[rola643]

Good idea but IMHO infrastructure needs to be in place first that makes this idea safe and work.

How Biking Can Save Cities Billions of Dollars in Health Expenses -... - StumbleUpon

[Poolie]

Would be great idea except for the infrastructure as Rola mentioned and most people I know simply don't want to exercise.

[photosbymark]

First thing that caught my eye is that 70% of all car trips are less than two miles. Well that depends on who and where you take a survey. Maybe in the middle of a downtown urban area, but I know how many car trips I have taken in the last year less than two miles. Its easy to compute. None. The closest store is about 7 miles away.

[froze]

Like Poolie said, most people don't and won't exercise so it's a waste of money to spend billions doing something that only 1% of the population would ever use. I ride the bike paths in my town and on occasion I run into another cyclist, but for the most part their semi deserted. The only busy part of the paths is the part where a popular park is and people are either walking the path or riding around in circles around the park, but the path network is about 30 miles more then just around the park, and once you get outside the park I may run into a couple of dozen riders along the 30 mile stretch.

I use to live in California and Bakersfield had about 60 miles of paths, and again, except where there was major popular park, most of the path was lightly traveled, granted more traveled then here in Fort Wayne Indiana, but still not used enough to justify the millions of dollars it cost to put the path in! I did live in Santa Barbara CA and those paths were will traveled for the most part, but it is a college town, it's a tourist town, it's along the coast, and people who live there like to get out, and a lot of people ride the paths simply because housing is so expensive it leaves very little money to own a car or own a decent one for a lot of people so their almost forced to use the paths. But a town like Santa Barbara would see more use of paths so in those areas I could understand, but for other areas I have a difficult time with the expense.

I've run into this argument before that I think it's a waste of taxpayers moneys to built these paths for such low amount of usage, I think cyclists would be better served if we just had separate lanes marked on regular existing roads, and it would be cheaper thus more lanes could be put in. The average separate bike path cost about a million dollars a mile to construct, the average bike lane cost an average of $23,000 a mile; so guess which one I think would be more suitable? Most cyclists I ever talked to vehemently disagree with my position, that's ok, it's just an opinion. But with communities already on the edge of financial collapse it seems unwise to have projects like that...as well as other wasteful projects. All these wasteful projects do is force the communities to raise property taxes and sales taxes to cover these expenses which straps homeowners and renters with the increase costs of higher taxes. Of course communities get federal grants for these projects, but grants still come from taxpayers.

[photosbymark]

I am of a different opinion still. The 23,000 a mile means to do a century on a bike lane is 2.3 million dollar investment. That makes no more economic sense that dedicated bike paths.

[Noel]

More importantly and allot cheaper then dedicated bike lanes and bike paths, we need laws that keep cyclists safe and they need to be enforced. I believe that bike lanes and paths can work against cyclists rights because they reinforce the idea that bicycles don't belong on the roads with the rest of the traffic and that the anti cycling contingent would want to confine bikes to the limited options they offer. As far as I know, in all states, cyclists have the same rights and responsibilities as drivers of motorized vehicles. There needs to be more education of motorists and cyclist to teach all how to travel on the same roads safely and with mutual respect. As cyclists we need to be ambassadors of good will. The more predictably and courteously we ride the more motorists will respect our rights.
I learned to ride a bike in Queens NY and later on Long Island. The most important thing I learned from riding in such high traffic areas is that you must always be on the alert, you need to be hyper aware and always ready to react. That and making sure that you are as visible as possible and to never make any unpredictable movements into traffic. So far this has kept me safer then any bike lane ever could.
Someone please tell me when to stop preaching.

[froze]

Originally Posted by photosbymark

I am of a different opinion still. The 23,000 a mile means to do a century on a bike lane is 2.3 million dollar investment. That makes no more economic sense that dedicated bike paths.

You think that 23,000 a mile is the same amount of money as a million a mile? So you would rather see taxpayers spend 100 million on a dedicated bike path instead of 2.3 million on bike lanes?

By the way the range for putting in bike lanes is between $5k and $50 per mile; see: walkinginfo.org: Bicycle Lanes
Bike path construction varies wildly due to land costs vary wildly from one city to another.