied on a regional basis.

In closing, we thank you for the opportunity to elaborate on Montgomery County's strong support for completion of the full 100-mile Metro system.

Mr. DANIEL. My name is Edward A. Daniel, director of transportation planning for Montgomery County, Md. I am pleased to present this statement on behalf of Cleatus Barnett, the Montgomery County voting member on the Metro Board, as well as for James P. Gleason, Montgomery County executive, who was a charter member of the first Metro Board and who remains a staunch supporter of the 100-mile system. We are grateful for the opportunity to present our views to the subcommittee.

BENEFITS OF METRO

I would like to summarize a few major points in the statement which supplements the statement by Mrs. Kramer. There are many benefits to the Metro question which we have identified in our statement for the record. The essential benefit is that we believe Metro is the one regional service that will unify this Federal region. It is appropriate,

therefore, for this committee to display its concern about the future of the Metro program.

ALTERNATIVES STUDY

As you are well aware, and as other speakers have amply documented, the Federal administration has, in effect, driven a wedge into this regionally developed and congressionally endorsed program by insisting on reevaluation of Metro. After 2 years of "negotiation" with the previous and current secretaries of transportation, the alternatives analysis of several segments of the regional system is close to completion.

After August 31, when the Metro Board completes its detailing of a financial plan for system construction and operation, the ball will be in the administration's court. A major unknown factor in the decisionmaking process is the timetable which the administration will follow in responding to the Metro system financing proposal. The subcommittee should urge that a time limit be placed on the Federal DOT to complete its review of the updated Metro plan.

RIDERSHIP IN MARYLAND

Mr. Chairman, I would like to cite some of the experience that we have realized in Montgomery County since the opening in February of the Silver Spring Metro Station, because I believe it documents the ability of the Metrorail and adequate bus feeder service to attract suburbanites from out of their cars.

Preliminary data indicates that the number of persons now utilizing all transit modes in the Silver Spring corridor near the District of Columbia line has increased 40 percent. Ridership at the Silver Spring station has been so great that only 2 months after the station opening, modifications had to be made to increase the station capacity because of the unexpected crowds.

Usage of the station is now approaching 20,000 riders per day, the fourth most heavily used station in the system. Also, just as the opening of the downtown District of Columbia segment 2 years ago generated the unanticipated "lunch bunch" ridership pattern in midday, so too the extension to Silver Spring is generating an unexpected travel pattern of suburban-to-downtown movement; a growing number of county residents who never before utilized public transportation for their travel into the District of Columbia.

Persons far beyond the expected service area of the Silver Spring station are using Metro rather than driving into District of Columbia in order to conduct personal business, attend college, or take advantage of the cultural and historical attractions of the Nation's Capital.

I would like to address, if I may, the administration's current position that the Federal financial interest in Metro be limited not by previous congressional intent for a 100-mile rail system, but by the amount of dollars which would have built 17 miles of freeway. This logic is as faulty as the earlier plan of meeting the region's transportation needs by construction freeways in the heart of District of Columbia.

I might add at this point, as the committee may be aware, Congressman Steers recently took a poll of the constituents in the Eighth Congressional District which includes most of Montgomery County, and

from 39,000 respondents, 53 percent of the county residents indicated their willingness to absorb additional taxes, if necessary, to insure completion of the Metro system. This is particularly signficant since most of Montgomery County will not have Metro service for another 5 years and since only 35 percent of our labor force currently commutes to the District, these being the prime beneficiaries of the service. Mr. HARRIS. Thank you very much.

Mr. Wilson, we welcome you too as an ex-patriot of Virginia and compliment Maryland on its excellent taste. We ask also, if you would like, that you present your statement for the record and now summarize the same.

STATEMENT OF ROBERT WILSON, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE

OFFICER, PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY, MD.

Mr. WILSON. Thank you very much for those comments. [The prepared statement on behalf of the Prince Georges County Government follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANCIS B. FRANCOIS, COUNCILMAN-AT-LARGE, PRINCE GEORGE'S COUNTY COUNCIL AND MEMBER, BOARD OF DIRECTORS, WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: On behalf of the Prince George's County Government, it is a pleasure to appear before this Committee to report our views on the importance and impact of Metro.

As you personally are aware, Mr. Chairman, Prince George's County has been a long, loyal and enthusiastic partner in the regional transit agency. The reason for this is simple. We recognize that we live in the Metropolitan Washington region, that our citizens have the need and desire to move daily across this region, and that they need an effective, region-wide transit system to do so.

Our county is the largest in the State of Maryland, with a population today of roughly 700,000 people. This is larger than some six of the States in the Union. Together with Montgomery County, we suburban Maryland counties represent more than 40 percent of the total population of the Metropolitan area which makes up the regional transit district.

Our county residents are essentially working men and women, both black and white, and mostly with modest incomes. Some 62 percent of our people are in the age category of 18 to 64 years, and our labor force totals some 53 percent of the population. In the youth category, approximately 33 percent of the county's population are under the age of 17.

It is estimated that about 40 percent of our work force, over 148,000 people, commute every workday to the District of Columbia. A large number of these are Federal workers. Looking to the years ahead, we see thousands of additional people in Prince George's County, many of whom will also commute to work at locations beyond our borders. If our highway system is not to collapse, if limited household budgets are not to be destroyed by the increasing cost of operating an automobile, and if we are to meet the energy crisis and help solve our air pollution problems, we in Prince George's County must have available to our people an efficient and rapid public transportation system. Since its inception, we have seen Metro as the very keystone of such a transportation system.

PUBLIC SUPPORT

Throughout the years, there has been strong public support for Metro in our county. In November, 1968, we held an $88 million bond referendum for the Metro system, and our voters approved it overwhelmingly. The overall approval rate was 62 percent, and in some areas of the county, it reached 74 percent. But this does not mean that many residents in our county have not raised questions about Metro.

In 1974 and 1975, as the rising cost for Metro became apparent, and as the first general construction proposals for lines in northern Prince George's County

began to emerge from the designers, many citizens expressed concerns about the system. In part this was because highway I-95 had been killed, which was to provide the right-of-way for the Metro E Route through the Chillum area. With the highway gone, the Metro route was suddenly seen as poorly located, and disruptive to the neighborhoods it was meant to serve. Other alignment issues also alarmed citizens, and many questions were being asked. Our elected officials. many of whom were not involved when the system was designed in the mid 1960's, recognized these questioning voices, and we undertook a series of public hearings, and a complete review of the system.

Some 18 months ago, at the urging of UMTA, an alternative analysis was launched for much of the unbuilt portion of the Metro system. We in Prince George's County saw this process as a good way to answer questions about the E line, and asked that it be added to the study. Over these past months, along with other local officials and citizens in the region, we have gone through an intense analysis of the unbuilt Metro lines. For Prince George's County, this included not just the E line, but the F, or Branch Avenue, line as well.

Region-wide, we have looked at over 1,700 possible combinations of bus and rail transit to serve the region, exploring nearly every idea that anyone cared to surface. Just a few weeks ago, after this intense analysis, we reached our conclusions. A system generally like that approved in 1968 still appears to best meet our needs, with some changes.

We now propose to underground portions of the E Route, and to put a socalled S-curve into the alignment that will serve Prince George's Plaza. The end of the line will be beyond the Beltway, and if necessary to satisfy legitimate concerns of the people in College Park, a station planned for that City will not be built. On the F Route, we now recognize the need for two lines, not one. One line terminates at Rosecroft, and this is currently our first priority. A later extension along Branch Avenue to Auth Road is also recognized as badly needed. and in the alternative analysis, it was a toss-up between the two, making a priority choice extremely hard to make.

Through this alternative analysis process, the government of Prince George's County has asked its questions, gotten its answers, and now stands firmly re-committed to the completion of a 100-mile plus system. How about the citi zen? From all indications, they, too, had many of their questions answered these past 18 months, and today we sense a stronger than ever dedication to Metro. There are some polling results from the past few years that back this statement, and give it meaning.

Some notable examples of these opinion polls are:

(1) In 1975, the Bureau of Social Science Research prepared an indepth report for the Joint Committee on Transportation on attitudes toward Metrorail. Among other elements of the survey, overall support for the Metro system was 77 percent, and on the question of the whole system vs. a shorter version, Prince George's respondents supported the whole system by 68 percent.

(2) In 1977, in polls conducted by WRC Radio and American University. support ranged from 72 percent on the WRC poll to 66 percent on the AU poll. The AU poll, in posing questions to those surveyed, added the qualifier. "Even if costs continue to rise, are you still in favor of building the Metro system?" In releasing the survey results, the University report noted, "This is true of both sexes, both races, all ages and income groups, liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats."

(3) A WRC Radio poll, conducted just two months ago, showed the greatest degree of support ever, with respondents from the region favoring completion of the system by 77 percent, with 82 percent of the Maryland respondents supporting the system.

(4) A recent in-depth poll conducted by our own county officials fully substantiates the results of the various other public opinion polls, showing that 62 percent of those surveyed favor completing the Metro system, even if it means a tax increase would be needed to do so. This poll is especially significant, because it concentrated on voting, real estate tax-paying citizens, those most directly affected by rising Metro costs.

Perhaps an even more valid indication of the public support from our county residents for the Metro system can be shown from the actual ridership figures compiled by the WMATA staff. Metrobus ridership is up on our county bus routes, and even though there is no rail service as yet in the county, the results of the last survey conducted by the Transit Authority staff showed that 21 percent of the A.M. peak and 15.6 percent of the all day riders on the Metrorail

system are Prince George's residents. That would appear to be proof positive of the popularity of the rail system with our residents.

METRO IMPACT ON THE LOCAL ECONOMY

Mr. Chairman, it is our view that the Metro system can be a positive force in the economic growth and stability of our county. By expanding the capacity of our inner-Beltway communities to absorb greater levels of high-quality residential and commercial development, the Metro system will contribute to a broader tax base, which in turn, will lessen the burden on the existing property tax rates. By providing Metro stations on the Beltway it will also make locations further out in the county more attractive economically, and as these sites develop jobs, Metro will make those jobs available to additional thousands of workers. The advent of the rail system will provide opportunities to rebuild and revitalize some of our older communities, some of which desperately need a catalyst for renewal of residential properties and commercial establishments— as well as a removal of the spirit of community residents. In short, we believe the quality of life in Prince George's County will be enhanced by Metro, and that it will provide accessibility to locations where important new economic development can occur.

We have already experienced the influence our Metro system has upon attracting commercial and retail development. In the New Carrollton triangle, to which Metro service begins this November, construction will begin this summer on the first of many office buildings which are planned for an "executive park" type of new dvelopment adjacent to the New Carrollton Metro Station. Prior to Metro, that parcel of land was landlocked, and considered virtually undevelopable.

Current plans for this site at New Carrollton call for the development of some 80 acres over the next five years, to include up to 25 new commercial buildings. It is estimated that this will ultimately add a minimum of $52 million to the present county tax base of about $5.2 billion.

For your information, four firms have already committed:

Digital Equipment Corporation, 250 employees housed in a 64,000 sq. ft. structure.

People's Security Bank, 60,000 sq. ft.

Rouse & Associates, 2 buildings with 120,000 sq. ft. total.

Retail Store Employees Union Local 400 Headquarters, 60,000 sq. ft.

In addition, the project is expected to include a 300-600 room high-rise hotel, a bank and restaurants. For embellishment, it might be mentioned that "some developers say the project could rival the Crystal and Rosslyn developments of recent years."

It is also at this location where we will link the Beltway, Metro, and the Metroliner, with Baltimore-Washington International Airport only a few miles away. The regionwide nature of Metro is the obvious key to what is occurring. Moving now to the Addison Road Metro route, currently under construction, two stations are located within the County, one at Capitol Heights, and one at Addison Road and Central Avenue. Existing conditions in the vicinity of the Capitol Heights Station show visible signs of deterioration, and many of the retail shops in the general area are failing. With the opening Metro, projected for late 1980, the Town of Capitol Heights expects revitalization of the business district, as well as rehabilitation of residential areas. Although no unmanageable traffic problems are anticipated, projections show that the peak hour traffic volumes are expected to more than double the current volumes.

The Addison Road Station area is another location where Metro should spark needed housing and commercial rehabilitation and revitalization. Current traffic counts on Central Avenue and East Capitol Street Extended place about 22,000 vehicles per day in that corridor, with roughly 70 percent of peak hour traffic going to and from the Washington CBD.

Perhaps the greatest economic impact which Metro might have on the county will come or fail to develop, depending upon whether or not they are builtfrom the Greenbelt, and the Rosecroft/Branch Avenue Routes, and our E and F Routes, respectively.

Based on projections from an economic impact study which was conducted a few years ago by a consultant for the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission, the economic stimulus which the Metrorail system might produce on the "E" and "F" Routes is significant.