3 ms·
You could also take unused railroad tracks and pave over them. It's been done elsewhere. Nice, long, straight bike paths.
by mtowle 13y ago
You could also take unused railroad tracks and pave over them. It's been done elsewhere. Nice, long, straight bike paths.
- pkulak 13y agoYes, that is a fantastic option, and why Minneapolis has such great bike path, I believe. But, you've got to have the tracks first, and I'm not sure many cities do. And even then, you can't choose where your paths go.
- jchrisa 13y agoOr the train company owns it and expects to use it "someday" so they stonewall.
- toomuchtodo 13y agoAre there any concepts where you can pave down the center and on the sides of tracks? To keep the track useful for later use, but to still allow cyclists to use them?
- egypturnash 13y agoThis strikes me as a terrible idea for two reasons. 1. Slim bike tires getting stuck in the grooves left for the train tracks. 2. Big trains with a ton of inertia running at ~50-60 mph using the same route as cyclists going at ~10-20 mph.
- toomuchtodo 13y agoI'm not speaking of city tracks, where the rails are integrated with the pavement. I'm talking about tracks where they have ties in the center, and using concrete in the center between the rails to create a path. Also, I'm not implying using it for high-speed trains and bike trails at the same time. I'm suggesting being able to go back to use of the paths for trains, and not tearing the tracks out.