Mt. Rainier just put in new permeable pavers to a parking lot adjacent to city hall. Good deal. Then they put a "park and ride" sign literally right in the middle of where people would walk (I still haven't taken a picture, but I will tonight). I got home from walking my dog the other night freshly P.O.'d that I had subconsciously altered my path around where I used to walk. No one seems to think it's a big deal. In a town that's trying to transform it's core, bring in businesses, and decrease the vacancy rates, that's just one of a thousand details that says "welcome, have a stroll around our lovely downtown", or "screw you get back in a car where you belong" and I'm afraid we just said the latter.

The other sidewalk I use frequently is at L and 18th (near Ritz Camera..if it's still there) where 18th adds a right turning lane onto L they took away all the space for the sidewalk and gave it to autos. Tons of people use it and it's tough to navigate during rush hours. A wall of people build up

I'm no expert, but it doesn't look like the sidewalk in the photo is ADA compliant. Lawsuit?

by thump on Jul 19, 2012 2:37 pm • link • report

The new, wider sidewalks in Adams Morgan are great! HOWEVER, some restaurants (esp those closer to 18th and Florida) have decided to take advantage of this space, creating new outdoor seating areas and expanding way out into the sidewalk. While we all love a good outdoor brunch, these new seating areas leave almost less space for pedestrians than before!

by melhank on Jul 19, 2012 2:45 pm • link • report

Thank you.

My pet-peeve: Why to traffic signs, street lights, and all kinds of other stuff get put on the side walk.

This is my favorite stupid side-walk:

View Larger Map

Much used because of the CaBi station [missing in the image]. The boxed in trees make the whole thing useless. Oddly, the trees were not boxed in, as can be seen on this (older) image:

View Larger Map

by Jasper on Jul 19, 2012 2:45 pm • link • report

@thump: It's bad. That building in Columbia Heights contains retirement housing and there are a lot of handicapped people using that stretch of sidewalk. I think only the facade is being renovated so hopefully the project will be finished soon.

by RCH on Jul 19, 2012 2:52 pm • link • report

Another good pro-sidewalk project is the ongoing streetscape in Glover Park. They are widening the sidewalks in front of Holy Rood cemetery on Wisconsin - some of the narrowest and most dangerous sidewalks in the city.

by Evan on Jul 19, 2012 2:58 pm • link • report

Columbia Heights is full of them. Instead of going north from DCUSA, go west on Irving and you'll hit an unnervingly narrow construction tunnel, followed by two blocks of old-fashioned (probably circa 1960) narrow sidewalks where you have about 6 feet between the building windows and the cars. And these are blocks that hundreds of K-12 schoolchildren walk daily.

by Tom Veil on Jul 19, 2012 2:59 pm • link • report

M street in Georgetown obviously,

Over in clarendon there is the section of wilson boulevard while its still two way and there are telephones poles in an already narrow sidewalk. Every time I've walked through there my wife and I have to go single files at some parts. Maybe somethign can be done when they redesign that intersection at large.

by drumz on Jul 19, 2012 3:01 pm • link • report

Thank you for this article! I moved to DC from NYC and was shocked at how narrow the sidewalks are.

by Sam on Jul 19, 2012 3:02 pm • link • report

I write about it all the time.

- http://urbanplacesandspaces.blogspot.com/2011/06/tension-in-urban-sidewalk-design.html

Sadly, by not providing some specific guidance in your entry, you don't provide any suggested remedies, improvements in eradicating problems, or a way forward.

---------
SIDEWALK WIDTH (from page 339 of the PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System)

The width of a sidewalk depends primarily on the number of pedestrians who are expected to use the sidewalk at a given time — high-use sidewalks should be wider than low-use sidewalks. "Street furniture" and sidewalk cafes require extra width, too. A sidewalk width of 1.5 m (5 ft) is needed for two adult pedestrians to comfortably walk side-by-side, and all sidewalks should be constructed to be at least this width. The minimum sidewalk widths for cities large and small are:

Local or collector streets ---- 1.5 m (5 ft)
Arterial or major streets ---- 1.8 to 2.4 m (6 to 8 ft)
CBD areas ---- 2.4 to 3.7 m (8 to 12 ft)*
Along parks, schools, and other major pedestrian generators ---- 2.4 to 3.0 m (8 to 10 ft)

*2.4-m (8-ft) minimum in commercial areas with a planter strip, 3.7-m (12-ft) minimum in commercial areas with no planter strip.

by Richard Layman on Jul 19, 2012 3:06 pm • link • report

So if my understanding of the ADA is correct, curb cuts have to be compliant, but the sidewalks themselves do not?

by MM on Jul 19, 2012 3:22 pm • link • report

Narrow sidewalks in GTown make it really unfriendly to both tourists and residents alike.

by cmc on Jul 19, 2012 3:23 pm • link • report

I have heard rumors that Florida avenue NE, near Gallaudet University is targeted for a "road diet" to expand the sidewalks there. Could not happen soon enough as the sidewalk on the south side is VERY narrow:

View Larger Map

A lot of students and neighbors walk in that neighborhood. Florida becomes six (6!) lanes there, completely unnecessarily, and is keeping the values of the houses down there in an otherwise booming neighborhood (who wants to live on a highway with a 3-ft sidewalk?).

by Boris on Jul 19, 2012 3:27 pm • link • report

My personal favorite is on Blair Rd NW in Takoma. There are tons of pedestrians, particularly at rush hours, but only one narrow sidewalk on one side of the road--with some really impressive obstacles in the middle at various locations:

View Larger Map

by Gray on Jul 19, 2012 3:34 pm • link • report

With Regard to the situation between Half St. and South Cap. on M, those parcels were all supposed to be redeveloped by private developers in and around 2008/09, and as part of the projects, they are in fact widening the sidewalk area to 12 feet. However, the real estate market tanked, and the projects were on hold, though now they are back on again for 2013 construction.

So the question really was, should the city go through the process & cost of moving fencing, jackhammering out old building foundation, and pouring new sidewalk knowing full well that the developers will need to cut it all up again to run utilities to the street. The option the city chose was to just wait and let the developer shoulder the cost.

I called out this example because it really speaks to the difficulty policymakers have in making decisions in the public interest. Would it have been better to finish these sidewalks in 2006 or 2007 with the stadium? In hindsight, yes, but at each step, DDOT and other officials were trying to make the best policy and fiscal decisions for the taxpayer.

At this point, it still seems like the best option is to wait and get the developer to pay for it.

by Will on Jul 19, 2012 3:36 pm • link • report

23rd Street NW, opposite the State Department and alongside the Navy complex, has the most ridiculously awful bit of sidewalk. It's way too narrow to begin with and then has parking meters planted right in the middle of the space. It's right on the route from Foggy Bottom metro to the mall so it's often used by tourists who end up having to walk in the roadway to get past.

by Jen on Jul 19, 2012 3:44 pm • link • report

It's a particular nuisance when cyclists chose to ride on the sidewalk by the retirement home (pictured above) in Columbia Heights, instead of using the bike lane right next to the sidewalk.

by Steve S. on Jul 19, 2012 4:15 pm • link • report

It's high time DC start re-thinking it's past policy of narrowing sidewalks for more lanes of traffic and off-peak parking. U Street is a big example: It was narrowed a lot in anticipation of the planned freeway there and has never gone back. I'm not sure the new streetscape there will help much more than Adams-Morgan's did.

As a city we've got to make up our minds that sidewalks and rapid transit will be encouraged by reversing the past street widenings. We need to return to wide easily-walkable sidewalks and also plan dedicated right-of-way bus/streetcar lanes. Whatever loss of small amounts of street parking on commercial streets won't matter much. Our policy of loading businesses from loading zones on the streets may be more difficult but isn't impossible to remedy, maybe with bulb-ins on each block or regulated alley deliveries.

It's worth the effort.

by Tom Coumaris on Jul 19, 2012 4:18 pm • link • report

Gray -- I don't know it for a fact, but I've been told that while in most of the city, technically the land up to the facade is public space and owned by the city, lots on Blair Road are not treated the same way. For the city to put in sidewalks, they'd have to buy the Right of Way (or get an easement), which is what typically has to happen in other jurisdictions, but not DC.

by Richard Layman on Jul 19, 2012 4:33 pm • link • report

I'm not at all pleased with the way that the Adams Morgan Streetscape project is turning out. The sidewalks were almost immediately re-cluttered after being widened. If anything, the area feels dirtier and more congested than it did before.

Also, they didn't lay rails for the street's planned streetcar. Big missed opportunity there.

And, yes. Florida Ave NE has some of the worst sidewalks I've seen in the city. Far worse than anything in Columbia Heights. Coupled with the speed of the vehicles that travel on the road, walking in the middle of the sidewalk can actually be dangerous. You can literally feel the rear-view mirrors whiz past you.

by Andrew Schmadel on Jul 19, 2012 4:51 pm • link • report

I should have added Eastern Ave. from R.I. Ave North, on the MD side. When there aren't utility polls in the middle of it, or it's not cracked/broken/undulating asphalt (vs. concrete), it just stops, like here between 30th and Bunker Hill.
View Larger Map

by thump on Jul 19, 2012 5:12 pm • link • report

A third vote for the horrific FL Ave NE sidewalks. Road diet can't happen soon enough!

by H Street Landlord on Jul 19, 2012 5:16 pm • link • report

In Takoma Park, many neighborhoods don't even have sidewalks, and when adding them was discussed, many turned out to bemoan the burden it would put on them as homeowners. Their biggest gripe was the 1 or 2 times a year they might need to shovel (which they really wouldn't because it melts in 2 days and the City doesn't even shovel the public sidewalks). When a City Council member talked about the burden the lack of accessibility caused by no sidewalks (e.g., to the hearing/sight-impaired, those in wheelchairs, etc.), she got rudely shouted down. End result--unless our neighborhood has a majority of people with young children, we will continue to need to walk in the middle of the road with the cars.

by PbJ on Jul 19, 2012 5:25 pm • link • report

I thought that DC had approved some sort of policy (law? regulation?) a couple of years ago that required construction projects to maintain pedestrian space, rather than completely block the sidewalk and force peds to cross the street. Yet I see this idea being violated in several places around the city. Anyone know what the story is with that?

by John on Jul 19, 2012 5:33 pm • link • report

Blair Rd. in Takoma DC is ridiculous. I’m with Gray on this one. I walk down Blair Rd everyday to the metro station and am shock at how narrow the sidewalk is along this road (and to make matters worse only on one side of road). I walk pass that damn pole in the picture every day wanting to smack the person or people responsible for putting it there.

by Marq on Jul 19, 2012 5:44 pm • link • report

Gray: Blair Road NW in Takoma really is not a pedestrian-friendly sidewalk. For extra fun, try that stretch of sidewalk while pushing a stroller! Around the corner on Piney Branch Road NW has another winner; check out the broken sidewalk over the storm drain in the foreground, and the combination parking meter plus light pole just a little bit up the street:

View Larger Map

PbJ: Woodside Park in Silver Spring is another sidewalk-less neighborhood. I can maybe understand the interior streets not having sidewalks (not really, but giving a big benefit of the doubt). But no sidewalks on Dale Drive???

by EMD on Jul 19, 2012 5:58 pm • link • report

1 Florida Ave like everyone else has said
2 Southern Ave for its entire length (DC and MD)
3 Eastern Ave for more its length (DC and MD)
4 Minnesota Ave
5 North Capitol Street from Mass Ave to Michigan Ave except for some small portions
6 Rhode Island Ave NE & NW
7 South Dakota Ave
8 Riggs Rd
9 7th Street NW
10 Georgia Ave
11 U Street NW
12 Good Hope RD
13 MLK Ave
14 New York Ave
15 Rockville Pike
16 New Hampshire Ave (MD and DC)

How is the width of a sidewalk determined exactly do they take into account strollers, wheelchairs or just a person walking. Another issue besides the width of the sidewalks is the fact that some slope up and down, lose bricks, tree roots and deadend sidewalks

by kk on Jul 19, 2012 6:51 pm • link • report

One reason to close the sidewalk raher than the road is that a lane closure many times can mean 30 minutes of delays. A sidewalk closure means pedestrians cross the street twice.

It's not an issue of respect, it's an issue of efficiency. I've never heard someone suggest roads should be closed before sidewalks. Seems bizarre.

by Just a thought on Jul 19, 2012 6:52 pm • link • report

The city really needs to do something about all the newspaper and brochure boxes at the major intersections downtown. Trying to cross 14th St NW at H St, for example, is treacherous because all pedestrians are forced into either the street or the wheelchair ramp because of the wall of newspaper boxes blocking access to the crosswalk. Google maps shows them in mid block, but they have since all been moved (probably by Cosi or the hotel) to the end of the block.

by jyindc on Jul 19, 2012 7:11 pm • link • report

My pet peeve is restaurants or other businesses that put out signs on the sidewalk. When you have a relatively narrow sidewalk to begin with, those signs can easily take up half the width of the sidewalk. And of course, the businesses want the most visible location for the sign, so they stick it right in the middle of the sidewalk.

by Rob on Jul 19, 2012 7:28 pm • link • report

newspaper boxes have 1st amendment protections which is why they can't be "overly" regulated in terms of placement.

2. Florida Ave. road diet would be great. I suggested doing a parking day event there back when Dan Tangherlini was director of DDOT. One night time red light camera ticket clocked someone driving in excess of 90mph.

3. Eastern Ave. on the Maryland side is still DC jurisdiction and should we be paying for "their" sidewalk? (E.g., the PG jurisdictions don't have jurisdiction over the road so e.g. Mt. Rainier police can't write tickets for speedingon Eastern Ave.) It's bad enough that the Marylanders get to park for free on the streets.

by Richard Layman on Jul 20, 2012 9:03 am • link • report

Not that I'm underplaying the issue of inadequate sidewalks, but i'd suggest being happy the are there at all. As some people have pointed out, there are some urban neighborhoods in the surrounding counties that do not have sidewalks. Thankfully current road code requires them in most jurisdictions around here, but from living outside Richmond Va for a couple years, the Counties down there discourage developers from building sidewalks. I remember an elected official from Henrico Co saying he felt sidewalks would take away the rural character of the County... of 350k people and growing? Hardly rural when one considers how geographically small that county is too.

by ramminggull on Jul 20, 2012 9:27 am • link • report

The worst cases of starved sidewalks occur where there are a lot of pedestrians. Two examples are M St. in Georgetown and U St. from 15th east. In both cases, the walks are excessively narrow and dangerous. Removing one side of parking and adding that width to both sidewalks would go a long way to solving the problem. Or even removing -- God forbid! -- one lane of traffic. The sad part is that M St. was thoroughly rebuilt just a few years ago. Talk about a lost opportunity!

by Arnold Berke on Jul 20, 2012 9:41 am • link • report

In Ballston, the sidewalk along Wilson Blvd west of Glebe is abysmal in both directions. It's a former bedroom community that's experienced an influx of pedestrians and it has just never been upgraded. Telephone poles, sewer lids, overgrown yards, bad concrete, and construction blockages. There's been some talk over the past 5 years about widening them, but no action yet.

by Jersey on Jul 20, 2012 9:45 am • link • report

Contractors that remove a sidewalk to maintain travel lanes can run afoul of national regulations.

The nationwide standard for work zone traffic control is Chapter 6 of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

Section 6D.01 states:

"If the TTC [Temporary Traffic Control] zone affects the movement of pedestrians, adequate pedestrian access and walkways shall be provided."

This is a "standard" statement, meaning agencies and construction contractors must comply with it unless they can prove it is impossible to do so.

I'd bet the Access Board has similar or stronger language in their regulations.

by Z. Fechten on Jul 20, 2012 10:19 am • link • report

One road I nominate for a 'road diet' is Reno Road/34th St. between Garfield to Fessenden. It became a temporary commuter corridor back when Connecticut and upper Wisconsin were torn up for Metro construction and much of the commuter traffic never went back. While is it a bit better than it used to be -- a passing lane was converted into a wide painted median with marked turn lanes at EVERY street, the configuation comes at the expense of sidwalks that are 3 feet wide at most, punctuated with road signs and utility poles and right along the fast travel lanes. Moroever, the street is not commercial -- it is lined with residences and schools the entire way, and kids try to walk to school along its narrow sidwalks. DDOT should eliminate the wide median, which increases speeds by giving drivers the sense of security of a divided road, and the unnecessary dedicated turn lanes and every minor street, and use the saved space to widen sidewalks and restore some street parking, which would further calm the traffic. A bike lane would also be nice. There have been various studies of that corridor, including through the Safe Routes to School Program, but DDOT has repeatedly shelved recommendations to improve the street for pedestrians.

by Sally on Jul 20, 2012 10:33 am • link • report

I meant to write "while it is a bit better than it used to be" and "DDOT should eliminate the wide painted median and unnecessary dedicated turn lanes at every minor street."

by Sally on Jul 20, 2012 10:38 am • link • report

Wider sidewalks in most of the places people noted would be great, but to some extent it would be analagous to adding extra lanes to I-66 or the Beltway: slow phalanxes of people walking in groups of four or more abreast. It's often tough to get around or through wide groups of slow people engrossed in their conversations, Angry Bird games, and so on.

by rosenrosen on Jul 20, 2012 11:00 am • link • report

Thanks for this write up.

One thing left out that probably deserves it's own post and thread is the issue of the egress and ingress for cars to and from off street parking across city sidewalks.

In very few cases are there speed humps, stop signs, different paving surfaces etc to make it clear to drivers that they are crossing a sidewalk and need to be extraordinarily careful and absolutely must yield to pedestrians.

And these curb cuts are massive invitations to drivers to park right on the sidewalk and block the right of way. And the folks who operate the valet parking services that use these off street spaces are often some of the worst violators and seem to have no qualms about stacking as many cars as possible on the sidewalk.

And from my experience most of the parking enforcement folks are hesitant to ticket any cars parked off of the street even though IIUC it is supposed to be a $100 ticket for blocking a public right of way.

DC really ought to have some standards for these crossings - the grades, sight lines, signage, some sort of differential materials to make it clear where the sidewalk is and where the road is not.

And parking enforcement (and MPD) need to be aggressive in ticketing any cars that park on the sidewalk.

And FWIW local public employees seem to be amongst the worst violators when it comes to parking on the sidewalk. I've regularly seen firefighters at the West End Firehouse park their cars on the sidewalk for entire shifts and WMATA employees around the Western Bus Garage park and block the sidewalk on both sides of 44th Street in Friendship Heights. MPD and DPR staff also seem to have no regard for pedestrians and park wherever it suits them regardless of whether there are legal spaces 10 feet further away.

by TomQ on Jul 20, 2012 11:03 am • link • report

@Richard Layman is the only commentator of the 38 above to rightly point out the sidewalk cafe impact. DC seems to approve nearly any request for cafe seating permit, and it's frequently abused with by restuarants who know it receives negligible enforcment.

I don't have any real objection to the cafe seating per se, but I do resent where it excessively narrow eggress for pedestrians on crowded streets or pushes smokers outside to share with pedestrians and bystanders.

by anon on Jul 20, 2012 11:16 am • link • report

3. Eastern Ave. on the Maryland side is still DC jurisdiction and should we be paying for "their" sidewalk? (E.g., the PG jurisdictions don't have jurisdiction over the road so e.g. Mt. Rainier police can't write tickets for speedingon Eastern Ave.) It's bad enough that the Marylanders get to park for free on the streets.

Well, yes. Unless, you'd like to give it back to MD? We'd LOVE to be able to do something with it, but we can't b/c it's not ours. Parking on Eastern is one of the few ways we're able to actually influence speeds along Eastern Ave. Even then, it doesn't do much b/c the road is FAR too wide!

by thump on Jul 20, 2012 12:39 pm • link • report

This is an example of a sidewalk DC has no control over, but the sidewalk immediately adjacent to the Thurgood Marshall building on Massachusetts Ave. NE. The feds recently repaved it but they still kept it too narrow. At rush hour a lot of people end up walking in the mulch and the grass because there's only room for two people.

My other gripe on the sidewalk front are the tiny islands for pedestrian crossings at various circles. Dupont Circle, Washington Circle are among the worst. People have to stand in the street sometimes because there's not enough room.

by lou on Jul 20, 2012 12:54 pm • link • report

@Andrew Schmadel:

They didn't lay rails for the 18th street streetcar line during the AdMo streetscape project because it's not certain that it'll ever happen. But notice that they didn't build medians and instead used cross-hatched stripping. I presume that's to make it easier to restripe the road and only tear up one lane instead of the whole road if that streetcar line ever gets approved.

by 7r3y3r on Jul 20, 2012 1:53 pm • link • report

@anon:

The most obnoxious thing about sidewalk cafes is when they take up more than half the space available. Immediately after they expanded the sidewalk in AdMo at the northwest corner Florida Ave and U St, El Tamarino installed its cafe (complete with gigantic palm plants), leaving a measly 4 foot space to walk. On Connecticut Ave between M and N (which is admittedly very wide), Pinkberry took up a load of space. The most irritating is the area in front of Lucky Bar and Dirty Martini which took an approximately 20 foot sidewalk and left maybe 5 feet for a heavy foot-trafficked area.

Ok, rant over.

by 7r3y3r on Jul 20, 2012 2:03 pm • link • report

I am particular "fond" of the sidewalks on south side of Penn. Ave. SE between 2nd and 4th. Talk about obnoxious cafe seating. Most of those places are restaurants with outdoor seating that I am not completely convinced complies with regs. Near some of the tree boxes there is literally less and 3 feet of sidewalk space between the seating and tree box.

by ET on Jul 20, 2012 4:00 pm • link • report

Concur with the author that sidewalks are mostly an afterthought in much urban planning and deserve more respect. But if you think DC is bad, come up to MC sometime if you want to see outright insults!

I live in the "urban core" of Silver Spring and there are a ton of streets without any sidewalk whatsoever! Now I know these streets were built intentionally narrow to preserve the green semi-suburban pastures that line them, but couldn't the county require developers to build sidewalks at least? It's not like people didn't walk in the 18th-20th centuries.

All urban planning departments should be required to train in Denmark, where the average street is composed of (1) a nice, wide sidewalk, (2) a nice, wide bicycle track including right of ways across all streets, (3) parked car lane to separate bicyclists from moving cars, and a reasonably-sized street for for moving cars. Until the US gets a smarter and more progressive generation of urban planners among its ranks, we're never going to make serious progress.

by TC on Jul 21, 2012 6:09 pm • link • report

From all the comments it appears that Hank's to the contrary, people are not enthused at so much sidewalk space being given to sidewalk cafes.

by Tom Coumaris on Jul 24, 2012 8:11 pm • link • report