Posted on 08/22/2008 6:05:21 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
It was the one part of the six-lane intercounty connector that even highway haters embraced as a small but eco-friendly offset to a road that will pave over streams, woods and wildlife.
Now, the possibility of building a continuous, off-road bicycle and walking trail along the Maryland highway's 18.8-mile route is in jeopardy -- in the name of protecting the environment.
Montgomery County planners say a continuous 10-foot-wide asphalt bike path would cause too much damage to ecologically sensitive parkland traversed by the toll road under construction between Gaithersburg and Laurel. Instead, planners say, cyclists and walkers should be detoured in some areas onto local roads, such as New Hampshire Avenue and Layhill Road.
But bicycle enthusiasts say forgoing a continuous off-road trail on environmental grounds is absurd, saying damage from a path would be minuscule compared with that from the highway. Requiring walkers and cyclists to use sidewalks along busy roads, they say, would be too intimidating and potentially dangerous for many people, particularly recreational riders and children.
"We really don't understand the rationale behind dropping a bike trail for environmental issues when they're already running a big highway through there," said Eric Gilliland, executive director of the Washington Area Bicyclist Association.
Just as bewildering, bike advocates say, is the timing. As gasoline prices, traffic jams and waistlines grow, governments have been pushing cycling and walking as healthy, eco-friendly ways to get around.
The debate is playing out before the Montgomery County Planning Board, which will decide whether to preserve the bike route that runs adjacent to the highway and through parkland, as outlined in the county's master plan, or support a state plan that would use some local roads. The Planning Board is scheduled to consider the issue again next month before making recommendations to the County Council...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Maryland “Freak State” PING!
Too infrequently, one inevitably meets its fate.
The reaction is inevitably a call for more (unused) bike paths and increased traffic enforcement (gleefully provided by armed toll-collection agents).
Having a biking/hiking path alongside the road is a lovely idea, but in that neck of the woods it’s a rapists’s dream come true. I would hesitate to use the thing if I were riding by myself—the local indigenous population and our charming Hispanic guests make it unsafe.
I understand the rationale. Perhaps they’re finally getting a bit rational and realize the costs outweigh the benefits because HARDLY ANYONE RIDES BIKES!!!!
Is it because of these idiots (who aren’t really riding to work, but engaging in their sport of cross-country cycling) that we all have to pretend that bikes are the equivalent of cars for safety rules?
I’m sorry, but I always rode the sidewalks when available unless for whatever reason (fun) I really wanted to go fast in the neighborhood. Now you’re not supposed to - a kid can’t ride the sidewalks? What nonsense is that? “It’s a vehicle” - I really don’t care. I’d much rather have an accident between bike and dog and pedestrian than between bike and car!
Which brings me to the reason that I SUPPORT bike lanes and bike paths...so cyclists will stay the f out of my way when I'm driving! But if they're going to be the f in my way anyhow, then maybe it's not worth it.
Their range and mobility is severely limited by the presence of carpet tacks, which can (for now) still be bought by the pound.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.