Re: 10/07/05: Do we belong on bike paths?

something that I suppose tht needs to be kept in mind is that a recreational
trail IS shared among many people, not the exclusive property of one group,
which is what the automobile drivers believe the streets to be. Actually ALL
are "shared use roadways" and concessions MUST be made to acomodate the
users of these pathways /roadways that are not as "fast" as the other users.
The situation of walkers and kids on tricycles and such like on recreational
trails is very much like that of bikes and trikes on city streets. tey have
every right to be there, so should you as a "responsible" rider be unhappy
because someone not of your mindset about travel is using "your" pathway?
Maybe you are not most pleased by walkers but what do you feel about cars
who blast past you on streets too close? Is there some similarity here?
 I ride on streets, I enjoy recreational trails and I am known to use
sidewalks too. But the KEY to all of these is courtesy to other users. True
some may not be as smart as you, since they are not riding a trike but are
instead walking and slowing you down and blocking your obviously important
progress. But what do they know, they are only walking!
(this is somewhat tongue in cheek)
 Personally, I LOVE to see people on our bike trails! It makes me very
pleased to see that our local recreational trail, called by critics "The
recreation Department Folly" is used by families, riders, walking couples,
children, skaters and everyone else! Personally when I am on it, or on the
street even, am looking at getting where I want to go as safely as I can,
not as fast as possible.
 I am surre that a car can go MUCH faster than the "speed limit" allows. But
they don't (usually) because of other traffic.
  Anyhoo....enough lecture!
mark

 On 10/7/05, Richard Guy Briggs <rgb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 07, 2005 at 08:34:50AM -0400, Jules D. Zalon wrote:
> > I don't want to sound like a heretic, but I wonder if trikes belong on
> > bike paths at all. And whether the term"bike path" isn't a misnomer
> > anyway. It is often used interchangeably with rail trail, isn't it? My
> > beloved GTO is 36 inches wide; my DFs, only 18. But even that
> > understates the difference, because you can use body English on a DF
> > to weave around an obstacle or walker when passing on a narrow path,
> > something you can't do on a trike. I read somewhere that the minimum
> > width of a one-way "bike path" is 6 feet; two-way width is 10, but
> > often is only 8. But walkers often walk 2-abreast, and even if they
> > anticipate being passed by an 18" wide bike, the idea of being passed
> > by a trike probably never enters their minds. Therefore, they won't be
> > thinking that they must allow all that much room on the path for a
> > trike.
>
> Ottawa doesn't have such a beast called a "bike path", so any ignorant
> motorists that tell me to use it, I tell them no such thing exists if I
> get the chance. We have on-road bicycle lanes and non-road "shared
> recreational pathways" that are shared with pedestrians, toddlers,
> strollers, dogs, kids trikes, skateboards, rollerblades, wheelchairs...
>
> I have a similar problem, my GTV being a metre (39.25") from axle to
> axle. The numbers I have heard are 1.5m (4.5') for one lane of a bike
> lane or shared recreational pathway. Many of the bike lanes here are
> less than 1m and some are as little as 75cm. The old shared
> recreational pathways are barely 1m per lane, but all the new ones are a
> decent 1.5m.
>
> I'm not a big user of shared recreational pathways, using them only the
> alternatives are out of my way, or I'm not in such an agressive riding
> mood. The pathways here did have a recommended posted limit of 15km/h
> (9mph) but in the last decade or more it has been set at 20km/h (12mph).
> The amount of traffic on the path and the speed limits usually determine
> if I use it.
>
> The use of walkmans and reluctant pedestrians is another reason to use a
> combination of bell and horn.
>
> I frequently drop a wheel onto the grass to get around obstacles on the
> path.
>
> > So the very thing that protects us on the roads from cars overtaking
> > us [the novelty of seeing these unusual contraptions] puts walkers in
> > danger, because they don't have eyes in back of their heads.
> >
> > So I'll just keep riding the roads, and leave the paths to more
> > "narrow"-minded cyclists.
>
> Works for me...
>
> > Jules.
>
> slainte mhath, RGB
>
> --
> Richard Guy Briggs -- ~\ Auto-Free Ottawa! Canada
> <www.TriColour.net <http://www.TriColour.net>> -- \@ @ 
> <www.flora.org/afo/<http://www.flora.org/afo/>
> >
> No Internet Wiretapping! -- _\\/\%___\\/\% Vote! -- <Green.ca<http://Green.ca>
> >
> <www.OpenSWAN.org <http://www.OpenSWAN.org>
> >___________GTVS6#790__(*)_______(*)(*)___<www.Marillion.com<http://www.Marillion.com>
> >
>
>
> &quot;Download your pictures for free at
> ftp://www.ihpva.org/incoming/&quot;
> trikes mailing list - trikes@xxxxxxxxx
> http://www.ihpva.org/mailman/listinfo/trikes
> %(disclaimer)s
>



--

"Life is short....Ride Naked!"

Post message: IowaVelomobiles@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe: IowaVelomobiles-subscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unsubscribe: IowaVelomobiles-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List owner: IowaVelomobiles-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


&quot;Download your pictures for free at ftp://www.ihpva.org/incoming/&quot;
trikes mailing list  -  trikes@xxxxxxxxx
http://www.ihpva.org/mailman/listinfo/trikes
%(disclaimer)s