Ten for Tuesday - No pain in the posterior

1. Daniel Prieto holds out bike trails as an example of luxurious spending.

Surely $3 billion to protect subway riders against terrorists can't be too much to ask when last year's transportation bill contained up to $3 billion for bicycle and walking trails.

Not that I'm against protecting subway riders, but what's he trying to say?

2. The Gazette ran a story on Nick Bax, a local teen who made the U.S Junior duathlon team and rides competitively for a national team.

‘‘Cycling is something that I’m good at,” he said. ‘‘It satisfies that craving for competition, and the chance you have to see if you can push yourself past the other people [in a race]. There is a real sense of accomplishment.”

3. One of my co-workers got himself in this Post article about recumbent bikes.

"The seat on my recumbent bike is as comfortable as the bucket seat in my car," says Greg Greer of Silver Spring. "It's like sitting in a chair, feet propped up in front. There's no strain on the back, neck, shoulders or wrists. No numb hands. No pain in the posterior."

I've never ridden a recumbent and it never occurred to me they'd be hard to take uphill, but it makes sense.

4. RPUS does a roundup of bike stories. I'll answer his first question - since I'm thinking about getting a folding bike.

why not just buy two bikes--one to ride to the station and one to ride from the station--as that would often still be less expensive than a folding bike?

I wouldn't want to leave a bike or two locked up at a station unless it was in a bike box. Bike boxes rent for $25 a month. For two that's $50 or $600 a year. Bicycle lockers are available for $70 for one year plus a $10 key deposit. For two that's $140 a year. I'd get a folding bike. Not sure what I'd do.

He also has a link to the Journal of World Transport and Policy's bicycling special. One paper was on whether helmet laws were good or not. It questions the benefits of helmets

"The proportions of head injuries did not change over the period despite helmet use in the USA increasing from 18% of cyclists in 1991 to 50% in 2000. However, cycle use during the period fell by 21%. Thus those who continued to cycle were 40% more likely to suffer head injury by
2001 than in 1991."

And claims that cycling without a helmet is better for you than not cycling at all. Since helmet laws discourage cycling, they conclude, they are bad for society.

The whole paper is pretty good and an interesting read. Still I feel naked without my helmet (and my girlfriend yells at me when I don't wear it). I'll keep it on.

 

The post also reminds me that I need to read Effective Cycling.

5. This seems like piling it on, because Brown probably isn't going to win anyway, but he seems to have riled up couriers at the Environmental Forum.

ATTENTION ALL DC BIKE MESSENGERS!!!

Do NOT pick up or deliver packages for Michael A. Brown--DC Candidate for Mayor.

Last night at the DC Environmental Network Mayoral Candidate Forum, Michael A. Brown announced that if elected mayor, he plans to enforce traffic laws, specifically by ticketing couriers.  He made false accusations about every single one of us and greatly misrepresented a hard working group of people--most of us residents of the District.

6. This is pretty scary, and a reminder to keep your radar up.  This was on the Four Mile Run trail, which the article oddly doesn't mention.

Police are investigating an apparent attempted rape on an Arlington bike trail, authorities said.  At about 6:20 p.m. Sunday, a woman walking on a bike trail between South Walter Reed and South George Mason drives was attacked from behind by a man, police said. He allegedly pulled her into nearby bushes and assaulted her.

7. Both the Post and Examiner covered the Georgetown Waterfront Park groundbreaking.

Bikers and joggers will be able to travel unimpeded from Mt. Vernon, Va. to Cumberland, Md.

8. A couple more things about local bike racing. Prince William County is trying to get professional BMX racing to return to the track at the G. Richard Pfitzner Stadium Complex in Woodbridge

With BMX (bicycle motocross) racing set to be an Olympic sport for the first time in 2008, it would seem that there is no better time for Prince William -- home to the only BMX track in Northern Virginia -- to try to host a pro race or even an Olympic qualifying event. The sport's popularity is likely to rise in the coming years.

And Silver Spring hosted the second annual Martens Volvo Grand Prix.

Also happy were the event’s organizers, including Susan Hoffman, marketing and special events manager for downtown Silver Spring. The second year of the event drew larger crowds than the year before, and the hope exists that the Grand Prix of Silver Spring will become a permanent fixture of the summer.

‘‘It brings people downtown, which is exactly what we want to do,” Hoffman said. ‘‘We’re ready for primetime, and we want people from outside the area to come here.”

9. The CCCT is looking for volunteers to help count Capital Crescent Trail users.

The CCCT is performing a trail traffic survey in cooperation with the Montgomery County Parks Department. Documenting the heavy use of the CCT by the public is an effective way to convince public officials to protect the trail. Trail use data will also help the Parks Department justify giving the CCT a higher priority for repair and maintenance. The last trail use survey was taken in 2000. We need a new survey that shows the growth in trail use.

CCCT needs volunteers to count trail traffic for one hour periods in September. CCCT will provide trail traffic survey forms and instructions to volunteers, and each volunteer can independately perform the one hour traffic count on a day in September that is convenient. Traffic counts are needed at four locations - near the Bethesda trailhead, near Brookeway Drive at milepost 5.5, near Kentbury Drive at milepost 2.5, and near Grubb Road at approx. mile 0.8. Traffic counts are needed for weekday, evening, and weekend time periods.

CCCT needs approx. 80 hours of total volunteer time to complete the systematic group of traffic counts. Each hour you can volunteer will be appreciated. If you can give more than one hour, great! Please contact us at survey@cctrail.org to volunteer.  Give us any preferences you have for survey location and time periods.

10. And finally, another reason bikes are awesome.

A scheme under which gunmen in the Democratic Republic of Congo are given bicycles in exchange for their weapons is being extended due to its success.

A BBC correspondent says it has proved more successful than the UN disarmament exercise, following a five-year war.

The BBC's Jonathan Kacelewa in Bukavu says a bicycle, worth about $50, makes a big difference to the lives of local people.

Purple Passion

It seems that this summer, purple is the new black.  It's probably just the Governor election in Maryland, but the purple line has been front and center lately in a way I've never seen before. There have been a dozen stories written about it lately. Of course since it's suppose to run on the same rigth-of-way (ROW) as the Capital Crescent Trail (CCT), and the trail is used as the main reason for not building it, it matters to cyclists.

There's a lot of debate on the issue and as you could guess not all of it is accurate. First there's a debate about what form of transit the purple line should take.

Some in the county, including County Executive Doug Duncan and Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Coalition President Mier Wolf, have pushed for heavy rail.

But the Greater Bethesda-Chevy Chase Coalition has openly fought ANY purple line because they claim they want to protect the CCT. The two candidates to replace Duncan both claim to support the purple line with small differences.

On the campaign trail, [Isiah] Leggett and his primary opponent for the Democratic nomination, council member Steven A. Silverman (D-At Large), have said they support the Purple Line but disagree on its design. Silverman favors a predominantly above-ground system, while Leggett said he would consider some tunneling known as "cut and cover" to avoid neighborhoods.

And then the Governor is clearly pushing for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Officials do not have a preference as to what mode the transitway should take, but Flanagan said bus rapid transit ‘‘may beat light rail in terms of cost effectiveness.”

How is that not a preference? Plus, what they're talking about is not true BRT - that would run in it's own right of way like a train on rubber wheels - their system will run on regular roads. When buses are the alternative, no wonder this is true.

Among the directors of the "Save the Trail" organization is the Vice President for Government Affairs of the National Asphalt Pavement Association, Jay Hansen.

As someone else wrote about the Governor's position

It is interesting that this tour apparently focused on the difficult engineering challenges while the effort to build the intercounty connector has focused so much on how engineering can resolve environmental and community conflicts.

Interesting too, that this project won't even start until the ICC is complete - but they claim it wasn't pushed to the back burner. While I'm discussing the ICC, I also saw this recently

Another element planners could address is the desire for a bike path. The ICC master plan calls for one running the entire length of the highway, but the state plans to construct only about seven miles of a bike path, almost all in Montgomery County.

Back onto the purple line, personally, I think heavy rail make the most sense, but I could live with light rail. The argument is that a metrorail type line wouldn't be able to win federal funding because it's cost-to-ridership ratio would be too high. Someone in the know told me that under today's standards metro wouldn't have been able to get federal funding, but that may be a different problem for a different blog.

So what about the positions on this? One thing that's been coming up a lot is that the ROW is too narrow.

We learned that it will be very difficult to do anything. They showed us how little space there was to build anything between existing train tracks and neighborhoods; they showed us how little space there is coming into the Silver Spring Station; and they showed us some narrow roads where houses would have to be taken to make way for the project.

and

There isn’t much room between the CSX railway and residences and businesses on either side of the tracks in downtown Silver Spring. Another transit line next to the tracks would be a tight squeeze.

yet, the bicounty transitway study seems to show a different picture. And I read this

An approx. 60' width is needed to accomodate two light-rail tracks and a 10' wide trail. The County owned Georgetown Branch Corridor right-of-way is at least 60' wide over its 3.3 mile length from Lyttonsville to Bethesda, and is 90' wide or more for over 1/2 of its length. Adjacent property owners have encroached upon the r.o.w. in many places so that it appears much narrower. At the Columbia Country Club, 4/5 of the public right-of-way has been fenced off for the private use of Club Members, with no compensation given to the public.

Why is it such a tight squeeze?

In those areas, 25 feet must separate the transitway from the CSX tracks, and planners have had to develop alternatives, such as raising the transitway over the tracks, that would preserve the community and be cost-effective.

That's just ridiculous. All over the country - all over the world, transit runs right next to rail. Ever ridden the red line out to Silver Spring? That is a CSX "rule" I think, not a federal railroad rule - and as such it can be changed. Again with the CSX. Another claim of too narrow comes from a board member of the Coalition for the CCT.

the danger arising from a trail-transitway separation of eight feet (perhaps less)

But again, that happens all the time. Look at this photo.

Arguments about destroying greenspace are valid. There is the question of are we willing to sacrifice the park-like setting of the eastern CCT for transit improvements. I'm not sure what the answer is, I do love trees, but I don't think this means taking all of the parkness away.

All trees must be removed in a 60' wide swath to make room for transit and trail between Rock Creek and Bethesda if the Inner Purple Line is built on the surface. Trees would remain along the south side of the corridor to shade the trail for the major part of this section, where the right-of-way is considerably greater than 60' wide. But the tree canopy will be opened. Light-rail cars will pass by trail users as frequently as every several minutes during rush hour periods. Much of the park character of the Trail will be lost in Chevy Chase/East Bethesda neighborhoods. But access to trails and parks would increase overall if the Purple Line transit/trail is built. Neighborhoods east of Rock Creek do not have good off-road access to Rock Creek Park. Completion of the Inner Purple Line transit/trail would provide neighborhoods on both sides of Rock Creek with good access to a trail and to Rock Creek Park. Trail users would be separated from motor vehicle traffic at the roadway crossings, so vehicle interactions overall would be reduced.

So, there would be some green space. I think it's important that bike advocates walk the walk. If we want to get space in places for our transit choice we shouldn't stand in the way of other good transit options.

But is it a good transit option? I haven't heard anything definitive about it. Opponents like to say that it won't do anything.

"To destroy the Capital Crescent Trail between Bethesda and Silver Spring, to put in a light-rail system that will not meet the transportation needs of the county or improve the Metro system, is foolish to say the least," Pam Browning said.

But I tend to agree with the Post.

It would begin to compensate for Metrorail's main deficiency -- its radial design, which reflects planners' flawed assumption that the District would forever be the lone focal point for the region's development and job growth. Much of the economic boom in recent decades has taken place in or near suburban hubs ringing the city; naturally, traffic has followed. A four-mile link between the Metro stations in Bethesda and Silver Spring, two of Montgomery's major development centers, would reflect the new reality of commuting patterns. Eastward, there is equally powerful logic in a rail line linking Silver Spring, College Park and New Carrollton.

And the Purple Line has benefits for cyclists.

The preferred CCT alignment for the final 1.1 mile from Lyttonsville into Silver Spring is along the CSX corridor. A CCT built along any other route into Silver Spring would not provide good separation from motor vehicles and would not have a seamless connection to the Metropolitan Branch Trail that is needed for the regional trail network. CSX has said it will never allow the CCT in their r.o.w. as a trail-alone project. But CSX has sent a letter to Maryland DOT Secretary Flanagan in early 2004 affirming its willingness to discuss the Inner Purple Line joint transit/trail project with state planners. It is much better for the CCT to be in the CSX r.o.w. as part of a transit/trail project than to be excluded from the CSX r.o.w. entirely.

Despite the individual letter above, the CCCT and WABA have the same positions stated best in this letter

Polarizing the issue into a "if you are not with us you are against us" kind of debate hurts bicyclists because it diverts attention from the real challenge. A public right-of-way such as the Georgetown Branch is a community asset that should be designed to serve the broadest population possible. It will take commitment and creativity to make sure that this valuable transportation corridor will serve everyone: transit users, cyclists, and pedestrians. WABA is committed to making that happen.

Finally, all this brings me to something that Richard Layman said on his blog.

This is the one concern I have with "Rails to Trails" programs. You create a built in constituency to oppose transit, if people aren't willing to co-locate transit and trails.

At first I was inclined to disagree. So few rail-trails are suitable for conversion (in low density areas - like the Western Maryland Rail-trail, too narrow - like the CCT in DC, plenty wide enough, etc...) that I didn't figure this happened very often. Then I saw this in my hometown.

NOISY protests over a possible light rail line on Richmond have eclipsed a quieter discussion of where to put rapid transit in the East End, a historic neighborhood in the midst of economic revival and on the threshold of gentrification.

The other remaining option, also a rail corridor, is a half-block north of Harrisburg.  The leafy strip, an abandoned rail right-of-way scarcely 50 feet wide in places, has been converted into a community treasure called the Harrisburg Hike and Bike Trail.

Homes back up to it, and if a two-direction transit route was built there, the space left for walking and biking would be cramped.

"Definitely not," said Jessica Hulsey, who lives a short stroll from the trail. "We worked very hard to create these trails."

So, it does happen. I still disagree and claim that it's the exception, not the rule. There are thousands of miles of rail trail in the U.S, very few of these miles involve transit conversion fights. But we need to be cognizant that when we fight to "save a trail" from transit conversion - especially one that was always set aside for such use - we shoot ourselves in the foot when the next rail trail opportunity comes along.

----- COMMENT: Ernie Brooks Your article leads me to believe that your understanding of rail-banking may be in error. Rail-banking is a way to preserve the existing railroad corridors for reversion back to their original use should that ever become necessary. When a Right-of-Way (ROW) is railbanked it can have interim uses of various types, including trails, light rail, Metro-type heavy rail, busways, etc., but if it is ever determined that the nation's freight lines (such as CSX) need to re-establish use there, they can take the ROW back (with proper compensation, of course.) Therefore, a local passenger rail use of a rail-banked corridor would fall under an "interim use" classification, just as locating a trail in the ROW would, not a "re-establishing rail" classification, and it would be subject to removal if the original rail line ever needed to be re-established. Granted, it isn't very likely that the original rail service would ever be resurrected in the Georgetown Branch ROW, but that is officially why it would be rail-banked, and not so that it will be available for other types of rail service. ----- COMMENT: Wayne Phyillaier The fact that a local rail transit project would be an allowed "interim use" and would not be considered as "re-establishing rail" under the rail-banking program is a distinction without a difference, for the point being made that "...when we fight to "save a trail" from transit conversion - especially one that was always set aside for such use - we shoot ourselves in the foot when the next rail trail opportunity comes along". The County Council voted $10M to purchase this right-of-way largely to consider it for a future rail transit use. If not for that potential future use, the Council would not have purchased the corridor and the CCT would not exist today. Cyclists understood this, and argued that an interim use as a trail would not be used to block future transit uses if that was the ultimate decision. The strong "Save the Trail" movement we are seeing should cause politicians elsewhere to have second thoughts about allowing any interim trail use if they want to keep a rail-banked corridor under consideration for future public transit. The Purple Line transit/trail must be sold to the public on its merits to be the best ultimate use of this corridor. But if cyclists now argue transit should be blocked here because "we got here first", then we are not playing fair. Wayne Phyillaier COMMENT: washcycle Ernie, I was going to write two things. One - you're correct, my knowledge of rail banking is incomplete and probably full of errors. Two - basically what Wayne said, that the county bought the line for future transit purposes, and that that was what I was referring to. ----- COMMENT: Richard Layman Railbanking misses the point. Washcycle understands things fine. So do I. I am a big transit advocate. I am a big bicycling advocate. I believe that such can co-exist. But apparently many others do not, and therefore, you get the kind of b.s. in Bethesda. They probably could care less about the trail, but the seize on it as a way to further deflect transit. I know that the National R-t-T-C is concerned about the anti-transit problem in Bethesda. This is why I wrote a few weeks ago to just change the alignment, like Robert Smith wrote yesterday, even though it is not a good idea. Had these people not fought this so vociferously, the line would have been constructed by now. Here's another photo that you could have used in your entry, showing path + bike + light rail in a pretty compact arrangement. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rllayman/12328091/ It's from Barcelona, and the photo is courtesy of John Norquist. ----- COMMENT: Kathy Jentz EMAIL: editor@washingto We at ACT - http://www.actfortransit.org/- are working very hard to get this issue to the fore-front of this political cycle. Thanks for picking up on this issue and making such a thorough report. There is a lot of BS going around and misinformation deliberately put out by those who want to keep the ROW out of the country club and others who do not have the best interest of the county citizens of the near future in mind. Please check out our site for answers to some of your questions. You are welcome to attend some of our informational meetings as well as to discuss this in more depth. ----- COMMENT: Jim How many of you actually use the trail. ACT has a very close alignment with the Chevy Chase Land Company which stands to make a lot of moola if the light rail stops at Chevy Chase Lake. This is from the "Save the Trail" website. "The Action Committee for Transit fought to keep the Trail closed; fought to keep the Tunnel closed; fought to prevent the re-building of the Trestle over Rock Creek Park. Richard Hoye (Vice President of ACT) routinely sends spam emails to Petition signers claiming that he and ACT are friends of the Trail -- but this is false." The Save the Trail group is made up of voluteeers who are not being paid by developers. How about ACT. Lets talk BS. You advocates who have never used the trail in your life but are for the trail know who you are and in my mind you are simply mercenaries. Mucho Buena Suerte Sin Verguenzas. ----- COMMENT: Wayne Phyillaier Jim, I use the CCT several times every week. I am a past Chair of the Coalition for the CCT. When I was the Chair I personally organized two rallies and a petition drive to open the trestle. I continue as an officer on the CCCT Board, and last fall personally coordinated the recent CCT trail traffic survey. I continue to be the www.cctrail.org webmaster for the CCCT. I have never taken a penny from any developer and have no development interests here. I do want to see the CCT be completed into my Silver Spring neighborhood and do want to give the Purple Line transit a fair chance to pass or fail on its own merits. My position is explained fully at www.silverspringtrails.org Jim, I will not question your motives or affiliations. I don't know your motives, and they are not important. But I do question why you find it necessary to launch a personal attack against people you do not know, intead of discussing the facts and issues. Are you afraid of a clean and fair debate?

Georgetown Waterfront Rebuild

Ground was recently broken (see photo at left) on the "largest park to be created in the Nation’s Capital...since Constitution Gardens was completed on the National Mall in 1976."  The Georgetown Waterfront Park project will completely reshape a very visible part of the city, and impact - hopefully in a positive way - both the CCT and the Rock Creek Trail.

The park will contain a promenade along the shoreline punctuated with three overlooks - with views of the Potomac River and recreational boaters - from the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts to Key Bridge. These overlooks will contain sculpted granite slabs etched with historic images of Georgetown’s maritime heritage, a separate bike trail to link the Capital Crescent Trail with the Rock Creek Trail (emphasis mine), a labyrinth containing intertwined pathways for contemplation, edges of native plants to replace aged concrete bulkheads, floral displays, shade and ornamental trees, rain gardens to retain storm water, lights for evening enjoyment, and benches to relax and enjoy the setting.

(I, for one, can't wait to start doing some contemplating). This area, though valuable, has been slow to develop. It was originally a rail yard (you can still see tracks bulging under the asphalt in some spots) used to transfer cargo between the Georgetown Branch railroad (now the CCT), the C&O canal and the Potomac. It was once scheduled to be a freeway. For a long time now, it's been a parking lot. The park is going to be a step up from any of these uses. The post does a good job of covering the history of the project and what it will include.

The third phase of construction would create two separate paths for bicycles and pedestrians, and would install trees and benches, from the Kennedy Center to about a half-mile upstream near Thompson boathouse, where visitors can rent kayaks, canoes and bikes and where many rowers keep their shells.

The work is going to be in three phases, moving gradually downstream.  Once the work is complete, it's hoped that a staircase connecting the Kennedy Center to the waterfront will be created (I'm always shocked that this wasn't built into the original design of the Kennedy Center). From what I understand a promenade will go along the waterfront in Phase One, with the bike trail along K Street/Water Street all the way to Rock Creek. There was hope that a bridge would be built across Rock Creek just south of K Street, (as part of the Swedish Embassy project, but that never materialized). So the bike path will then run south along the west side of Rock Creek to the improved Rock Creek Bridge and then along the Potomac on a separate path from one for runners.

The Swedish Embassy project is almost complete and the connecting space between the Thompson Boat Center and the Washington Harbour is now open (see photo at left).

One further change to the waterfront is being planned. As discussed before, there are plans to build a boat house at the Georgetown trail head of the CCT. WABA, after staying neutral on the subject has come out against THIS boathouse.

The integrity of the Capital Crescent Trail in DC is under threat from the construction of a large boathouse for the crew team of Georgetown University.  Access to the site would require construction equipment, boat trailers and delivery vehicles to share use of the Capital Crescent Trail for a distance of several hundred feet.  The user experience on the trail will be diminished by blocking the views of the river.  In addition, the sheer size of the structure will give the trail a "tunnel-like" feel and create shadows that will prevent the melting of ice during the winter.

The comment period for this project is over. Now we can only sit and wait for the Park Service's decision. That, and write editorials and letters to the editor about it. Harry Jaffe says it so well, that I'll just say I agree (rather than add my own opinion).

»  Georgetown’s proposed boathouse is enormous. At 50 feet high, it would dominate the shoreline from the river and block views from the trails behind.

» It would block parts of the Capital Crescent Trail and bring vehicular traffic onto a path that has been the domain of bikers, walkers and baby carriages for more than a decade.

» The dealings between the National Park Service and Georgetown University are starting to reek of the same scent that came from the NPS arrangements with Redskins owner Dan Snyder and also its plan to close parts of Beach Drive.

The Capital Crescent Trail has become a regular commuting route from Bethesda and a destination for travelers from around the world. It is one of the premier biking trails in the nation. It took years for community groups to negotiate with the Park Service to create the trail. Why obstruct it now?

“I don’t know why the needs of a university rowing program trumps the needs of everyone else,” says Eric Gilliland, executive director for the Washington Area Bicyclist Association.

Thousands of Washingtonians wrote letters to the Park Service opposing the boathouse in the public comment process that ended June 15. Hopefully, the Park Service will have the good sense to reduce the size of the building or move it to an alternative site.

But, to avoid confusion - I think the park is great, I think the boathouse is too big for that spot, and I like to contemplate. 

The Purple Line Elevator

Though the Dulles line seems to be the big Metro story of late, for this week at least the Purple Line is getting the headlines. On May 9th, the Montgomery County Council voted to spend $5 million to study the addition of a south entrance to the Bethesda Metro Stop.

The Bethesda south entrance will be a bank of elevators going down from the corner of Wisconsin Avenue and Elm Street to the back end of the Metro station. The Purple Line (also  known as Bi-County Transitway) will have its Bethesda terminus in the tunnel that goes under Wisconsin Avenue at this intersection.

The Capital Crescent Trail now uses that tunnel, but if the Purple Line is built the tunnel would house both the trail and the Bethesda stop.

The new elevators are expected to cost $50 million and will increase ridership - even if the purple line is never built.

it would help boost Metro ridership from residential areas by 3.2 percent and increase commuter ridership at the station by 7.5 percent, according to a Metro analysis.

The Station Access Demand Analysis considered three options: no build, a two-stop system (metro platform and street level), and a three-stop system (with an additional stop in the tunnel - with access to the CCT).  The CCCT is taking no position on whether or not the elevator should be built, but is taking one on what kind of elevator is built

If the county and WMATA decide to go ahead with the project, [Ernie Brooks, chairman of the Coalition for the Capital Crescent Trail] said, the coalition wants a stop at the trail level included.

 

‘‘We strongly recommend that they put the elevator stop in at the trail level,” Brooks said. ‘‘A lot of the traffic, not just car and bike traffic, but people traffic, is based around that intersection of Bethesda and Woodmont avenues. It makes sense to have an entrance there.”

I absolutely agree. It seems the added cost of a third stop is small compared to the benefit. One would have a quick, seamless transition between the trail and metro - unlike anywhere else in the system. Even at New York Avenue - which was built with the Met Branch trail - riders have to go down and into the station and then back up to the platform.

In addition to all of this, there are planned rallies in support of the Purple Line and informational open houses. I'm all for the Purple Line - as long as they keep their promise to enhance and expand the CCT.

When the light rail line is built, the paved trail will extend east from Wisconsin Ave. as far as the Silver Spring Metro station, running alongside the new tracks.  The old  railroad right-of-way is 60 - 100 ft. wide in Chevy Chase, leaving room for two tracks, a trail, and a vegetated buffer between the transportation facilities and adjoining houses.  The extension of the paved trail will replace a shorter interim gravel trail, called the Georgetown Branch Trail, which now goes part way to Silver Spring.  Instead of stopping to walk across busy highways, trail users will cross Connecticut Avenue on a bridge and go under Jones Mill Road through a tunnel.

CCT Trouble and Scenic Byway

Just south of where Newark Street NW would intersect with the Capital Crescent Trail if it went through, there's an area where the road bed under the trail is slowly washing away.(Map) A few years ago a small support was added to protect the trail, but if you ride by you'll see that the erosion is starting to occur around the support. We may be only one big storm (think Isabelle) away from the trail washing out. A complete collapse of the hillside is not out of the question and if that happened it might be years for the trail to be restored.

There's some question as to who is responsible for protecting the trail - with the Park Service and the District both trying to determine what to do and who should do it. One possible source of funding would be the designation of Canal Street (below the CCT) as a Scenic Byway. The Scenic Byway plan is filled with bicycle goodies (It's also a little hard to read since the text on some images is too small), Including:

• Between Foxhall Road and the Georgetown Reservoir, support the conversion of the trolley right-of way to a multi-use trail ed: This is the old Cabin John Trolley right-of-way that runs all the way to - you guessed it - Cabin John.
• Connect the Capital Crescent Trail crossing of Canal Road to the rail trestle (tow path to trestle on the east, Arizona Avenue to trestle on the west). ed: this is confusing since the crossing IS the rail trestle, but I think the part in parenthesis is what they're talking about.
• Connect Battery Kemble Park//Palisades Park Trail to the Capital Crescent Trail. Add directional signage. If feasible, convert the culvert to a secondary bike trail.
• Enhance the connection of Glover Archbold Park to the Capital Crescent Trail using the existing pedestrian underpass (Foundry Branch Tunnel). If feasible, relocate the existing sewer and restore the culvert to its historic configuration.
• Improve vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle access to Fletcher’s Boat House area.
• Install a pedestrian bridge over Canal Road to connect Battery Kemble Park/Palisades Park Trail to the Capital Crescent Trail in the vicinity of the access road to the Fletchers Boat House access road.

Like the Four Mile Run plan - it has good ideas, but we'll see if it gets the money. And we'll see if the CCT gets fixed before it collapses. The review period ended on Feb 17th, but here's one letter.

One last thing. For some time the Park Service has been trying to add lights and a call box to the Arizona Avenue Trestle on the CCT, it seems that that might be occurring "sooner rather than later." Wish I had specifics.

CCT Parking and Accolades

The Capital Crescent Trail, the busiest rail trail in the United States according to the Project for Public Spaces, got the Minkoff Company kicked off of CCT land because they failed to follow through on the 1998 agreement that allowed them to park there.

The agreement allowed the Minkoff Company to park its commercial vehicles on county land located next to its property at 5223 River Road along the Capital Crescent Trail. Minkoff’s use of the property, which predates the trail, was contingent upon funding and building a plaza for trail users including public parking spaces, a water fountain, benches and improved landscaping.

After years of delays and recent complaints from trail advocates, Duncan’s Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Scott W. Reilly said the county is cutting ties with Minkoff and will seek other means of building the trail plaza.

Mr. Minkoff had delayed the project because he planned to redevelop the land and he wanted assurances from the county that redeveloping his office buildings would not affect their agreement. The CCCT are quite proud of themselves.

In other news the CCT recently got a new accolade as the Rails to Trails Conservancy "Trail of the Month."  There are a lot of good tidbits in the article including this:

the trail has its own rush hour that coincides closely with that of local roads and at its most crowded the trail can verge on unpleasant.

In this month's RTC magazine there's an article on Peter Harnik, former head of the RTC and Arlington, VA local yokel. He's photographed on the Met Branch Trail next to the New York Avenue station, which is odd, since the Met Branch isn't a rail-to-trail and that section he's on isn't open. They also quote him with this:

Washington, D.C., and some other cities don’t yet have their trail advocates aligned with public officials. “Everything you do in a city is more complicated.” Harnik says 

I'll agree about the complicated part, but DC doesn't have a lot of abandoned railroad to work with. There's the Shepard Industrial Spur (which the city can't get their hands on), the old Glen Echo trolley line (which would need a lot of work),  a spur to St. Elizabeths, a bridge over NY Avenue and the obliterated right of way of the Chesapeake Beach Railway. On which rail-to-trail projects are local trail advocates suppose to align with public officials?