The widest bike path I have seen (so far)

Came through there on Thursday and couldn't believe it:

http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/Bikepath1.JPG

Yes, it is a MUP but I think one does not have to be concerned about
running into pedestrians when you can give them 50ft or more of
clearance. Even for a loose dog it would be a serious cardiovascular
exercise to chase a cyclist. The ones I encountered were very behaved.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Looks like it is gravel. So its probably a dike to keep the water/ocean beside the gravel road from flooding. They just put gravel on the top to allow service vehicles to drive on it easier than dirt/mud. Making it a multi use path for walkers and bikers was simply because it did no harm to its true purpose. Its not a MUP as you claim.

Its the exact same concept as the 50 mile long paved bike path on top of the dike on the north of Netherlands. It was built as a dike to keep the ocean out. And then because the Netherlands is bike friendly, they decided to put a paved path on top. But its a dike first, the path is just a fortuitous benefit.

On Saturday, November 12, 2016 at 11:12:53 AM UTC-8, wrote:
Looks like it is gravel. So its probably a dike to keep the water/ocean beside the gravel road from flooding. They just put gravel on the top to allow service vehicles to drive on it easier than dirt/mud. Making it a multi use path for walkers and bikers was simply because it did no harm to its true purpose. Its not a MUP as you claim.

Its the exact same concept as the 50 mile long paved bike path on top of the dike on the north of Netherlands. It was built as a dike to keep the ocean out. And then because the Netherlands is bike friendly, they decided to put a paved path on top. But its a dike first, the path is just a fortuitous benefit.

It's great when you can incorporate a bicycle facility into other infrastructure, like a dike. I'm writing a letter to the Donald to see if we can incorporate a MUP on the top of the new wall between the US and Mexico, e.g. http://www.airpano.ru/files/china_wall_01_big.jpg

-- Jay Beattie

On 11/12/2016 12:53 PM, Joerg wrote:
Came through there on Thursday and couldn't believe it:

http://www.analogconsultants.com/ng/bike/Bikepath1.JPG

Yes, it is a MUP but I think one does not have to be concerned about
running into pedestrians when you can give them 50ft or more of
clearance. Even for a loose dog it would be a serious cardiovascular
exercise to chase a cyclist. The ones I encountered were very behaved.

Finally, we have at least one SAFE place to ride!!!!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2016-11-12 11:12, wrote:
Looks like it is gravel. So its probably a dike to keep the
water/ocean beside the gravel road from flooding. They just put
gravel on the top to allow service vehicles to drive on it easier
than dirt/mud.


It's ok even with road bikes as long as you don't have really flimsy
tires on there.


... Making it a multi use path for walkers and bikers was
simply because it did no harm to its true purpose.


It was recently changed. Used to be a narrower path and now they opened
it up across the whole top of the dike.


... Its not a MUP as you claim.


It is a MUP and signed as such.


Its the exact same concept as the 50 mile long paved bike path on top
of the dike on the north of Netherlands. It was built as a dike to
keep the ocean out. And then because the Netherlands is bike
friendly, they decided to put a paved path on top. But its a dike
first, the path is just a fortuitous benefit.


Right, but it's a marvelous idea. Dikes tend to run in a straight line
and get you from A to B in a jiffy. Unless the wind is too strong and
comes from the wrong direction.

For me singletrack is all I need.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Saturday, November 12, 2016 at 3:42:11 PM UTC-6, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-11-12 11:12, wrote:
Looks like it is gravel. So its probably a dike to keep the
water/ocean beside the gravel road from flooding. They just put
gravel on the top to allow service vehicles to drive on it easier
than dirt/mud.


It's ok even with road bikes as long as you don't have really flimsy
tires on there.


... Making it a multi use path for walkers and bikers was
simply because it did no harm to its true purpose.


It was recently changed. Used to be a narrower path and now they opened
it up across the whole top of the dike.


... Its not a MUP as you claim.


It is a MUP and signed as such.

I ride on roads and streets with yellow signs with a bicycle on them. So according to your logic these are bike trails? And MUPs since I have walked on these streets and roads. The thing you posted is a dike to keep water back. The authorities put a gravel road on top to allow service vehicles to drive on it. Then someone said why not let bikes and walkers use it too. Its still a dike.

I can nail a tire to my joists in the basement and then hang clothes hangers from the tire. Does that make it a clothes rack? According to you it does. Just like you think a dike with a gravel road on top is a bike path.




















Its the exact same concept as the 50 mile long paved bike path on top
of the dike on the north of Netherlands. It was built as a dike to
keep the ocean out. And then because the Netherlands is bike
friendly, they decided to put a paved path on top. But its a dike
first, the path is just a fortuitous benefit.


Right, but it's a marvelous idea. Dikes tend to run in a straight line
and get you from A to B in a jiffy. Unless the wind is too strong and
comes from the wrong direction.

For me singletrack is all I need.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 2016-11-12 13:57, wrote:
On Saturday, November 12, 2016 at 3:42:11 PM UTC-6, Joerg wrote:
On 2016-11-12 11:12, wrote:
Looks like it is gravel. So its probably a dike to keep the
water/ocean beside the gravel road from flooding. They just put
gravel on the top to allow service vehicles to drive on it
easier than dirt/mud.


It's ok even with road bikes as long as you don't have really
flimsy tires on there.


... Making it a multi use path for walkers and bikers was simply
because it did no harm to its true purpose.


It was recently changed. Used to be a narrower path and now they
opened it up across the whole top of the dike.


... Its not a MUP as you claim.


It is a MUP and signed as such.

I ride on roads and streets with yellow signs with a bicycle on them.
So according to your logic these are bike trails?


No. Obviously there are motor vehicles allowed on them and that is not a
MUP in the usual sense. The path I showed is only allowed to
pedestrians, horse riders, cyclist and state service vehicles. Just like
other MUP are.


... And MUPs since I
have walked on these streets and roads. The thing you posted is a
dike to keep water back. The authorities put a gravel road on top to
allow service vehicles to drive on it. Then someone said why not let
bikes and walkers use it too. Its still a dike.


Same with a rail trail. It is usually a rail bed which was converted to
a MUP. Which is a very good thing IMO if the traffic warrants the
expense. The one they are paving east of here right now does not warrant
the expense, wrong priorities.


I can nail a tire to my joists in the basement and then hang clothes
hangers from the tire. Does that make it a clothes rack?


Sure. It's a redneck clothes rack :-)

Just like a tire tied to a tree branch with a rope is a ... swing.
Because it works as one.]


... According
to you it does. Just like you think a dike with a gravel road on top
is a bike path.


Because it is one. Not a bike path but a MUP.

Same here, a very nice bike path and best of all without a speed limit:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-3gnLIUum0

Yes, the canal was there first. That does not make it any less a bike
path and it is mapped as such.

Or this one which I ride regularly:

http://eldoradotrail.com/wp-content/...ut-228x300.png

All on maps as bike trails respectively MUP. As they should be.

[...]

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Per Joerg:
They just put
gravel on the top to allow service vehicles to drive on it easier
than dirt/mud.

Does anybody else think that the right kind of packed gravel is easier
to ride on that asphalt?
--
Pete Cresswell

On 2016-11-12 14:50, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
Per Joerg:
They just put
gravel on the top to allow service vehicles to drive on it easier
than dirt/mud.

Does anybody else think that the right kind of packed gravel is easier
to ride on that asphalt?


Not with my road bike but with the MTB it doesn't make much difference.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

goo.gl/N89moJ