nate
06-02-2008, 10:09 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053102022.html
Lance Armstrong wannabes be forewarned: Starting this week, the speed limit on the Capital Crescent Trail in Bethesda will be 15 mph.
There are a couple things I find disturbing about this. Bolding mine:
For the most part, joggers, cyclists and walkers who use trails in the region coexist peacefully, but increasingly crowded trails can lead to conflict. Although no agency keeps a tally of the number of incidents, there are anecdotes. In January, for example, park police were called to mediate a dispute between a dog walker and a cyclist. Last month, they responded to a report of a jogger struck by a cyclist.
The decision to establish the Bethesda limit rose out of discussions that began last year between commission officials and members of the Coalition for the Capital Crescent Trail, a citizens advisory and advocacy group. Both groups had been getting informal reports of growing numbers of collisions on the trail.
Peter Gray, chairman of the Coalition, said his group would love to see the trail widened to accommodate the increasing number of users, but park officials and the coalition had to find other strategies because of cost and other factors. He said that although no study was done to examine the effectiveness of speed limits, coalition members hope the change will make a difference.
In other words, they have not established that the trail is any more dangerous than it used to be, either in total accidents or accident rate. They have not compared CCT safety to other trails to judge overall safety relative to what is expected and reasonable. In fact, they have no baseline so they won't be able to accurately say whether the speed limits increase safety or not.
They didn't do any kind of fact-finding whatsoever, in terms of current accident rates, past accident rates, acceptable accident rates, or most effective speed limits. From the sound of this I am guessing a very small number of people complained about cyclists and the result is going to be haphazard at best.
The article also points out that many cyclists don't have speedometers.
Finally, even if a speed limit is proven necessary, having a speed limit 24/7 doesn't make much sense to me. Someone commuting at 05:00 or 22:00 will see very few other trail users in the area they are posting the limits.
I realize I may be coming off as bitter here, and that's because I am. :) I am for trail safety, don't go blazing through this area, and don't do group rides on the trail. I do think there are probably quite a few better ways to keep the trail safe rather instead of a speed limit.
Lance Armstrong wannabes be forewarned: Starting this week, the speed limit on the Capital Crescent Trail in Bethesda will be 15 mph.
There are a couple things I find disturbing about this. Bolding mine:
For the most part, joggers, cyclists and walkers who use trails in the region coexist peacefully, but increasingly crowded trails can lead to conflict. Although no agency keeps a tally of the number of incidents, there are anecdotes. In January, for example, park police were called to mediate a dispute between a dog walker and a cyclist. Last month, they responded to a report of a jogger struck by a cyclist.
The decision to establish the Bethesda limit rose out of discussions that began last year between commission officials and members of the Coalition for the Capital Crescent Trail, a citizens advisory and advocacy group. Both groups had been getting informal reports of growing numbers of collisions on the trail.
Peter Gray, chairman of the Coalition, said his group would love to see the trail widened to accommodate the increasing number of users, but park officials and the coalition had to find other strategies because of cost and other factors. He said that although no study was done to examine the effectiveness of speed limits, coalition members hope the change will make a difference.
In other words, they have not established that the trail is any more dangerous than it used to be, either in total accidents or accident rate. They have not compared CCT safety to other trails to judge overall safety relative to what is expected and reasonable. In fact, they have no baseline so they won't be able to accurately say whether the speed limits increase safety or not.
They didn't do any kind of fact-finding whatsoever, in terms of current accident rates, past accident rates, acceptable accident rates, or most effective speed limits. From the sound of this I am guessing a very small number of people complained about cyclists and the result is going to be haphazard at best.
The article also points out that many cyclists don't have speedometers.
Finally, even if a speed limit is proven necessary, having a speed limit 24/7 doesn't make much sense to me. Someone commuting at 05:00 or 22:00 will see very few other trail users in the area they are posting the limits.
I realize I may be coming off as bitter here, and that's because I am. :) I am for trail safety, don't go blazing through this area, and don't do group rides on the trail. I do think there are probably quite a few better ways to keep the trail safe rather instead of a speed limit.