bike  

[BIKE] Cyclists urge support for Route 202 bike paths in Birmingham

John Boyle
Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:20:50 -0800

Some classic myths being tossed around in this article, always amazed how the press gets it wrong every time.

myth #1 - no one bicycles, (1.2 million Delaware Valley Residents do, On average 75,000 bicyclists take 120,000 daily bicycle trips)
myth #2 - bikes are for recreation, (20% of all bike trips are not for recreation)
myth #3 - bike lanes are bike paths (The proposed alternate route and accommodation of bicycles on 202 are separate issues, adequate shoulders are planned for the entire route. Bike lanes on route 202 apparently have been rejected).
myth #4 - no one will bicycle or walk to shop – Maybe not the customers but the workers do, but these people often fall through the cracks of public awareness.

http://www.dailylocal.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13603644&BRD=1671&PAG=461&dept_id=17782&rfi=6

The Daily Local

BIRMINGHAM -- The state Department of Transportation has already rejected building bicycle paths as part of its Route 202 widening project, but cycling enthusiasts are still soliciting support from municipalities.

Township supervisors here voted Dec. 6 to endorse a request from the Chester County Cycling Coalition and county planning commission to ask PennDOT to look at alternative means of transportation as it plans to widen Route 202 from West Chester to the Delaware state line from four to six lanes.

 

PennDOT is required to consider such paths when planning highway expansions, as well as changing signals, intersections and planning for mass transit.

However, municipal support influences PennDOT’s decision whether to include the alternative pathways, according to Ray Sachs, a traffic planner with the Chester County Planning Commission.

Sachs asked the Birmingham supervisors during that Dec. 6 meeting to write a letter asking PennDOT to investigate the possibility of including bike paths. However, Tim O’Brien, portfolio manager with PennDOT, said on Dec. 9 that his department had already rejected bicycle paths as part of the project because "they did not meet project needs."

When told about PennDOT’s rejection, Sachs said he was unaware of any formal dismissal. Sachs added that the joint venture between the planning commission and the cycling coalition wants to get the idea "on the plate" for Penn-DOT’s final environmental impact statement.

The Birmingham vote, 2 to 0 with one abstention, means only that township supervisors agree that PennDOT should investigate the possibility of putting in bike paths, walkways and crosswalks over Route 202, not that those paths should necessarily be constructed. According to Sachs, West Goshenand West Chester have already agreed in making the request. Westtown and Thornbury are still considering the idea. (Note: Westtown and Thornbury have endorsed the idea)

He said bike paths and crosswalks would allow people ways of getting to and from restaurants and retail shops without the need to drive their cars. Sachs presented the Birmingham supervisors with a preliminary concept of what the planning commission and cycling coalition see as a possible bike path along Route 202. He said the bike route through Birmingham would be along the highway, not on paralleling streets such as Old Wilmington Pike.

Sachs stressed it was "conceptual only" and that Penn-DOT might come back with something completely different.

He said there was a possibility of safety barriers for cyclists, or simply for wider shoulders. There could also be crosswalks so pedestrians and cyclists could cross Route 202 safely.

The overall idea, he said, was to allow alternative means of transportation, but he could not be specific on what percentage of the population might use the alternative methods of cycling or walking to a shopping center or restaurant.

Bicycle paths in Philadelphia are being used, he said, but he admitted it is only a small percentage of the population using them. Sachs also said townships could reject a proposal PennDOT made if it didn’t meet with supervisors’ approval.

Resident reaction was mixed.

Several residents, such as Helen Mozzani, don’t like the idea at all.

"I would not walk any trail to do grocery shopping, and I wouldn’t dare ride a bicycle," Mozzani said.

Sachs agreed most people would not use them. However, others differ in their opinion. Lyman Welch urged supervisors to send the letter of support and said he would use bike trails and hoped to see pedestrian crosswalks across Route 202.

Richard Gross, chairman of the township Recreation, Parks and Open Space Committee, recommended support, saying many people would use pedestrian overpasses if they were available.

Supervisor Bill Kirkpatrick voted for the request, saying he "would be loath" to preclude PennDOT from looking at the possibility of bike paths. He said he’s always made sure his children ride their bicycles only within their residential development because that was safer than riding elsewhere in the township.

Supervisors’ Chairman Richard March also voted in favor, but with less enthusiasm than Kirkpatrick. March said he would prefer the Chester County Planning Commission be the entity seeking township support rather than the cycling coalition, a private organization. He made it clear the township letter asking PennDOT to make the consideration was being sent to the planning commission, not the cycling coalition.

March said it would be inappropriate not to allow the consideration of the paths, but based his vote on Sachs’ comment that the township could reject a PennDOT recommendation the supervisors didn’t like.

"We owe it to the residents to see if there’s any benefit so long as it’s in the investigation stage," said March after the meeting. Abstaining was Supervisor David Bortner, who said he was "lukewarm" on the idea, adding: "I have an unprovable suspicion a small group of cyclists has gotten the ear of the Chester County Planning Commission."

Bortner also said during the meeting that since the request was forwarded through the RPOS Committee, he felt the matter had more to do with recreation than with traffic.

Delaware County is also involved because the stretch of Route 202 under consideration runs through Chadds Ford, Concord and Bethel townships.

Tom Shaffer, manager for transportation of the Delaware County Planning Department, said Delaware County has recommended PennDOT consider a pedestrian facility for the entire length of the portion of Route 202 being considered for widening. Shaffer said the entire length, from Delaware to West Chester, should have sidewalks or trails because of the mix of land use -- residential, commercial and retail -- and because of a possible bus route running the length of the widened area.

Justin Dula, the highway and bicycle planner for Delaware County Planning, said members of the Bicycle Coalition of greater Philadelphia and the Delaware Valley Bicycle Club have expressed interest in a "more scenic" parallel bike route beside Route 202.

However, Dula said Delaware County has made no formal submission for bicycle paths because the plans for the Route 202 widening include shoulders that are wide enough to accommodate cyclists.

 

©Daily Local News 2004

 

  • [BIKE] Cyclists urge support for Route 202 bike paths in Birmingham John Boyle