mrdoright0405

Prohibited in Alabama and Georgia also.

Shimpie

Unless absoulutely necessary, you won't find me on the shoulder of a freeway! I've seen cyclists riding along Interstate 5 at Camp Pendleton (north of San Diego). The speed limit is 65 mph. However, no car seems to travel that stretch slower than 75 mph unless the popo is in sight. I've always thought it was so dangerous to cycle where there is such a difference between cycling and driving speeds. Just a small piece of gravel from a passing semi would do all sorts of damage.

-Shimpie

DnvrFox

I don't think that getting hit by someone going 40 is going to be any safer than someone going 75!

Admittedly gravel might be a problem, but at least around here in Colorado, the shoulders are generally pretty wide.

One strange advantage is that the rumble strips (which are now universally installed on freeways in this state) will give you some extra protection from errant and wandering mortorists. A rumble strip might have saved the life of the biker in Summit County killed by a 17 yo girl who was looking at the clock when she wandered into the shoulder, hitting and killing the biker.

We have lots of places where a freeway is the only way to get from one town to another - either because of mtn passes or simply a lack of roads between distant towns. If that is the case, bikes are allowed on the freeway. For example, from S of Colorado Springs to Trinidad and beyond. Have seen a number of bikes on the shoulder in this section. Even the Santa Fe Century utilizes about 10 miles of Interstate 25 on the official route. No problems that I have heard of.

DieselDan

With all the backroads in Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and North Carolina, there is really no real need to bike on an interstate highway.

ngateguy

You see a lot more bikes on that part of I-5 since they closed the trai; down that goes through the base.

madpogue 

The 200-person podunk towns sounds a lot like most of WI, north of the Dells or so. But for the most part, the roads are paved. Oh, duh, that's right, we had 14 years of a governor (member of the party that's always calling for term limits, but I digress...) who was in the back pocket of the roadbuilding industry.


So before the Interstate system went in, there were no paved roads thru these passes (WA) or between these towns (CO)? Wow, I never thought of the I-system as serving exclusive local city-to-city access (other than as a faster alternative to existing access). I had no idea that settlements so close geograpically were so isolated before the I-system.

DnvrFox

No.

The interstates followed the same routes as the previous connector 2 lane paved highways, supplanting the former 2 lane roads. Strange they didn't do the same thing in Wisconsin? Did your road building governor keep both the old road and the new interstate? How wasteful!

DnvrFox

https://transweb.sjsu.edu/publications/BikesAndPeds.htm

Colorado

DnvrFox

Strange as it may seem, they had paved roads between them. Those roads became the interstate system.

Colorado Springs - Pueblo 42 miles
Pueblo to Walsenburg - 44 miles
Walsenburg to Trinidad - 37 miles

And there are no other roads - paved or not, unless you might like to make a 150 mile detour through Rocky Ford? Or Canon City?

Once you get into New Mexico, towns are generally scores of miles apart.

madpogue 

Well, the I-system was built decades before our road-happy gov took office. But yeah, this pretty-much describes the entire midwest, south and east coast. The state and US federal highways and county trunks are all still there. Wasteful? Hmm, haven't noodled that thru. True, generally, we've built too many roads. A local county board sup, who's also director of the area Sierra Club, quips "Paving your way out of a traffic congestion problem is like eating your way out of a weight problem." But surface roads between cities do serve a purpose. I don't think I'd want to bicycle the Interstate to, say, Milwaukee.

Wow, this whole notion of taking out surface roads for Interstates is a bit mind-blowing to me. Not sure what to make of it, socio-politically. Part of me sees the whole point of not over-paving. But part of me sees it as further expression of "screw those of you who don't want to go everywhere at 65 MPH". Puzzle, puzzle....

khuon

I grew up in the Chicago area. I used to spend many of my summers cycling around northern IL and much of WI. I for one loved the forgotten roads in WI. I do see the quandry you're facing but the thing is, the roads are already there. Yanking them out would require more resources to be spent in both time, material, labour and the added pollution accompanying that. I imagine that most of them have very little actual traffic these days as most people would opt to take the newer faster routes. This leaves you with roads that require much less maintenance and IMHO offer much prettier scenery for people like cyclists yet will get you to the same places as the freeways. Here near the mountains, it's expensive to simply build a new parallel route through the passes so the older roadways were simply built over with the newer ones and thus we have no choice but to ride the freeways. I don't like it and would prefer much quieter scenic roads than sucking down diesel exhaust from the 18-wheelers and worrying about the errant weekend driver with the swinging RV hanging off the back all the while toeing the line which seperates the right lane from the shoulder. FWIW, the amount of times I've actually cycled on a major expressway I can count on one hand.

DnvrFox

Sometimes I don't think folks realize how spread out and isolated much of the west is.

And, our east-west network of non freeway roads is much better than our north south. Think of Colorado as 3 separate states -

1. The plains east of the rockies - actually about 1/2 of the state geographically. Movement in this area was east to west and roadways generally followed this pattern.

2. That tremendous barrier - the Rocky Mountains. You only build roads where you can put them through passes or tunnels. That is is. We have just two routes west from Denver - I-70 and US 285. US 6 is so dangerous and busy that bicycles are prohibited (rightfully so) - it is congested with usually over-drinking folks returning from the casinos in the Central City Area. MAny terrible accidents on this route. US 40 doesn't even start until you get past Idaho Springs in the mtns. There are also some roads connecting valleys and towns in the mtns, but to get there you must use one of the two routes. This causes tremendous congestion on weekends and holidays. These roads are tremendously expensive to build and maintain.

3. The Western slope, which does have a few north-south non-freeway corridors. Utah, to the west, is a vaasstt area of desert and openness. Over 100 miles between some towns, as is the case in parts of New Mexico.

So, the geography is quite different than Wisconsin, and therefore, the road system is different.

montana_cyclist

Yes like Smurfy said, riding on the interstate system is allowed in Montana. I find riding on the interstate much more enjoyable than riding on the 2-lane roads with less than a 2-ft shoulder with cars going by at upto 70 mph. About 80% of the semis will pull into the other lane on the interstate, if they are not blocked by other traffic, when passing cyclists. I also periodically get flats from the wire from radial tires and am concerned about rocks, etc., but overall the experience with the wide shoulders and rumble strips on the interstate is much better than on the 2-lane roads. I commute on 2-lane roads and prefer to avoid peak traffic times even in this small town with pop. 9,000.

Marshall

supcom

In Texas bicycles may be excluded from portions of interstates either by the state or local jurisdictions. However, those sections where bicycles are prohibited must be marked with official traffic-control devices. This is per Chapter 545.065 of the transportation code. I believe that, by default, the interstates are open to bicycles in Texas.

In fact, I know of two charity rides that use the frontage road of I-30 for their routes and the Adventure Cycling Southern Tier cross country route uses interstate highways (not frontage roads) in West Texas. At least, that's the impression I get from reading journals of those who have done it.

I have also ridden countless times on the I-30 frontage road East of Dallas and have never been stopped by any of the frequent DPS, county, or city police that patrol that road.