Montgomery Planning Board to hear recommendations about Capital Crescent Trail

Bicycling

Montgomery Planning Board to hear recommendations about Capital Crescent Trail

by Matt Johnson • November 16, 2011 12:02 pm

As a part of the Purple Line, Montgomery County will fund upgrades to the Capital Crescent Trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring. Tomorrow, the Planning Board will hear recommendations from its transportation planning staff about several issues facing the trail.

Current trail. Photo by thecourtyard on Flickr.

After hearing testimony, the Planning Board will send their recommendations to the County Council.

The current design from the Maryland Transit Administration includes a number of improvements to the trail. The upgraded trail will be expanded to 12 feet wide, where feasible, and paved. Additionally, the trail will be extended from its current terminus at Lyttonsville 1.5 miles farther east to Downtown Silver Spring. New overpasses or underpasses will be provided over Connecticut Avenue, Jones Mill Road, 16th Street, and Colesville Road.

This is good news for trail users.

Planning staff is calling for the installation of lighting along the new trail from Bethesda to Silver Spring. The trail would be lit during the hours the Purple Line is open, and would allow the trail to be used safely during commuting hours. The recommendation is to design lighting so that it does not disturb neighboring properties.

Staff is also calling for emergency call boxes to be placed at intervals along the trail. This will help to promote security and reduce crime. New landscaping will help to create a pleasing trail experience and will screen trail users and neighbors from the Purple Line.

The Bethesda tunnel. Photo by thisisbossi on Flickr.

The most costly decision that will have to be made is whether to put the trail above the train in the tunnel under Wisconsin Avenue. Right now, estimates place the cost of keeping the trail in the tunnel at $40.5 million, which is 43% of the cost of the entire trail. Planning staff have recommended against putting the trail in the tunnel if the price remains so high. For a fraction of that cost, the surface alignment could be significantly improved. The Planning Department is calling for more study before making a final decision.

Not having the trail in the tunnel would mean that trail users would need to cross Wisconsin Avenue at grade. If a surface alignment is chosen, the staff recommends prioritizing pedestrians and cyclists crossing Wisconsin Avenue. They recommend a working group be convened to hammer out the design details.

A surface alignment is clearly not as nice for pedestrians and cyclists because of the Wisconsin Avenue crossing. But there are plenty of ways to make the crossing of Wisconsin safe and efficient for trail users.

The Planning Department recommends that if the surface alignment is used through Bethesda, that the trail will be made as user-friendly and safe as possible. While the exact design solutions have not been determined, many solutions will be considered, including creating a bicycle/pedestrian only signal phase for crossing Wisconsin Avenue, a separated "cycle track", raised crosswalks, and more.

A separated cycle track in Vancouver. Photo by Paul Krueger on Flickr.

And let's not forget that even if the tunnel under Wisconsin is lost to the Purple Line, the trail will still be vastly improved. It will be paved, bridge several major arterials where people have to cross at grade now, and extend 1.5 miles farther to downtown Silver Spring.

Cross-posted at The Straight Line.

16 comments

Tags: bicycling, Capital Crescent Trail, Maryland, Montgomery, Purple Line

Tunnel vision threatens the Capital Crescent Trail in Bethesda (Nov 4, 2011)
Changes mean more Purple Line and trail grade-separation (Sep 21, 2011)
How the Purple Line will fit through the Silver Spring Transit Center (Nov 11, 2009)
Urban bike trails aren't just for recreation (Jan 5, 2009)
Montgomery removing one useless underpass while planning another (Jul 15, 2009)

Matt Johnson has lived in the Washington region since mid-2007. He has a Master's degree in Community Planning from the University of Maryland and a BS in Public Policy from Georgia Tech. He has worked in the planning field since 2006 and lives in Greenbelt, where he serves on the city's Advisory Planning Board.

Comments
Add a comment »

I remember when I lived in Bethesda a few years ago, a main opposition factor to the Purple line expansion along the trail was the large amount of mature trees that would have to be felled for the project.

As for crossing Wisc. Ave, crossing it scares me already.

by Matt Glazewski on Nov 16, 2011 12:22 pm

Maybe the upgrades will benefit cyclists, but running mass transit along the trail will be disastrous for pedestrians. The best thing about the trail is that it is a beautiful walk. There are so many tall trees and streams. I reckon it's too costly to run another subway line under East-West Highway, and I'm resigned to the loss of the trail for enjoyable hiking. Still it makes me sad to think of the loss.

by Kyle on Nov 16, 2011 1:09 pm

Crossing Wisconsin Avenue at-grade will not be as good for trail users as having a grade-separated tunnel crossing. But it will not be especially dangerous.

The Wisconsin Avenue crossing has had a long history of being hyped as especially dangerous since the "Save the Trail" began a push to open the tunnel. The tunnel opened for trail use in 1998, and Purple Line opponents have continued to pump up the issue of crossing Wisconsin Avenue since then.

But thousands of pedestrians cross Wisconsin Avenue every day. The Wisconsin Avenue/Bethesda Avenue intersection is listed in the County Mobility Report as one of the most pedestrian active in the county. It is no more dangerous than most crossings of busy roadways.

I personally find crossing Woodmont Avenue and Bethesda Avenue on the trail to be as risky as crossing Wisconsin Avenue - the turning traffic and crosswalks not squared with the streets sets this intersection up for pedestrian/vehicle conflicts. Yet none of those who obsess with the Wisconsin Avenue crossing seem to notice the safety issues of this intersection only one block away.

Yes, we need to explore all reasonable means to keep the trail in the tunnel. The Coalition for the Capital Crescent Trail and others want the concept of single trackting the Purple Line in the tunnel to be explored. But let's keep things in perspective - the staff recommendations to tame the turning traffic at a Wisconsin Avenue at-grade crossing can make this crossing safer for trail users than are some other crossings that are on the trail today.

by Wayne Phyillaier on Nov 16, 2011 1:10 pm

I run along the Capital Crescent Trail and the Georgetown Branch Trail all the time and I've never had an issue crossing Wisconsin, Bethesda or Woodmont Ave.

Pay attention to the lights. Pay attention to crossing signals. Pay attention to cars. Be vigilant. It's pretty simple.

That said I do think the improvements would help. I'm glad that the Planning dept is not recommending the underground tunnel at the estimated cost.

by Fitz on Nov 16, 2011 1:35 pm

Why do these public project take so D*mn long!!!! in other countries they get this done much faster. 9 years from now is RIDICULOUS considering how much planning has gone into it already!

by davidj on Nov 16, 2011 1:37 pm

Regarding my post above, David Anspacher of M-NCPPC has informed me the county mobility report draft had incorrect numbers for the Wisconsin Ave./Bethesda Ave. pedestrian activity, and the corrected report will not list this intersection.

But nonetheless I regularly see many pedestrians cross there now.

by Wayne Phyillaier on Nov 16, 2011 1:50 pm

As to teh assertion that the Purple Line will be disastrous for pedestrians, I think it's fair to say some pedestrian users now will dislike the change, and others will welcome it. In general, I think we can expect usership to climb significantly, which will mean that this resource will be more extensively utilized. More people will enjoy it.

The flip side is that those who enjoy the underutilization of the trail now will be losers in the whole thing.

by Crickey7 on Nov 16, 2011 2:53 pm

40 million to run underground is more than enough for me to vote against the surface alignment. You have to look at it objectively, think about all the other mini projects we can do along the trail instead if we could reduce that cost to 4 million for a good surface alignment. It is just not worth the money.

by Matt R on Nov 16, 2011 3:12 pm

"40 million to run underground is more than enough for me to vote against the surface alignment. You have to look at it objectively, think about all the other mini projects we can do along the trail instead if we could reduce that cost to 4 million for a good surface alignment. It is just not worth the money"
Good point. Not only will spending that much money on the tunnel jeopardize the quality of the rest of the trail, that is money that cannot be used elsewhere. Look at the big picture: the CCT, the Metropolitan Trail, and the Green Trail are all supposed to connect into one, world class trail system. If you blow 40 million on this tunnel, that's 40 million less dollars available for making this entire network a reality.

by BS_Dawg on Nov 16, 2011 3:36 pm

Just to be fair, it's not clear that the incremental expense of the trail in the tunnel is $40 million. It is true that if the trail is in the tunnel, the cost of shoring up all the necessary support columns will eat up that amount. However, the engineering analysis indicates that even without the trail in the tunnel, an unknown number of those columns may need to be shored up anyway.

by Crickey7 on Nov 16, 2011 3:40 pm

I'm all for a surface alignment. I live in Bethesda, and crossing Wisconsin Ave is really no big deal. As Fitz said, if you pay attention to the signs, you're in good shape.

Also, I think people are really underrating the connection to Silver Spring. The current way of traveling along suburban streets is really inefficient and sometimes dangerous, especially when crossing over the tracks. If I had to take a Silver Spring connection at the expense of losing the tunnel, I'd take the Silver Spring connection anytime.

by Cassidy on Nov 16, 2011 4:01 pm

Crickey7's got a good point that the full $0mil may not be attributable to the trail, but the overall point that if it's going to cost many millions to keep the trail in the tunnel, it's worth exploring alternatives, or considering how to live with worse options. I've been digging, but I haven't been able to find much int he way of discussions of surface options other than simply telling bikes/peds to follow a certain route on surface streets. Does anyone know if there's been discussion of trying to come up with a dedicated routing for the trail, along Bethesda or Miller, with a trail bridge over Wisconsin, and through or adjacent to Elm Street park? It seems like if a dedicated trail were the goal, it might actually be cheaper to elevate the trail than to bury it. There are, obviously, reason why this wouldn't be ideal either, and might not be feasible, but I haven't really found discussion of the idea anywhere, and was wondering if these options were being discussed somewhere.

by Paula Product on Nov 16, 2011 5:13 pm

Just out of curiosity, how much would people be willing to pay to keep the trail in the tunnel? $40M appears to be too much for almost everyone. How about $20M? Or $5M? or $1M? What do people think it IS worth?

by David C on Nov 16, 2011 10:32 pm

Having spent several days in downtown Bethesda in the last week, crossing Wisc at different times, I have to grown at the hysteria here. Wisconsin's lights are synchronized to slow down the vehicle traffic through most of the day and it's hardly the "highway" it becomes in the stretch N of the Beltway. The relocation of the CCT and the delicate sensitivities of a few should not stand in the way of the Purple Line.

by Rich on Nov 16, 2011 11:47 pm

@David C

I would say it's worth whatever it would cost to build a very good (better than DC cycletracks) surface alternative. Maybe $500K? The 15th Street Cycletrack cost around $100K per mile.

As I said in a previous thread, someone should draw up a plan for what it could look like. Take an entire lane of traffic to separate out bikes and peds, paint it so it's visible, put up planter barriers or something nice. Put a dedicated signal at Wisconsin with its own turn in the sequence so trail users are treated just like regular traffic. Make it easy, obvious, safe and highly visible and it will be just as easy as the tunnel connection.

Currently you still have to cross Bethesda Ave & Woodmont in order to get from the trail to the tunnel. People are making this out like the current option is just continuous travel, which it isn't. You could make a trail space in the street that is just as nice or nicer and just as convenient as the tunnel connection is now.

by MLD on Nov 17, 2011 11:14 am

Just as an example of what I'm envisioning:
http://www.montgomeryplanning.org/community/plan_areas/bethesda_chevy_chase/master_plans/bethesda_cc/ch5_bethcbd.pdf

Page 15 - class I, separated from traffic by the curb and trees, separated from peds as well for biking.

by MLD on Nov 17, 2011 11:18 am