The Montgomery County Planning Board will review and comment on a petition by the "5500 Westbard Avenue Block Civic Association" to permanently close the existing vehicular access to and from River Road at the end of that block of Westbard tomorrow, Thursday, July 27, 2023 at 10:00 AM. That closure was recommended in the 2016 Westbard sector plan after residents of the block expressed concern about existing and future cut-through traffic, including trucks seeking to avoid the tight right turns from River onto Ridgefield Road. The Montgomery County Department of Transportation will hold a public hearing on the closure request on August 29, 2023, according to the Montgomery County Planning Department. That meeting's location was not disclosed.
While the proposed permanent closure would prohibit vehicular access to and from River Road from the 5500 block of Westbard, it would retain access by pedestrians and cyclists. The physical barrier to vehicular traffic would also have to mountable by fire and rescue vehicles, as recommended in the sector plan. Montgomery County planning staff write that the closure will require construction of a turnaround "acceptable to" MCDOT and the Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Service.
Staff are recommending delaying permanent closure of 5500 Westbard at River Road until the realigned Westbard Avenue connection to River Road, located on the former Ridgefield Road right-of-way at River, opens to the public this fall. At that time, staff suggest traffic studies be performed on travel patterns in the area under the new configuration. After study results are compiled, staff recommend the following options be considered for the 5500 Westbard/River intersection:
1."Permanent closure to motorists, except emergency vehicles while maintaining access for bicyclists, and pedestrians. This alternative should include a turnaround acceptable to Montgomery County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) and Montgomery Department of Permitting Services (MCDPS) Fire and Rescue."
2. "Closing the median on River Road, which would prohibit left turns onto Westbard Avenue."
3. "Installing a larger directional island that ensures right-in/right-out traffic operations from and towards River Road support the signed left turn restrictions already in place."
4. "Closing northbound access onto River Road from Westbard Avenue altogether. This alternative should include a turnaround acceptable to MCDOT and MCDPS Fire and Rescue."
Staff recommend that the MCDOT study of these alternatives include the participation of the Maryland State Highway Administration, the Planning Department, and MCDPS Fire and Rescue and Stormwater Management.
Thursday's public hearing has appeared quickly, and with no notice to nearby residents in the community. It is also being held at the height of summer travel season. As such, it's not surprising that the staff report notes that "Staff has not received any public correspondence on the Right-of-Way Petition as of the date of this staff report." Well, that might be because the public was not made aware of this hearing, nor has MCDOT notified the community of the August 29 public hearing or its location, as of this morning.
23 comments:
I lived on that block for six and a half years. The non-stop traffic was a major reason for my move to Florida. It literally was affecting my health as about half of the traffic on Westbard was breaking some law and should not have been driving there. Nothing worse than the sight and sound of other people's vehicles speeding past your home.
@5:26 AM
Boo hoo. The road was there before you moved in, you should have known better. It's like living near an airport and crying about the airplane noise. White privilege at its finest.
Yes, why have a vaguely functional street grid when you can force all vehicles onto a single road instead. Gotta protect those dozen millionaires (whose backyard is River Road, anyways) at the expense of everyone else.
If the barrier is "mountable" by emergency vehicles you can count on many non-emergency vehicles also mounting it. Unless there is a camera present to monitor the area.
Yes 606, I knew that you would be making this "point". I moved to Westbard for family reasons not because I wanted to. And with the expectation that the road would be eventually closed off per the county's master plan. Now that is in doubt but, fortunately, I am no longer there to have to endure it. I engaged in self-help. I am not looking for your sympathy as it is clear you have none. The fact that you also dragged race into it tells me all I need to know about you. Another reason I am in Florida and not Maryland. P.S. my main problem was with the law-breakers, big trucks, speeders, illegal turners, etc. I did not sign up for that when I moved there.
I understand that traffic on these side streets can be a nuisance. But restricting or eliminating more streets is making the problem worse, not better. At some point everyone is going to want their neighborhood closed to cars, create logjams on the main roads and disconnecting communities. The solution is to instead put calming features in place, including making one way roads two ways, making streets narrow at intersections, and using speed bumps selectively.
@ 5:26 AM - Moving to Florida because you don’t like the traffic on your street, sounds like setting fire to your house to kill a fly.
In MoCo, how much does it cost to turn your street into a permanent cul-de-sac? According to the Westbard PAC and Ridgefield/SCA PAC, surprisingly not that much.
I'd frequently see Giant trucks labor to make that turn onto Ridgefield from River and think how foolish that trucks weren't allowed on westbard. Now they want to close westbard all together.
Public streets cannot be confiscated for private driveways, even if those who live there don’t like the traffic. Leland St in Bethesda tried this same move, and the public fought it - they ended up with turning restrictions (based on time of day) when all was said and done. Didn’t Kenwood attempt to close access to their streets too at some point in the past - and they are only allowed restricted turns at specific times. Why is Westbard special?
Westbard is being realigned to the River Road intersection. Closing Westbard at River Rd has always been part of this plan. Let’s get excited for the new shopping center and focus our efforts on getting Little Falls Parkway back to 4 lanes between Dorset Ave and Hillandale.
What is a little individual inconvenience for the common good?
Agree with 9:33 but the true goals of the planning board and the council are to make driving as miserable as possible directing some into public transit while the rest who actually need their cars can suffer the idealistic goals of people who will never live by the rules they impose.
Yes, his comment was terrible.
I thought closing Westbard at River was an aspiration of the residents on that street and was not actually ever formalized or agreed upon? The general public will weigh-in on the merits of closing this section of Westbard at River. But anyway - 4 lanes at LFP - yes!
The lady (608) makes a good point. The mob (1019, 1201 and 413) are so worried that some "privileged" group might get favorable treatment that they refuse to see the facts. I guarantee you would not like it if semi-trucks were driving past your house on a residential street every day.
An aspiration in a sector plan is not a guarantee that it will happen. In the Westbard 1982 sector plan (I think, date may be wrong), the neighborhood aspired to a park at Ridgefield and Westbard where there are now four single family homes. So, saying “it’s always been part of the [sector] plan” doesn’t mean it will actually materialize. Someone with a better recall of past sector plans can correct me about the date/details, if needed.
Thanks.
7:40: Yes, it was 1982. That plan also had the townhome development off Little Falls Parkway, which then fell through, but was revived in 2011 by EYA because the 1982 plan was still in effect.
A larger problem, as Robert Dyer reports, is that the Planning Board gave little or no prior announcement of its hearing and MCDOT had not, as of July 27, posted an announcement of its late August hearing on its website. This is problematic for the surrounding community.
In addition, the Westbard Sector Plan states that consideration of the Westbard Avenue closure should be considered on the basis of a *neighborhood* plan. The 5500 Westbard Block Civic Association represents a *block* of roughly 25 homes on a longer street, not a *neighborhood.* The Springfield Civic Association, which represents the 600+ homes in the surrounding neighborhood, was not informed of the street closure request and has not supported it.
While Montgomery County law allows any individual or organization to apply for a street closure, the larger Springfield neighborhood and its civic organization should be given the opportunity to weigh in on this issue. Residents of nearby communities also might want to comment.
Raise your hand if you think that it’s acceptable that the only public discussion on closure of a public road has been on the Robert Dyer blog. Montgomery County government needs to do better.
Springfield folks are understandably unhappy for having to put up with the traffic that Westbard residents experienced, in my case, for six and a half years. Difference is that the Springfield traffic is diffused over a much greater area and many streets while Westbard was just one street. I hope that the new configuration mitigates this problem such that everyone may be able to tolerate residing there. Westbard residents have relied on the county's representations that Westbard will be closed to through traffic and, in my opinion, that is what should happen. Drivers will have no good reason to make that right turn onto Westbard when the newly configured intersection will have a dedicated right-turn lane and no stop signs or traffic lights between River and the shopping center.
@5:58 AM: Concerning your comment that “Westbard residents have relied on the County’s representations”:
The provision of the Westbard Sector Plan recommending permanent closure of Westbard Avenue was never presented publicly prior to final publication of the Plan, nor was the Springfield community briefed on this recommendation. It seems evident that the community should have been informed and public feedback sought. It is appropriate to inform the community and obtain public feedback now.
As noted earlier on this thread, sector plan recommendations are frequently not implemented, so it was premature for residents of the 5500 block of Westbard Avenue to have relied on this recommendation.
Regrettably, the Montgomery County planners often fail to inform the public of salient decisions, as was the case here. It might be that permanrntly closing Westbard Avenue at River Road is the right thing to do, but the County’s handling of this matter has been secretive and counterproductive, both in the adoption of the original recommendation and the failure to publicize the July 27 hearing.
Montgomery County residents deserve a fair and transparent planning process. We do not have such a system now.
Their comment was accurate. No one wants to hear the truth. It’s a public road paid for by taxes. If residents want the road closed then county taxes shouldn’t be used to fund the upkeep of the road. This is what privilege looks like. Yet they want our tax dollar to make their road exclusive to them. It's a public road... Gotta love those self entitled NIMBYs!
It’s a public street. They are demanding favorable treatment. Our taxes are used for the upkeep of this public street. Semi trucks drive on some residential streets. It sucks but it’s life. Either move or accept that it’s a public street.
Post a Comment