Bikeforums.net is a forum about nothing but bikes. Our community can help you find information about hard-to-find and localized information like bicycle tours, specialties like where in your area to have your recumbent bike serviced, or what are the best bicycle tires and seats for the activities you use your bike for.
07-10-11, 07:29 AM
I've noticed that the term "Bike Path" is dying and being replaced by "MUP". I don't really care since I'm a dedicated road rider, but I do find it curious of this name change. Was there ever an attempt to make a true bike path, only for bikes?
I personally think (speculation) there was a push to make strickly bike paths, but it soon became apparent that these facilities attract other users and since it's not something that can easily be regulated it just had to be accepted.
07-10-11, 08:27 AM
There are several paths in the Minneapolis/St. Paul area that have both a bike path and a pedestrian path running in parallel. That's nice in theory, but many don't understand the concept, even with clearly marked paths. Most walkers do stay on the pedestrian path, and most cyclists stay on the bike path, but some hit the wrong one, joggers never seem to know where to run, dog walkers with long leashes may be walking on the pedestrian path while their dogs are on the bike path, inline skaters still interfere with biking, etc.
Perhaps the "cleanest" example is the Cedar trail heading west of downtown Minneapolis, that actually has three paths: pedestrians, and then one for each direction of cycling--sort of a bike freeway. This stretch probably has the highest percentage of "correct" use.