rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn) (10/30/85)
> >I don't object to bike paths as long as they are part of the road. I > >refuse to use a bike path that is separated from the roadway, since > >they subject me to the same dangers that sidewalks do. The dangers > >of separate bike paths have been well documented. > > I lived in the Netherlands for four year. They had bike paths and > they worked GREAT. The path was right next to the sidewalk, usually > with a grass median between the bike path and the road... We have a variety of paths, lanes, etc. in Boulder. The paths are a problem and account for more accidents than the lanes. One of the problems is that when a path comes to an intersection, it brings the bicyclist into the intersection in a way that motorists aren't expecting and often can't see well. Running a bike path next to a sidewalk, which is particularly common near the CU campus, is a disaster; the average pedestrian's mental state differs only slightly from comatose. Worse yet, the city likes to swap bike path and sidewalk--they're not in a consistent relationship with respect to the street (as in sidewalk closer, say). Finally, the city seems to like to build these artsy-fartsy bike paths that curve and swoop around--extra curves for no apparent reason, and they even plant trees or run paths near existing trees so that you can get scraped and/or be unable to see around the next unnecessary curve. -- Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303)444-5710 x3086 ...At last it's the real thing...or close enough to pretend.