Lighting. They need to be lit up at night.

tl:dw - Cyclists use the most appropriate route for their journey, just like cars use the most appropriate roads for theirs. Cyclists will avoid a path because it doesn't go where they are trying to get to, the other users are going too slow, it's unsafe, closed, etc. May as well ask why motorists don't use side streets when there's an arterial roadway that they can use.

The big reason I don’t use pathways is because of walkers, so many people walking take up the entire path.. I’m constantly dinging my bell and some people think that’s rude of me, like I’m honking a horn at them. Plus most of them have earbuds in and don’t hear my bell anyway so I scare them on the way by. I’ve been yelled at by way more walkers than motorists

I love how security is not a concern in Canada, here in Colombia it's a major problem and those pathways are the perfect place to get robbed.

I really wish we could get to Dutch standards of riding.

It's also worth mentioning that there's the 20km/h (12 miles/h) speed limit on pathways. And there's 400CAD fine for speeding (going over 10 km above the limit) in Calgary. Which makes pathways less usable for bike commutes.

it's so true, your compliments and criticisms, exactly my experience here in Toronto as well... it's one of those catch-22s: they're recreational, but the municipality will pretend it's transportation, but not in a way that makes it usable as transportation, and then the anticycling crowd gets to pretend cycling just isn't popular

Bike paths often force bikers to compete with pedestrians, the worst being those with dogs on a 20 foot leash. The speed limit is often 10 mph. Thanks for limiting me to barely more than running speed. Then the need to go up and down curbs every 500 feet. Cars coming from parking lots aren't looking for you because you are not in a regular automobile lane. Then the path changes lanes all the time so you constantly need to search for the correct place to ride. I completely agree with this video. I'm from Minneapolis and honestly, as bike friendly as it is, I think most people resent bicyclists.

On the safety note, they're often unlit and isolated. Which means a lot of folk don't feel safe using them after dark. The nice trees block line of sight, so you don't know if someone is there. And if something happens, you're to far away from anything else for people to hear you if you call for help.

My bigest gripe about MU pathways is there is always some group of 5-6 people all walking side by side takeing up 90% of the path. I normaly come up on at least 3-4 of these groups from behind every time and I have to slow down to nearly walking speed ringing my bell till they move over enough to pass. Second bigest is the dog walkers who walk on one side of the path and let their dog wander over to the other side with that wonderful tripwire between them (also called a leash). I hope whoever came up with those extending reel leashes is cursed to stub their toe every time someone clips one on to their pet.

We have these in the Netherlands too, often when the main route takes you through a park or something. The difference is, that they're designed to be part of the main cycling and walking networks and basically help you to get where you want to go. For instance, I used to live in Amsterdam North and to get to work in the Sloterdijk neighbourhood I could take the bus and train, or I could cycle to one of the free (at least for pedestrians and cyclists) ferries and cut through Westerpark. The main pathway is super wide and almost straight. After cutting through it I'd be dumped on separated bicycle lanes until I finally have to make a real turn not 250 meters from the office (of course, even turning kept me on separated lanes which take me literally to the bike shed build into the office building).

One reason why I can't use them is in our country they have a 10 km/hr limit. As a fraction of my normal riding speed this is like putting a 30km/hr speed limit on the M1. And if you exceed that? Well a car doing 120 km/hr in a 100 zone gets a 300 dollar fine. A bike doing 20 km/hr on a shared pathway is given a $1600 fine. Some of the shared pathways contain chicanes that are difficult or impossible to navigate. They are only suitable for mum dad and the kids at walking pace.

Totally agree with you. Wished you have mentioned the failure of cities to clear snow from these paths or the failure to clear snow from them in a timely manner. I live in Des Moines. Iowa, and we have a wonder network but all the same issues as you have. Flooding is a major issue for us.

It’s wonderful to have options :). I have two routes I can choose to get to the grocery store and back. One is surface streets, the other is a multi-use pathway. On the weekends the pathway is very busy with pedestrians, joggers, and kids riding bikes. On those days I take the streets, because I’m ok with riding with traffic of the vehicular kind, but more worried about accidents with pedestrians, dogs or small kids. The multi-use path is also at an incline, so sometimes if I’m feeling lazy I’ll ride the path “downhill” to the store and then take the level surface streets back instead of cycling uphill with 40 or 50 lbs of groceries (I ride a cargo bike).

4:10: In the Netherlands there would be a concrete wall between the cycle path and the water, keeping the cycle path dry. There are even paths that are permanently lower than the water level in the waterway directly next to it.

my dad is visually challenged but LOVES cycling. his eyes have gotten worse and worse so he no longer rides, but one thing that gave him troubles was those little poles at the edges of the pathways. in my town, they are a yellow color up against a beige gravel path, meaning they are virtually invisible to him.

Another problem with multi use paths the way that they're generally designed in Canada is intersections. They're where proper protected cycling infrastructure is needed the most yet there's very little thought given to designing them with safe cycling in mind. Cyclists are often expected to get off and walk across the intersection, which defeats the purpose of cycling in the first place. Dutch style protected intersections are slowly starting to appear in Canada but they're extremely rare.

I'd also add that pathways tend to be much hillier than roadways which can be an additional deterrent.

Cyclists and pedestrians share little in common other than they both are non-cars. In a car-centric society it's kind of logical to bundle them up on a shared pathway. From another perspecitve, it's as logical as to make high-speed trains share the highways with cars; it sounds like a stupid idea since it wouldn't end well for either cars or the trains, but nonetheless this is exactly waht is being done when mixing pedestrians and cyclists. Two different sort of traffic.

The pathways need to be cleared of snow in winter. It's like the city waits for demand to build up before they do any changes in their priorities for routes. A city needs to be prepared with a proactive plan that actually works, to encourage cycling and year round cycling. The alternative is for an activist group (or more) to do this planning and oversee their activities.

Once you do get used to riding on the road you realize it's not as dangerous as it looks or first seems. Especially if you are assertive with your position. Recreational paths/shared use paths are really frustrating on busy routes, pedestrians and cyclists riding for transport do not mix well. I'm pretty shocked that a speed limit could be enforced on a vehicle that doesn't have an odometer I would love to see this challenged in court. Using these paths to try to get across Calgary when I cycled across Canada I got lost numerous times when there was a gap between the bits of the path.

Good points. For me, the biggest challenge is pedestrians. You need to be alert and I don't like making them feel nervous. Still multi-use paths are a great boon.

Safe covered parking where I would be comfortable leaving an expensive bike. Many time, I will drive instead of ride to a grocery store, drug store, or to get a haircut because there is no safe place to leave my bike.

A couple additional points. Paths are... - often unlit. - often more vertical. - not cleared of snow (at least not quickly), or simply closed in winter.

"Hold on - there's a duck" - LOL; are ducks that unusual to see?

Where I‘m from (Berlin), the cycling network kind of connects such paths with sidestreets and bike paths. I personally like to use these paths because they are way less stressful than cycling next to a road. The problem with these are in my experience: - usually they aren’t directly; this kind of wears off the further my destination is away, and then I also accept a more comfortable route when I don’t have to be stressed about traffic. - there are many more turns and detours than on the main roads, which is annoying and slow - some of them are very crowded with pedestrians and this isn’t very comfy - they aren‘t sometimes well maintained and the asphalt isn’t in a good shape - there aren‘t enough to exclusively go to every point in the city I think such paths make very well main cycling network, but solely relying on them brings you nowhere. Main roads need protected bike infrastructure, but you also need such paths to ensure a comfortable and unstressed experience. In my city they built 100km cycle highways, they are just for bikes and very directly. This is very good, but it’s like with a highway: if there aren’t any roads that connect to them, they are useless.

My town (in the UK) was designed and built in the 1960s/70s when I believe multi-use pathways were all the rage. Subsequently it’s absolutely covered in them. They’re amazing. The only issue they have is not being maintained as critical transport infrastructure, the vegetation alongside the path rarely gets cut back in the summers so can narrow the paths at areas, surface repairs take months to get done, and they’re only ever ploughed or gritted in winter if they happen to run parallel to a main road.

Interesting. Commuter cyclist here and my route to work has paths parallel to my route for a 50% of the way to work but I still opt for the shoulder except where there is no shoulder. A number of reasons for this. One is that the path is well offset from the road which means cars on side-streets cross the path before stopping and waiting to get onto the main road. You have to ride substantially slower just to be able to stop in time for the cars popping out of nowhere from sidestreets. Pedestrians, especially those with dogs on long leashes are also an issue. Also for certain stretches, the path is only on side side, which makes the issue of cars popping out from side-streets even worse because they are looking in the opposite direction from where you are.

Awesome videos man!!! These are great for people looking to start commuting to work. Will be passing these on to friends. Thanks for the great videos

That is a great point about pathways being shut without any detours or warnings or timely repairs. When I ride to work, there are sometimes obstructions due to construction, trail damage after a storm, or river flooding etc. and there are no detours.

We have a very lengthy pathway along the oklahoma city river. I absolutely love using the pathway. Provides me a good mix of straight road and small hills. Plus I can just casually ride and enjoy the scenery, and being able to easily stop and take pictures. Good video as all these things definitely do happen. Thank you.

With the rising popularity of electric bikes comes higher speed and longer reach for a larger population of cyclists. Therefor the need of a more dedicated bike lane system - in towns but also in suburbs and even the close to town countryside. If the “average Joe” would consider cycling within i a mile or two, with electric bikes that range is tenfold.

Thanks for your videos. I live in Calgary too and have been commuting by bike for 10 weeks now. Gonna try it out through winter. Best thing is it takes half the time as the bus and it's free!

I ride in bike lanes and MUP paths all the time when I ride with no problems and I won't ride on a road unless it's a side street because I don't have a death wish.

The problem in my city is that bike infrastructure outside of the main pathways is nonexistent. Like most roads surrounding the pathways have little to no bike lanes and people always drive around 50 mph (nearly 100kmh) on main roads. So you’re essentially forced onto the sidewalk most times or to the gutter if there’s no sidewalk.

Where I live we have these bike lanes on the pavement/sidewalk, separate from the road traffic, but there’s lots of side roads and dropped kerbs for entrances to car parks or gateways. It means you have to ride along looking over yourself shoulder regularly, speeding up and slowing down, going up and down things all the time. Riding on the road is much faster and smoother but also safer because you aren’t going to T-bone a car emerging from a gate.

Multi-use paths are yet another symptom of North American planners' view of cycling as a sport rather than a transportation mode: they literally lump cyclists together with other forms of athletic mobility (skating, skateboarding, running, and recreational walking) and make them all use the same path, even though these various travelers cannot safely share a right-of-way without making some inconvenient compromises.

I agree a mixed bag. Some other pros and cons 1) here at least some will separate people from bikes in two different parallel paths Smart! 2) scenic. Better to see nature and rivers rather than another late capitalist strip mall 3) meet people (by the way. I meant scenic in more than one way) 4) roadies avoid them so less judgement or unsolicited advice. 5) lined with water fountains and trash cans and plenty of trees where you can sneak off to take a #1. Other cons: 1) often every single road crossing is a stop sign and can be hairy to cross. You’d think they would have the deadly vehicles be the one to yield but nooooo. 2) they often don’t go anywhere. If a path happens to take you to a useful point A to B that is pure coincidence (due to they are often built from old rail road or utility corridors) 3) around here. They are unlit and technically closed at night. Now sometime I enjoy night ride by moonlight but I’m weird. 4) pedestrians do not pay any Fing attention. If they got headphones they cannot hear you coming. Bonus points they have a poorly controlled dog or child. 5) they like to build the bridges out of wood here (great idea in the lightning capital of the world occasionally one does burn down!) which when coated with wet leaves is slick AF.

Bikeways have too many signs telling cyclists to get off and walk.

I use pathways as much as possible for walking, cycling, and riding my electric scooters. I find they’re always the best route when they’re an option. If they’re not, then they’re not being built in the right places.

Another limitation is when the pathway is full of people, it becomes so slow that you might aswell walk. I ended up riding on a busy road instead of a safe parallel pathway as the pathway was just so slow and full of people on my commute.

I always appreciate it, when there's a dedicated cycle route, to any destination. Unfortunately, whilst getting much better, certain parts of London seems to be so far behind other world cities, when it comes to the cyclist, and I often have to ride on roads in heavy traffic, which can be pretty terrifying at times!

I just found your channel, I know this is an old video and you might not see the comment, but it is very true. I cycle from dowtown Calgary to UofC and sharing the pathway with pedestrians is always difficult. Specially in the sections that the paths divide and the pedestrians remain on the bike lanes instead of using the appropriate one

The path to my job has me almost there when I have to go on a road with cars!

I hate mixed use pathways. Pedestrians tend to have no awareness of their suroundings, changing direction without looking and not noticing bikes approaching from behind unless they use a bell. Even small groups can clog up the whole width of a path - I've had single persons block a whole path that was at least 4 meters wide by walking in the middle and constantly changing directions at random without looking back more times than I can count. Bonus points if they wear headphones so even using your bell doesn't help.

My partner won't ride to work because the bike path route is double the distance. It's so frustrating. I ride to the shops on bike paths and am slowly getting to the point where i will choose to use the roads because it is time wasting to do double the distance. All your comments were so true.

The biggest problem are blind and deaf zombies taking up the whole road, and thinking everyone else is a nuisance.

My big reason for not riding on mixed use, are the rude dog walkers that think its ok to let there pet wander across the path, and therefore block everyone else with those damn long leashes. And it really irritates me to see a sign telling us that bikes must yield to pedestrians, but do not tell dog walkers that there dog should yield to me!

The "bike" paths in my city is about a little noodle lane in the middle of a 50mph highway

I live in airdrie/Calgary area. glad I found your channel. one great thing about this covid-19 issue is there are more cyclist for the better. it's great to know the bicycle shops and stores are busy. wondering too if you would do a video of the rotary/Mattamy greenway. would like to know if it really goes around Calgary. thank you.

We have lots of these in the uk and they typically come in the form of closed railway lines. this makes them function like highways in many places. Fantastic for getting between towns or from one side of the city to the other but rubbish for shorter trips due to the lack of exits and the distance from shops and services in places

Dog walkers with leashed 🐕 are more of an issue ironically than when the dogs are doing their own thing. Dogs are much quicker to adjust if needs be and not be in the way. And of course all those walkers who are invested in walking the middle path.

Thank you for the great video. May I know the brand and model of your bike? Thank you

Where I live there are two multi use pathways that run parallel to each other about 7 miles apart from each other. If you want to ride without cars you need to at least ride for several miles before you can pickup on one of these. Also one is pretty much right next to a car lane so I'm not even sure if it counts. The other one is closed for five months now due to construction right in the middle with a detour going thru the city.

The occasional bike cop on the trails wouldn't suck

Wow, your city is beautiful. Those scenery pathways and extensive network of bike lanes make me feel like I Iive in shitty city 😅

York Region in Ontario keeps proposing multi-use paths running beside major roads, allegedly for recreation and transportation. It seems like failure is guaranteed. These are noisy unnatural settings, so they are unlikely to attract many recreational users. If one were to be a success as recreation, there would be too many pedestrians for safe cycling at a speed suitable for cycle commuting. The proposals do not connect places people would walk for transportation. A couple of existing multi-use paths beside roads are almost completely empty. The lack of pedestrians might attract cyclists, but design discourages them. Although the paths follow dead straight roads, the paths zig-zag dangerously around poles, trees and other obstructions. I once asked about design speed and got a blank look. Every road has a design speed but it never occurred to the engineers that the principle also applies to bicycle infrastructure.

My city has some very narrow, busy multi-use pathways near a college, and they are virtually unusable for cyclists on weekends and afternoons. They are meandering like you mentioned, and the shear number of people, often walking slowly shoulder to shoulder makes it extremely difficult to pass safely. Of course it doesn't really lead anywhere useful, so it's not like anybody uses it for anything other than recreation.

I'm in Ottawa and so much of what you say in this video also applies here.

Great video

Maintenence is awful. City of Calgary, with empty pockets forgot to repave many many sections. I got a rim cracked last year plus two flats. Very sad, Calgary pathways used to be famous, let's see if a new mayor gets the work done .

You forgot the one way that even gets people killed taking multi-use pathways. When the pathway must cross a side street, often visibility for drivers is poor, so they get run over. And that's how someone got killed.

Does Calgary maintain mixed use trails for winter?

I live in Carmel, Indiana, which has a huge system of pathways that run alongside most major roads as well as a major rail-trail with the Monon. Unlike greenways and pathways/rail trails which can be a bit windy, because these are alongside the roads, they generally are pretty straight. Or if they are windy, it is because the road itself is windy too. One of my big safety issues with pathways and greenways is tree roots. These can cause a lot of sharp bumps in a paved pathway which can be dangerous for people on two wheels and make it an accessibility issue for those in wheelchairs, using strollers, etc... Another issue with pathways is with roads, bridges, and general intersections. Often the pathway and the road, bridge, or intersection aren't lined up or don't "ramp up" well causing a sharp bump which can definitely be a flat tire danger. Finally, detours are a pain. The Monon Trail in Indianapolis recently got a bridge over 38th St. Great! But during construction, the detour dumped you onto a neighborhood street which probably hadn't been repaved in a decade or two. A very, very bumpy ride which could cause a flat tire if not careful.

I love the multiuse pathways here in Sudbury (Ontario) mountain bikers have made a lot of bike trails off them, theyre a good detour and a lot of fun. I just wish the city winter maintained them. Sure dog walkers squish down the poofy snow so we can bike on it but running over 500,000 frozen boot indents isnt exactly the most enjoyable experience. So many of them connect together well enough to get across the city but more often than not you need to go down roads without bike paths to join them together.

Pathways are similar to sidewalk. But the payment is much smoother. Rollerbladers love pathways. I almost hit one several times. They take unpredictable directions directions, so I actually felt a little more comfortable with cars for this reason. I also hate going around groups of pedestrians especially children. So bike lanes would be better. Yes! Pathways are not straight. But if no one is using them, you can cut some real time. Reason? There usually no lights. So I take the park's path to avoid lights. But there is a real hill section, because they wanted to make the park more scenic. So I took the down hill as fast as I could to make that steep hill. Paths can also be shortcut to certain areas. So I use it to get to the other side. Unfortunately, the lead to stairs. But if I used the sidewalk or streets, I will be like walking like a "L" The parks department manage these path very well. But sometimes they do get flooded. So compare to sidewalks and bike lanes, they are generally better. The sidewalks and bike paths are rarely maintained. Sidewalks come up in certain places. And bike lanes are often place where sewer drain are. Vehicles oil waste often ends there as well. Sometimes garbage, which eventually leads to cracks. Sidewalk to street don't always have a disability section. You have to slow down or stop for vehicle right turns. They are not expecting a bike. Some who see a bike feel they can maneuver that turn fast than that bike. They do it with pedestrians, but they can stop suddenly. A bike can't, making a bike on a sidewalk almost as dangerous on the street. They are also private driveways to consider, which is why bike speeds must be slower on the sidewalk vs bike lanes or pathways. No one is expecting a bike to show up out of nowhere. At least when a bike is in a street, pedestrians know. Because they looking for cars that travel faster. But cars don't like bikes, because they move much slower than cars. Some drivers make sudden moves to get away from bikes for this reason, which could cause an accident. Anyway, Pathways are best to use when pedestrian traffic is lower, which is out of season.

Shifter starts a serious explenation about safety on pathways... Hold on There is a duck!!! I love this guy!

My biggest problems are two things you didn't even mention: Dogs and people with ear buds in.

In my city, and i think sweden in general, multiuse pathways are actually treated as traffic infrastructure, though since my city only has bike paths that are shared with pedestrians (though often segregated) i can't really compare how they feel to fully separate bike paths.

I agree with you completely.

The flooding on a lot of the MUPs in Ottawa, the capital of Canada, is not "just happening". They were all actually aplanned and built in lower, known flooding areas. In contrast, all the roads for car drivers were carefully and thoughtfully raised and built further away from the river. The MUPs are unusable by cyclists for a good month or more in Spring (April- May), as I'm sure you were able to.experience in 2018-2019, 2 consecutive years of "once in 100 years" flooding in Ottawa-Gatineau.

Another problem where I live is household bins are left out on the pathway so you can't get past and some barriers are not suitable for tricycles.

Thanks!

Thank you for pausing to show us the duck! A great video but the duck was an extra surprise

Other negatives about multi use pathways are the idiots that use the middle, people pushing a pram often right down the middle, joggers and dog walkers often with several dogs. Punters are a problem too. On the Golden Gate Bridge I once saw a father with his kid riding and the kid had a lollipop sticking out of her mouth. Tourists stop at the towers and take phots blocking the lanes and take offense being told to get the hell out of the way.

One advantage of many multiuse pathways, including many in Calgary when I lived there, can be fewer road crossings per kilometer than if cycling city streets. In jurisdictions that have adopted the Idaho stop for cyclists, this is less of an issue than it used to be, but it's still nice not to have to cross roads as often, where that's the case for the pathway.

An odd thought, but speaking as an American, I just noticed that you aren't wearing a helmet. Is that normal in Canada like it is in the Netherlands or is it a personal thing?

I hear you. We have a number of pathways in Minneapolis and surrounding suburbs. But they are all disconnected. Honestly, if we did treat these are transportation like we do motor vehicles, I could live pretty car-free. Hope Calgary and the rest of North America will finally embrace other modes of transportation soon

I used to ride along the Charles River in the Boston Metro Area. It ran along the River but that means the bike path crossed the bridges which crossed the river. There was no special bike signals. One day I was crossing one of these bridge roads, I could see the road had a red light (I couldn't see the light for the road parallel to the bike path) and half way across the road the light changed. Well a car stepped on it and knocked me over. Fortunately they didn't run me over. Not the best design though.

Just like a racetrack (recreational roadway) doesn't replace the need for normal roads. :)

Multiuse pathways are a bad compromise. Better than no bike lanes at all, but still not good enough. Pedestrians and bikers don't mix.

I dunno, this might be a Calgary thing. My city's cycle network needs some work, but the pathways are working really well. We have a north/south pathway that runs the length of the city and connects to a few east/west paths that run the width. Just that barebones arterial network of three or four trails does soooo much for bikeability. Now we just need to get the on-street network where it needs to be...

"hold on, there's a duck" me everytime i'm out and about biking.

Multiuse pathways are a boon for recreational riders (weekend warriors, and/or those family biking outings) and walkers and joggers. Even if it is clearly marked which is for bikes and which is for pedestrians, the pedestrians will always take both sides. It never fails. You could repurpose a six lane blacktop and give them 5 lanes, they will take all 6. Pathways are a huge waste of money and resources. The pedestrians have a sidewalk. The bikers are left battling with cars.

We got like 2 of those here in Puerto Rico. One of them goes from one municipality into other 2. But they do not connect into roads so you can use it for transport.

In my town there is one pathway that curves along the northern part of town going through a park and the zoo , but it's for recreation, not commuting. If you are going to the store or any public building you either have to choose the road or the sidewalk along main street. It's not technically legal to ride on the sidewalk, but it's safer than the street. Its awful how there just isn't any safe bike infrastructure in my town.

I been riding for years Your rite on 👍

In my city I’m sometimes forced to cycle on the road with the traffic when the shared use path is too crowded with pedestrians, dog walkers, joggers, mums with prams and wayward toddlers. Also I don’t want to have to give way at every side road which our local council seems to think is acceptable.

Here in Warsaw, Poland, the city council has built hundreds of kms of cycle pathways. Some are great with smooth asphalt, but others were built many years ago and were made with red brick. These latter types of paths are really uncomfortable for those of us on road bikes, so I use the road and, of course, encounter verbal abuse from some drivers who couldn't tell the difference between different kinds of bikes if they jumped up and slapped then in the face. :)

With my hardtail 29er I will always make my own detour lol

Bike lanes are ghettos also. :-) Nice, necessary, but incomplete, sporadic and coated with road detritus.

I hate shared multi-use pathways with a vengeance. When out for a stroll you're forced to pay constant attention and hold your kids tight. When cycling to work I share my road with dogs (and leashes), old folks and even worse: people with I-phones. There's constant breaking. The problems are bound to escalate with faster bicycles made for commuting - especially s-pedelecs. Here in Stockholm pedestrians and cyclists kind of shun each other, with some non-cyclist saying "bikes are worse than cars!" Just imagine if pedestrians had to share their space with cars.

I never ride anywhere but on MUP’s. Ohio has an extensive system. A couple small towns have pedestrians. There are a couple of riding stables. But it’s basically a bicycle network. Town to town. City to city. I’ve ridden it all. A piece at a time. I really don’t like traffic.

Also a lot of the time, they are "closed" during times when I would be potentially be commuting. In a lot of places they are considered "parks" so they keep a "Dawn til Dusk" schedule which usually means they organization was too cheap/lazy to light the path. Not an issue for me because I have really good lights. But yeah I know people who have been stopped by police for using the path at night. Really dumb.

The bulk of the problems you mentioned are not a problem when the pathways don’t suck. The pathways in the city where I live are usually a more direct route than taking streets, are never closed without a detour or flooded, and go very long distances with good connections to places and other transportation infrastructure. Many of them also have overpasses and underpass at major roads. 100% better and safer than biking on the streets.

We have paved paths where I live in Michigan, but you cannot get to them except by riding on roads with NO space for bikes, or sidewalks (which is fortunately legal here). Most paths are well maintained, but it turns out the closest one to my home is practically abandoned. Tree roots breaking up the pavement, weeds, overgrowth, glass where the paths go under road bridges. I even bought a folding saw so I can remove fallen tree limbs! On the nicer paths, there are lots of pedestrians, but I'm one of the polite riders who slows down, rings my bell, and says "Passing on your left!"... only to see a "roadie" in spandex blowing past children at 20mph unannounced 🙄 Of course, headphones make it impossible to alert some people, and when they are jogging with headphones and a dog on a 10 foot leash, I just ride through the grass to get around them. Flooding can be an issue, and it's rare that I get back home without mud on my bike. One spot is permanently covered in 3 inches of standing muck, so I go on the road, but the guard rail prevents me from getting back on the path for almost a mile.

In Minneapolis, I've been almost run-over by "cyclists" that insist on riding at over 20 MPH while I'm trying to enjoy a pleasant ride around the famous Lakes. Bicycle regulations should recognize that bicycle riders have diverse speed choices. That said, I don't think riding at over 20 MPH is safe on a bicycle because the machine provides no protection to the rider and it's a spindly structure that invites crashes from even small road hazards like a fallen branch, a pothole, or streetcar flangeway. That's another reason I prefer not to exceed 15 MPH when I ride.

In the last 3 years, our network of pathways have become tent slums for drug addicts. I stopped using the paths in the center of the city because of that.

You don't need a bike Helmet in Calgary?

Where I live, packs of immigrants absolutely love to walk on those pathways and take up the entire thing. I make sure not to slow down and pass super close by them.