OPINION:
Maryland residents, beware. The trendy “15-minute city” is coming your way.
Montgomery County planners have approved a sweeping redevelopment plan for a 3.5-mile stretch of University Boulevard, despite opposition from residents, who say the proposal fails to reflect their needs.
The Montgomery County Council, which must approve the scheme before implementation, should stop this travesty.
In a “15-minute city,” residents can access work, retail, education, recreation and health within 15 minutes or less, without cars. This might work for some in dense urban centers such as Manhattan and Georgetown, but it is unsuited to suburbs where cars remain necessities.
The University Boulevard Corridor Plan shows what backlash ensues when inflexible planners seek to impose trendy plans on constituents they are supposed to serve.
Planners aim to redevelop a stretch of Maryland State Highway 193 from the Capital Beltway to downtown Wheaton into a road no longer geared toward cars and residents. Instead, planners envision a “pedestrian-oriented and multimodal corridor that supports safe movement for all people, especially those walking, biking, and rolling.”
The proposal, which includes additional apartment housing, reduced road space for cars, and expanded infrastructure for buses and non-vehicular travel, describes itself as necessary for a transition to “15 minute living” in which residents “access daily necessities within a 15-minute walk.”
Montgomery County Planning Board Chair Artie Harris, a Stanford MBA whose career in real estate development included 15 years with Bozzuto and Yum! Brands, said that “the University Boulevard Corridor Plan is a step toward creating a safer and more connected community … that reflect[s] the needs of the people who live and work along the corridor.”
When planners advertise safety and 15-minute living, that’s an excuse to get rid of cars.
But many residents have voiced strong objections. They argue that the plan conflicts with the area’s suburban character, and fails to account for those commuters, families, seniors, and individuals with limited mobility who rely on vehicles for daily life.
Civic associations, school leaders, religious institutions, and dozens of residents expressed concern in public comments to the Planning Board that the plan would reduce car access without providing viable alternatives. At a standing-room-only public hearing on Feb. 27, more than 90% of speakers opposed the plan.
Residents cited long distances to bus stops, limited transit options, and the impracticality of walking or biking for daily errands such as buying groceries for their families.
“Many of the people in my area are over 60 (I will be 60 in a few months as well), and rely on cars to get to work,” wrote Jeffrey Elikan. “Not only is there no practicable way for them to access public transportation, but many of them are unable to walk long distances or ride bicycles.”
Jessica H. commented, “No buses run through our neighborhood. My house is nearly 1 mile to a bus stop. Furthermore, we are a carpool community … Many in the community also work for the government so after driving carpool they drive into D.C.”
Some pointed to past failures as evidence of the plan’s shortcomings. “There is simply no demand for bikeable, rollable, walkable space along University,” wrote Alex U., referencing a discontinued 2021 University Boulevard pilot bike lane. “The ill-fated bike lane pilot should have taught you that lesson: nobody used it.”
Michelle Penn of La Zooz Dance recalled traffic problems during the pilot bike program. “In fact, when you did the pilot biking program, you also took away our right hand turn lane [from Arcola to University] … During morning rush hours, it would take 2-3 lights for the lanes to empty, backing up almost to Lamberton Drive each morning.”
As the Montgomery County Council considers a plan that many taxpayers say will make their lives more difficult, the disconnect between policy and public sentiment has never been more apparent. The University Boulevard Corridor Plan may be well-intentioned, but it flouts community preferences.
The Montgomery County Council should pause this plan. Residents have spoken clearly, and their choices should be respected. Anything less would be a disservice to the democratic process and to the people who call the county home.
Many people enjoy walking, biking, and transit, yet the car remains essential to the daily lives and transportation needs of most Americans. If planners lose sight of this, they court inevitable backlash of the sort currently brewing in the Maryland suburbs.
_____
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, former assistant secretary for research and technology at the U.S. Department of Transportation, directs the Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment at The Heritage Foundation.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.