Archives
Links
DJWriter
The blog of Chicago-based freelance writer David Johnsen.
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
The Bike Path Trojan Horse
In a recent issue of Adventure Cyclist magazine, editor Mike Deme described the construction of bike paths as "heartening" news. This seems rather naive coming from the editor of a magazine devoted to bicycle touring, published by an organization that has been mapping road routes across America for almost 30 years. Bike paths can be used to undermine the rights of cyclists to use the roads.
Some bike paths are fun to ride. They carry riders on scenic routes away from "civilization," often along rivers or through forests. My upcoming book, Biking Illinois, will have a 50-50 split between road and trail rides, focusing on such scenic paths. But too many "bike paths" are just glorified sidewalks, particularly in urban and suburban areas. They are neither safe nor fun to ride. Their only purpose is to get bikes off the roads.
Many cyclists and cycling lobbyists reason that new bike paths are good because roads are "too dangerous" and more paths will get more people on bikes. But a lot of motorists like them, too. They see bike paths as a way to get bikes off "their" roads. As a cynical cyclist, I view bike paths as nothing less than a trojan horse offered to the pro-bike movement. Once these "separate but equal" facilities are constructed, it will be easy to pass laws forcing cyclists to use them. And once cyclists accept those laws, the next round of legislation may very well declare that bikes are only allowed on off-road paths or trails.
It is already happening. Lake Bluff, an upscale Chicago suburb, is crossed by several paths. The roads are as wide as or wider than those in neighboring towns, traffic is not particularly heavy, and the speed limits are 45 mph at most. Although these would be good roads for cycling, bicyclists can't use them. When a road rider reaches the village limits, he encounters "no bikes" signs that force him off the road and onto a parallel bike path.
But bike paths are not ideal for many riders. Cyclists who cruise the streets at 15-25 mph cannot ride nearly as fast on paths without endangering themselves and others. Paths are full of walkers, runners, rollerbladers, and children, and many have sharp curves with limited visibility. Sidepath users are less visible at intersections than road users, which makes every street crossing inherently more dangerous on a path. Forcing cyclists onto paths in essence makes them second class citizens by denying them access to the roads their taxes have paid for (it is a common misconception that gas taxes fund all highways; a large portion comes out of the general fund).
I can't see why more people in the cycling community, particularly lobbyists, do not recognize the danger of bike path proliferation. Paths turn bikes into mere recreational vehicles or toys, when instead we should be looking at bicycling as a viable, healthy means of transportation that doesn't depend on fighting wars in the Middle East. We should be putting our efforts into programs like Complete Streets that strive to accommodate rather than segregate bicyclists (and pedestrians) with better roadway designs.
Labels: bicycle advocacy
- posted by David Johnsen @ 10:35 AM
