The Montgomery County Council voted 10-1 to approve an amendment to the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission's FY-2024 capital budget that would prevent construction of a permanent road diet on Little Falls Parkway in Bethesda, and the creation of a linear park along the closed traffic lanes, without Council review and approval. It was introduced by Councilmember Andrew Friedson (D -District 1), who represents the area. But don't break out the champagne glasses just yet. The move is a delay of the project, not the killing of the project, and does not reverse the existing temporary road diet.
While the amendment essentially grants the April 30 request by County Executive Marc Elrich to defund the controversial project, the language does not require Montgomery Parks to dismantle the temporary road diet now in place, which has reduced the parkway to two lanes between Arlington Road and Dorset Avenue. And Montgomery Parks Director Mike Riley, calling Friedson's bluff, said he intends to come back to the Council with a better-developed proposal for a permanent road diet in three to six months.
The issue is sure to remain ongoing and controversial for reasons beyond Riley's persistence in ramming the unpopular idea through. Montgomery Parks has already illegally used funds appropriated for other purposes to implement the two-stage temporary road diet currently in place. It improperly implemented it without the required public process, and without any formal public input or feedback. The agency made the alterations without receiving the required formal approval of the National Capital Planning Commission, which has federal oversight authority on any changes to the parkway. And most importantly, a lawsuit is pending in Montgomery County Circuit Court on these illegal actions by Montgomery Parks, filed by the Kenwood Citizens Association.
So you must take this development with a significant grain of salt. But the move does indicate that the ferocious community opposition has required the Council and Montgomery Parks to temporarily retreat, regroup, and come up with a new approach to selling the project to the public. Friedson acknowledged the project's many opponents in a prepared speech upon introducing his amendment.
"We have received over a thousand emails opposing funding for this project, on the heels of a petition with more than 4000 residents in strong opposition to the project," Friedson recalled. "We also have to recognize when there is overwhelming support for or against a given project, and be responsive to our constituents."
Friedson expressed strong support for the original road diet between Arlington Road and Hillandale Road. But, he said, a linear park along the parkway "is not a priority of mine, or the district I represent." He noted that there are park projects promised in existing master plans that have not yet been delivered, and that a linear park along Little Falls Parkway was not proposed in any master plan.
In Friedson's analysis, Montgomery Parks' estimate of the permanent road diet project's cost is "unrealistic." He said he expects the total price tag to be higher. "In a budget that is full of difficult choices we have just begun to make, starting today, I just don't know why we would insist on throwing money at such a divisive and unpopular project."
The language of Friedson's amendment stipulates that a permanent road diet project "must be reviewed by the Council before the funds may be utilized for this purpose. No funds may be utilized for the implementation of a linear park in this section of Little Falls Parkway."
"I will not support that amendment," Councilmember Natali Fani-Gonzalez (D - District 6) said, arguing that councilmembers should support any project that furthers Vision Zero goals, regardless of community opposition. She called the proposed permanent road diet an "amazing project," and exhorted her colleagues to do the "right thing." Friedson later said he did not appreciate Fani-Gonzalez questioning his integrity. "I took offense at that, and continue to take offense at that," he said. "I have been an outspoken supporter of Vision Zero."
Council President Evan Glass asked Montgomery Parks Director Mike Riley if any past project had received such strong blowback from a community as the Little Falls proposal has. Riley said the North Four Corners Local Park and Matthew Henson Trail projects had vocal opposition. Glass said that while those two Silver Spring projects had a few vocal nearby opponents, "this is a far different case. This is not a few folks who are concerned about this. This is a broader community [opposition]." He advised Riley to determine what parts of the county people will welcome such projects, and focus on using their limited funds to deliver them there.
Glass and many other councilmembers appeared to be unfamiliar with Little Falls Parkway and the current conditions there. He was under the impression that the original 2017 road diet, which reduced the segment between Arlington and Hillandale to one lane in each direction but with the wide grass median intact, was still the configuration today. The road was reduced to two lanes on one side of the grass median from Arlington to Dorset last fall. Barring further intervention by the courts, the Council or voters in 2026, there's no reason to believe that "temporary" configuration won't continue.
8 comments:
Marx would be so proud of his proteges.
A good vote by the Council. Thanks for the article, and the warning all this will continue to play out.
The folks who think this "road diet" is a good idea must not live in or near to the road in question; the ones who do live there know they have the playground and grassy area by the Kenwood Forest Townhomes, the Little Falls trail which runs from Norwood Park (another park!) all the way to Dorset avenue, parallel to the parkway, and also the Capital Crescent trail on the other side of the parkway. This might be appropriate when all other areas of Bethesda have so much outdoor space, but for not it just seems completely unnecessary.
It's not about creating another park but rather it's about deliberately causing more pain and hassle for commuters and people who drive. That's the real agenda.
10:37 - You're close. The agenda is about control. The agenda is about removing you from your car completely. The agenda is, as a voter, you don't matter, we're in charge and will dictate behavior as we see fit. Think that's a stretch? They have a few thousand signatures against this idea and everyone of those voter's voices was summarily silenced and dismissed. This is soft tyranny. Want real change? Don't allow people like this to gain power. Simple. You know this is bad when Elrich is against it. He should be applying major pressure to kill this thing before it's too late. And keep watching Tuckerman Lane. The same insanity is being proposed.
I've driven this stretch of road many times over the last few weeks during the afternoon/evening rush and haven't noticed any issues at all with traffic. Are there issues in the morning? If not what are people complaining about?
Little Falls Parkway was built with two lanes in each direction, in the early 1960's and it quickly became an efficient way to get to and from downtown Bethesda to homes and businesses in the River Rd and Mass Ave corridor. Problems with speeding and the crossing of the Capital Crescent Trail probably let to it being on the Vision Zero list of roads where traffic should be slowed down. It's not clear why Fani-Gonzales is so behind reducing the traffic capacity of this 60 year old road, which is not in her district, but it points to her apparent agenda of opposing auto travel and efficiency under the guise of safety. Thanks for reporting and lets hope all funding is removed for "linear parks" that are in close proximity to many other parks and places for recreation. Montgomery Parks apparently has lots of extra money to spend on projects which may hurt more residents than the projects help.
10:29 - I'm so glad that someone else sees thru this veil of safety, sharing the road, etc. It is about getting rid of cars even electric ones. We're in real trouble with folks like this obviously on the local level here but state all the way up federal. MoCo leaders are in lock step with the other nuts who want to control everything we do. Oh, that's just Fox News talking. Really? They aren't trying to control what stove you have? How bout dishwasher, HVAC, lightbulbs, toilet, shower head and the list goes on. Red states are thriving and blue states area hemorrhaging people month after month. Still, Elrich & Co. could give a flying flip.
Post a Comment