Public hearing on the Montgomery County Bike Plan set for January

Earlier this month, the Montgomery County Planning Board approved the draft version of the county's 370-page long Bicycle Master Plan and they set the date for a public hearing on the plan for January 25th (a week later then planning department recommended).

The plan aims to make Montgomery County a world-class bicycling community. It sets the stage for a cultural shift, encouraging people of all ages and bicycling abilities to meet their daily needs by bicycle – in a safe, comfortable and accessible manner throughout the county.

View the Bicycle Master Plan Public Hearing Draft.

The community is invited to sign up to testify about the Bicycle Master Plan at the public hearing. Sign up to testify online http://montgomeryplanningboard.org/meetings/signup-to-testify/sign-testify-form/ beginning on January 15.

The public is also invited to submit comments about the Bicycle Master Plan via email to [email protected]. These comments will become part of the public testimony and public record for the Plan.

Learn more about the plan’s Proposed Bicycle Network map.

Without combing through it too much it seems to be an excellent bike plan with a lot in it, but that is rarely the issue. The issue is usually mustering the money, political will and dedication to make the plan a reality. So, we'll see.

Montgomery County is enormous and I'm certainly not familiar with enough of it to say whether or not he map is complete - but it appears to be appropriately ambitious. [It doesn't fix a major problem with the county - which is that the line dividing it from PG County is in the wrong place (New Hampshire Ave to the Beltway to I-95 would make more sense)]] There are some lengthy new trails in the west of the county, a bike crossing on the American Legion Bridge, a widened Bethesda Trolley Trail and over 500 miles of planned bike facilities. But looking at how it connects to DC, I'm a little disappointed with the number of connections on the west side of DC. There's not, for example, a trail along the old Cabin John Trolley (though there are 3 parallel facilities, so that's not such a missed opportunity). Nor are there connections to the Pinehurst or Beech parkways, which I think would make natural, future connections to DC, especially if a trail were continued along Fenwick Branch. I assume that where the plan connects to DC they conversed with DDOT and were left off for good reason, so my disappointment might be founded on my ignorance. 

You can watch the December 7th presentation on the bike plan at this link (I think).

If you bike in Montgomery County, review the plan and map and get any comments in before it's too late. Let's make sure they make the best bike plan possible. 

Bethesda Magazine, as per usual, has great coverage of this. 

The 370-page document is an overhaul of several past plans. It is written to improve safety and increase the number of cyclists by making more people feel comfortable traveling by bike. The plan will arm county leaders with tools for getting the most out of the money they spend on bike improvements, county planning board Chairman Casey Anderson said.

“We have a limited amount of resources. We can’t do all the most expensive fixes, but we probably should do a few expensive ones that are really important and valuable,” he said.

The draft will come before the planning board for a public hearing on Jan. 25, after which board members will hold work sessions to refine the proposal.

Comments

[Jeffb]

Well if there’s a (not good) reason why DC connections were left off it would be the NIMBYism of NW residents to bike infra.

[Jessica]

Rural areas of Montgomery County should have separated bikeways instead of unsafe shoulders,
the Virginia capital trail is a good example.

[Brett Young]

I have mentioned the Maryland portion of the Glen echo Trolley trail to MD reps, but its been about 3 years and she said they didn't have money.
There currently is a bike path next to Macarthur Blvd but it isn't great. The bigger problem is most cyclists ride on MacArthur Blvd and they do it during rush hour. The only way to really change there habits is widening MacArthur Blvd and adding a bike lane to it (which brings back the question whether or not using the old trolley line would be worth it.
Personally I think it would be useful but you'd have to fix the old trolley bridge across from Sycamore store.
Photos of this segment of the trail can be viewed here
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jojopuppyfish/albums/72157646895823423

[scoot]

Cyclists riding on MacArthur are a problem? Seems to me the problem is that there are no reasonable alternatives.

[washcycle]

It's definitely a source of conflict, though I hear less complaining about it from drivers than I used to. I think the conflict could be reduced if there were better alternatives, and a trail along the Trolley ROW would be one such alternative.

[Crickey]

Cyclists riding on MacArthur are not a problem. Not at rush hour. Not ever.

[Brett Young]

@crickey
There is a bike path next to Macarthur Blvd. Yet most cyclists are biking on MacArthur Blvd during rush hour in the Morning.
And the specific area I am referring to is DC state line going north to the Clara Barton Pkwy on ramp road (Nex to to Oberlin)
I thought the law in MD is if there is a bike lane, then the bicyclist needs to use it vs using the road.
Anytime I cycle on MacArthur Blvd in that area, I use that MacArthur Blvd bike path.

You could possible connect that trolley path to the CCT via the Brookmont Neighborhood but it would be a huge bridge over Little Falls Branch. (Not included nimby oppostion and NPS support would be needed) The old trolley had a bridge that went over that creek back in the day.

[Crickey]

I know the bike laws in Maryland quite well. It is mandatory to use a bike lane. But there are very specific requirements for what constitutes a bike lane, and the multi-use path on MacArthur categorically does not qualify.

Yes, there are cyclists on MacArthur in the morning and evening. I've been one, at times. You're welcome to use the bike path if you wish. But do not confuse your personal choice with the law, so as to imply that a lawful road user lawfully using the road for its intended purpose is some kind of "problem". The problem is with those who think there's something wrong with a cyclist who is riding right where they're allowed to.

[oboe]

There is a bike path next to Macarthur Blvd. Yet most cyclists are biking on MacArthur Blvd during rush hour in the Morning.

Perhaps the problem is drivers driving on MacArthur Blvd rather than one of the many other streets and roads available to them.

[John A.]

Maryland law requires cyclists to use a bike lane where one is present, and defines a "bike lane" as "any portion of a roadway or shoulder designated for single directional bicycle flow." The path adjacent to MacArthur is not a bike lane because it is bi-directional and is not a portion of the roadway or shoulder. It is rather a "bike path," which Maryland defines as "any travelway designed and designated by signing or signing and marking for bicycle use, located within its own right-of-way or in a shared right-of-way, and physically separated from motor vehicle traffic by berm, shoulder, curb, or other similar device." See MD Trans Code 21-101(c), (e); 21-1205.1(b)(2). Therefore, cyclists can ride legally on MacArthur instead of the bike path. It should also be noted that cyclists wishing to use the bike path in the vicinity of Cropley and Old Angler's Inn cannot do so and must ride in the roadway, because the bike path is perpetually blockaded in this area by vehicles parked illegally to access the C & O canal. The county makes no apparent effort enforce parking laws in this area.

[Brett Young]

@john A
Thanks for the explanation. That is what I wanted to know.

So in conclusion, Montgomery County still needs to come up with a better solution at Macarthur Blvd from Glen Echo Park to the DC border.
THey could widen Macarthur Blvd for bike lanes.
They could use the trolley path in MD.
Or they could improve what is currenly used as a bike lane that isn't a bike line.
When I last talked to Patricia Shepard, Montgomery County didn't have the funds and they were still in the planning stages for the area I mentioned.....and that was 3 years ago.

[scoot]

Does the Maryland law mandating bike lane usage allow exceptions for unsafe conditions, at the rider's discretion? In Virginia, many of our bike lanes are designed so hazardously that it would be foolish to confine oneself to that space. On a typical ride from Arlington's courthouse to the Key Bridge (down Clarendon Blvd to Lynn St), I take a travel lane almost the entire way. Otherwise some car door would certainly have knocked me to the pavement by now.

[scoot]

* travel lane = general purpose lane

[John A.]

Maryland law allows you to leave the bike lane and enter the roadway "when reasonably necessary to . . . avoid debris or other hazardous condition." The mere possibility of a car door opening in your path is probably not a sufficient hazardous condition to avoid the bike lane entirely, at least in the eyes of the law. My personal view is that bike lanes adjacent to parked cars are inherently dangerous because they effectively force the cyclist to ride into the zone of opening doors. Any collision or injuries resulting from being doored (or swerving to avoid being doored) can be attributed at least in part to the faulty design and placement of the bike lane. One sensible solution is to create a buffer space between the parked cars and the lane, as was recently done on Woodglen Dr. and Nebel St. in Rockville. Other than that, I try to straddle the edge of the lane furthest away from the parked cars, which generally leaves enough room to avoid doors while still staying in the lane.

[DE]

Yeah, I'm always on the white line in door lanes. Always amazes me that people will ride right in the door zone. But the thing is, the design is actually telling new cyclists that that is the place to ride. It amazes me that we have a standard design that inculcates unsafe riding behavior in new cyclists. It is setting people up for injury.

[Smedley Burkhart]

The comments on door zone bike lanes go without saying and I would add that they also set one up for all kinds of squirrelly moves from the left. Instead of silly stripes, they should paint educational messages, such as: "Cyclists belong here, so chill, you maniac."

[ACyclistInThePortCIty]

"It amazes me that we have a standard design that inculcates unsafe riding behavior in new cyclists."

In the case of a buffered lane, there is some argument in favor of putting the buffer on the right next to parked cars, but still I think some resistance from DOTs. In the case of one too narrow for a buffer there is really not much choice in how you stripe it I think - and the actual danger will vary with the rider speed, and the extent of parking turnover (and driver behavior, good drivers doing the Dutch reach would actually make door zone bike lanes perfectly safe, but I won't count on that). Note, I do see experienced cyclists riding in the door zone on streets without bike lanes - at least a painted bike lane should signal to someone in a parked car to expect bikes.