AGENDA ITEM #5

March 10, 2009

Action

MEMORANDUM

March 6, 2009

TO: County Council

~
FROM: Glenn Orlin, Deputy Council Staff Director

SUBJECT: Action-Intercounty Connector Limited Functional Master Plan Amendment-

Bikeways and Interchanges

Attached is a resolution that would adopt this plan. It reflects the decisions made by the
Council at its worksession on February 24.

Paint Branch. In the segment between New Hampshire Avenue and US 29 through the
Paint Branch Special Protection Area (SPA), the Council has decided that the ICC Bikeway
should be a shared use trail parallel to the ICC. However, the Council has not yet decided
whether or not also to plan for a shared use trail route along segments of New Hampshire
Avenue and Fairland Road to provide an additional route that would avoid the SPA. (A shared
use path is already planned for East Randolph Road.) The text for this additional route is
highlighted in bold italics on ©12. Therefore, depending upon how the Council decides this
issue, the highlighted text will either be included in or deleted from the resolution.

f:\orlin\fy09\fy09t&e\icc master plan\09031 Occ.doc

 Resolution No: - - - - -
Introduced: - - - - - -
Adopted:

COUNTY COUNCIL FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND

SITTING AS THE DISTRICT COUNCIL FOR THAT PORTION
OF THE MARYLAND-WASHINGTON REGIONAL DISTRICT
WITHll'J MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND

By District Council

Subject: Approval of Planning Board Draft for the Intercounty Connector Limited Functional
Master Plan Amendment-Bikeways and Interchanges

Background

On September 22, 2008 the Montgomery County Planning Board transmitted to the County
Executive and the County Council the Planning Board Draft for the Intercounty Connector
Limited Functional Master Plan Amendment-Bikeways and Interchanges.

On December 1, 2008 the Executive transmitted to the Council comments concerning the
Planning Board Draft with a fiscal analysis.

On January 15,2009 the Council held a public hearing regarding the Planning Board Draft. It
was referred to the Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee for
review and recommendation.

On February 9, 2009 the Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee

held a worksession to review the issues raised in connection with the Planning Board Draft. The
Committee forwarded it to the Council with several revisions.

On February 24, 2009 the Council reviewed the Planning Board Draft and the recommendations
of the Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee.
 Action

The County Council of Montgomery County, Maryland, sitting as the District Council for
that portion of the Maryland-Washington Regional District in Montgomery County,
Maryland, approves the following resolution:

The Planning Board Draft for the Intercounty Connector Limited

Functional Master Plan Amendment-Bikeways and Interchanges is
approved with revisions. Council revisions to the Planning Board Draft
are identified below. Deletions to the text of the Plan are indicated by
[brackets], additions by underscoring.

Page 13, modify the recommendations for Rock Creek Option C as follows:
This plan recommends:
• developing an alternative ramp alignment that avoids additional property displacements.
• [that all properties owned by the State be considered part of the M-83 alignment right-of-way and
subject to property reservation policies pending completion of the alternative ramp design.]
• that all properties shown on Figure 2 be considered part of the M-83 alignment right-of-way and
subject to property reservation policies pending completion of the alternative ramp design.
• that the portion of the property located at the southwest corner of Garrett and Overhill Roads, as
shown on Figure 2, is excluded from the reservation area for the future interchange for the ICC and
Midcounty Highway.
• that the ICC right-of-way through Rock Creek Park and not used for the ICC Project (Rock Creek
Option A) is deleted from the Master Plan of Highways and all other pertinent Master Plans.
• that the M-83 Alternate B right-of-way is deleted from the Master Plan of Highways and all other
pertinent Master Plans.

Page 13, add the following sentence to the paragraph under Northwest
Branch Option A:
This amendment deletes the old ICC right-of-way through Northwest Branch Park (Option B) from the
Master Plan of Highways and all other pertinent Master Plans.

Page 14, add the following sentence to the paragraph under Briggs Chaney
Road Interchange:
This amendment adds the partial interchange to the Master Plan of Highways and all other pertinent
Master Plans.
Pages 14-20, for Study Area A: Needwood Road and Vicinity, delete all text
regarding options and add new text under recommendations as follows:

[Several alternative alignments were studied, including the options shown on figure 4 and described
below:

OPT ION 1 is a newly planned shared-use path along the east side of Needwood Road between the
ICC and Muncaster Mill Road and along the south side of Muncaster Mill Road between Needwood Road
and Shady Grove and Airpark Roads (Applewood Lane to Shady Grove Road currently exists). This
option provides access to Montgomery Village via the shared use path SP-55 along Airpark Road that
terminates at Muncaster Mill Road.

OPT! 0 N 2 is a newly planned shared-use path along Muncaster Mill Road (briefly following the
Option 1 alignment), but connects to Midcounty Highway via an on-road bike route along Applewood
Lane, leading to the future location of the ICC/Midcounty Highway interchange, then along the future
Midcounty Highway alignment (path SP-70) to Shady Grove Road. This option provides access to
Montgomery Village and points north along Midcounty Highway.

OPT ION 3 is a newly planned shared-use path along the new ICC right-of-way between Needwood
Road and the eastern Rock Creek Regional Park boundary that connects through the park (and through
wetland or along steep slopes) to Muncaster Mill Road and following Options 1 or 2 above. This option
would offer trail users a more park like experience by briefly following the new highway alignment to and
through Rock Creek Park.

ANALYSIS
OPT! 0 N 1 offers the most immediate connection since available right-of-way exists along most of
these roads to make this connection possible. Option 2 is desirable, but requires coordination with the
location, design, and timing of the future Midcounty Highway extension from Shady Grove Road to the
ICC. Option 3 affords too few benefits at the expense of environmental resources and capital costs.

RECOMMENDATIONS
• Option 1 is recommended as the new alignment for SP-40.
• Option 2 along Applewood Lane is recommended as a new designation-SP40A.

PRIOR DECISIONS
In reviewing the DEIS, the Planning Board and the County Council recommended ending the CBP at
Needwood Road, routing the pathway along Needwood, Muncaster Mill, and Shady Grove Roads to
connect to the master planned Midcounty Highway path. They also recommended enhancements along
Needwood Road to connect the CBP terminus at Needwood Road with the Shady Grove Metrorail
Station.

RECOMMENDATIONS

®
 Remove the CBP alignment along the old ICC right-of-way between Needwood Road and Shady
Grove Road from master plans.
Pursue Option 1 to connect the CBP with the up-County trail system and connections to the Shady
Grove Metro Station via Needwood Road.

ROADWAY ANALYSIS
NEEDWOOD ROAD (ICC TO MUNCASTER MILL ROAD)

E X 1ST I N G CON D I T ION S: Residential Primary, 70-foot right-of-way, two lanes. Shared use
path and/or sidewalk exists in short segments along south side from Redland Road to Needwood
Mansion.

MAS T E R P LAN G U I DAN C E: The 2004 Upper Rock Creek Master Plan calls for a shared
use path and on-road bikeway. The CBFMP recommends a dual bikeway, with both bike lanes and a
shared use path (DB-14).

DIS C U S S ION: This segment of Needwood Road connects the CBP with Magruder High School
and the future community of Bowie Mill Estates. And because the CBP is no longer planned to continue
west through the park, it now also must be part of the bike route that links with the Midcounty Highway
path, leading to up-County communities east of 1-270. Contract A of the ICC highway project will construct
the path along the road within the highway right-of-way only.

R E COM MEN D A T ION: Identify the segment between the ICC and Muncaster Mill Road for
inclusion in the County's Annual Bikeway Program, and request matching funding from the State for the
short connector. Ensure that the crossing of Muncaster Mill Road to the high school meets AASHTO
standards for a shared use path.

MUNCASTER MILL ROAD (NEEDWOOD ROAD TO SHADY GROVE ROAD)

E X 1ST I N G CON D I T ION S: Arterial (A-93), 80 to1 OO-foot right-of-way, two-four lanes. Shared
use path and/or sidewalk exists in short segments along both sides, but SHA most recently constructed a
shared use path along the south side near Redland Middle School and near the Redland Road
intersection.

MAS T E R P LAN G U I DAN C E: The Upper Rock Creek Master Plan calls for an on-road
bikeway. The CBFMP recommends bike lanes (BL-35) for this segment of Muncaster Mill Road.

DIS C U S S ION: This segment of Muncaster Mill Road connects the Needwood Road path with a
future path along Shady Grove Road leading to Midcounty Highway, which is master planned to have a
shared use path along its south side. In 2005, SHA reconstructed sections of the road, some with a
shared use path and some without, including where the road passes through the park. Therefore,
constructing a path through the park will need to be a separate project. The road was a major discussion
point during the County Council review of the CBFMP, and ultimately the Council voted for only bike lanes
and not the shared use path recommended in the Upper Rock Creek Master Plan. Therefore, receiving
County funding for the path may prove difficult without a master plan amendment.
R E COM MEN 0 A T ION S: Amend the CBFMP to identify the road as a dual bikeway with both
bike lanes and a shared use path along the south side, between Needwood Road and Shady Grove
Road.
Short-term: Pursue the shared use path between Needwood Road and Applewood Lane in a
future Capital Improvement Program.
Long-term: Link to the future Midcounty Highway path via a signed, shared roadway connection
along Applewood Lane, immediately after the interchange is built. Ensure the interchange design and the
related Midcounty Highway extension to Shady Grove Road includes a shared use path.

SHADY GROVE ROAD (MLINCASTER MILL ROAD TO MIDCOUNTY HIGHWAY)

E X 1ST I N G CON 0 I T ION S: Major highway (M-42), 120 to 150-foot right-of-way, six lanes
divided. EXisting five to six foot sidewalk along the entire south side and existing bike lanes.

MAS T E R P LAN G U IDA NeE: The 2004 Upper Rock Creek Master Plan doesn't
recommend any changes to this configuration. Along with the 2006 Shady Grove Sector Plan and the
CBFMP, it recommends bike lanes (BL-30).

DIS C U S S ION: A shared use path would meet the needs of all potential users, but with only 120-
feet of right-of-way nearest to Muncaster Mill Road, implementing the path without impacting the bike
lanes will be extremely difficult. Implementing the shared use path as part of the future Midcounty
Highway connection to the ICC interchange (SP-70) is more likely, connecting via Applewood Lane to the
future path and bike lanes along Muncaster Mill Road.

R E COM MEN 0 A T ION: Do not amend the master plans to add a shared use path along the
road. Instead, pursue the path connection along Midcounty Highway and through the interchange to
AppJewood Lane.]

Recommendations:

• Remove the CBP alignment along the old (Option A) ICC right-of-way between Needwood Road and
Shady Grove Road from the Countywide Bikeways Functional Master Plan.
• Designate a new route for SP-40 along Needwood Road, Muncaster Mill Road, Applewood Lane and
Midcounty Highway connecting to Shady Grove Road. Designate a new shared use path along
Muncaster Mill Road between Needwood Road and Applewood Lane, effectively making this stretch
of the road a dual bikeway (proposed shared use path and proposed bike lanes) Applewood Lane is
recommended as a new signed shared roadway.
• Designate Muncaster Mill Road between Applewood Lane and Shady Grove Road as DB-40, a dual
bikeway (existing shared use path and proposed bike lanes).

Page 22, revise the first sentence of the second bullet, as follows:
• Include the park trail connector along Emory Lane and Muncaster Mill Road in a CIP facility planning
study [to be led by DPWT].
• Pages 22-29, for Study Area C: Northwest Branch Stream Valley Park and
Vicinity, delete all text regarding options and add new text under
recommendations, as follows:

[Staff considered two options for connecting points A and B that do not go through point C.

OPT ION 1 From point A, construct a new shared-use path connecting Layhill Local Park to the
relocated Trolley Museum via a new trail bridge across the Northwest Branch. Use the Trolley Museum
driveway to access Bonifant Road, and then construct a new shared-use path on the south side of
Bonifant Road between the Trolley Museum Driveway and Notley Road and a new shared use path on
the west side of Notley Road between Bonifant Road and the ICC path at point B.

• Option 1 is recommended as the new alignment for SP-40.

OPT ION 2 From point A, construct a new shared-use path along Layhill Road south to Bonifant Road
and a new shared-use path along Bonifant Road between Layhill Road to the Trolley Museum.

Staff considered three more options for connecting points Band C, some of which could also be part of a
connection between points A and B:

OPT ION 3 From point A, construct a new shared-use path northward along the east side of Alderton
Road to Alderton Lane and use the existing shared use path along Alderton Road between Alderton Lane
and Bonifant Road. From this point, the remainder of Option 3 is the same as the portion of Option 2 east
of Alderton Road.

The portion of Option 3 west of the Trolley Museum driveway is recommended as a new path-SP 40B-
to connect Matthew Henson Trail to SP-40.

OPT iON 4 Between points C and B, construct a new shared-use path along the edge of the park
property, including a new trail crossing of Northwest Branch south of the proposed ICC crossing. While
this alignment is essentially the same as proposed in the 2005 CBFMP, the park's topographic and
natural resource constraints make construction challenging. However, SHA is building the ICC between
the park boundary and Notley Road to reserve space that will accommodate a future trail and this option
remains possible as long as the trail alignment is retained in master plans. Implementing the trail then
becomes a matter of funding, timing, and minimizing impacts to sensitive resources.

OPT ION 5 Between points C and B use existing, low-volume residential roadways-Alderton Drive,
Atwood Road, and Foggy Glen Court-to connect to the Poplar Run development's proposed shared-use
path system that includes a new crossing of Northwest Branch to the Rachel Carson Greenway (RCG)
trail. Use Vierling Drive, another low-volume, residential road, to access Notley Road near the ICC. As
currently designed, neither of these routes is suitable for road bikes. And because the RCG prohibits
bicycles, this routing would offer Riders a connection to Notley Road through the park and along local
streets through the Drumeldra Hills neighborhood on the east side, but prohibit them from accessing the
RCG. It is unlikely that the Department of Parks can effectively enforce this prohibition, and so this route
is not preferred because.

Connections between points A and C are the least important in this area, and can be made either via
Layhill Road and the Matthew Henson Trail or by a combination of Option 2 (west of the Bonifant
Road/Alderton Road intersection) and Option 3 (south of the Bonifant Road/Alderton Road intersection).

In late 2007, the Department of Parks initiated a master plan amendment for Northwest Branch Park
north of Bonifant Road. Preliminary recommendations would create a regional park with ballfields, a
mountain bike challenge course, and an adventure playground that would complement the Trolley
Museum site, connected by a hard surface trail. The Department will study a CBP connection-between
Layhill Road and Bonifant Road-parallel to the ICC that could help implement the CBP through this
area. The remaining east-west gap would be along Bonifant Road and Notley Road, consistent with
Option 3.

PRIOR DECISIONS
The Planning Board supported the detour along Alderton Road, Bonifant Road, and Layhill Road during
its review of the highway's FEIS, but stopped short of recommending that the segment of the CBP
passing through the park be removed from County master plans. The County Council recommended the
CBP parallel to the highway, but did not address how to accomplish this alignment if the trail was not
included in the highway right-of-way.

RECOMENDATIONS
• Include the connector between Notley Road and Alderton Road in a CIP to be led by the Department
of Parks. Request State funding assistance for this study since SHA committed to helping implement
this connector in the ROD. Areas requiring detailed environmental study include:

o Routing a hard surface trail along the current master planned route making a direct
connection between Alderton and Notley Roads through the park.
o Routing a new shared use path by widening the existing sidewalk along both Alderton Road
and Bonifant Road and then along Notley Road and by bUilding a new shared use path to
connect the sidewalk with CBP (Option 3 above and SP-40B on figure 4).
o Routing the trail south through Indian Spring/Poplar Run, then over the stream and through
the Drumeldra Hills neighborhood as described in Option 5 above.

• Make recommendations for the bikeway and trail connector between Layhill and Bonifant Roads as
part of the Northwest Park Master Plan. This new route is part of the CBP's revised alignment
between Layhill and Notley Road (Option 1).

Do not further study any park trails directly along the old or selected ICC master plan highway
alignments.

MAS T E R P LAN G U IDA NeE: The 1994 Aspen Hill Master Plan recommends no changes to
the current configuration and recommends the road be signed as a shared roadway.
DIS C U S S ION: The roadway features a four-foot sidewalk on the east side from Bonifant Road to
about 250 feet south of Alderton Court that can accommodate light bicycle and pedestrian travel, but if
and when the park trail connector is built through the park between the current MHT terminus and Notley
Road, bicycle and pedestrian traffic will increase and a wider sidewalk or shared use path will be needed
particularly for child, novice, and intermediate cyclists. Ample space exists north of Alderton Court to
widen the existing sidewalk without causing excessive impact. However, extending a wider sidewalk or
path to the south will have to minimize impacts to street trees.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
Amend master plans to include a shared use path along the east side between Bonifant Road and the
MHT that will function as part of SP-40B, between MHT and Notley (C to B on Figure 6).
Include the project as a CIP facility planning study concurrently with the construction of the park trail
connector through the park between Notley Road and the MHT.

BONIFANT ROAD (ALDERTON ROAD TO LAYHILL ROAD)

E X 1ST I N G CON D I T ION S: Arterial (A-40) 2 lanes, 80-foot right-of-way. Open section
roadway, except curb and gutter with sidewalk and landscape buffer between Catoctin Drive and Layhill
Road. Short sidewalk segments (asphalt or concrete) intermittently along both sides, conditions are poor
except near Layhill Road. A six to eight-foot shoulder on both sides functions as the master planned bike
lanes.

MAS T E R P LAN G U I DAN C E: The 1994 Aspen Hill Master Plan recommends no changes to
the current configuration. CBFMP recommend bike lanes (BL-17), but not a shared use path.

DIS C U S S ION: The bike lanes accommodate experienced cyclists traveling from Layhill Road to
Alderton, however there is no consistent sidewalk or shared use path along either side to accommodate
less experienced cyclists or pedestrians. Implementing a shared use path on the property side of the
roadway swales is problematic. The road's 80-foot open section right-of-way has wide drainage swales.
Implementing the path on either side of the swales would impact the property owners or possibly
eliminating the existing master planned bike lanes. A shared-use path along the south side would be
unlikely unless the road is reconstructed with a closed section. Removing the drainage swales would
permit space for the shared use path, but reconstructing the road with closed section is unlikely since the
County's new road code recommends reducing the need for stormwater management structures.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
Designate the roadway as a dual bikeway that includes a shared use path along the south side
between Layhill and Notley roads.
Implement the path between Layhill Road and Alderton Road only when the County reconstructs the
roadway with curb and gutter, eliminating the drainage swales.
Include the segment between Alderton Road and Notley Road as a future CIP facility planning study.

LAYHILL ROAD (BONIFANT TO ICC)

E X 1ST I N G CON D I T ION S: Major highway (M-16), four-lanes divided from Bonifant Road to
Longmead Crossing Drive, two lanes approaching the ICC. 150-foot right-of-way master planned, but only
120' exists in short segments. Closed section roadway with open section approaching the ICC north of
Longmead Crossing. The four to five-foot sidewalks along both sides are in good condition. Bike lanes
from Bonifant Road to just north of Longmead Crossing Drive.

MAS T E R P LAN G U I DAN C E: The 1994 Aspen Hill Master Plan recommends Layhill Road
as four-lanes divided from MD 28 to southern plan boundary (south of Bonifant Road). Both the Aspen
Hill Master Plan and CBFMP recommend bike lanes.

DIS C U S S ION: The existing bike lanes accommodate experienced cyclists and the sidewalks
accommodate pedestrians, but they don't accommodate child or intermediate bicyclists. Within the
planned 150-foot right-of-way, widening the sidewalk to shared use path standards would be relatively
easy. The east side has fewer obstructions and would improve bicycle and pedestrian access to Layhill
Local Park. In addition, SHA will be constructing 2,000 linear feet of shared use path along the east side
near Park Vista Drive north to the entrance of Layhill Local Park as an ICC highway community
stewardship project.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
Designate the roadway as a dual bikeway to include a shared use path along the east side.
Add the shared use path (widened sidewalk) as a CIP facility planning study to connect Bonifant
Road with the community stewardship project.]

Recommendations:
• Designate a new alignment for SP-40 that parallels the ICC through Northwest Branch Park and
Layhill Local Park between Layhill and Bonifant Roads connecting to and through the new
location for the National Capital Trolley Museum, then traveling along Bonifant Road, Alderton
Road and the Matthew Henson Trail.

• Designate a new shared use path along the south side of Bonifant Road between the ICC and
Notley Road, effectively making this stretch of Bonifant Road a dual bikeway (proposed shared
use path, eXisting bike lanes).

• Designate a new shared-use path along the east side of Alderton Road between Bonifant Road
and the Matthew Henson Trail as part of SP-40.

• Designate a new shared use path along the west side of Notley Road between Bonifant Road
and the ICC Trail.

• Extend the Matthew Henson Trail (hard surface) across Northwest Branch Stream Valley Park
from Alderton Road to Notley Road as part of SP-40. effectively making it a transportation
bikeway, connecting to the CBP (SP-40) along the ICC that terminates at Notley Road from the
east.

• Do not further study SP-40 or any hard surface park trails along the old (Northwest Branch Option
B) ICC ROW between Bonifant Road and the eastern boundary of Northwest Branch Park.
Pages 29-34, For Study Area D: Paint Branch Stream Valley Park and
Vicinity, delete all text regarding options and add new text under
recommendations as follows:

[R E COM MEN D A T ION S

Remove the CBP through the park from County master plans.
Identify Fairland Road, Randolph Road, and New Hampshire Avenue as the bikeway/trail connector
between US 29 Corridor and the ICC trail heading west.
Pursue the CPTP recommendation to identify a park trail connection through the park parallel to the
ICC.
Request the Department of Parks study this park trail connector as a high priority Trail Corridor Study,
and evaluate the general alignment shown on figure 7 of this plan to determine feasibility, detailed
alignment, and surface type.

FAIRLAND ROAD (US 29 TO EAST RANDOLPH ROAD)

E X 1ST I N G CON D I T ION S: Two-lane arterial (A-75), eight-foot shoulder both sides that
function as bike lanes. Master planned right-of-way is 80 feet, existing right-of-way varies. Sidewalk along
south side largely exists between East Randolph Road and just west of US 29 in fair to poor condition.
Pavement is mostly four-foot asphalt, sometimes three feet changing to five-foot concrete about 900 feet
west of Old Columbia Pike. Pathway merges with shoulder briefly where road crosses Paint Branch, and
then disappears heading west; pedestrians can use the Paint Branch Trail extension along the road, but
the two facilities aren't connected.

MAS T E R P LAN G U I DAN C E: CBFMP identifies existing bike lanes (BL-13), 1997 Fairland
Master Plan identifies existing sidewalk along segment as well as existing bike lanes (EB-6).

DIS C U S S ION: Only one major destination exists along the road-the Paint Branch Trail-and
widening the path to a dual bikeway is difficult to justify given the anticipated low demand.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
Modify master plans to support widening the existing south side sidewalk to shared use path
standards, thus making the road a dual bikeway.
If the road is widened or reconstructed, include a shared use path and a bridge over the Paint Branch
in the roadway design.
If road is not widened, add this project to the CIP as a facility planning study to widen the sidewalk to
shared use path standards.

EAST RANDOLPH ROAD (FAIRLAND ROAD TO NEW HAMPSHIRE

AVENUE)

E X 1ST I N G CON D I T ION S: Major highway (M-75), six-lanes divided. Eight-foot concrete
shared use path on the north side, narrowed in places due to overgrowth, but generally in fair to good
condition. Four-foot landscape buffer between the McDonalds property and Fairland Road. No buffer from
the McDonalds property to New Hampshire Avenue.
MAS T E R P LAN G U I DAN C E: The 1997 White Oak Master Plan calls for a Class I bikeway
(EB-5). The CBFMP recommends a shared use path (SP-17).

DIS C U S S ION: Generally, this segment meets he needs of all user groups. However, several
small changes would greatly enhance safety, aesthetics, and mobility. A landscape buffer is
recommended between the McDonalds property and New Hampshire Avenue.

R E COM MEN D A T ION S:

Implement improvements when the intersection of New Hampshire Avenue/East Randolph Road is
reconstructed.
Relocate the path closer to property lines and where appropriate, install a landscape buffer with street
trees between the trail and roadway.

NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE (RANDOLPH ROAD TO ICC)

E X 1ST I N G CON D I T ION S: Major highway (M-12), six-lanes divided, 120-foot right-of-way.
Existing sidewalk both sides in generally fair to good condition with no landscape buffer and adjacent to
the curb. Bike lanes exist north of Midland Road.

MAS T E R P LAN G U I DAN C E: The 1997 White Oak Master Plan calls for a Class II bikeway
(PB-23) CBFMP recommends bike lanes (BL-11).

DIS C U S S ION: Except for the bike lane gap between Midland Road and Randolph Road, this road
segment serves all user groups. It's not ideal, however. A shared use path or wider sidewalk along one
side would be desirable to better accommodate novice cyclists. But within the constrained right-of-way a
wider sidewalk is unlikely unless the median is unlikely unless the roadway is shifted, or additional right-
of-way is acquired. Many buildings are located close to the right-of-way line, making land acquisition
difficult.

RECOMMENDATIONS:
When the New Hampshire Avenue/Randolph Road intersection is reconstructed, ensure the bike
lanes along both sides of MD 650 up to Midland Road and the northern MD 650 crosswalk are
improved for bicycle travel (eight-foot ramps at both the northwest and northeast corners of the
intersection).
Designate the road's west side as a shared use path to widen the sidewalk to eight feet, recognizing
that additional right-of-way would be required a,nd that the improvement is a low priority and may
take a decade or longer to realize.
Maintain existing sidewalk along east side.]

Recommendations:

• Retain SP-40 along the ICC through the Paint Branch Stream Valley Park area. To avoid and/or
minimize impacts to sensitive environmental and natural resources in this park, construct the
shared use path within the limit of disturbance for the ICC highway project as a first preference,
within the 300-foot wide master planned ROW as a second preference and within parkland as the

@
 third preference, recognizing that the final alignment may be a blend of all three preferences with
the trail weaving in and out of these areas in order to best balance the needs of trail users with
the need for environmental protection.
• Designate a new shared use path along Fairland Road. Randolph Road, and New
Hampshire Avenue as a supplemental bikewayltrail connector between the US 29 Corridor
and the ICC trail heading west at New Hampshire Avenue.
o The CBFMP designations for the bikeways along these roads are modified as
follows:
• New Hampshire Avenue between E. Randolph Road and the ICC becomes DB-41
(existing bike lanes, proposed shared use path.
• Fairland Road between E. Randolph Road and US 29 becomes DB-42 (existing
bike lanes. proposed shared use path). The path should be on the south side to
avoid the Upper Paint Branch Special Protection Area.
• Pursue the CPTP recommendation to identify a park trail connection through the park parallel to
the ICC. Request the Department of Parks study this park trail connector as a high priority Trail
Corridor Study, and evaluate the general alignment shown on figure 7 to determine feasibility,
detailed alignment. and surface type.

Page 37, under recommendations for Study Area E: US 29 and Vicinity, delete
the first bullet and replace with another as follows:

• [Remove the CBP through the interchange from County master plans.]

• Retain the CBP (SP-40) through the US 29 interchange.

Page 37, modify third sentence under the section titled "County Bike Path-
Before and After," as follows:

This amendment recommends retaining the previously master planned alignment in [two] three areas
(StUdy Areas B, D, and E) and routing it along major roads in other areas, generally consistent with the
SHA's Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.

Page 38, modify the paragraph under the section titled "Park Trails - Before
and After," as follows to more accurately reflect final Council decisions:

MAT THE W HEN SON T R A I L (see figure 5). The County Bike Path was intended to intersect with the
MHT within Northwest Branch Stream Valley Park south of Bonifant Road, where the MHT-reserved land
intersects with the ICC right-of-way. When the State decided not to include the trail through the park
along the highway, the location of the trail§-intersection changed significantly. With the CBP no longer
passing through the park south of Bonifant Road (blue line), the connection between the MHT terminus at
Alderton Road and the CBP terminus at Notley Road now must be implemented as a [park trail not a]
transportation bikeway, thus making it part of the SP-40 designation. Therefore [the] this connection
between Alderton Road (C on figure 5) and Notley Road (B on figure 5)] becomes a [park trail] bikeway
connector, an extension of the Matthew Henson Trail, to be evaluated jointly by the Department of Parks
and the Department of Transportation as a future facility planning study [(looking at options for both
natural surface and hard surface trail users). This connection will be the subject of a future facility
planning study led by the Department of Parks], with SHA funding assistance requested per SHA
commitments in the ICC ROD.

P A IN T BRA N C H 5 T REA M V ALL E Y PAR K (see figure 7). The CBP [is proposed to be removed
from the park due to environmental impacts.] is retained along the ICC through the park. Recognizing the
CBP is a long-term vision, in the short term hard surface trail users will be expected to follow the SHA
Bike/Pedestrian Plan (Fairland Road, East Randolph Road, and New Hampshire Avenue). The
Department of Parks will also initiate a Trail Corridor Study to determine the type (hard surface or
natural), location, and design of a future trail through the park connecting Cape May Road with
Countryside Park, consistent with the recommendations in the CPTP.

Pages 39-42, delete Appendices A, Band D

[A: Planning Process and Public Participation

The outreach strategy engaged stakeholders in this amendment's issues and included bicycle
transportation advocates, pedestrianlwalking advocates, park and trail (recreation) advocates, and
environmental advocates. Due to the limited scope of the issues studied, staff established an informal
working group consisting primarily of the groups most interested in the outcomes of this planning process:
Bicycle transportation advocates
Pedestrian advocates
Park and recreation advocates
Environmental advocates

In addition, staff developed an interagency technical working group of representatives from the County
Executive, including the Department of Public Works and Transportation and the State, including the
Maryland Department of Transportation and the State Highway Administration.
To engage residents and the general public staff held two public information meetings, on March 19 and
April 2, 2008, to obtain comments and reactions to preliminary recommendations. This general approach
was consistent with how we conducted the master plan process for the CBFMP in 2004-2005.]

[B: Themes

Several broad themes emerged during the planning process that shaped the analysis and staff
recommendations and will influence the review of this amendment's options by decision makers and the
public.

@
 S H 0 R T - T E R M SOL UTI 0 /II S V E R SUS LON G - T E R M V IS! 0 N The planning process
must not merely react to the approved highway design with quick fixes, but must offer long-term vision,
20-30 years in the future, that anticipates needs generated by local, regional, and global environmental
and societal challenges.

E 1'1 V I RON MEN TAL PRO T E C T ION V E R SUS MOB I LIT Y AND A C C E S s Bikeways,
like any land development-including ballfields and playgrounds-eause some environmental harm,
such as tree loss, disrupted drainage patterns, adverse impacts to natural habitat, and damaged water
quality from increased runoff. However, bikeways and trails also offer significant environmental and health
benefits that are difficult to quantify. A commuting cyclist using a path or bike route equates to one less
car on the road, which in turn means less air and water pollution. This conflict was, and remains, at the
heart of the debate about a full-length ICC Bike Path as well as debates about bikeways and trails
throughout the County.

TRANSPORTATION FUNCTION VERSUS A RECREATIONAL, AESTHETIC

EXPERIENCE
Transportation cyclists often prefer the shortest and most direct connection. Recreational cyclists and
other pathway users want an aesthetic, park-like experience for which a meandering pathway is
appropriate. These conflicting desires merge in this amendment because the most direct connection
between future ICC Bike Path segments would pass through parkland, offering the best of both worlds.
However, these direct connections sometimes travel through sensitive environmental resources. Moving
the trail to parallel roadways keeps the transportation function high, but the aesthetic, park-like
experience is low or non-existent. This amendment offers a choice between enhancing transportation
function while reducing recreational value or selecting a path alignment that enhances recreational and
transportation value while affecting environmental resources. In reality, both affect environmental
resources; the former is indirect and diluted while the latter is direct and visible.

D iFF ERE /II T R 0 UTE S FOR 0 IFF ERE N T USE R S From the beginning this plan process
sought to identify one route that accommodates all user groups-eyclists of all levels, hikers, walkers,
and others. It became apparent during public meetings that one route would not satisfy all groups.
Some wanted a hard surface trail, some did not want any facilities along roadways, and others
wanted a natural surface trail (only hard surface was evaluated during the ICC Final Environmental
Impact Statement [FEIS]). Some bicyclists value the most direct route, while others value on a park-
like experience.

C HOI C E T R A ! L S V E R SUS SAN C T ION EDT RAil S Choice trails result where connections
are needed, and sanctioned trails are not planned. As a result, choice trails-typically created by
residents-can damage sensitive natural resources. To prevent this, many user groups (particularly
of natural surface trails) are asking the County to designate trail routes along the ICC corridor that
would allow unsanctioned trails to revert to a natural state.

8 ICY C LEU S EON A LIM I TED Ace E S S HI G H WAY Many transportation cyclists are
asking the County and state to allow bicycles travel along the ICC shoulders. Current State law
prohibits bicycle use on highways with speed limits 50 mph or higher, particularly those managed by
the Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA). Recent legislation authorizes the Transportation
Authority chairperson to approve bicycle use of MdTA facilities. This law will be effect by the time this
amendment is approved and adopted and it should be considered and reflected in any
recommendations. However, the ICC is a co-sponsored by the MdTA and SHA and it will most likely
be signed to prohibit bicycle access by on all highway approaches to minimize potential confusion
with where cycling is permitted on the pathway within the highway right-of-way.
 USE 0 F H! G H WAY CON S T Rue T ION Ace E S S R 0 ADS FOR R E eRE p, T ION Trail user
groups have asked staff to consider converting ICC construction roads to pathways after SHA
contractors are done. Staff studied this option, but rejected it for two reasons. First, most of the
roadway will be built within the highway footprint and not require access roads. Second, where
access roads are being built, they must be environmentally restored per commitments in the ROD.

CRITICAL CONNECTIONS FOR EASTERN COUNTY RESIDENTS

There was strong sentiment in public meetings for preserving critical connections that allow County
residents living east of New Hampshire Avenue to enjoy park trails. Of particular concern is that
eliminating hard surface trails through parkland and along the ICC in the Paint Branch and Northwest
Branch stream valley parks, would block eastern County communities from safe and enjoyably links
with the County trail system. Families are unlikely to use this amendment's alternative routes along
parallel roads, particularly to reach the major park trails further west.]

[D: Master Plan Amendment Schedule

OCTOBER 2007
Planning Board reviews and approves the Purpose and Outreach Strategy report

NOVEMBER-JANUARY 2007
An intergovernmental technical committee is established and the committee members chosen. Staff
conducts research, collects and analyzes data, and develops initial recommendations with the technical
committee. The technical committee obtains feedback on the initial recommendations from the advisory
committee

MARCH .2008
Preliminary recommendations are drafted for comment at two public meetings

MARCH-APRIL 2008
Two public meetings: March 19 in Spencerville and April 2 in Derwood]

General

All figures and tables are to be revised where appropriate to reflect County Council changes to
the Planning Board Draft for the Intercounty Connector Limited Functional Master Plan
Amendment-Bikeways and Interchanges. The text is to be revised as necessary to achieve
clarity and consistency, to update factual information, and to convey the actions of the County
Council. All identifying references pertain to the Planning Board Draft for the Intercounty
Connector Limited Functional Master Plan Amendment-Bikeways and Interchanges, dated
September 2008.

This is a correct copy of Council action.

Linda M. Lauer, Clerk of the Council