Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan

Document Sample
Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan Powered By Docstoc
					                              TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER                                                                 PAGE

    1     INTRODUCTION                                                  1-1
          Vision, Goals and Priorities                                  1-2
          How This Plan Should Be Used                                  1-3
          Changes in Policies and Orientation                           1-4
          Benefits of Integrating Non-Motorized Transportation          1-4

    2     THE PLANNING PROCESS                                          2-1
          Bicycle Suitability                                           2-1
          Calculating Bicycle Suitability                               2-2
          Application to the Bike Routes                                2-3

    3     EXISTING CONDITIONS                                           3-1
          Origins and Destinations                                      3-1
          Opportunities and Constraints                                 3-3
          Roadway Inventory                                             3-4
          East-West Multi-Use Trail Purpose and Needs                   3-4

    4     DESIGN GUIDELINES                                             4-1
          Types of Bicyclists                                           4-2
          Types of Facilities                                           4-3
          Selection of Design Treatments                                4-4
          New Construction and Reconstruction Versus Retrofitting       4-6
          Signing and Striping                                          4-6
          Intersection Treatments                                       4-7
          Bicycle Routes and Lanes                                      4-8
          Bike Paths                                                    4-9
          Traffic Calming                                               4-10
          Facilities That Do Not Meet Recommended Guidelines            4-10
          Bicycle Parking                                               4-11
          New Development Policies                                      4-13
          Education/Safety Programs                                     4-14
          On-Street Parking Policies                                    4-14

    5     RECOMMENDATIONS AND IMPLEMENTATION                            5-1
          Town-Wide Recommendations                                     5-2
          Old Greenwich Pilot Project – 5 Components                    5-3
          Additional Project Recommendations                            5-6
          Implementation of the Master Plan                             5-8
          Summary                                                       5-9

    6     FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES                                         6-1
          Federal Funds Administered by the Connecticut Department of
          Transportation                                                6-1
          State, County, and Local Funding                              6-3
          Private Funding                                               6-3

FIGURE                                                                   FOLLOWS
NUMBER                                                                     PAGE

    1-1   Study Area                                                         1-3
    2-1   Bikeway Suitability Map                                            2-3
    3-1   Origin and Destination Map                                         3-3
    3-2   Segment 1: Center Drive to Leonard Avenue                          3-6
    3-3   Segment 2: Station Drive at Sachem Road to Kinsman Lane            3-6
    3-4   Segment 3: Arch Street at Greenwich Avenue to Delavan Avenue       3-6
    3-5   Segment 3: Arch Street at Greenwich Avenue to Delavan Avenue       3-7
    3-6   Segment 3: Arch Street at Greenwich Avenue to Delavan Avenue       3-7
    4-1   Bikeway Cross Sections                                             4-3
    4-2   Warning and Regulatory Signage                                     4-7
    4-3   Informational/Route Signage                                        4-7
    4-4   Intersection Treatments                                            4-8
    4-5   Roadside Hazards                                                   4-11
    4-6   Bike Parking Facilities                                            4-13
    5-1   Network Evaluation                                                 5-1
    5-2   Route Prioritization                                               5-3


TABLE                                                                        PAGE

    2-1   Bicycle Suitability Rating (BSR) Values                            2-2
    2-2   Overall Suitability Rating Ranges                                  2-3
    2-3   Bicycle Suitability Assessment                                     2-4
    4-1   Recommended Design Guidelines for Bicycle Routes                   4-5
    5-1   Bicycle Network Recommendations and Cost                           5-2
                                 CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION

The Town of Greenwich, through its Department of Public Works (DPW) and in cooperation with
Greenwich Safe Cycling (GSC), has selected Wilbur Smith Associates (WSA) of New Haven, CT to
study and prepare a Bicycle Master Plan for the Town. A Bicycle Master Plan consists of
identifying safe and convenient bicycle routes linking town-wide destinations, developing strategies
and recommendations for educating citizens about the opportunities and advantages of bicycle
transportation, and developing a phased improvement program to upgrade unsafe routes and provide
bicycle friendly amenities

On April 13, 1998 the Representative Town Meeting adopted a new Plan of Conservation and
Development (“POCD”) for Greenwich. The POCD reflects the Town’s vision of how it should
manage its inevitable further development. It makes recommendations on a wide range of topics,
including recommendations to mitigate the Town’s increasing traffic congestion and to improve its
deteriorating air quality. One of these is to encourage alternatives to the single-occupant automobile,
and the POCD assigns a high priority to the achievement of this goal.

Apart from car-pooling, the alternatives to the single-occupant automobile fall into two broad
categories: public transit and non-motorized transportation. The principal modes of non-motorized
transportation, in turn, are bicycling and walking. Unlike many other alternatives to the single-
occupant automobile, encouragement of bicycling and walking can best be achieved at the local level
because these are short-range options.

Bicycling and walking are viable alternatives to the automobile. In Europe, particularly northern
Europe, the facilities for both foot and bicycle transportation are well developed, and use of the
bicycle is very much part of the way of life. The United States has a long way to go, but American
cities such as Arlington, Virginia, Portland and Eugene, Oregon, Madison, Wisconsin, and Davis,
California (to name just a few), have extensive bicycle facilities and have successfully encouraged
bicycling as transportation.

Bicycle planning is underway in the areas surrounding Greenwich. To our east, Stamford has
obtained federal funding for a Pedestrian and Bicycle Route as part of its Mill River Improvements
project, and its new Master Plan will include a network of bicycle routes throughout the City. To
our north and west, Westchester, Putnam and Rockland Counties jointly are preparing a Bicycle and
Pedestrian Plan.

While the State and the Town both have encouraged car-pooling and public transit, very little has
been done to encourage bicycling in Greenwich. To date, Greenwich has done more for walking
than for bicycling. The Selectmen’s Pedestrian Safety Committee (formerly known as the
Selectman’s Sidewalk Committee) has maintained a focus on improvement of pedestrian ways. For
example, the Pedestrian Safety Committee has arranged for the installation in recent years of
sidewalks and safe passage crossings along the entire length of Putnam Avenue. The Pedestrian
Safety Committee also works with the Planning and Zoning Commission when proposed
development is under consideration and, where a problem is seen to exist, promotes redesign of
intersections of Town roads with State roads, particularly Putnam Avenue. The Pedestrian Safety

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 1-1
Committee maintains an inventory of potential projects and works with the DPW in prioritizing
projects for the purpose of seeking funding.

Until recently there has been no Town committee or agency comparable to the Pedestrian Safety
Committee to focus on bicycling. The steps that have been taken to encourage bicycling have been
too limited and not sufficiently visible to result in significant use of the bicycle as transportation.
The signs around Greenwich indicating a bike route appear to be randomly placed, and the route they
mark (from Grass Island to Tod’s Point) is difficult to follow. A map of the route exists, but it is not
widely available. Until recently, there were bicycle lockers at the Greenwich railroad station, but
they were not used regularly. There are old-fashioned bike racks at schools and some parks and
railroad stations, but there appear to be no racks of the more modern (and more attractive) inverted-
U design anywhere in Greenwich or bike racks of any design in shopping and business areas.

This Bicycle Master Plan is an element of an implementation plan for the POCD prepared by the
Planning and Zoning Commission. In addition to planning ways by which non-motorized
transportation might supplement the automobile, this Plan serves as an implementation plan for three
other, more specific recommendations made in the POCD, namely that the Town should (1) provide
more “crosswalks, signals, signs and sidewalks in densely developed areas and jogging and biking
paths on or next to appropriate roads”, (2) provide “more bike racks at train stations, public buildings
and in business zones” and (3) “use more traffic calming methods such as narrow roads, on-street
parking in business zones, humps, circles, and islands, consistent with safety and efficiency of traffic


The Planning and Zoning Commission formed Greenwich Safe Cycling (originally known as the
Bicycle Facilities Committee), to prepare this Plan, working with the Selectmen’s Pedestrian Safety
Committee and other Town bodies. The project goal that was established by Greenwich Safe
Cycling is as follows:

               Employing a citizen driven process, Greenwich Safe Cycling will develop a
               Bicycle Master Plan designed to make the Town of Greenwich a bicycle- and
               pedestrian-friendly community in which bicycling and walking are accepted
               as convenient and comfortable alternatives to other modes of transportation
               and recreation.

Based on this and through the study process, this Plan provides a framework in which the Town can
achieve the following vision:

               Greenwich will be a place where people have the convenient and comfortable
               option of traveling by bicycle and on foot to access recreational, cultural,
               commercial and employment areas and public services.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 1-2
The National Bicycling and Walking Study, published by U.S. Department of Transportation,
outlines two major goals for bicycling and walking in the United States:

   •   To double the percentage of trips taken by bicycling and walking; and
   •   Simultaneously to reduce the number of bicycle-related injuries and fatalities by ten percent.

These goals provide direction on what improvements need to be made in order to create more, and
safer, opportunities for bicycling and walking in the Town of Greenwich.

During the public involvement process, several priorities for physical improvements were identified

   •   Overwhelmingly, the public sees a safer environment for bicycling and walking as the
       greatest need in Greenwich;
   •   In particular, provision for the safe crossing of U.S. Route 1 and the streets adjacent to Route
       I-95 exits is needed;
   •   Conditions at present lead many parents to consider it unsafe for their children to bicycle or
       walk to school; and
   •   Secure parking facilities are needed at prospective destinations of bicycling trips, including
       shopping, employment, recreational, cultural and municipal locations.

In addition to these physical improvements, several programmatic recommendations were noted:

   •   Improvement in bicycle and motor vehicle operator education;
   •   Consideration of the needs of bicyclists and pedestrians in the regular maintenance programs
       and new development; and
   •   Promotion of opportunities for bicycling and walking in the Town.

These priorities can be translated into goals as a way of channeling efforts to improve conditions for
bicycling and walking in the Town of Greenwich.


This Bicycle Master Plan is designed to be used by citizen advocates, public policy decision-makers
and Town staff. It introduces the broad issues in bicycle and pedestrian planning and applies these
concepts to the physical environment within the Town of Greenwich. It also provides information,
guidance and recommendations for improvements.

The focus of this Master Plan is in the southern third of the Town of Greenwich, from the Stamford
Town Line to the New York Border (see Figure 1-1). The study area was defined as such to cover
the highest density of potential users and town destinations. The successful implementation of
strategies in this plan can lead to expansion of town-wide policy regarding bicycle routes.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 1-3
                                     STUDY AREA
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                           FIGURE 1-1

Greenwich’s new POCD recognizes the need to change the focus of transportation planning from
accommodation of the automobile. It states:

        ‘Now, virtually every public and private body recognizes the need to relieve congestion on
        roads to reduce air pollution, sustain economic vitality, improve living conditions, and
        maintain the Town’s residential character.

        To do this, Greenwich must encourage alternatives to the single-occupant automobile.
        Experience shows that an alternative must be competitive with the private automobile: it
        must pick up a person at or near home and go where the traveler wishes to go quickly,
        economically, and reliably.’

In respect of short-range trips, bicycling and walking meet these criteria perhaps better than any
other alternatives to the automobile.


Bicycling and walking trips (as transportation) typically cover relatively short distances. The
Federal Highway Administration estimates reasonable bicycling distance as up to five miles and
walking distance as up to one mile. According to the National Bicycling and Walking Study,
approximately 60 percent of all daily trips are less than five miles, 50 percent are less than three
miles, well within the range of an average cyclist; approximately 25 percent of trips are less than one
mile; well within the range of an average pedestrian. The close proximity within Greenwich of
many residential areas, businesses and shopping areas, and recreational facilities make bicycling and
walking attractive travel options. Although both are relatively short-range transportation choices (as
compared with car-pooling and public transit), bicycling and walking can also serve as mid to long
range choices when used in conjunction with public transit or rideshare lots.

Bicycling and walking as transportation are not for everyone, but these activities cut across age,
ethnicity, neighborhood, income and profession. Many Greenwich residents bike or walk regularly,
usually as part of an exercise regimen. (Nationally, walking and biking are the number two and
three ranked sports activities, after swimming, according to the National Sporting Goods
Association.) Greenwich supports no less than four bike shops, and one local bike shop owner has
estimated that 20,000 Greenwich residents own bicycles. An appropriate combination of facilities,
publicity, encouragement, education and planning could cause a shift to bicycling and walking from
the use of the single-occupant automobile.

As evidenced by data from cities in North America and Europe, the shift to bicycling could be
significant. In Toronto, designated by Bicycling magazine as North America’s best cycling city, it is
estimated that up to 20 percent of the half-million adults in the older part of the city bicycle to work,
school or the store. In Davis, CA (population 55,000), considered by many to be the best bicycling
city in the U.S., over 20 percent of trips are made by bicycle. In The Netherlands 27% of trips
nationwide are by bicycle, and the percentage is higher within major cities. While it is unlikely that
such percentages could be achieved in Greenwich, a goal of 10% of all short trips being made by
bicycle seems achievable since cities such as Eugene, OR and Madison, WI have reached a similar

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 1-4
level according to Federal Highway Administration statistics. Furthermore, across the U.S. more
commuters are opting for bicycles to avoid congestion on the roads. Surveys by Bicycling magazine
indicate that the number of people bicycling to work has grown by more than 20 percent over the last
five years, to seven million.

A wide variety of factors – both physical and attitudinal – affect an individual’s decision to bicycle
or walk. The most significant physical disincentives to bicycling and walking are safety and, in the
case of bicycling, theft. Both of these can be minimized with appropriate facilities that includes an
integrated network of on and off road bicycle and pedestrian routes connecting all likely origins and
destinations, traffic calming on busy roads, and secure parking for bicycles.

The physical built environment can create opportunities for, or barriers against, the choice to travel
by bicycle or on foot. As the POCD recognizes, the process of delivering public roadway facilities
often focuses on accommodating the “demand” created by people who drive alone. Providing
Greenwich with transportation choices provides the option of driving, bicycling, or walking, and
puts the “livability” of Greenwich in the hands of its citizens. The potential for increasing bicycle
and pedestrian traffic is dependent on taking a more comprehensive and inclusive approach to
developing or retrofitting public roadways.

The most secure bike routes are off-road bicycle paths, which have proven to be very popular in the
communities that have them. However, four or five foot bike lanes that are striped on roads makes
roads both feel safer to bicyclists and safer in fact. Additionally, counter-flow bike lanes, advanced
stop lines (which make bicyclists more visible and gives them a head start at traffic signals), bicycle
traffic signals and the coloring of bike lanes also contribute to safety. Traffic calming is desirable
for a variety of reasons, but it, too, contributes greatly to the safety of both bicyclists and pedestrians.
Secure bike racks are relatively inexpensive but are essential to encouraging bicycling. Bicycle
facilities are discussed more fully in Chapter 4 of this Bicycle Master Plan.

Perhaps the most important attitudinal factor is that most people simply don’t think of bicycling and
walking as transportation alternatives. Education and encouragement by Town government can
contribute to greater acceptance, and once facilities are in place, they should be promoted. For
example, a bike map showing bike routes and the relative safety of different roads in Town should
be published and made widely available at bike shops and libraries and through bicycling and other
recreational organizations.

Provision of safe bicycling and walking conditions around our schools can have health benefits for
our schoolchildren. The inactivity of children is a phenomenon that has attracted national attention.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) views inactivity among children as a threat
to public health. As quoted in Bicycling magazine, Rich Killingsworth, health scientist at the CDC,
says, “14% of our youth is sedentary, and one of every four is overweight. Only 10% of our children
walk or [bike] to school, down from 50% in the 50's and 60's.” Not only does bicycling and walking
to school enable children to get a little exercise, it helps them develop a sense of self-reliance.

Bicycling and walking are clean modes of transportation, requiring no fossil fuels. Errands around
town often consist of several short trips within a few blocks of each other. If an automobile is used,
it must be turned on and off, emitting excess exhaust. Trips made on foot or by bicycle produce no

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 1-5
air pollution, contribute little or nothing to road congestion and may take less time, especially if
convenient bike parking is provided. Bicycling or walking to the store, school or work is also a
time-efficient way of attaining an acceptable level of fitness.

The integration of bicycle and pedestrian facilities extends beyond the needs of just the bicyclist and
the pedestrian. These facilities can simultaneously benefit the motorist by enhancing the safety and
attractiveness of the road and reducing demand for automobile parking facilities.

The creation of bike routes can have a positive effect on the value of properties adjacent to and near
the bike routes. Recent studies of the preferences of new homebuyers indicate that there is a demand
for more livable communities in general, and better bicycle and pedestrian facilities specifically.
Multiple-use pathways generate more “recreation hours” per dollar of investment than any other type
of recreation facility. Regional trail systems demonstrate the demand for these opportunities, among
many users and for many purposes.

The success of this Master Plan relies on the support generated from Greenwich residents as well as
from public officials. The planning process involved holding public informational meetings at
various stages in the study to gauge public opinion and listen to ideas from cyclists and non-cyclists
alike. The first meeting took place on the evening of May 18th, 2000 to inform the public of the
study and to review its goals and objectives. The meeting outlined the planning process and gave an
initial look at the preliminary suitability index for the identified bike network.

The second Public Informational Meeting took place on the evening of October 5th, 2000. The
agenda covered the status of the planning and analysis portions of the study, and the public was
introduced to the various alternative concepts that would eventually lead to the Master Plan’s
recommendations. Each of the comments were documented and are listed as follows:

   •   Developing off-road trails for recreational riding should be considered, and a potential
       location for one is the newly acquired Pomerance property near the Central Middle School;
   •   There is an immediate need for more bicycle parking facilities and racks, which should be
       included as an early implementation item;
   •   The study should look into Metro North’s policy on allowing bicycles onto trains;
   •   The network should focus on young children as well as experienced cyclists;
   •   Young children are usually encouraged to ride on sidewalks since the streets in Greenwich
       are hazardous for inexperienced riders;
   •   A concern over how pedestrians (runners) and bicycles avoid conflicts when sharing the
       shoulders was addressed;
   •   A question on allowing more shoulder width on positive grades at the expense of width
       along the opposing direction’s negative grade was addressed;
   •   The study recommendations should start with implementation in a local community, such as
       Cos Cob or Old Greenwich, to build support for the entire Master Plan;
   •   A question was raised on the extent of opposition that may exist to getting roads widened;
   •   The study must consider recreational riders in order to be successful;
   •   A question on how signage can help in increasing motorist awareness was addressed;

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 1-6
   •   An opinion was stated that intersections are not intimidating or difficult for most cyclists
       who would rather negotiate high volume intersections than narrow roads with high speed
   •   The study should be expanded to include backcountry routes;
   •   The East-West Path should consider the Metro North Bridge as an alternative to the Route 1
       bridge; and,
   •   An opinion was stated that circuitous routes that are safe are preferred over direct routes on
       unsafe roads.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 1-7
                           CHAPTER 2 - THE PLANNING PROCESS

According to Paul Schimek, in his paper titled The Dilemmas of Bicycle Planning, people often find
that there are a number of dilemmas facing bicyclists and the bicycle planner. The dilemmas are as

   •   The public has many misconceptions about bicycling, including the skills required, which
       places are safe for riding, and the rights of bicyclists to use public roads.

   •   Professionals have often ignored bicycling, failing to consider bicyclists in roadway design
       or traffic enforcement.

   •   The locations where bicycling is the most useful for transportation are also some of the most
       challenging, especially for the beginner.

   •   The bicycle is not generally a "design vehicle," so roads are not routinely designed with
       bicyclists in mind.

   •   Transportation funding emphasizes capital spending over maintenance, although the latter is
       often more important to cyclists.

   •   Bicycle education has not yet become available on a wide scale, in part because advocates,
       funding programs, politicians, and public opinion focus on building facilities.
Mr. Schimek states “getting beyond these dilemmas requires a focus on changing public opinion
through advertising, politician and celebrity endorsement, making the bicycle a design vehicle, and
widespread availability of bicycle training programs.”
The planning process for the Master Plan considers the state of the existing transportation
infrastructure and its ability to accommodate bicyclists. General guidelines were developed from
sources such as AASHTO and the Transportation Research Board (TRB) to arrive at quantitative
measures from which a particular roadway segment could be rated.


Bicycle suitability relates to how well a roadway accommodates cyclists. For this study a numerical
rating system, a Bicycle Suitability Rating, was adapted from those that have been developed and
used nationally. This technique is used to provide an objective snapshot of relative cycling
conditions. The method used here rates roadways based on the three most important indicators of
how good a road is for cycling: effective pavement width, traffic volumes and traffic travel speed.

Effective lane width: This is the net amount of roadway space that is available to the cyclist for
riding. It typically is the dimension of the outermost travel lane. For instance, on a 24’ wide, two-
lane roadway, the effective lane width is 12’ (= 24’/2). For a roadway that is 40’ wide with on street
parking on both sides, the effective lane width is 13’ (= [40’-14’]/2). In this example, 14’ is
subtracted from the total pavement width to account for the on-street parking lanes (assumed to be 7’
each). In general, the higher the effective lane width, the greater the degree of separation between
the cyclist and motorist and the lower (better) the suitability rating.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 2-1
Traffic volume/per lane (VPH/Lane): Peak hour traffic volumes per lane are used. Peak hour
volume is typically taken to be one-tenth the average daily traffic volume (ADT). For a two-lane
roadway with an ADT of 5000 vehicles per day, the VPH/Lane equals 250 (= 5000/10/2). For a
four-lane road with an ADT of 10,000, the VPH/Lane is also equal to 250. This is a measure of the
cyclist’s exposure to traffic. In general, the higher the traffic volume, the lower the comfort level of
the cyclist and the higher (worse) the suitability rating.

Observed travel speed: Traffic speed is an important factor in how comfortable a cyclist is in traffic.
An assumption in our analysis is that the travel speed is related to the classification of the roadway.
Speed limits for each road in the network were collected.


The Bicycle Suitability Rating (BSR) is calculated by assigning an individual suitability rating for
each of the three factors according to ranges of values. These ranges have been determined by
bicycle research. These points are summed and then averaged to determine an overall suitability
rating for each roadway segment. These ratings apply to the general conditions between
intersections. Table 2-1 describes the rating system.

                                             Table 2-1
                              Bicycle Suitability Rating (BSR) Values

                            Bicycle Suitability Ratings (BSR)

                Width                Speed                 Daily Traffic
                 (ft) BSR            (mph) BSR               Volume      BSR
                 11'   5               25   1                0 - 2000     1
                 12'   4               30   2              2001 - 4000 2
                 13'   3               35   3              4001- 6000     3
                 14'   2               40   4              6001 - 8000 4
                 15'   1               45   5               Over 8000     5

For instance, a roadway with the following attributes would have the following overall BSR of 3.3.

Effective lane width, 13’      Width BSR = 3
Speed, 35 mph                  Speed BSR = 3
Volume, 6500 vpd               Volume BSR = 4
                                    Total = 10
                       Overall BSR = 10/3 = 3.3

Table 2-2 shows the conversion of the numerical rating into a qualitative rating. This road would
rate on the upper (worse) end of the moderate range of suitability for cycling.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 2-2
                                            Table 2-2
                                Overall Suitability Rating Ranges
         Overall BSR           Rating                    Rating Interpretation
           1 – 1.9            Very Good               Good for child cyclist (C)
           2 – 2.9              Good               Good for casual adult cyclist (B)
           3 – 3.9            Moderate              Good for advanced cyclist (A)
                                                   Poor for advanced cyclist without
            4 – 4.9             Poor
                                                           mitigating design
               5              Very Poor                 Not suitable for cyclists

For Greenwich, the goal should be to provide no higher (worse) than a 3.5 rating on the routes. This
approaches the upper limit where a moderately experienced cyclist would feel comfortable. As
shown in Table 2-1, no additional points are provided for Effective Lane Widths greater than 15 feet
(11’ travel lane and 5’ bike lane = 16’, for example). Although the BSR would not account for this
additional width, the actual conditions for a cyclist will improve. So for example, if an existing
roadway with an effective lane width of 16’ is rated a 2.2, this would not rate ‘good’ for the child
cyclist. Providing an additional foot (17’ configured as a 12’ travel lane and 5’ bike lane) in
effective lane width may in reality provide a ‘good’ facility for children cyclists. Judgment needs to
be used in using the rating system.


This methodology was applied to the proposed bike routes. Values were determined from the field
inventory (effective lane width and observed traffic speed) and from data obtained from the Town of
Greenwich DPW (traffic volumes). For many local streets, traffic volumes were not available and
conservative estimates were made. These ratings reflect current estimated traffic volumes and

Figure 2-1 shows the suitability ratings mapped on the bike network routes. As calculated, a large
portion of the routes (37%) rate Moderate with a significant portion (11%) rating Poor. A significant
amount (50%) rates Good while a very small amount (2%) rates Very Good. Segments that would
rate very poor do not show up on the map because they are very short and include many of the
bridges and underpasses to I-95 and Metro North Railroad.

Further breaking down the mileage included in the Moderate range finds the majority in the lower
end (better) of the range (32% between 3.0 and 3.5 versus 5% of the routes with a BSR from 3.5 to
3.9). This is important in view of the proposed goal of all of the improved routes achieving a BSR
lower than 3.5. Table 2-3 lists the total miles of network road under each suitability range.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 2-3
                             BIKEWAY SUITABILITY MAP
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                           FIGURE 2-1
                                          Table 2-3
                                Bicycle Suitability Assessment

                                                             Percent of
                 Overall Suitability Rating      Miles         Total
                 Very Good (1 to 1.9)              1            2%
                 Good (2 to 2.9)                  30            50%
                 Moderate (3 to 3.9)             21.5           37%
                 Poor (4 to 5)                     6            11%
                 Very Poor (5)                   <1.00          <1%
                 Total Routes                    58.5          100%

                 Low Moderate (3 to 3.5)         18.6            32%
                 High Moderate (3.5 to 3.9)       2.9             5%
                 Moderate Subtotal               21.5            37%

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 2-4
                             CHAPTER 3 - EXISTING CONDITIONS

While there are sidewalks and other facilities for pedestrians throughout Greenwich, there are
virtually no existing bicycle facilities. There are no bike lanes on any Town roads and no bike paths.
There is one bike route, but this requires the bicyclist to dismount and use the sidewalk alongside
U.S. Route 1 to cross the Mianus River. It also takes the rider past two I-95 interchanges; one of
which, Arch Street at Exit 3, may be the least bicycle-friendly stretch of roadway in Greenwich.
Consequently, a network of bike routes for Greenwich must be developed from scratch.

The topography of Greenwich consists of a series of north-south ridges extending from the less
densely settled backcountry to Long Island Sound. The bicyclist has a choice of roads if his or her
destination is to the north or south. By contrast, the choices open to a bicyclist wishing to go east or
west are very limited. Other than Route I-95 and the Merritt Parkway (neither of which is usable by
bicycles), the only road that extends the width of the Town is U.S. Route 1, a busy, commercial

In the southern tier of Greenwich, an alternative route exists south of U.S. Route 1, but only west of
the Mianus River. Proceeding eastwards, this route extends from Mill Street in Byram to the
intersection of River Road and U.S. Route 1, following Delavan Avenue, Hamilton Avenue, Arch
Street, Bruce Park Drive, Indian Field Road, Strickland Road and connecting roads; it follows the
posted bike route from Horseneck Lane eastwards and thus shares its disadvantages for the bicyclist.

North of U.S. Route 1, a bicyclist seeking to cross Greenwich without using U.S. Route 1 must use
Palmer Hill Road, Valley Road, Orchard Street, Fairfield Road, Patterson Avenue, Glenville Road
and connecting roads. This is a very hilly route that requires the bicyclist to ride a much longer
distance than would be required using U.S. Route 1.

In regard to parking facilities for cyclists, there exist some old-fashioned bike racks at schools and
some parks and railroad stations. Except at the Greenwich and Cos Cob Libraries, there are no bike
racks of the more modern inverted-U design in Greenwich or bike racks of any design in shopping
and business areas. The POCD notes a shortage of parking spaces for automobiles, particularly at
train stations and in central Greenwich. The Town’s shortage of automobile parking at train stations
and in shopping areas would be alleviated by increased use of bicycle and pedestrian travel.


To illustrate the opportunities that bicycle and pedestrian improvements offer the population of
Greenwich, Greenwich Safe Cycling considered the origins and destinations most likely to be
generators and attractors of local bicyclists and pedestrians. Origins include primarily residential
areas where people live and business areas where people work. Destinations include the origins
described above as well as public and private schools, parks, clubs and other recreation areas,
railroad stations and shopping areas and restaurants along U.S. Route 1 and elsewhere.

The scale of the southern tier of Greenwich is ideal for walking and bicycling trips. A large
proportion of the residential and working population of the Town lives and/or works within this area.
The following is a list of destinations in the various areas within the southern tier of the Town:

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 3-1
       Central Greenwich
              Central Business District
              Julian Curtis School
              Greenwich Library
              Town Hall
              Greenwich Railroad Station

       Harbor Area
             Roger Sherman Baldwin Park, including the Island Beach Ferry
             dock and the Arch Street Teen Center
             Bruce Park/Bruce Museum
             Grass Island
             Boys and Girls Club

       Cos Cob
             Cos Cob Business District/Cos Cob Library
             Cos Cob School
             Central Middle School
             Cos Cob Power Plant site (future park)/Cos Cob Railroad Station

       Old Greenwich (RTM District 6)
             Greenwich Point
             Old Greenwich Business District, including Old Greenwich School
              and the Old Greenwich Railroad Station
             Binney Park/Perrot Library/First Congregational Church
             Eastern Civic Center/Innis Arden

       Riverside (RTM District 5)
              Riverside School/Eastern Middle School
              Riverside Railroad Station
              St. Paul’s Church
              Riverside Yacht Club
              St. Catherine of Siena Church

       RTM District 12
            North Mianus School
            Dundee School

       North Central Area
              Greenwich High School
              Greenwich Hospital
              Brunswick School
              Greenwich Academy
              Greenwich Country Day School

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 3-2
                Byram Park
                Schubert Library
                New Lebanon School
                Western Middle School
                Byram Business Area

             Hamilton Avenue School/St. Roch’s Church

              Glenville Shopping District/Glenville School/Western Civic Center

       Figure 3-1 illustrates the general locations of these destinations on the bicycle route network.


A number of opportunities and constraints exist for the development of bicycle and pedestrian
facilities in Greenwich, including the following:


   •   Local shopping districts in Old Greenwich, Cos Cob, Byram and Glenville represent
       opportunities for shoppers who live nearby to travel relatively short distances by bicycle or
       on foot.
   •   Similarly, the locations of libraries in Old Greenwich, Cos Cob and Byram, in addition to the
       main library in central Greenwich, present opportunities for nearby residents to reach a
       library by bicycle or on foot.
   •   The existence of four railroad stations in Greenwich creates the opportunity to encourage
       greater numbers of rail commuters to bicycle or walk relatively short distances to the stations
       they use.
   •   Schools in the more densely-settled areas of Greenwich (e.g., Eastern Middle School) are in
       close proximity to students’ homes which presents the opportunity to encourage greater
       numbers of school children to bicycle or walk to school.
   •   There is a great potential to encourage the large number of people in Greenwich who bicycle
       and walk for recreation and fitness to do so for other reasons, such as to reach shopping and
       work destinations, if safer conditions exist.
   •   The support that has already been shown by the public for bicycle and pedestrian travel in
       Greenwich is an opportunity in that such support will help in project implementation.
   •   Route I-95 and the Metro-North Railroad line constitute corridors of publicly owned land
       running east and west in the southern part of Greenwich and present the opportunity to create
       multi-use paths along the adjacent land. These corridors represent opportunities in that they
       run the length of the town in the east-west direction and facilitate creation of a continuous
       corridor. They are also constraints in that they must be crossed and there are limited
       opportunities for doing so.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 3-3
                             ORIGIN-DESTINATION MAP
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                           FIGURE 3-1

    •   The relatively long distances between homes in the mid-country and backcountry areas of
        Greenwich and shopping districts, libraries and recreation areas is a constraint to use of non-
        motorized travel between these areas.
    •   The narrow width of many older roads in Greenwich is a constraint to the retrofitting of such
        roads for bicycling and pedestrian facilities, although traffic calming treatments may be
        suitable on many narrower roads.
    •   Heavy traffic, commercial development (with frequent curb cuts) and irregularly placed
        parking spaces on U.S. Route 1 represent constraints to its use by bicyclists.
    •   Schools in less densely-settled areas or accessible only from roads that experience high
        speed traffic (e.g., North Street School) may not be suitable for bicycling or walking by
        young children.
    •   The hilly topography of Greenwich, particularly in the central business district, is a
        constraint to the use of bicycles by less fit riders and in hot weather.


In order to collect the necessary data required for the suitability analysis, physical data collection
efforts were performed to measure roadway cross sections, collect speed data, and observe other
geometric and traffic conditions. This data collection was performed on foot, on bicycle, and by car
to cover the multitude of on-road and off-road opportunities in Greenwich. The results of this effort
were fed into the suitability analysis detailed in Chapter 2.


Multi-use paths are those that exist on exclusive right of way and ideally are subject to minimal
conflict with crossing traffic. From both a transportation and recreational standpoint, they can
provide the safest conditions for less experienced cyclists and help to reduce congestion on roads by
making bicycle trips more appealing to a greater number of users. Most experienced cyclists prefer
on-road riding for transportation purposes when provided with a bicycle-friendly road.

In Greenwich, opportunities exist for such paths to further strengthen the bicycle network,
particularly in the east-west direction. A potential location for an off-road path lies within the state-
owned right of way (ROW) that is currently served by Interstate 95. The I-95 corridor is relatively
flat and would provide critical east-west linkage to heavily used town centers and neighborhoods
where bicycle use is most likely to occur. As part of the Bicycle Master Plan, portions of this
corridor have been investigated to identify the potential for constructing such a path. While this is in
no way meant to reflect a feasibility study (which would be required), it does identify opportunities
and constraints for the town. Potential segments have been identified in areas in which difficult on-
road alternatives could prove undesirable to some cyclists. If these segments were constructed, they
would be tightly integrated with numerous on-road routes to provide safe and convenient alternatives
to automobile transportation within Greenwich.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 3-4
On several occasions, field visits were made to inspect visually the potential for trail construction
within the I-95 right of way. Factors such as usable width, density of vegetation, proximity to
private property, rail and interstate highway, and potential linkage to on-road routes were considered
during these evaluations. Based on these observations, three distinct segments were identified that
could provide beneficial east-west connectivity while avoiding on-road segments that are potentially
constrained to improvement for cyclists.

Segment 1 - I-95 corridor from Center Drive to Leonard Avenue

This particular segment was explored due to its favorable east-west linkage from eastern Greenwich
(Riverside and Old Greenwich) to Cos Cob. The difficulty in the roadway network in this area is
that the alternative routes parallel to I-95 are not bicycle friendly and are highly prohibitive to any
widening strategies. Route 1 to the north of the interstate is a high volume, multi lane state route
with narrow or no shoulders and frequent curb cuts. The dangers presented to cyclists on this route
are numerous, even to the most experienced riders. To the south of the interstate, Lockwood Road is
a narrow residential street that experiences heavy cut-through traffic during the peak hours of the
day. This street has been evaluated for opportunities for traffic calming measures to reduce the
speeds (and possibly volume) of traffic. The western terminus of Lockwood Road tees into
Riverside Avenue, which is narrow and heavily utilized by vehicular traffic. In addition, Riverside
Avenue intersects with Route 1 at a busy intersection just east of the Mianus River.

In addition to the sub-standard on-road bicycle routes in this vicinity, the Mianus River is a major
constraint to east-west travel. Forcing cyclists onto Route 1 at this juncture would deter most
cyclists from making a bicycle trip from eastern Greenwich to Cos Cob or beyond. The only other
option is to travel north onto Sheephill Road until Palmer Hill Road, then head south toward Route 1
on Valley Road. This trip is long, circuitous, and presents challenging grade changes.

From the evaluation of the I-95 right of way, it seems that sufficient land exists to construct a
parallel off-road (multi-use) path as an alternative to some of these difficult on-road segments.

   •   This path would begin south of the eastbound interstate at Center Drive and continue west,
       hugging the Interchange 5 northbound entrance ramp. Just west of the interchange, the path
       would continue within the ROW, or alternatively could join with an on-road segment using
       Leonard Avenue until it reaches the Lockwood Lane overpass to I-95.
   •   West of the overpass, the path would continue until it reaches Riverside Avenue and crosses
       the interstate on the existing structure.
   •   Once north of the interstate, an opportunity for public-private partnership exists that could
       bring the route down an existing driveway and behind some private property that currently
       uses the land for parking. A steep grade differential exists between the parking lot and some
       vacant land that exists along the Mianus River waterfront. Wetland issues as well as path
       grade issues present challenges to this segment, in addition to the fact that use of private land
       would be required.
   •   If the above challenges can be overcome, the path would most likely have to cross the
       Mianus River on a newly constructed structure that could possibly be an extension to the
       existing bridge over the river.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 3-5
   •   On the western bank of the river, the town owns property that is currently used for a DPW
       maintenance garage. The path could traverse this property and tie into the existing road
       network at River Road.

Refer to Figure 3-2 for an aerial representation of this segment.

Segment 2 – From Station Drive at Sachem Road to Kinsman Lane

This segment was identified due to the limited on-road alternatives that exist in the east-west
direction. This length of path would allow for an excellent connection between Cos Cob and
Greenwich Center. The existing on-road routes such as Route 1, Indian Field Road, and Loughlin
Avenue/Cross Lane do not meet desired guidelines for bicycle routes. This link would also provide
direct access to the Cos Cob commuter rail station and serve large residential communities in the

This segment would most likely exist along and parallel to the Metro North Rail Line. It would
begin where Station Drive terminates at Sachem Road and continue west along some relatively flat
ROW. The path would likely pass under Indian Field Road and behind a row of residential property
where a rough-cut trail (likely an old rail maintenance road) already exists. At a point in which the
trail is directly opposed to Kinsman Lane on the south side of I-95, the path would have to cross the
railroad and interstate on a new structure to meet with the on-road segment at Kinsman Lane. This
structure would have to be high enough to clear the electrification towers of the railroad and the
interstate system before it could touch down to the at-grade road system. While this segment is
logical in terms of providing an alternative to poor on-road options, it would be expensive. Refer to
Figures 3-3 to 3-4 for an aerial representation of this segment.

Segment 3 – Arch Street at Greenwich Avenue to Delavan Avenue

This lengthy segment of path has been evaluated because it would replace a series of difficult on-
road routes with a straight and level east-west link from Greenwich Center to Byram. The on-road
alternatives that exist in this area are mainly Route 1 and Hamilton Avenue/Railroad Avenue. The
problems with Route 1 are clear, as this state route presents similar characteristics throughout
Greenwich. The Hamilton/Railroad Avenue alternative is not a desirable bike route unless parking is
removed or limited to provide room for wide shoulders. Due to the highly commercially developed
nature of these roads, this seems unlikely since parking is already in short supply. Any alternative
routing north of Route 1 becomes too circuitous to make cycling a practical alternative to the

For these reasons, a multi-use path would serve the bicycle network exceptionally well in this area
by providing a safe and direct connection between these busy communities. The path would begin at
Arch Street and Greenwich Avenue and use the I-95 ROW along the eastbound on-ramp. The path
would cross Arch Street at the eastbound off-ramp and continue against the ramp as it crosses
Greenwich Harbor. The grade in this area presents a problem and useable width is minimal. At
Shore Road the path would pass under the interstate and continue to head west in the ROW between
I-95 and Metro North Railroad. This alignment could continue within this ROW until it reaches the
westbound off ramp terminus at Delavan Avenue. An alternative on-road connection also exists at

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 3-6
          Segment 1: Center
          Drive to Leonard

                              CONCEPTUAL EAST-WEST PATH
          Segment 2: Station
          Drive at Sachem
          Road to Kinsman

                               CONCEPTUAL EAST-WEST PATH
         Segment 3: Arch
         Street at Greenwich
         Avenue to Delavan

                                                                       Segment 2: Station
                                                                       Drive at Sachem
                                                                       Road to Kinsman

                               CONCEPTUAL EAST-WEST PATH
the point where the path would intercept Hamilton Avenue as it passes below the interstate. The on-
road segment of Ritch Avenue to Delavan Avenue could be used to reduce construction cost. Refer
to Figures 3-5 and 3-6 for an aerial representation of this segment.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 3-7
         Segment 3: Arch
         Street at Greenwich
         Avenue to Delavan

                               CONCEPTUAL EAST-WEST PATH
         Segment 3: Arch
         Street at Greenwich
         Avenue to Delavan

                               CONCEPTUAL EAST-WEST PATH
                              CHAPTER 4 - DESIGN GUIDELINES

Guidelines exist for the development of new bicycle facilities and for accommodating bicycles
through roadway redevelopment. The American Association of Highway and Transportation
Officials (AASHTO) Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities (2000) and the Federal
Highway Administration Case Study Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate
Bicycles (1994) may be used as guides for the implementation of this Bicycle Master Plan. The
Federal Highway Administration’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) may also
be used for standard pavement markings and signage that pertain to bicycle facilities. While much
of the information included in this section of the Plan was taken from the documents identified
above, this section is not intended as a complete reference, but rather as an overview of the possible
solutions to problems that designers face in the implementation of bicycle facilities.

On-road facility improvements can be classified into three categories: marginal roadway
improvements such as striping and spot improvements, roadway widening and more extensive
roadway improvements that would bring a segment up to guidelines, and traffic calming.
Supplemental facilities can also be completed to act as an extension to the actual roadway and/or
pathway facilities. The choice of which improvements should be made depends on the goal of the
improvement, the likely user groups, existing physical conditions and citizen input.

       Marginal Roadway Improvements. Marginal improvements generally take the form of minor
       improvements to the surface quality of roadway pavement, the removal of minor barriers or
       hazards to bicycle travel and improvement of traffic signalization.

       Minor Widening. Roadway widening would consist of extending the cross sections of a
       particular road in spots along its entire length to make it meet guidelines for bicycle
       facilities. For example, if a road with a 28’ cross section was recommended to include bike
       lanes on both sides (8’ minimum) and the Town DPW required the road to maintain 12’
       travel lanes, then the road would need to be widened to 32’ to accommodate these lanes.

       Traffic Calming. Traffic calming can be beneficial to cyclists by bringing the speed of
       vehicular traffic down, and increasing the suitability of the road for cyclists. Many times
       roadway striping can provide a level of traffic calming by visually reducing the cross section
       and providing shoulder room for cyclists.

       Separate Facilities. Open right-of-way is limited in the Town of Greenwich; however, there
       are still opportunities for the development of separate pathways or trails. In addition to the
       Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, The Rails to Trails Conservancy book
       Trails for the Twenty-First Century, and the guide Greenways may be consulted for
       additional information.

Examples and details of each of these types of improvements are cited in the following sections.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-1

Bicyclists can be defined according to age and ability. In order to understand better the needs of
bicyclists, the Bicycle Federation of America (BFA) has developed a system of classifying
bicyclists. This provides for three general categories of bicyclists, on the basis of which design
decisions can be made based on the needs of the users, while considering existing roadway
conditions. The three categories of bicyclists (as described in BFA’s Case Study for the Federal
Highway Administration Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles) are:

       Advanced Bicyclists (Type A): These are experienced riders who can operate under most
       traffic conditions. They comprise the majority of the current users of collector and arterial
       streets and are best served by the following:

           •   Direct access to destinations usually via the existing roadway system.
           •   The opportunity to operate at maximum speed with minimum delays.
           •   Sufficient operating space on the roadway or shoulder to reduce the need for either
               the bicyclist or the motor vehicle operator to change position when passing.

       Basic Bicyclists (Type B): These are casual or new adult and teenage bicyclists who are less
       confident of their ability to operate in traffic without special provisions for bicycles. Some
       will develop greater skills and progress to the advanced level, but the vast majority of
       bicyclists will always be basic bicyclists. They prefer:

           •   Comfortable access to destinations, preferably by a direct route, using either low-
               speed, low traffic-volume streets or designated bicycle facilities.
           •   Well-defined separation of bicycles and motor vehicles on arterial and collector
               streets (bike lanes or shoulders) or separate bike paths.

       Children (Type C): These are pre-teen riders whose roadway use is initially monitored by
       parents. Eventually they are accorded independent access to the roadway system. They do
       not understand traffic rules and regulations and may not physically be able to perform at a
       level that allows them to ride safely in traffic. They and their parents prefer the following:

           •   Access to key destinations surrounding residential areas, including schools,
               recreation facilities, shopping or other residential areas.
           •   Residential streets with low motor vehicle speed limits and volumes.
           •   Well-defined separation of bicycles and motor vehicles on arterial and collector
               streets or separate bike paths.

Basic bicyclists and children are generally combined for purposes of selecting design criteria. The
“design cyclist” concept is viewed as recognizing two broad classes of bicyclists: Advanced (Type
A) and Basic/Children (Type B/C) riders. Most of the recommendations in this Plan are intended to
provide for the basic riders (Type B), which is essential if the vision of making Greenwich “bicycle
friendly” is to be realized. Many of the roads in the network have traffic volumes and speeds that
will make it undesirable, even with improvement, for use by C cyclists.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-2

Due to the large difference in skill levels among bicycle riders, different types of facilities need to be
provided. Generally, advanced bicyclists will best be served by designing all roadways to be
compatible with a shared use between bicycles and motor vehicles. This can be accomplished by:

    •   Establishing and enforcing speed limits to minimize speed differentials between bicycles and
        motor vehicles on neighborhood streets and/or by implementing “traffic calming” strategies.
    •   Providing wide outside lanes on collector and arterial streets built with an “urban section”
        (i.e., with curb and gutter).
    •   Providing usable shoulders on highways built with a “rural section” (i.e., no curb and gutter).

Generally, basic riders and children bicyclists will be best served by a network of neighborhood
streets and designated bicycle facilities, which can be provided by:

    •   Ensuring neighborhood streets have low speed limits through effective speed enforcement or
        controls and/or by implementing “traffic calming” strategies.
    •   Providing a network of designated bicycle facilities (e.g., bike lanes, separate bike paths or
        shared-lane bicycle routes) through the key travel corridors typically served by arterial and
        collector streets. These roadways should have design features that allow competent
        bicyclists safely to share the roadway with motor vehicles.
    •   Providing usable roadway shoulders on rural highways.

The difference between a compatible roadway and a designated roadway can be summarized as
follows (Figure 4-1 illustrates the typical cross-sections for each of these facilities):

Compatible Roadways. These roadways have design features that allow competent bicyclists safely
to share the roadway with motor vehicles. Compatible roadway design guidelines differ based on
traffic volumes, speed and environmental setting. Because advanced bicyclists can be anticipated to
use substantially all of the roadways in Town (other than limited access highways), it is important
that all roadways be designed to be compatible with bicycle use.

Designated Roadways. These roadways are those on which bicycle use is anticipated and invited
through the use of lane markings, signage, maps or tour guides. Designated bicycle facilities provide
greater safety for less experienced or less confident riders and are located where use of bicycles is
encouraged in consideration of traffic conditions, pavement width and geometrics, and
appropriateness and directness of the particular route. They are also often located in areas that offer
especially pleasing rides such as in parks or through quiet subdivisions. Designated roadways
should at least meet the minimum recommended guidelines but may still not be recommended for C

Five categories of bicycle facilities that are designated roadways are as follows:

        Multi-use/Bicycle Paths (Class I): A bicycle facility physically separate from motorized
        vehicular traffic by an open space or barrier and either within a highway right-of-way or
        within an independent right-of-way. A bicycle path is not a sidewalk but may be designed to

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-3
                                                                                                               Roadside       Pavement
                                                                                                               Signage        Markings

                                                                                                                       Number of Lanes
                                    10’ Wide Minimum                                1’ Curb / Gutter                                                   1’ Curb / Gutter
                                                                                                                       And Widths Vary
                                    12’ – 14’ Optimum
                                                                                 4’ Paved Shoulder Minimum                                    4’ Paved Shoulder Minimum
          2’ Graded Shoulder /                            4’ Minimum
                   Clear Zone                             Side Clearance
                                                                                                                   Bike Lanes
                                   Multi-Use Path                                                            Typically a ‘Urban’ Facility

                                                                      Add 1’
                                                            13      If Curbed                                                            13

                                    Number of Lanes                                                             12’               12’
   4’ Paved Shoulder                                         4’ Paved Shoulder
                                    And Widths vary                                                          Minimum           Minimum
            Minimum                                          Minimum

                                 Paved Shoulders                                                       Wide / Shared Curb Lane
                           Typically a ‘Rural’ Facility

                                                        BIKEWAY CROSS SECTIONS
                                              TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                                                                                      FIGURE 4-1
       permit shared use with pedestrians. Minimum recommended width: eight feet or, if shared
       with pedestrians, ten feet.

       Bicycle Lanes (Class II): A portion of the roadway that has been designated by striping,
       signing and pavement markings for exclusive or preferential use by bicycles. Minimum
       recommended width: four or five feet.

       Bicycle/Parking Lane (Class II A): A lane designated for shared use by bicycles and parked
       cars. Minimum recommended width: eight or nine feet.

       Bicycle Routes (Class III): Roadways designated for bicycle use through the installation of
       directional and informational signage. Bicycle routes may incorporate one of the following
       accommodations to bicycles:

           •   Wide outside lanes: Right-most through traffic lanes that are substantially wider than
               12 feet, up to 16 feet.
           •   Shoulders: A portion of the roadway contiguous with the traveled way for the
               accommodation of stopped vehicles, for emergency use and for lateral support of the
               sub-base, base and surface courses.
           •   Shared lanes: 12 foot lane widths or less with no shoulders where the cyclists are
               expected to share the travel lane with automobiles.

       Traffic Calming: Physical alterations to the horizontal and vertical alignment of the roadway
       to change in priority and bring traffic speeds in line with speed limits.


This section provides recommended guidelines for the selection of roadway design treatments to
accommodate bicycles in Greenwich. Specific dimensions are suggested for the width of the
recommended facility type. These recommendations reflect the current state of the practice in the
design of bicycle-friendly roadways but are adapted specifically for use in Greenwich. Users of this
Plan are encouraged to treat these recommendations as “guidelines” rather than standards.

When design treatments are provided primarily to serve advanced riders, designation is optional. In
some cases, it may be desirable not to designate the facility for bicycle use. For instance, it may not
be appropriate to designate U.S. Route 1 as a bicycle facility unless this route serves as the only link
between two points and minimum recommended guidelines can be met.

Another consideration involves minor or marginal roadway improvements for bicyclists, such as
providing a narrow (less than four feet [1.2-m]) shoulder. This can significantly improve riding
conditions for advanced bicyclists and should be considered if no better treatment is possible;
however, this width is less than the minimum recommended guideline in virtually all design
specifications and should not be designated as a bicycle lane. Where a facility is intended to be
designated a bicycle lane, it is desirable that the design conforms to recommended guidelines.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-4
In this Master Plan, roadways that meet or that can be improved to the recommended guidelines are
to be treated as designated routes, provided there is sufficient continuity between origins and
destinations. Roadways that meet the minimum guidelines should be treated as compatible.

The Table 4-1 lists the design guidelines that are recommended by the plan. Ideally, all roadways in
Greenwich should incorporate the design treatments recommended in the tables for advanced
bicyclists as a minimum. Roadway treatments suitable for basic cyclists will also accommodate
advanced bicyclists. This table provides recommended guidelines based on the desired facility type.
For example, if the average daily traffic volume and the average speed of vehicular traffic is known,
then the table can be consulted to determine the recommended guidelines for either a shared lane or
bike lane facility. It is important to note that these guidelines are for bicycle facilities that are
intended to be designated bicycle routes.

                                             Table 4-1
                            Recommended Design Guidelines for Bicycle Routes

                                                                    Daily Traffic Volumes
 Observed Speed        <2000                  2000-4000               4000-6000                6000-8000          Over 8000
  Under 25 mph      12' SL / 9'-4'         12' SL / 9'-4'             12' SL / 9'-4'         13' WC / 9'-4'     14' WC / 10'-4'
   25 - 30 mph      12' SL / 9'-4'         12' SL / 9'-4'             12' SL / 9'-4'         13' WC / 10'-4'    14' WC / 10'-4'
   31 - 40 mph      13' WC / 9'-4'        13' WC / 10'-4'           14' WC / 10'-4'          14' WC / 10'-5'    14' WC / 10'-5'
  Over 40 mph       4' SH / 10'-5'         4' SH / 10'-5'            4' SH / 10'-5'           4' SH / 10'-6'     4' SH / 10'-6'
  - SL = Shared Lane                 Notes:
  - WC = Wide Curb Lane
    (>12')                           Add 1' to each side of bike route for sections with curves or 1' per side with curb.
  - SH = Paved Shoulder              Add 1' to travel lane requirements for roads with over 5% trucks.
     Example,                        Add 7' per side of road for on-street parking.
     10'-4' = 10' travel lane,
      4' shoulder                    Observed speed is generally speed limit plus 5 or more mph.
  - #' / #' = Minimum /              If minimum guideline cannot be met, find an alternate route.
      Recommended Bicycle
                                     Minimum guidelines are to accommodate experienced cyclists.
      Facility Guideline

Adapted from: Selecting Roadway to Accommodate Bicycles, FHWA, 1994.

The design treatments for advanced bicyclists (Type A) should be used as a guide to the minimum
design for any roadway in Greenwich. The recommended design treatments for basic bicyclists
(Type B) should be considered the recommended design for any route on which this type of bicyclist
is likely to ride. Additional width may be needed for roadways with on street parking and curbing.
These are identified as notes below the table.

Recommendations are provided for the width of the various design treatments. These recommended
dimensions are considered to be “desirable widths.” They should be treated as “minimum widths”
unless special circumstances preclude such development. Any treatment specifically designated for
bicycle use should meet the minimum design standards called for in the AASHTO Guide.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-5
The treatments recommended in this Plan are based on the research and findings in Selecting
Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles (FHWA, 1994) and adapted for Greenwich.
For instance, travel lane widths less than 11’ and 12’ (typical lane widths) could potentially exist on
lower volume and lower speed roadways; however, before these ‘substandard’ widths are utilized, it
is recommended that the Town perform a study to ensure that motorists and cyclists feel comfortable
with these guidelines. These travel lane widths are also intended to provide some traffic calming
effect, an assumption that also should be validated during that same study. Both the AASHTO and
FHWA documents do not specify travel lane widths but do specify a minimum of 4’ bike lane width
that is adhered to in the guidelines of this Plan.

It is anticipated that the guidelines in this Master Plan will be revised to reflect the continuing
evolution of the state of the practice in selecting design treatments for roadways to accommodate
shared use by bicycles and motor vehicles. Accordingly, at the time of the implementation of any
segment of this Plan reference should be made to the appropriate design reference guide for the most
up-to-date treatments.


The design treatments in the tables are most easily implemented when new construction or
reconstruction is planned. Projects that are currently in the Town’s capital improvement program
should be identified to include bicycle improvements that incorporate the treatments identified
herein. The primary element of providing bicycle compatible roadways is seeking a minimum 12-
foot wide outside lane on all roadways that would be shared by bikes and automobiles.

Implementation involving retrofitting existing roadways to accommodate bicycle use may make
projects more complex. Existing streets built with a curb and gutter section will often be viewed as
having a fixed width, and improvements will likely be limited to “moving paint,” that is, re-striping
the existing lanes.

When working with existing streets and highways, consideration should given to making at least
minor or marginal improvements; however, where bicycle routes have been identified to serve basic
bicyclists (Type B), it will be necessary to provide facilities that meet the recommended design
treatments for these cyclists before such roads can be designated as bicycle routes.


Signage programs for cycling take two forms: warning-regulatory and directional-informational.
Care should be taken so that the signage program is implemented with conformance to sign
standards (where applicable), catered to the information and safety needs of cyclists and motorists
and with maintainability in mind. Excessive use of signs can be confusing and distracting and
generally lessens their effectiveness.

Warning and Regulatory Signs

These play an important role in providing safe bike routes. Signage should conform to the Manual
on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) where applicable. This reference ensures to the
extent possible, uniformity of signage design and application from community to community. Some

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-6
flexibility is allowed in its application. Important signs that may have application in Greenwich

   •   Share the Road – Use includes on shared lane roadways to raise awareness that a higher
       amount of bicyclists are to be expected. These can be posted at the Town limits, approaches
       to village centers and commercial districts and along routes using a shared lane facility.
   •   Bike Lane – Used to denote that a bicycle lane is present on a roadway and is for the
       exclusive use of cyclists. No parking is allowed within a bicycle lane.
   •   Narrow Bridge - Use of the narrow bridge sign (W5-2/W5-2a) along with zebra striping at
       the approaches and on the bridge will alert both bicyclists and motorists that special care is
       needed to traverse an upcoming bridge.

Bicycle lanes should be well marked and signed to ensure clear understanding of the presence and
purpose of the facility by both bicyclists and motorists. The MUTCD specifies standard signage and
markings to be used with bicycle facilities. Figure 4-2 represents several typical signs and symbol
pavement markings utilized with bicycle facilities. Designers should refer to the MUTCD for all
appropriate signing and markings that can be used in conjunction with bicycle facilities. AASHTO
Guide for Development of Bicycle Facilities also contains typical pavement marking layouts and
descriptions of uses.

Informational Guide Signs And Route Signage

Bicycle Route signs indicate that the roadway is part of the bike route system. These may include
destination and informational signs and may be color-coded to ease understanding, using route
designations developed to date. As shown in the MUTCD manual, the M1-8 sign can be combined
with words (denoting the route name, “Old Greenwich Center”, for instance) and an arrow if
necessary to denote a turn or change in direction.

Typical bike route signage should follow standards as described in the MUTCD, Part IX. The
MUTCD provides several types of signage with descriptions and uses for each. Figure 4-3 displays
two types of signage that could be used to identify bike routes. The D11-1 sign is intended to be
used on bike routes that are not differentiated by number. According to the MUTCD, this sign
should be placed “at intervals frequent enough to keep bicyclists informed of changes in route
direction and to remind motorists of the presence of bicyclist”. The bike route sign should be used
with sub-plates with directional information, distance measurements or destination points indicated.


Due to the conflicts that are experienced at intersections between motor vehicles and bicycles,
special care and treatment must be provided at these locations. Just as motorists approaching
intersections desire to be able to make all turning movement (left, through and right), so do
bicyclists. Proper treatment to help reduce these conflicts must be utilized.

The MUTCD provides good recommendations for signage that may clarify motor vehicle and
bicycle merging activities prior to and at the intersection. AASHTO Guide for Development of
Bicycle Facilities provides numerous pavement layouts that help alleviate conflicts between motor

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-7
                R9-8 : Bicycles Use                                                       W5-2a : Narrow
                                                                                                                W5-4 : Bikeway Narrows
                  Shoulder Only                                                           Bridge (symbol)

                                                                                                                W11A-1 : Bicycle Crossing
              R7-9a : No Parking                                                        W7-5 : Hill (bicycle)
                  Bike Lane

    Note: These are typical examples – consult the MUTCD for total signage solutions.

                                          WARNING AND REGULATORY SIGNAGE
                                                     TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                                                                     FIGURE 4-2
         D11-1 : Bike Route
                                                                                                             M1-9 : Bicycle
                                           D4-3 : Bicycle Parking   M1-8 : Bicycle Route Marker
                                                                                                             Interstate Route

                                                                                         Community Awareness Sign
                  Example of a Custom Route Sign

                                INFORMATIONAL / ROUTE SIGNAGE
                                   TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                                                         FIGURE 4-3
vehicles and bicyclists. Figure 4-4 represents several options for intersection treatments at
intersections. Some of these options are as follows:

       Signal Detection and Priority for Bikes. Two primary types of traffic signal systems exist: 1)
       pre-timed and 2) demand-actuated. Pre-timed signals cycle through phases on a set period of
       time, so a cyclist is guaranteed to get a green light if he/she waits. Demand-actuated signals
       are slightly different in that they are controlled by the presence of vehicles at the approaches
       to the intersection. This is accomplished by detectors beneath the surface of the pavement
       that detect the disruption in an electromagnetic field created by vehicles passing over the
       detectors. This can be a problem for cyclists because these detectors are usually not sensitive
       enough to detect bicycles and a green signal may not be triggered. The development of bike
       sensitive loop detectors can allow for bicycles to trigger the signal. They can also provide an
       exclusive advance phase for cyclist to clear the intersection before vehicles are given the
       green signal. This reduces the overall time allotted for vehicles, which can create severe
       congestion problems at busy intersections. A full evaluation of traffic conditions and signal
       operations is required before such a treatment is selected.

       Bicycle Boxes and Advance Stop Bars. These treatments provide a refuge for bicyclists at
       intersections by allowing them to move ahead of stopped vehicles so they can safely cross
       the intersection before the vehicles accelerate. The boxes are usually striped ahead of any
       vehicular stop bar and have a bicycle symbol denoting its purpose. Many times these boxes
       are combined with bicycle sensitive loop detectors to give the cyclist an additional period of
       time to cross the intersection before the vehicles are allowed through. These treatments
       should not extend beyond any pedestrian cross walks that might exist.

       Exclusive Lanes. One of the greatest hazards that bicyclists encounter when crossing an
       intersection is the presence of right turning vehicles. Cyclist wishing to cross an intersection
       must be aware of vehicles behind them that are attempting to make a right hand turn
       movement and may not be watching for bicycles. An exclusive bike lane to the left of the
       right hand turn lane can help to reduce these conflicts. With this type of treatment, the
       cyclist would position him/herself to enter the exclusive lane before the intersection, so that
       right turning vehicle can enter the pocket and make its move without conflict from cyclist.
       Many times this lane is colored or designated with striping and symbols.


Some of roads proposed within this Master Plan would need to be retrofitted with bike lanes or
upgraded to meet recommended guidelines for shared roadway use to be designated as bike routes.
Roads in the Bicycle Network that cannot meet recommended guidelines should be upgraded to
achieve compatible roadway status. This will ensure that, at the very least, advanced (Type-A)
cyclists will be accommodated.

Bike routes can be designated by the installation of proper signage along the route. The following
minimum conditions should be met in order for a roadway to be designated as a bike route:

   •   The roadway meets recommended guidelines for shared-use by having suitable
       traffic volumes, curb-lane widths and traffic speeds;

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-8
                          Advance Storage Area for Bicycles

                                                                 Excusive Bike Lane to the Left of Right Turn Pocket

                          Channelization at Busy Intersections

                                     INTERSECTION TREATMENTS
                                 TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                                         FIGURE 4-4
   •   The roadway has no significant barriers preventing passage of bicycles and
       should not end at such barriers;
   •   The roadway has no significant hazards; and
   •   The route is designated as a segment of an interconnected system of bicycle

Bike lanes can be completed pursuant to the following:

   •   Re-stripe existing roads to provide extra space for bike lanes, shared bike/parking lanes, or
       physically widen existing roads as necessary to include bike lanes. Such lanes should meet
       the recommended guidelines outlined in this Master Plan.

Greenwich’s existing roadway system permits many of the facilities proposed as part of this Plan to
be accomplished by re-striping the roadway. Adequate space exists that will allow for bicycle lanes
without impacting existing traffic patterns, although in many cases, on-street parking will be
affected. Several options exist when re-striping is required. They are as follows:

   •   Reduce travel lane widths;
   •   Reduce the number of travel lanes;
   •   Reconsider the need for parking;
   •   Narrow the parking lanes;
   •   Remove parking on one side only;
   •   Change diagonal to parallel parking;
   •   Prohibit parking by employees; and
   •   Create a wider outside lane.


Bike paths (Class I) are valuable additions to the roadway system since they will improve conditions
for all categories of bicyclists. They can serve both a transportation and recreation function and have
proven to be significant generators of bicycle use. Just as it is desirable to provide adequate on-road
facilities as part of Greenwich’s network of bike routes, it will also be important to provide bike
paths to complete the system.

One-way trails are not recommended since they are likely to be traveled in both directions and have
been proven hard to enforce. The AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
recommends that, under most conditions, an all-paved width for a two-directional bicycle path
should be ten feet (3 meters). It does note that a width of eight feet may be adequate, but only where
the following conditions prevail:

   •   Bicycle traffic is expected to be low, even on peak days and peak hours;
   •   Pedestrian use of the facility is not expected to be more than occasional;
   •   There will be good horizontal and vertical alignment providing safe and frequent passing
       opportunities; and,
   •   The path will not be subject to maintenance vehicle loading conditions that would cause
       pavement edge damage.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 4-9
Where possible, especially if bicycle or pedestrian traffic is expected to be high, paths should be a
minimum of twelve feet wide.

The above information is intended to provide an overview of design standards associated with
bicycle paths. Reference should be made to the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities for further design criteria.


Traffic Calming is an integrated program of education, enforcement and engineering measures to
affect the speed and often the volume of traffic on a roadway. A full discussion of traffic calming is
beyond the scope of this project, but some general guidelines are offered.

As noted in the Bicycle Suitability Rating in Chapter 2, traffic speeds are one of the three most
important indicators of bicycle suitability. Reducing speeds can have the equivalent effect of
increasing pavement width. Where widening to accommodate a bicycle facility is not feasible or
desirable, reducing speeds can have a desirable effect.

Traffic calming measures often seek to reduce travel speeds by reducing street widths. Frequently,
this narrowing is done to create choke points and therefore, needs to be done in careful consideration
for its effect on bicyclists.

Typical traffic calming measures include: speed humps; medians; curb extensions/bulb outs; and
traffic circles/roundabouts. Care needs to be taken so that adequate width is provided along the road
for safe motorist/bicyclist interaction.

Striping is proposed as one low cost measure for traffic calming. Adding a travel lane edge stripe
has been shown to be effective at channelizing vehicles and having the effect of visually narrowing
the roadway. This can result in reduced travel speeds. Table 4-1 should be consulted when striping
travel lanes to create de facto paved shoulders along a shared lane bike route. This table specifies
minimum travel lane widths and shoulder widths for various roadway classes and traffic volumes.


For roads that cannot meet recommended guidelines to achieve bike route status, it is important to
note that any extra operating space for bicycles is better than no extra space. Along segments or in
areas where the width recommended in Table 4-1 for Group B/C bicyclists is not yet achievable (due
typically to parking lanes, turn lanes, limited right-of-way, etc.), a roadway with lesser width might
be considered; however, such roads are not recommended to be included in the designated bike route
category – or at least not without the added caveat that they are only suitable for advanced (Type A)
cyclists. Where roads meet recommended guidelines for bicycle routes, they should be signed and
striped according to the appropriate AASHTO design standards.

“Share the Road” signage may be placed on roads that do not meet minimum recommended
guidelines and will serve as a warning to motorists of the possible presence of bicyclists. This
signage will be especially important for roadways that connect planned facilities and therefore may

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                Page 4-10
be frequented by bicyclists. This situation will exist as Greenwich’s network of bike routes is being
established and consequently will be somewhat fragmented, because bicyclists will have to travel on
substandard roadways in order to reach new bicycle facilities.

Share the Road signs are advisory and remind the motorist that the bicyclist has a right to use the
roadway, even when there are no designated bicycle routes. Share the Road signs do not serve the
same purpose as bicycle route signs, which are intended to attract bicyclists to roads with better
conditions. Share the Road signs can be removed after a particular road has been upgraded to meet
guidelines, in order to avoid having too many signs on the roadway.

All roads on the bicycle network map should have bicycle-friendly catch basin inlets. Many roads
already have these in place, save a few locations. The Town uses a standard grate that is safe for
bicyclists during new construction and whenever the inlets need replacement. Each location where
the sub-standard grate exists should be evaluated from a bicyclist safety perspective and replaced.
This should apply to all sub-standard grates throughout the town, and especially to roads that are
used frequently by bicyclists.

Another potential hazard to bicyclists are the square edged (often granite) curbing that exists on
many town roads. While physically attractive, they are difficult to mount by bicycles in the case of
an emergency. The design guidelines stipulate that an additional foot of shoulder width be provided
where this curbing exists. In cases where the road width is very narrow and widening is not an
option, the town should consider having this curbing removed.

The bicycle-friendly inlets are illustrated in Figure 4-5.


If a bicycle network is to be used to its full potential, cyclists must have safe and secure parking
available at likely destination points. Bicycle parking (or the lack thereof) can make the difference
between a trip that is taken by bicycle and one that is not. A survey conducted by Bicycling
magazine revealed that over 40 percent of adults who had ridden a bike in the last year, but not to
work in the past month, said they would bicycle to work if there were showers and secure bicycle

The greatest fear of bicyclists is theft of their property. A bike rack placed close to building
entrances, visible to others, offers adequate security for short-term parking, while lockers are
preferred for long-term storage. Local legislation can be used to develop a comprehensive parking
program. An example can be found in San Francisco, where local law requires the City to provide
its employees the equivalent of a locker, i.e., “sheltered and access restricted”, while visitors to
municipal buildings have the more appropriate bike rack outdoors for short term use. One type of
bicycle parking does not meet all cyclist needs; rather a combination of facilities should be
investigated to accommodate the needs of bicyclists.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                Page 4-11
                                                                              Bicycle Friendly Catch Basin Inlets

       Square Granite Curbing – Provide Additional Shoulder Width or Remove

                                                 ROADSIDE HAZARDS
                                   TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                                             FIGURE 4-5

The location of bicycle parking facilities might be considered the most important element of creating
an effective bicycle parking system. Facilities should be located with the user in mind. Bicyclists,
more than motorists and pedestrians, enjoy a freedom of mobility that allows them to travel within
feet of their final destination. Facility site location should consider this element heavily. Bicyclists
will find another option to secure their bicycles if the provisions provided are not near the final

In Greenwich, locations with the need for bicycle parking have been identified and are listed as

       Public Buildings
              All post offices;
              All libraries;
              Town Hall;
              Eastern Civic Center;
              Western Civic Center; and
              Havemeyer Parking Lot.

               All parks with ball fields;
               Greenwich Point (in lot across from Quenn Anne Building and at Old Greenwich
                  Yacht Club);
               Roger Sherman Baldwin Park;
               Bruce Park playground and Bruce Museum;
               Grass Island;
               Pomerance Property;
               Byram Park;
               Babcock Preserve; and
               Mianus River Park.

       Shopping Locations
             Old Greenwich (close to storefronts);
             Cos Cob;
             Byram (close to storefronts);
             Glenville (close to storefronts); and
             Central Greenwich.

              All schools.

       Train Stations
              All train Stations.
                 (At the Greenwich station, three locations are recommended: (1) Horseneck Lot,
                 (2) under Greenwich Plaza, and (3) under the overpass on the eastbound side).

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                Page 4-12
Types of Parking

There are three basic types or levels of parking available for bicycles, based on the level of security
provided for the bike and the needs of the intended users. The first level of parking generally serves
the needs of short-term users, such as shoppers and college students, and is often called low-security
parking and is the least expensive. Standard bike racks fall into this category. Racks should be
designed to support the bike by its frame and allow for the use of various types of locks. Medium-
security racks allow the frame and both wheels of the bike to be secured using various types of locks.
These racks serve longer-term users, such as people accessing transit stations, and usually involve
moving parts. Bicycle lockers provide the highest level of security. Lockers not only provide
protection for the bike from theft, but also provide protection from the elements and security for the
bicycle’s components, lights and other gear. Figure 4-6 illustrates several of these examples.

In Greenwich, it is recommended that racks in the medium security category be installed in most
locations. These racks would typically consist of an ‘inverted-U’ type construction such that the
frame and one wheel of a bicycle could be locked to the rack with a typical U-shaped shackle lock.


Although Greenwich is, for the greater part, a developed community, the Town continues to
experience considerable new development and redevelopment. It is important that accommodation
of bicycles be addressed in the planning and design of these projects. The Town’s Building Zone
Regulations should be reviewed to ensure that appropriate accommodations are provided, both as
specific facilities (e.g., bicycle parking) and as a part of street configuration and access control.

In the case of new development, careful consideration should be given to bicycle circulation within
the development area, to connections with the local and regional bike route systems with particular
attention to intersection accommodations adjacent to existing roadways. Grid street patterns and
providing pedestrian and bicycle connections between cul-de-sacs and/or long block faces are
examples of development patterns that provide options to bicyclists and encourage bicycling as a
part of people’s everyday lives.

Revisions to the subdivision ordinance could include modification of standard road cross-sections to
provide space for bicyclists. Also, street layout and lot configuration impact bicycle accessibility to
the street system, and language in the ordinance to require or encourage development patterns that
encourage bicycling should be considered

Providing people with convenient and close access to shopping, schools and churches increases the
potential that people will choose to bicycle to these locations as opposed to driving a car. Mixed use
zoning districts or provisions within the zoning ordinance that allow small scale, neighborhood
oriented commercial development within residential zones can create neighborhoods where people
will choose to walk and ride their bikes.

Right-of-way should also be dedicated, which will allow bicycle connections between adjacent
development and land uses.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                Page 4-13
                   Ribbon – Type Bicycle Rack
                                                                Inverted U Bicycle Racks

                          Bicycle Lockers                     Bicycle Rack Integrated with Transit

                                       BIKE PARKING FACILITIES
                               TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                              FIGURE 4-6

Education programs are essential for building a user base for the emerging bike routes and to
advance their safe use. Because most of the initial routes will be along city streets, education
programs must address all age groups of cyclists as well as motorists. This will ensure that both
cyclists and motorists are aware of their rights, responsibilities, rules-of-the-road, and proper
operating skills. Education is particularly important for children. Event such as ‘Bicycle Rodeos’
are effective at teaching children hands-on bicycle riding skills. Bicycle helmet programs are
emphasizing and increasing the use of helmets. Some organizations provide lower cost/no cost
bicycle helmets to children.

Promotional programs raise awareness that cycling is a viable means of transportation within a
community. Special events such as the national ‘Bike to Work Day’ are used to increase the amount
of commuting by bicycle. Contact the League of American Bicyclists or Greenwich Safe Cycling
for more information.

A bicycle map clearly showing the designated bicycle routes and route destinations can be an
effective way to increase bicycle use. It should be kept up to date and show the status of
implementation. Other items to show could be roadways to avoid/where bicycles not permitted
(Byram Park, for instance) and hazards (narrow bridges).


The Town of Greenwich may need to consider banning on-street parking at locations that require
bike lanes, but have limited cross section to accommodate them. The State of Oregon’s Bicycle and
Pedestrian Program offers some guidance on various techniques to reduce or eliminate the conflicts
that on-street parking has with cyclists. It states that a road’s primary function is to move people and
goods, and not serve as a storage area for vehicles. When it becomes desirable to remove on-street
parking to improve roadway capacity or make room for bicycle facilities, the Oregon Department of
Transportation (ODOT) suggests the following set of strategies:
Narrow Parking Lane. Parking can be narrowed to 2.1 m (7 feet), particularly in areas with low
truck parking volumes, as today's cars are on average, smaller. This may not apply well in
Greenwich as Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) are becoming increasingly popular.
Remove Parking On One Side. In some cases, parking may be needed on only one side to
accommodate residences and/or businesses. Note: It is not always necessary to retain parking on the
same side of the road through an entire corridor.
Prohibit Parking By Employees. Most business owners cite the fear of losing potential customers as
the main reason to retain on-street parking. Many cities have had success with ordinances prohibiting
employees from parking on the street. This could help increase the number of available parking for
customers, even if the total number of parking spaces is reduced. Special note: One parking place
occupied by an employee for eight hours is the equivalent of 16 customers parking for half an hour,
or 32 customers parking for 15 minutes.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                Page 4-14
Replacing Lost Parking. Where all of the above possibilities of replacing parking with bike lanes
have been pursued, and residential or business parking losses cannot be sustained, innovative ideas
should be considered to provide parking, such as with off-street parking. Other uses of the right-of-
way should also be considered, such as using a portion of a planting strip, where available:

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                Page 4-15

This chapter recommends specific construction treatments for bicycle network segments in
Greenwich. These recommendations are based on the analysis and professional judgment as applied
to the bicycle route network. Adjustments can and should be made on a case-by-case basis as
construction plans are developed and implemented. In particular, the route plan may require
modification to connect with bike routes developed in neighboring communities. As previously
noted, Stamford and Westchester County (jointly with Rockland and Putnam Counties) are currently
developing bicycle plans.

The Bicycle Network Map illustrated in Chapter 1 proposed a network of potential bike routes for
the more densely populated southern tier of Greenwich. This network has been evaluated and color-
coded in Figure 5-1 to reflect the condition of each route in the Plan as it relates to accommodating
Type B cyclists. Type B cyclists are defined as casual or new adult and teenage bicyclists who are
less confident of their ability to operate in traffic without special provisions for bicycles. The full
key for the color-coded links are listed below:

   •   Green links are those that currently meet recommended guidelines for bicycle facilities
       suitable for Type B cyclists (in most cases striping and signage would be required);
   •   Blue links are those that currently do not meet recommended guidelines for Type B cyclists,
       but many are of sufficient width to meet requirements for a shared lane facility;
   •   Red links are those that do not meet recommended guidelines for any type of bicycle facility
       and have considerable constraints to widening;
   •   Orange links are those that do not meet recommended guidelines for any type of bicycle
       facility but could benefit by traffic calming measures; and
   •   Purple links are those that do not meet guidelines due to the existence of on street parking;
       however, could be improved by removing the parking.

The majority of the proposed on-road bicycle facilities are located on arterial roadways. These
roadways represent the most direct and continuous routes while providing access to many town-wide
destinations. Many of these roadways are not suitable for use by Group B/C bicyclists. The
proposed treatment of many of these roadways or segments thereof would require retrofit such as
widening or re-striping in order to accommodate these types of bicyclists.

To prioritize projects as short or long term, a combination of factors was used. Short-term projects
are those most easily implemented, those that have received the greatest public support and those
that will contribute the most to elimination of existing constraints on bicycle use. Long term projects
are those in which development of facilities meeting recommended guidelines is difficult, where
significant cost savings can be achieved by taking advantage of “piggybacking” on other projects,
where (as in the case of the proposed East-West Multi-use Path) the project will require the
cooperation of ConnDOT, and/or where the cost of the project requires that it be funded from
sources such as TEA-21.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                PALMER HILL
  W       E


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        HA VE MEY

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 FLOR ENC E RD


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ER LN
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     E ST
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                BI BL
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  IT R

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             H ST
                                                                                                                                                 MAP LE A                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  BO
                                                                                                                                                          VE                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            NST

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       N O RT

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             M AI



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           S HEEPHILL
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                H   IN

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              FAI                                                                                                                                                                            NS

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 R FI                                                                                                                                                                                                                          E
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ELD                                                                                                                                                                                                                     AV




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 SID E




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           H I LL


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            C ENTER DR

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    SIN A
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   YWO OD
                                                                                                                                                                                                               A VE

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           R IV


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   H RD
                                                                                                                                                                                              ER SO                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           VE
                                                                                                                                                                                         P ATT                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            RD A





                                                                                                                                                                                                                        K AV

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            V ALL E
                                                              GLEN VI LL

                                                                                                                                                                                  N ORTHFIE LD
                                                                        E RD



                                                                                                                                                                                                                      P AR

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        AV E
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     D                                                                  FO
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 OD R                                                                     RE
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            K WO

                                                                                                                                                               HO L
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        LO C



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  SI DE



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           S OUN

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               STRICKLA ND RD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   LA R


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           R IV ER


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               SS L                                                                                     E AV E

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  D BE

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               M AL


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            HIGHVI EW

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             TO M

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      A CH


                                                                                                                                                                                                          M AS
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       OVAL AVE                                                                         END A VE

                                                                                                                                   LL         BR

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         INDIAN FIELD RD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       AV E
                                                                                                                                VA               OO

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 AV E
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          SUMMIT RD


                                                                                                                                                                                                                             E LM ST
                                                                                                                                                   KS                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    LA

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                A VE
                                                                                                                                       ED                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  KE


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    B RD
                        PE M

                                                                                                                                         GE              E                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         DR

                          E                                                                                                                W                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          AVE

                       AV                                                                                                                    OO

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                C LU
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  IDE                                                                                                    VE
                   Y                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ERS                                                                                                   OD A

                ML                                                                                                                              D
                               FL E

                                                                                                                                                  DR                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       RIV                                                                                                   K WO



                                                                                                                                                                                                                               S AV E

                                                                                        WEA VE


                                                                                                                                                         PROSPECT ST                                                                                                          AN                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                BEN



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             M                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     JA M

                                                                                                                                                                                                                         D AV I
                                                                                                                       LA N

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      IN                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               IN S




                                                                                                          VALLEY DR U P
                                              AR O


                                                                                                                                                                            RAILROAD AVE
                                                  LIN E





                                                         RIVER DA LE


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    RE R

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             S HO

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          IF T
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      S DR

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  TO D
                                                                  ER S
                                                             WA T



                                                                    VA N A             VE     R                                                                                                                                         Implementation Strategy
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Meets Guidelines
                                                                                               E   RD                                                                                                                                        Below Minimum Guidelines
                                                                                        SH                                                                                                                                                   Below Minimum Guidelines: Parking
                                                                                RA                                                                                                                                                           Below Minimum Guidelines: Constraints
                                                    VE                                                                                                                                                                                       Traffic Calming Recommended
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             I-95 Pathway Corridor
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             Other Paths

                                                                                                                                               NETWORK EVALUATION
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                                            TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                FIGURE 5-1

The process for selecting and prioritizing routes was based on a system-wide approach utilizing
performance criteria for selecting proposed routes that were established by the FHWA Case Study
Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicyclists. These criteria included the

   •   Accessibility — Distance from trip origins and destinations
   •   Directness — Most direct route; shortest distance traveled
   •   Continuity — Few missing links or gaps
   •   Route Attractiveness — Visual aesthetics, separation from vehicular traffic, perceived
       safety, amenities
   •   Low Conflict — Few conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians and/or motorists
   •   Cost — Costs both to establish and maintain facility
   •   Ease of Implementation — Availability of space
   •   Community Support — Public input and interest
   •   Scheduled Improvements — “Piggybacking” projects

Table 5-1 lists the recommended treatments for each road on the bicycle route map. Some of the
routes could be striped and/or signed as bicycle routes (represented in green) that are currently
suitable for Type B cyclists, while others (represented in blue) could achieve some benefits from
striping, but may still not be suitable for Type B cyclists. These blue linkages could be included as
bicycle routes (provided they meet the recommended guidelines for shared lane facilities) but
caution in signing them as bike routes should be taken, as liability can become an issue. Signage can
encourage Type B/C cyclists to use the routes when they are only suitable for Type A cyclists.

Striping has been recommended on routes that can currently accommodate Type B cyclists and bike
lane designation can be included at the Town’s discretion (Table 4-1 should be consulted); however,
adequate distance and connectivity to key destinations should be a prerequisite before such a
treatment is considered. Additional striping on all routes cans also provide a benefit to advanced
cyclists, although route signage on roads that do not meet minimum guidelines can encourage use by
less experienced cyclists and should be used with caution. To provide striping on each of the
network links where appropriate, a cost of approximately $101,000 in year 2000 dollars has been
estimated. This type of improvement can be phased over a three to four year period. The striping,
and signage where appropriate, would be an important first step in making bicycle transportation a
reality in Greenwich.

Some of the blue coded routes that would complete important linkages in the bicycle network could
be upgraded to meet the recommended guidelines for Type B cyclists by widening the roads. Over a
ten-year period, the high priority widening alternatives could be implemented to further strengthen
the bicycle network by providing safer routes. Some of these projects can be “piggy-backed” onto
town projects aimed at upgrading existing roads. While there do not appear to be any compatible
projects scheduled for the next year or two, it is possible that these will exist in the future, further
diminishing the total cost to widen these routes. The high priority routes identified in this plan
would cost approximately $2,100,000 in year 2000 dollars; however, costs such as right of way
acquisition, environmental mitigation, and relocation of utilities has not been estimated and could

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-2
Town of Greenwoch Bicycle Master Plan

                                                                                                                                 Table 5-1
                                                                                                               Bicycle Network Recommendations and Costs
                                                                              Colors Correspond to Bicycle Network Map
                                                                                       Meets Guidelines for Type B Cyclist   1                                             "S" = consider spot widening
                                                                               Does Not Meet Guidelines for Type B Cyclist   2                                             "W" = consider segment widening
                                                                                             On-street Parking Constraints   3
                                                                                       Could Benefit from Traffic Calming    4                                                       "H" = high priority
                                                                                       Significant Constraints to Widening   5                                                       "L" = lower priority

                                                                                                                                                           Striping Cost



                                                                                                              Distance Width
                                               Roadway Segment          From              To                    (ft)     (ft)                                                                     Cost to Widen                Comments/Recommendations
                                        Glenville Road                  Weaver            Hobart                  5,150       26      2         X              $2,500        W          H           $193,000    Stripe 10'/5'
                                                                        Hobart            Dearfield               4,375      26       1         X              $2,100                                           Stripe 9'/4'
                                        Weaver Street                   Glenville         W. Putnam               9,970  24-26        2         X              $4,800        S          H           $112,000    Consider spot widening to 28' for 30% of segment.
                                        Pemberwick Rd                   Weaver            Lucy                    8,000  24-26        2         X              $3,800                                           Strip 10'/3' where possible
                                                                        Lucy              W. Putnam               3,060               3                                                                         On-street parking constraint
                                        Comley Ave                                                                           24       1                                                                         Shared lane, as-is
                                        Caroline Place/Fletcher Ave                                               3,400      27       1                                                                         Shared lane, as-is
                                        Riverdale Ave                                                             2,000      32       3                                                                         On-street parking
                                        Valley Drive                    Alden             W. Putnam               2,160      24       2         X              $1,000                                           Stripe 9'/3'
                                                                        Glenville         Lake                    1,840      26       2         X                $900                                           Stripe 10'/3'
                                        Upland Dr/Edgewood Pl                                                     2,990  20-24        2         X              $1,400                                           Stripe 9'/3' where possible
                                        Edgewood Dr                                                               2,680      24       2         X              $1,300                                           Stripe 9'/3'
                                        Brookside Dr                                                              2,560  28-30        1         X              $1,200                                           Stripe 10'/4' and 10'/5' where possible
                                        Lake Avenue                     Valley            Carlton                 1,490      28       1         X                $700                                           Stripe 10'/4'
                                                                        Carlton           Maple                   4,970  26-27        2         X              $2,400        W          H           $186,000    Consider widening to 28'
                                        Dearfield Dr                                                              1,910      28       2         X                $900                                           Stripe 10'/4'
                                        North Maple Ave                 Lake Ave          Husted Ln               2,800      24       2         X              $1,300        W          L           $105,000    Consider widening to 28'
                                                                        Husted            North St                3,150      24       2         X              $1,500        W          L           $118,000    Consider widening to 28'
                                        Skylark/Hollis/Patterson/Glen                                             3,630      30       1         X              $1,700                                           Stripe 10'/5'
                                        Northfield Street                                                         2,310      26       1         X              $1,100                                           Stripe 9'/4'
                                        Church Street                                                             1,070      30       3                                                                         On-street parking
                                        North Street                    Maple             Martindale              1,170      34       1         X                $600                                           Stripe 11'/6'
                                                                        Martindale        Fairfield               3,950  24-28        2         X              $1,900        S          H            $74,000    Stripe 9'/3' and 10'/4' where possible
                                        Fairfield                       North             Stanwich                4,320      24       2         X              $2,100        W          L           $162,000    Stripe 9'/3'
                                        Park Avenue                                                               2,480      22       2                                      W          L            $93,000    Consider widening to 28'
      Page 5-2

                                        Hillside Road                                                             3,700      28       1         X              $1,800                                           Stripe 10'/4'
                                        Stanwich Road                                                             3,300      26       1         X              $1,600                                           Stripe 9'/4'
                                        Indian Rock Ln                                                            1,390      26       1         X                $700                                           Stripe 9'/4'
                                        Orchard Street                                                            4,300      28       1         X              $2,100                                           Stripe 10'/4'
Town of Greenwoch Bicycle Master Pla

                                                                                                                               Table 5-1 Continued
                                                                                                        Bicycle Network Recommendations and Costs
                                                                       Colors Correspond to Bicycle Network Map
                                                                                Meets Guidelines for Type B Cyclist   1                                                 "S" = consider spot widening
                                                                        Does Not Meet Guidelines for Type B Cyclist   2                                                 "W" = consider segment widening
                                                                                      On-street Parking Constraints   3
                                                                                Could Benefit from Traffic Calming    4                                                           "H" = high priority
                                                                                Significant Constraints to Widening   5                                                           "L" = lower priority

                                                                                                                                                        Striping Cost



                                                                                                       Distance   Width
                                              Roadway Segment   From               To                    (ft)      (ft)                                                                        Cost to Widen                  Comments/Recommendations
                                       Valleywood Road                                                    3,250       26           1         X              $1,600                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Sinawoy Road                                                       2,500       26           1         X              $1,200                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Bible Street                                                       3,850    24-28           2         X              $1,800        S          L           $72,000       Stripe 9'/3' and 10'/4' where possible
                                       Valley Road              E. Putnam          Mianus View            1,890       26           3                                                                           On-street parking
                                                                Mianus View        Palmer Hill            5,120    28-32           1         X              $2,500        W          H           $96,000       Stripe 10'/4' and 11'/5' where possible.
                                       Bridge                                                                                      5                                                                           Evaluate bridge on Palmer Hill Road
                                       Riverside Lane                                                     2,730           28       1         X              $1,300                                             Stripe 10'/4'
                                       Sheephill Road           E. Putnam          Riverside Ln           1,780           24       2         X                $900        W          L           $67,000       Stripe 9'/3'
                                                                Riverside Ln       Old Orchard Rd         2,530           26       1         X              $1,200                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                                                Old Orchard Rd     Palmer Hill            1,780           24       2         X                $900        W          H            $67,000      Stripe 9'/3'; Consider widening to 28'
                                       Old Orchard Road                                                   2,360           24       2         X              $1,100        W          L            $89,000      Stripe 9'/3'
                                       Palmer Hill Road         Sheephil Road      Old Wagon              3,600           24       2         X              $1,700        W          H           $135,000      Stripe 10'/2'; Consider widening to 28'-30'
                                                                Old Wagon          Stamford TL            1,050           32       1         X                $500                                             Stripe 10'/6'
                                       Sound Beach Ave          E. Putnam          Sheephill              2,880           24       2         X              $1,400        W          H           $108,000      Stripe 10'/2'; Consider widening to 28'-30'
                                       Sunshine Ave             Sound Beach        Bonwit Rd              1,000           24       2         X                $500        W          L            $38,000      Stripe 9'/3'; Consider widening to 28'
                                       Bonwit Road              Sunshine           Florence Rd            1,860           30       1         X                $900                                             Stripe 10'/5'
                                       Florence Road            Bonwit             Split Timber           1,240           30       3         X                $600        W          H           $47,000       Consider eliminating/relocating parking at
                                                                                                                                   3                                                                           school (stripe 10'/5') or consider widening to 37'
                                                                Split Timber       Palmer Hill            1,320       28           1         X                  $600                                           Stripe 9'/5'
                                       Havemeyer Lane                                                     4,100       22           2                                      W          H           $154,000      Consider widening to 26'-28'
                                       Laddin Rock Rd           E. Putnam          I-95                   1,390       30           1         X                $700                                             Stripe 10'/5'
                                                                I-95               Sound Beach            2,680       26           1         X              $1,300                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Center Drive                                                       1,810       26           1         X                $900                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Leonard Ave                                                        1,590       24           2                                                                           Leave as-is
                                       Lockwood Road                                                      5,020       22           4                                                                           Implement Traffic Calming
           Page 5-3

                                       Sound Beach Ave          E. Putnam          Laddin Rock            2,660       26           2         X              $1,300        W          H           $100,000      Consider widening to 28'-30'
                                                                Laddin Rock        Webb                   1,140       30           1         X                $500                                             Stripe 10'/5'
                                                                Webb               Quintard               2,200    30-51           3                                                                           On-street parking; commercial district;
                                                                                                                                   3                                                                           highly visible 'Share the Road' signage
Town of Greenwoch Bicycle Master Pla

                                                                                                                             Table 5-1 Continued
                                                                                                      Bicycle Network Recommendations and Costs
                                                                     Colors Correspond to Bicycle Network Map
                                                                              Meets Guidelines for Type B Cyclist   1                                                 "S" = consider spot widening
                                                                      Does Not Meet Guidelines for Type B Cyclist   2                                                 "W" = consider segment widening
                                                                                    On-street Parking Constraints   3
                                                                              Could Benefit from Traffic Calming    4                                                           "H" = high priority
                                                                              Significant Constraints to Widening   5                                                           "L" = lower priority

                                                                                                                                                      Striping Cost



                                                                                                     Distance   Width
                                             Roadway Segment   From              To                    (ft)      (ft)                                                                        Cost to Widen                  Comments/Recommendations
                                                               Quintard          Shore Road             3,720           30       1         X              $1,800                                             Implement Bike Lanes 10'/5'
                                       Forest Avenue                                                    1,960           24       2         X                $900                                             Stripe 9'/3'
                                       Tomac Avenue                                                     2,380           24       2         X              $1,100                                             Stripe 9'/3'
                                       Acadia Road                                                        920           27       2         X                $400                                             Stripe 9'/4' where no parking exists
                                       Highview Avenue                                                  1,640           27       1         X                $800                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Arch Street             Sound Beach       Hendrie                2,360           24       2         X              $1,100                                             Stripe 9'/3'; Consider widening to 26'-28'
                                       Bridge                  Hendrie           Summit                   650                    5                                                                           Narrow Bridge, 20' wide
                                       Hendrie Avenue                                                   4,550       26           1         X              $2,200                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Oval/Summit Rd                                                   4,350       28           1         X              $2,100                                             Stripe 10'/4'
                                       West End Ave            Arch              West End Court           720       30           1         X                $300                                             Stripe 10'/5'
                                                               End Court         Sound Beach              800       25           2         X                $400        W          H           $30,000       Stripe 9'3'; Consider widening to 26'-30' as feasible.
                                       Lockwood Avenue                                                  2,130       24           2         X              $1,000                                             Stripe 9'/3'
                                       Benjamin Street                                                  2,480       26           1         X              $1,200                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Shore Road              Stamford TL       Wahneta Rd             4,940       26           1         X              $2,400                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                                               Wahneta           Tods Driftway          2,660       20           4                                                                           Implement Traffic Calming
                                       Tods Driftway           Shore Rd          Park Entrance          2,000       20           4                                                                           Implement Traffic Calming
                                       Riverside Avenue        E. Putnam         Lake Dr                4,250       26           2         X              $2,000        W          H           $159,000      Stripe 10'/3'; Consider widening to 28'-30' as feasible
                                                               Lake Dr           Indian Head            1,940       25           2         X                $900                                             Stripe appropriately to provide minimal shoulder
                                                               Indian Head       Summit                 4,750       22           5                                      W          L           $178,000      Consider widening as feasible.
                                       Club Road                                                        2,930       22           5
                                       River Road              E. Putnam         Strickland             3,700       26           2         X              $1,800        W          H           $139,000      Stripe 10'/3'; Consider widening to 28'-30' as feasible
                                       Mead                                                             1,240       26           1         X                $600                                             Stripe 9'/4'
                                       Strickland              River Rd          Indian Field Rd        1,910    28-30           1         X                $900                                             Stripe 10'/4' or 9'/5'
                                       Sound Shore                                                      2,060    26-30           1         X                                                                 Stripe 9'/4' and 10'/5'
           Page 5-4

                                       Loughlin Ave/Cross Ln                                            2,380       20           5                                      W          L            $89,000      Consider widening as feasible.
                                       Indian Field Road                                                6,310       24           5         X              $3,000        W          H           $237,000      Consider widening as feasible.
                                       Station Drive                                                    1,190       22           5                                                                           Make Connection to Trail
                                       Kinsman Lane                                                     1,090       24           2         X                  $500      W          H           $41,000       Stripe 9'/3'; Consider widening to 28' as feasible
  Town of Greenwoch Bicycle Master Pla

                                                                                                                                 Table 5-1 Continued
                                                                                                             Bicycle Network Recommendations and Costs
                                                                         Colors Correspond to Bicycle Network Map
                                                                                  Meets Guidelines for Type B Cyclist     1                                               "S" = consider spot widening
                                                                          Does Not Meet Guidelines for Type B Cyclist     2                                               "W" = consider segment widening
                                                                                        On-street Parking Constraints     3
                                                                                  Could Benefit from Traffic Calming      4                                                         "H" = high priority
                                                                                  Significant Constraints to Widening     5                                                         "L" = lower priority

                                                                                                                                                          Striping Cost



                                                                                                             Distance   Width
                                                Roadway Segment    From                To                      (ft)      (ft)                                                                    Cost to Widen                 Comments/Recommendations
                                         Bruce Park Dr/Davis Ave   includes some one way (9'/4'/7')             3,580    20-24       2         X              $1,700        W          H           $134,000    Stripe 9'/3'; Consider widening to 28' as feasible
                                         Museum Drive              Davis               trail head               2,560       30       2         X              $1,200        W          H            $96,000    Eliminate/relocate parking
                                                                                                                                     2                                                                         (stripe 10'/5') or consider widening to 37'
                                         Mallard Drive                                                          3,000       26       1         X              $1,400                                           Stripe 9'/4'
                                         Anderson                                                                 500       20       5
                                         Elm Street/Davis Rd       Anderson             Bruce Park Rd           3,350       30       3                                                                           On-street parking
                                         Davis Avenue              Bruce Park Rd        Museum Dr                 570       28       1         X                  $300                                           Stripe 10'/4'
                                         Bruce Park Avenue                                                      1,120       28       3                                                                           On-street parking
                                         Railroad Avenue           Prospect             Mason                   2,730    28-38       3                                                                           On-street parking, 1 or2 sides
                                         Mason Street                                                           3,920    32-35       3                                                                           On-street parking
                                         Field Point Road          W. Putnam            Brookside               1,520       37       3                                                                           On-street parking
                                                                   Brookside            proposed I-95 path      2,060       28       1         X              $1,000                                             Stripe 10'/4' or 9'/5'
                                         Brookside Dr                                                           1,000       28       1         X                $500                                             Stripe 10'/4' or 9'/5'
                                         Prospect Street                                                        2,040    26-28       1         X              $1,000                                             Stripe 9'/5' or 9'/4' as width permits
                                         Hamilton Avenue                                                        7,220    28-32       3                                                                           On-street parking
                                         Ritch Avenue                                                           2,480       28       1         X              $1,200                                             Stripe 9'/5'
                                         Byram Road                W. Putnam            Water St                1,070       28       3                                                                           On-street parking
                                                                   Water St             Delavan                 2,480       28       1         X              $1,200                                             Stripe 9'/5'
                                         Delavan Avenue                                                         2,380       28       1         X              $1,100                                             Stripe 9'/5'
                                         Byram Shore Road                                                       4,170    24-26       2         X              $2,000        W          L           $156,000      Stripe 9'/3' or 9'/4' as width permits
                                         River Avenue                                                           1,290       22       5                                      W          L            $48,000      Consider widening as feasible.
                                         Water Street              Byram                Division                3,200    28-30       3                                                                           On-street parking
                                                                   Division             River Ave               2,110       28       3                                                                           On-street parking

                                                                                                                                          Striping Costs, Interim Plan:                          $ 100,800
Page 5-5

                                                                                                                                                           High Priority:                        $ 2,108,000
                                                                                                                                                        Lower Priority:                          $ 1,215,000
                                                                                                                                                                  Total:                         $ 3,423,800
increase the costs significantly. The Town must evaluate each improvement on a case-by-case basis
to determine feasibility of upgrading.

Finally, a set of lower priority improvements could be implemented beyond this ten-year period to
further enhance the network. This group of projects is estimated to cost approximately $1,215,000
in year 2000 dollars.

Figure 5-2 illustrates the network of routes that would be suitable for Type B cyclists if each of the
widening recommendations are implemented. While it is important to include all network routes as
viable bicycle alternatives, the main goal was to provide a network of safe routes that connected as
many important town destinations as possible to the greatest number of cyclists. Often, the resulting
network of routes does not result in the most direct path across Greenwich. Because the hills,
valleys, and water-courses present considerable obstacles to east-west travel, cyclists may have to
travel greater distances to avoid high traffic volume routes such as Putnam Avenue. Off-road
alternatives, such as the I-95 Shared-Use Path, can greatly enhance east-west mobility in the town.


One of the short-term improvements for implementation by the town is the development of a pilot
project that can be easily and cost effectively put in place in a local community that appears to be
supportive of bicycle planning. Based on discussion with Greenwich Safe Cycling, it has been
determined that the community of Old Greenwich would be and ideal location to start. The
following recommendations have been developed for this project:

       1) It is recommend that the Town of Greenwich adopt changes in or establish new policy to
          include striping for bicycle facilities where appropriate on town roads.

       Provisions for bicycle lanes and shoulders on roads should be made during new construction
       or whenever road maintenance is required. The routes illustrated in the Bicycle Master Plan
       should serve as the framework for bicycle facilities, and appropriate funding should be
       allocated to these projects.

       It is recommended that Old Greenwich be the pilot for immediate road striping projects. On
       roads where minor widening is not feasible, aggressive striping could potentially calm traffic
       and provide benefits to cyclists. On roads that currently meet recommended guidelines for
       bicycle routes, striping and ‘Share the Road’ signage programs can be established.

       Ideally, roads that can accommodate 12’ travel lanes and 6’ bike lanes provide the safest
       conditions for cyclists while still providing optimum throughput for vehicular traffic. Due to
       the topography, environmental conditions, and cost, this cross section is simply not feasible
       in most locations. The main goal is to provide additional benefits for cyclists within the
       constraints of the current infrastructure. The basic criterion for designing bike routes and
       providing route signage is to include a minimum 4’ bike lane or a shared lane with a
       minimum 12’ width. The bike lane is created by first defining the vehicular travel lane width
       that meet the Town’s traffic engineering requirements, and using the remaining pavement
       width to include the bike lane – provided a minimum 4’ width is maintained. Similarly,
       roads that meet the criteria for shared-use facilities can be striped with shoulders or un-

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-3
                      N                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      #                   å                        PA


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           FLO RENCE RD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   H AVEMEY
       W                         E


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ER LN


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            SH EEPHILL RD

                                                                                                                   MAPLE AV

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            B IB

                                                                                                                                                                                NOR T


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               å                                                                                                                                                          #







                                                                                                                   LAKE AVE


                                                                                                                                                                                                                HI LLS

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         STA NW

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      V ALLEYWOOD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               #                     PUT NAM

                                                                                                                                                                       P AR


                             å                                                                                                                                                                                   å

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             H RD



                                                    GL E                                                                                    RK


                                                            LE RD                                                                      LA
           PEMBE RWIC


                                                                                                                              SK                                                    #




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                R IVE R
                                                                                                                                                                  #                                                                                                                                             CK


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            å å                                                                 b

                      K RD

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     HENDRIE A

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             D RD
                                                                                                                                                                                å                                                                                                               b

                                                         ST                                               OO

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ÆÆ                                                           SUMMIT RD


                                                                                                                                                          MA SO N S
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  R IVER SIDE AV E

                                                                                                                                         L  DD



                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      #                                                                                              BE
                                                                                    AN D


                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     SO U
                                                                                UP L


                                                                                                            AV                                                                                                                            RK

                                                                                                       AM                                                                                                                               PA
                                                                                                                                                                                #                                                                                                        J






                                                                                                   å                                                   Æ
                                                                                                                                                       J                                                                            Constraints
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     # Intersection Improvement

                                                                                  Æ                                                                                                                                                  # Structural Constraint

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Activity Centers

                                                                    å                                                                                                                                                                   å


                                                                   Æ                                                                                                                                                                Æ Rail Station
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    b Parks/Recreation

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Æ Other







                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Prioritization of Routes
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Undesignated Bike Route
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Route Meets Guidelines
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           High Priority Widening

                                                  å                                                                                                                                                                                        Low Priority Widening
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           I-95 Path Opportunity
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Other Paths
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Route I-95
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           Activity Centers

                                                                                                                     ROUTE PRIORITIZATION
WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES                                                                    TOWN OF GREENWICH BICYCLE MASTER PLAN                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      FIGURE 5-2
       striped, provided they meet the minimum 12’ shared-lane width requirement. Where these
       minimums cannot be met, any additional widening or shoulder delineation is desirable,
       although such roads should not be signed as designated bicycle routes.

       Functional roadway class should be considered before any travel lane width reductions can
       be made. The percent of heavy vehicles should dictate whether or not a travel lane can be
       reduced to 10’ or less. For example, minor collectors and neighborhood streets would most
       likely experience low truck volume, while major collectors and minor/major arterial roads
       would have greater truck traffic potential. It is recommended that the town’s functional class
       designation be used as an initial indicator of truck volume, and where appropriate, current
       classification counts are performed prior to any striping.

       The following locations are recommended for striping to include bike lanes that meet
       minimum recommended guidelines:

          1. Sound Beach Avenue: From Quintard Avenue to Shore Road – Striped to include 10'
             travel lanes and 5' shoulders (would require on-street parking restrictions).
          2. Sound Beach Avenue: From Laddin Rock to Potter Drive - Striped to include 10'
             travel lanes and 5' shoulders.
          3. Laddin Rock Road: From E. Putnam to Harding - Striped to include 9' travel lanes
             and 4' shoulders.
          4. Laddin Rock Road: From Harding to Sound Beach Ave - Striped to include 10' travel
             lanes and 5' shoulders.

       The cost of striping these routes is approximately $5,300 in year 2001 dollars. The estimates
       assume a cost of $0.24 per linear foot for a 4” stripe and $0.50 per linear foot with the
       addition of bike symbol on designated bike lanes.

       In addition, several roads could achieve benefits for bicyclists by striping shoulders without
       meeting minimum recommended guidelines for bike lanes. Some cyclists would prefer to
       have some nominal width within the shoulder than none at all, and the reduction in travel
       lane width could potentially calm traffic at the same time. These roads could be designated
       as shared lane bicycle routes.

          1. Sound Beach Ave: From E. Putnam to Laddin Rock - Striped to include 10' travel
             lanes and 3' shoulders.2500
          2. Forest Ave/Tomac Ave - Striped to include 9' travel lanes and 3' shoulders.5800
          3. Arch Street, Shoulder - Striped to include 9' travel lanes and 3' shoulders.2000
          4. Lockwood Ave - Striped to include 9' travel lanes and 3' shoulders.2000
          5. Shore Road: From Stamford Town Line to Wahneta Road - Striped to include 10'
             travel lanes and 3' shoulders.5000

       The cost of striping these routes is approximately $4,200 in year 2001 dollars. The estimates
       assume a cost of $0.24 per linear foot for a 4” stripe.

       2) Erect neighborhood gateway as well as bicycle regulatory, warning, and directional

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-4
       It is recommended that gateway signage be installed in Old Greenwich as a trial location for
       shared-lane bike routes in village centers. “Share-the-Road” signs can help increase the
       awareness of motorists to the presence of cyclists. This type of signage program serves as a
       traffic calming measure in addition to creating an atmosphere that is friendlier to bicyclists.

       Old Greenwich Gateway Signage (where bike route would narrow to shared lane):

          1.   Sound Beach Avenue @ Potter Drive (north of village center)
          2.   Sound Beach Ave opposite Quintard Avenue (south of village center)
          3.   Laddin Rock Road @ Sound Beach Rd
          4.   West End Avenue @ West End Court (west of village center - where roadway
               narrows from
               30' to 25')

       The cost of signage at these locations is estimated to be approximately $4,000 in year 2001
       dollars ($1000 per location, including signs and installation).

       On roads that meet the recommended minimum guidelines in this Master Plan, bike route
       signage is recommended. Care must be taken to not over sign, as proliferation can reduce
       effectiveness. Standard MUTCD signage should be installed at the following locations.

          1.   Sound Beach Avenue: From Quintard Avenue to Shore Road (.75 miles, 4 signs)
          2.   Sound Beach Avenue: From Laddin Rock to Potter Drive: (.25 miles, 2 signs)
          3.   West End Ave (to West End Court): (.25 miles, 2 signs)
          4.   Laddin Rock Road: (.75 miles, 4 signs)

       The cost of signage at these locations is estimated to be approximately $ 3,000 in year 2001
       dollars (at 12 total locations at $250 per location, including signs and installation – assumes
       1 sign per .25 to .5 miles, each side of the road and a minimum of 1 sign per half mile, each
       side of the road).

       3) Initiate before-after vehicular speed and cyclist preference studies.

       It is recommended that the Town perform before and after studies both on routes that meet
       and do not meet AASHTO guidelines in Old Greenwich. The effectiveness of travel lane
       reduction on average speeds can be measured by installing speed tubes prior to the road
       striping and again after the striping. The constriction in travel lanes can provide the dual
       benefit of allowing more shoulder width for bicyclists while potentially calming traffic at the
       same time. The effectiveness of the striping program can be quantified and used to promote
       other projects if successful.

       In addition to the speed studies, it is recommended that the town perform a before and after
       cyclist preference study to help determine the perceived benefits of striping by the bicyclists
       using the facilities. Greenwich Safe Cycling could enlist the help of several cyclists of
       various ages and experience to ride the roads before and after the striping takes place. These

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-5
       cyclists would be surveyed and their answers recorded to help determine if a perceived level
       of safety can be obtained by providing wider shoulders.

       The estimated cost of performing these studies on two town roads is approximately $5,000.

       4) Provide additional ‘state of the art’ bicycle parking facilities.

       It is recommended that a budget line item be included to provide additional bicycle parking
       at frequently traveled town-wide destinations. These locations would start with an emphasis
       on Old Greenwich and include such places as schools, shopping areas, municipal buildings,
       and parks. The task of installing and maintaining such parking would be the responsibility of
       the jurisdictional entity under which each of these properties exist (primarily DPW, Parks
       and Recreation, and the Board of Education). The DPW will coordinate the funding of these
       parking facilities with each agency.

       Recommended bicycle parking should include inverted U and ribbon-type racks on Sound
       Beach Avenue on the sidewalk in front of stores (three racks, one on west side near to bagel
       shop and two others on east side between Arcadia Road and the gas station).

       The cost of installing bike parking at these locations is approximately $9,800 in year 2001
       dollars. This assumes that installation, vendor shipping, and staff costs are 50% of rack cost.

       5) Initiate a low cost spot improvement program.

       It is recommended that the Town remove and replace catch basin inlet grates that are
       demonstrated to be hazardous to cyclists. The type of grate that is currently used for new
       town drainage projects should be installed. At this time, the quantities and locations of these
       replacements are uncertain. Further field data will need to be collected with the assistance of
       GSC to ascertain this information.

       It is also recommended that road shoulders be cleaned of debris to provide a safe
       environment for cyclists. This can be done as part of the town’s normal maintenance

       The cost for this road modification is approximately $30,000 in year 2001 dollars.

In addition to the improvements described on the Bicycle Network Map and the Old Greenwich Pilot
Project, a number of other independent improvements were identified as desirable solutions to
particular situations that present problems for bicyclists. These improvements complement and add
to the recommendations presented in the Bicycle Network Map to form a complete system design
plan. The following are categories of independent improvements and examples of each:

Upgrade of Critical Intersections. Intersections with major arterial roads and state routes such as
U.S. Route 1 need to be evaluated further before any treatment can be recommended. Intersections
should be counted for traffic volume, existing signal plans should be reviewed, and safety evaluated

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-6
before any intersection treatment is identified. Field observation has determined that the following
intersections should be evaluated for safety and the potential implementation of bicycle friendly

   •   Putnam Avenue and Brookside Drive;
   •   Putnam Avenue and Orchard Street/Mead Avenue;
   •   Putnam Avenue and Riverside Avenue;
   •   Putnam Avenue and Sound Beach Avenue; and
   •   Putnam Avenue and Havemeyer Lane/Laddin Rock Road.

Off-road Linkages from to Key Destinations. These facility recommendations include off-road
treatments that link neighborhoods with identified key destinations. Multi-use trails and designated
bicycle routes may be considered as solutions for the areas listed below:

   •   Vacant ROW (no owner identified) connecting Hamilton Avenue to Western Middle School;
   •   Vacant ROW (no owner identified) Hendrie Avenue to Eastern Middle School and the
       Riverside School; and,
   •   Vacant ROW (no owner identified) connecting Stoney Ridge Lane to Riverside Avenue at
       Paul’s Church.

Ownership identification and desired treatment would need to be identified before costs for such
paths are estimated.

Replace Sub-standard Catch Basin Inlet Grates. It is recommended that any inlet grate that does not
meet the maximum six-inch spacing requirement be removed and replaced with the Town’s standard
inlet grate. The priority is on routes that are included on the Bicycle Network Map, but a move to
upgrade these grates on all roads should occur over time. Numbers and locations of grates need to
be determined.

Bicycle Parking Facilities. In addition to the locations from bicycle parking specified in the Old
Greenwich Pilot Project, it is the recommendation of this plan that the Town of Greenwich adds bike
parking to the Building Zone Regulations that deal with off-street parking. Bicycle racks and lockers
are needed at locations throughout the Town. The Town should use modern inverted U or ribbon
racks and should be installed at town locations based on the following criteria.

Based on a review of Sections 6-154 through 6-162 in the Regulations, the following formulation
was developed:

       With the exception of schools, land uses are required to provide bike spaces equal to 10% of
       the required automobile spaces, 5% of required automobile spaces or none, but subject to
       three qualifications:

                   a. If bike parking is required, no fewer than two spaces would be required. This
                      deals with the smaller use by requiring at least one inverted U rack.
                   b. After the first 50 bike spaces have been provided, the requirement for
                      additional spaces drops by one-half.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-7
                   c. Where the expected need for bicycle parking is uncertain due to unknown or
                      unusual operating characteristics of this use, Planning and Zoning may
                      authorize that construction and provision of not more than fifty (50) percent
                      of the bicycle spaces be deferred. Land area required for provision of
                      deferred bicycle parking spaces shall be maintained in reserve.

       In the case of schools, the requirement should include provisions for one space for every
       three students above the second grade that is not being bused to school, with a minimum of
       10 spaces.

       The 10% of automobile spaces requirement would apply to all uses except where the 5%
       requirement or none applies. The 5% requirement would apply to the following uses in
       Section 6-158 of the Greenwich regulations:

                   a. Convalescent hospitals, sanitariums, homes for the aged or children;
                   b. Supermarkets; and
                   c. Hotels.

       No parking would be required at the following:

                   a.   Commercial loading areas;
                   b.   Car washes, service stations;
                   c.   Drive-in establishments;
                   d.   Funeral parlors, cemeteries; and
                   e.   Storage facilities.

Seek Funding for an East-West Path Feasibility Study. While this Master Plan has identified the
benefits that could be achieved with an East-West Multi-Use Path, it does not provide enough detail
on the feasibility and cost of such a project. Many obstacles would have to be overcome such as
getting an easement from the State to build the trail, environmental impact, public opposition from
adjacent property owners, structural considerations, and cost just to mention a few. It is the
recommendation of this Master Plan that funding be sought to perform a trail feasibility study to
assess this trail in greater detail.


Implementation of bicycle facilities can be accomplished at two levels. Spot improvements should
be made when roads are scheduled for maintenance to eliminate immediate safety concerns (raising
drainage grates to meet the pavement surface, e.g.). A second improvement type is to perform bike
route-specific improvements. These would accomplish improvements for a significant portion of a
route (widening for example). These improvements will generally require a higher level of pre-
planning/engineering and potentially higher costs.

As noted above, key considerations when implementing bike routes are providing continuity,
connectivity and directness of facilities. Two important implementation principles are:

   •   The routes should be implemented in a logical sequence to ensure connectivity as the route

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-8
         system evolves – avoid creating isolated route segments that will create safety problems by
         stranding less skilled riders; and
    •    Facilities should provide good continuity, not switching facility types over short distances
         (ideally not less than 0.5 miles) – transitions between facility types need to be well marked
         and well planned.

Selection of the facility type (shared lane, shoulder or bicycle lane) and design (configuration and
width) will be based on a number of factors. The most important factors to consider are the design
cyclist in conjunction with the characteristics of the roadway.

On lower volume, lower speed roadways such as neighborhood residential streets, shared lane
facilities may be the preferred choice. If additional ‘protection’ for the cyclist is desired by
providing traffic calming and channelization, adding a road edge stripe should be considered. This
will create a shoulder area that will help to guide drivers. Currently, parking is allowed on most
residential streets. Designation of a street as part of the bike route will require careful assessment of
the use of parking on a street. For streets where there is higher demand for on-street parking,
additional width should be provided so as to not reduce the space available to cyclists. Infrequent,
low turnover parking should not present too high a conflict and can be allowed but should be

On higher speed, higher volume streets that are likely attract more type B/C cyclists; a bicycle lane is
the preferred facility. Bicycle lanes provide more separation between cyclists and motorists,
requiring less interaction between them.

        “Bicycle lanes can be considered when it is desirable to delineate available road space
        for preferential use by bicyclists and motorists and to provide for more predictable
        movements by each. Bicycle lane markings can increase a bicyclist’s confidence that
        motorists will not stray into his/her path of travel.” (The Effects of Bicycle
        Accommodations on Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Safety and Traffic Operations,
        USDOT/FHWA, 1994.)

In general, bicycle lanes require additional initial construction costs and ongoing maintenance costs.
Initial construction costs may be higher due to additional pavement width requirements and ongoing
maintenance costs will be higher due to more intensive signage and striping requirements.
Implementation of bicycle lanes also requires their careful design at intersection approaches. Signs
and striping should reinforce correct operating procedures by bicyclists at intersection approaches.


Overall, the Town of Greenwich should establish a methodical plan to implement the
recommendations presented in this Master Plan. The Plan outlines items that in some cases will
requires some expenditures, but many recommendations can be implemented with minimal
expenditures while significantly enhancing the quality of life of town residents. This enhancement
arises by reducing motor vehicle dependency, increasing recreational opportunities, and creating a
neighborhood ambiance with bicycle activity.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 5-9
                          CHAPTER 6 - FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES

Bicycle and pedestrian facilities can be constructed at significantly lower cost than facilities for
motorized transportation for the same capacity. Nonetheless, bicycle and pedestrian facilities cost
money. This section of the Bicycle Master Plan reviews funding opportunities available for such
facilities in Greenwich.

Federal Funds Administered by the Connecticut Department of Transportation

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, or “TEA-21”, is the massive federal
transportation-spending bill signed into law by President Clinton in June of 1998. It provided over
$214 billion in federal funds over a six-year period (federal fiscal years 1998 through 2003) to assist
states, metropolitan regions and local governments with everything from building freeways to
installing curb cuts on sidewalks.

First passed in its original form by Congress in 1956 and renewed every five or six years since then,
the federal transportation bill establishes programs and policies that guide the expenditure of
revenues from the 18.3 cent federal gasoline tax. Originally intended as funding to construct the
Interstate highway system, the legislation was dramatically altered in the early 1990s to fund more
transportation alternatives to single occupancy vehicle travel as well as include more local
government and public participation.

The passage of TEA-21 represented a major victory for advocates of a more balanced transportation
system and greater local control over decision-making. While the bill contains more federal funding
for public works projects than ever before, it also contains the most flexibility of any federal
transportation bill ever passed as well as the most funding ever – both in real dollars and as a
percentage – for community-based and environmental programs.

The Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) administers funding under TEA-21,
which is available under various programs. Bicycle and pedestrian projects are eligible under the
following programs:

       National Highway System funds may be used to construct bicycle transportation facilities and
       pedestrian walkways on land adjacent to any highway on the National Highway System.
       The proposed East-West Multi-use Path would qualify for funding under this program.

       Surface Transportation Program (STP) funds may be used for either the construction of
       bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways, or non-construction projects (such
       as maps, brochures and public service announcements) related to safe bicycle use and
       walking. TEA-21 specifies that “the modification of public sidewalks to comply with the
       Americans with Disabilities Act” is an activity that is eligible for these funds.

       Ten percent of the State’s annual STP funds are set-aside for Transportation Enhancement
       Activities (TEAs). The law provides a specific list of activities that are eligible TEAs, and
       this list includes “provision of facilities for pedestrians and bicycles, provision of safety and
       educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists”, and the “preservation of abandoned

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 6-1
       railway corridors (including the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian and bicycle
       trails)”. However, ConnDOT has committed the State’s TEA funds for entire five-year life
       of TEA-21.

       Another 10 percent of the State’s STP funds is set aside for the Hazard Elimination and
       Railway-Highway Crossing programs, which address bicycle and pedestrian safety issues.
       TEA-21 requires each State to implement a Hazard Elimination Program to identify and
       correct locations that may constitute a danger to motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians. Funds
       may be used for activities including (1) a survey of hazardous locations, (2) projects on any
       publicly owned bicycle or pedestrian pathway or trail, and (3) any safety-related traffic
       calming measure. The proposed traffic calming on Lockwood Road in Riverside would
       qualify for funding under this program.

       Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ) funds may be used
       for either the construction of bicycle transportation facilities and pedestrian walkways, or
       non-construction projects (such as maps, brochures and public service announcements)
       related to safe bicycle use.

       Recreational Trails Program funds may be used for all kinds of trail projects. Of the funds
       apportioned to a State, 30 percent must be used for motorized trail uses, 30 percent for non-
       motorized trail uses, and 40 percent for diverse trail uses (any combination).

       Provisions for pedestrians and bicyclists are eligible under the various categories of the
       Federal Lands Highway Program in conjunction with roads, highways and parkways.
       Priority for funding projects is determined by the appropriate Federal Land Agency or Tribal

       National Scenic Byways Program funds may be used for construction of a facility along a
       scenic byway for pedestrians and bicyclists.

       Job Access and Reverse Commute Grants are available to support projects, including
       bicycle-related services, designed to transport welfare recipients and eligible low-income
       individuals to and from employment.

       High Priority Projects and Designated Transportation Enhancement Activities identified by
       TEA-21 include numerous bicycle, pedestrian, trail and traffic calming projects in
       communities throughout the country.

       Title 49 U.S.C. (as amended by TEA-21) allows the Urbanized Area Formula Grants,
       Capital Investment Grants and Loans and Formula Program for Other than Urbanized Area
       transit funds to be used for improving bicycle and pedestrian access to transit facilities and
       vehicles. Eligible activities include investments in “pedestrian and bicycle access to a mass
       transportation facility” that establishes or enhances coordination between mass transportation
       and other transportation.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 6-2
       Another potential funding source established by TEA-21 is the Transportation and
       Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP). The TCSP provides funding
       for planning grants, implementation grants, and research to investigate and address the
       relationship between transportation and community and system preservation. Funding for
       the TCSP is $25 million per year for Fiscal Year’s 2000 through 2003.

       TEA-21 also creates a Transit Enhancement Activity program with a one percent set-aside of
       Urbanized Area Formula Grant funds designated for, among other things, pedestrian access
       and walkways and “bicycle access, including bicycle storage facilities and installing
       equipment for transporting bicycles on mass transportation vehicles”.

       Pedestrian and bicyclist safety remain priority areas for State and Community Highway
       Safety Grants funded by the Section 402 formula grant program. A State is eligible for these
       grants by submitting a Performance plan (establishing goals and performance measures for
       improving highway safety) and a Highway Safety Plan (describing activities to achieve those

       Research, development, demonstrations and training to improve highway safety (including
       bicycle and pedestrian safety) are carried out under the Highway Safety Research and
       Development (Section 403) program.

State, County, and Local Funding

While TEA-21 is a valuable source of money, it only accounts for roughly one-third of
transportation investments made by state and local governments every year. As described in the
recommended set of improvements, many improvements relate to items such as signs and striping
that will likely be implemented and maintained as part of regular operations and maintenance
activities. Larger projects, such as minor or other widening of roadways may only be possible when
the roadway would be reconstructed through regular programming through the town’s Capital
Improvement Program or as part of the ConnDOT Transportation Improvement Program. It is
critical that segments on the Bicycle Network Map that are being improved be identified and
bicycling accommodations be incorporated into the design.

Private Funding

Funding by the private sector should not be overlooked. Bicycling should be an element of
company wellness programs. This may provide workplaces incentives to provide facilities such as
bicycle racks and showers and lockers. Companies may also contribute to bicycle facilities that
serve or pass closely by their site. Bicycling can be an important part of reducing parking
requirements and demand for employers.

Town of Greenwich Bicycle Master Plan                                                 Page 6-3