« Advocate Training for extending the WB&A Trail to DC. | Main | 63 mile greenway coming together in southeast Pennsylvania »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The line between sidepath and protected lane starts to blur once you start getting really good at designing both. The main difference being that pedestrians aren't allowed on bike lanes I guess.

But if we have a spot where a sidepath has so many people that its causing congestion then A: it's a success that should be celebrated and B: you can come up with an engineering fix (aka separate paths now).

Re: Speed limits

Maybe its clearer in the report but are we proposing separate speed limits for bikes for on-street routes? Or would cars using the shared streets and greenways also now be driving at a 20mph limit?

Same speed limit for both.

As I see it, the big difference between sidepaths and protected bike lanes is the intersection treatment.

Sidepaths use crosswalks to get through intersections. These are dangerous because drivers are not looking out for high-speed people (relative to a person walking) in crosswalks. People who ride bicycles do not have the discipline to slow to walking speed at every crosswalk. This is why sidewalk cycling is so dangerous.

Protected bike lanes generally have extra signage and street markings to inform drivers that bicycles might be present and also usually do _not_ include slip lanes or other accommodations for speed-crazy drivers. Big difference.

Okay regarding that connection between the CCT and the Brookmont neighborhood:
That would be a huge bridge.
NPS would have to approve it.
The Brookmont neighborhood would have to be supportive of it.
All the streets there are one way (Going in a counterclockwise loop) for the buses.
Residents would rightly argue that bicyclists would cycle in the wrong direction on one way streets.
And just for the record, this would NOT connect to the Palisades-Georgetown trail I am working on.

That said, what MCDOT let out is that not only would this bridge connect indirectly to the C&O canal, it could potential connect people using the trolley path going north to Glen Echo Park. I met with Patricia Shepard about 4 years ago about this connection so at least they know about it.
The trolley path going north from Brookmont to Glen Echo Park is 80% there. A trolley bridge at the sycamore store would need to be restored/replaced. And 20 % of the path would need to be created.....but it would be a better connection than the current Macarthur Blvd path IMO.

Even if NPS approves this connection, they would need to construct a very large bridge.

I don't think you'd need that big of a bridge. It doesn't have to be at grade the way the trolley bridge was. The trail could follow the terrain (I've hiked across that area) and then climb up to the other side again. You'd need long ramps and maybe a switchback, but not a trestle.

It would not connect directly to the Palisades trail, but both could connect to the CCT and only a short distance apart.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader