Old 07-17-21, 09:06 PM
  #20  
canklecat
Me duelen las nalgas
 
canklecat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Texas
Posts: 13,513

Bikes: Centurion Ironman, Trek 5900, Univega Via Carisma, Globe Carmel

Mentioned: 199 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4559 Post(s)
Liked 2,802 Times in 1,800 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions
The MUPs in New England are a totally different story. I ride them and all kinds of roads, and often the MUPs are relatively sparsely populated and considerably faster than roads. The only roads where I can get longer uninterrupted high speed riding are rural state highways with wide shoulders.

I did give up on them last year, but this year, they're back to normal.

Sorry, but your story of inevitable decline just doesn't jibe with what's going on here.
Noted. I'll try to remember to modify my generalizations from "all" to "most" and from "inevitably" to "usually."

I've seen photos of good MUPs. I've just never seen or experienced one in person. Our extensive MUP throughout my region is mostly makeshift, just repurposing existing old utility easements, slapping on a coat of chipseal, some ridiculously narrow paving, or indifferently maintained gravel.

And usually it's the infrastructure that determines how it's used, rather than people misusing shared infrastructure. Good urban planning and infrastructure design are forms of nudge theory, accommodating the way real people use shared resources in the real world, rather than unrealistically expecting people to adapt to poor design.

Originally Posted by SoSmellyAir
I have seen pretty much everything you described above in my local MUPs except (1) sexual harassment and (2) homeless people. I generally prefer to ride in the bike lane on local roads, which have better surfaces than the MUPS, although bike lanes have their own dangers too.
I'm not sure whether sexual harassment is a daily thing here on the MUP, but it is reported often enough in local social media to know there's a valid concern. Oddly, most of it seems to be reported along the most heavily traveled segments, rather than in the more isolated areas. Some of the complaints indicate the offenders may be mentally unstable or simply lack self restraint, or chose the most heavily used areas out of some attention-seeking compulsion. One of the offenders who was arrested seemed eccentric but not homeless or mentally ill. Either way, it's a valid concern to the victims.

I do occasionally see homeless folks camping along the more isolated segments of the MUP, but there are no extensive semi-permanent encampments, no reports of systematic harassment of trail users. In my experience, most homeless folks who choose to camp out in the parks and near the trails just want to be left alone. Those I've spoken with tend to be reclusive, sometimes with schizophrenia or mental illnesses that make them uncomfortable in crowds, and they dislike the noisy, aggressive vibe of the designated homeless shelters.

There has been one instance I know of in which a mentally ill homeless man brutally murdered a jogger. The victim's wife took her own life soon afterward out of grief. The murderer had a history of mental illness and hospitalization, but not violence (if I'm recalling correctly, it's been a few years, and that occurred in Dallas, not in Fort Worth where I live). Unfortunately that kind of horrific incident is what many folks remember when they expect the MUPs to be patrolled and enforced the same way as motor vehicle infrastructure.

Originally Posted by SkinGriz
^ This. I respect all the users on the path. But I’m a dad with little ones. They are learning how to ride, be safe, get back over after they pass, etc.

I do think it’s arrogant to not realize “I was 7 once also, I did a ton of stupid stuff. So I’ll be gracious to those families learning to use the trail.”

And some families just kind of barely meander along 4 or 5 wide. Yes it’s frustrating, but they do the same thing in Walmart- so it’s not personal.
There are parts of our MUP that wind through the parks where lots of families congregate. My attitude is that I'm briefly borrowing their park, and ride accordingly. I don't expect them to move out of my way. Pedestrians, joggers, folks with families, etc., shouldn't feel pressured to constantly jump off the paved path to accommodate speeding cyclists. These trail segments are only a few hundred yards to maybe a mile in length, so it's not asking much to expect cyclists to slow down a bit and show some consideration and patience.

And those are the segments being widened. So it's relatively safer for cyclists crossing in opposing directions while passing pedestrians. But it'll be interesting to see whether simply enlarging and widening infrastructure actually improves it. There are theories among urban planners and highway designers that traffic always expands to accommodate expanded infrastructure, so the same traffic problems eventually persist.

I doubt the initiative to expand the local MUP will continue. It was a pet project of the former mayor, who was also an active cyclist and jogger. There was a lot of political antipathy toward that mayor last year, including disdain for accommodating cyclists when some residents feel their own neighborhood deteriorating infrastructure is being neglected in favor of cosmetic improvements that benefit a limited demographic where gentrification is the priority.

There are also often alternate routes -- a parallel crushed gravel path that's much wider than the pavement, easy to ride with anything other than skinny road bike tires at maximum inflation; and paved roads for cars with side parking, a speed limit of 15 mph and, in my experience, preferable for cycling than the paved MUP.
canklecat is offline