Welcome to Montgomery Bicycle Advocates!

Advocacy - Design - Education


Montgomery County Budget

MoBike and other bike groups have submitted a series of budget requests to the County Executive to be included in the Montgomery County 2009-2014 Capital Budget. The letter outlining these requests is here. This was a joint effort with WABA, the Coalition for the Capital Crescent Trail and the Potomac Pedalers Touring Club.


Road Code Work Group

Please comment on the road code standards in the table below!

Background...

This year Montgomery County enacted a new "road code" bill aimed at setting new road design standards for the county, with the goal of improving pedestrian safety. But the legislation calls for much narrower lanes than is current practice, something of great concern to cyclists. After much protest, the bill was changed to allow a "road code work group" of staff and citizens (including MoBike) to override the standards in the bill and come up with better standards. However, the bill's original standards will at least be a starting point for the group, so cyclists need to be vigilant.

Here are some major problems with the standards specified in the bill:

  1. The bill stipulates much narrower lane widths (11' or less) than previous county standards.
  2. The bill does not consider cyclists except on roads identified as on-road bike routes in the county master plan, which is a small fraction of county roads
  3. On roads that are "shared roadway" bike routes in the master plan, the bill allows only a bit of extra lane width, not enough to meet current U.S. (AASHTO) standards. Only on the few roads with designated bike lanes or shoulders will there be adequate width provided for cyclists (in the bike lanes or shoulders).
  4. The bill sets hard width numbers that leave designers inadequate flexibility to solve complex, road-specific problems typically encountered in trying to accommodate bikes properly. (Some feel that firm standards will keep the county in line... ultimately it depends on what the standards are).

Whatever standards are devised, they will impact new road construction, road improvements, intersection improvements and potentially even striping of existing roads. Allowing narrower lanes may help on roads where the inner lanes could be narrowed to allow wider outside lanes or shoulders. But requiring narrower lanes could force all lanes to be narrowed and lead to many new or rebuilt roads you wouldn't want to take a bike on.

I (Jack Cochrane) am representing cyclists on the work group and I'm looking for input from all cyclists in the county. Tell me how you would change the road width standards in the bill, identified in the table below. I can be contacted at:


Classification Target Speed Road/Lane Width Curbside Width (6) Bike Lane Width (2) Sidewalk Width (8)
Freeway 55-65 mph 12' lanes variable none none
Controlled Major Highway (1) 50 mph 12' lanes variable 5' 5'
Parkway (1) Urban: 25 mph
Suburban: 40 mph
11' lanes 25' none none
Major Highway (1,3) Urban: 25 mph
Suburban: 35-40 mph
Rural:45 mph (7)
urban: 10'5' lanes
suburban: 11' lanes
rural: 12' lanes
urban: 20' min.
elsewhere: 15'
5' urban: 15' min.
elsewhere: 5'
Country Arterial
(not County Arterial as
erroneously stated earlier) (4)
Suburban: 40 mph
Rural: 40-45 mph (7)
11' lanes
4' suburban: 5'
rural: none
Arterial (1,4) Urban: 25 mph
Suburban: 35 mph
Rural: 40 mph (7)
urban: 10' lanes
suburban: 11' lanes
rural: 12' lanes
urban: 15' min.
elsewhere: 15'
urban: 4'
suburban: 4'
rural: 5'
urban: 10' min.
elsewhere: 5'
Minor Arterial (1,4) Urban: 25 mph
Suburban: 30 mph
Rural: 35 mph (7)
urban: 10' lanes
suburban: 10.5' lanes
rural: 11' lanes
urban: 15' min.
elsewhere: 15'
4' 5'
Business District Street (1) 25' mph urban: 10' lanes
elsewhere: 11' lanes
urban: 15' min.
elsewhere: 15'
none 10'
Industrial Street (1) 25 mph urban: 10' lanes
elsewhere: 11' lanes
urban: 15' min.
elsewhere: 15'
none 5'
Country Road 25 mph 20' road
none suburban: 5'
rural: none
Primary and Principal Secondary Residential Streets
(no curbs or parking)
(w/curbs, no parking) (5)
(w/curbs, 1-side parking) (5)
(w/curbs, 2-side parking) (5)
25 mph 20' road
22' road
28' road
34' road
15' 3' 5'
Secondary Residential Street
(no curbs, no parking)
(w/curbs, no parking)
(w/curbs, 1-side parking)
(w/curbs, 2-side parking)
20 mph 20' road
20' road
20' road
24' road
15' none 4'
Tertiary Residential Street 20 mph 20' road 12' none 4'
Alley 15 mph urban (2-way): 20' road
urban (1-way): 16' road
suburban: 16' road
none none none

Notes: (per numbers above... this is part of the bill too)

(1) Add 1 foot of width to each lane abutting an outside curb. Except in urban areas, add another 2 feet of width to each lane abutting an outside curb if a shared-use roadway is consistent with the Countywide Bikeways Functional Master Plan or the applicable area master or sector plan.

(2) Bike lanes must be included when a road is constructed or reconstructed if bike lanes are consistent with the Countywide Bikeways Functional Master Plan or the applicable area master or sector plan. This bike lane width replaces the added width under note (1).

(3) For an open-section Controlled Major Highway, Major Highway or County Arterial add 5 feet of width on each road edge for a paved shoulder. A bike lane replaces this additional width.

(4) For an open-section Arterial or Minor Arterial add 4 feet of width beyond the edge of the outside lane for a paved shoulder. If a bike lane is provided on a road edge, the bike lane replaces this additional width.

(5) For a Primary or Principal Secondary Residential Street, the total curb-to-curb width must be the sum of the road width and any master-planned bike lane widths.

(6) Curbside width is the area beyond each curb necessary for sidewalks, shared use paths, street trees and other landscaping, streetlights, utilities, and other elements. For an open section road or street, the area beyond the shoulder is shown in the design standards adopted under Chapter 49.

(7) Target speed for these classifications in suburban and rural commercial zones is 30 mph.

(8) Sidewalks are required on both sides of any road or street, as indicated on this table, except Secondary and Tertiary Residential Streets, where the Planning Board may require a sidewalk on either or both sides of a street, depending on the area's housing density and the potential users of the sidewalks. An alley must not have any sidewalks.

(9) Trees may be planted in a median if the design speed of the road does not exceed 40 miles per hour. The median must be at least:

(1) 8 feet wide to accommodate trees that will grow to no more than a 4-inch diameter at maturity; and

(2) 12 feet wide to accommodate any tree that will grow larger than a 4-inch diameter at maturity.

(10) A landscape panel abutting a closed-section road must extend at least 5 feet from the curb and be at least 8 feet long. Trees planted in landscape panels along 'urban' roads must be at least 30 feet apart unless the tree spacing is interrupted by a public street or driveway.

(11) Each newly built or reconstructed street must retain or filter the following amounts of stormwater on-site during a 24-hour period: ˝-1" in an 'urban' area; at least 2" in a 'suburban' area; and at least 3" in a 'rural' area.


The rest of the bill isn't nearly as important to us, but the full bill as enacted is here (everything in square brackets is removed from the law, which is easy to miss while reading the bill).

Again, please provide comments to Jack Cochrane at...


Maps

Routes and Gaps

MoBike is embarking on a new effort to identify important bike routes as well as problem streets and missing bikeways in Montgomery County. Near term, this will help us make recommendations for the county's 09-14 capital budget. Ultimately it will also help us update the MCBAG Top 10 List and make more informed requests to state, county and municipal governments.

We've started by creating a map of bike-friendly routes and not-so-friendly gaps. Routes are in green, gaps in magenta. The map is depicted below (click to enlarge).

Click on map for larger view

High Priority Project List

We were able to analyze the map of routes and gaps to identify high priority gaps around the county. The following lists identify the most critical gaps that the county has jurisdiction over (no state or city roads). Input is needed. This is just a first cut. Projects solidly "in the works" are not listed.

Small Projects

These may be suitable for the county's small scale Annual Bikeways Program

Big Projects
Standalone Trail Projects
Other Projects
A handful of projects don't fix a countywide route but would improve access to an important destination. An additional set of projects are repeat requests that we need to keep pressing for. Just a few of these miscellaneous projects are listed here:

Send your comments and input to:
.

Spine Routes

At the same time, we're trying to identify "spine" routes, important countywide routes that will (if developed) provide fast access to every part of the county, like major arterials in the road network. Not all these routes are bike-friendly or even built yet, but most are at least planned as bike routes. This exercise is highly useful because it prioritizes corridors, highlights gaps in these corridors, and gives routes an identity that supports wayfaring, signing and naming/numbering. It will also help us improve the MCBAG Top 10 (or 20) list. By listing all the problems within a corridor as one item on the Top 10 List, we can save room on the list and emphasize context.

Of course these aren't the only important routes, just those that qualify as spine routes.

A tentative list of spine routes is depicted in the map below (click to enlarge).

Click on map for larger view

Tentative Spine Route List

Radial Routes
Lateral Routes
Diagonals and Other Spine Routes
Trail Spine Routes

(Some of these may not be ideal spine routes due to location or their hilly and windy character, but they are nevertheless long and useful and many are already built. A bird in the hand...)

In conclusion...

That's it! Please send your comments and input to:
.


Friends of Bicycling!

The following Montgomery County communities have been very supportive of bicycling. Please let us know of any others!

County Bikeway Maps

The county's new Functional Master Plan of Countywide Bikeways was approved in February 2005.

Also see Montgomery County's own Bike Map Viewer which is a great resource. You can zoom in to see aerial photography and top info for the entire county.

Other good aerial photo resources include Google Maps and TerraServer.

Want to download a good Montgomery County roadmap into your Palm Pilot or other PDA? Check out Mapopolis for good inexpensive downloadable PDA maps (thanks Bill M.).


Old Bike Map Project

MoBike's old Bicycle Map Project (www.montgomerybikemap.org) contains a lot of information about bike routes cyclists would like to see for Montgomery County, as well as existing routes. However, this site is a couple years out of date and not terribly easy to use. I'm working on a new bike map website that will hopefully be ready by the end of the year.

Contact Your Elected Officials!

If you have a bike concern, let your elected representatives know about it! Don't be afraid to write, email, fax or call County Council members, the County Executive, your state representatives or the governor. Tell them you're a cyclist and what your needs and concerns are, whether it's a gap in an important bike route or a deteriorating bike path or missing bike racks. Please see ourDirectory Page for contact information for your state and county elected officials.


ICC Bikeway

The ICC, if built, must include a parallel bike/pedestrian facility.


Links

Contact Information

The Internet is our meeting hall – we “meet” frequently via the MoBike Yahoo! group. There we discuss MoBike issues. To join the group, send an email to MontgomeryBike-subscribe@yahoogroups.com. We also discuss issues face-to-face at MCBAG meetings (which shares most of our membership). To reach us directly, contact:

Jack Cochrane, MoBike Chair:

Phone: 301-767-5998
7121 Thomas Branch Dr.
Bethesda, Md. 20817