Safety
and Design
Is
Liability a Problem?
Occasionally
trail skeptics
and opponents
claim that the liability
risks posed by multi-use
trails are so great
that the community
cannot afford
the insurance necessary
to protect itself
from lawsuits
and
legal judgments.
However, virtually
all the managers
of existing trails
dismiss
the liability
problem as negligible.
Since most trails
are owned or operated
by a public
entity such as
a county park
and recreation
agency or a state
department of natural
resources,
the risks
associated with
the trail are
folded into
the overall insurance
policy of the county
or
the
state. When
asked, most trail
managers are not
even able to identify
what percentage
of their insurance
premium
is due to the
trail.
Obviously trails
need to be properly
and
safely designed.
Bridges need adequate
planking
and standardheight railings,
tunnels need protection
from rock falls
and trestles
need certifications
of safety. Nevertheless,
within the spectrum
of public
facilities,
trails are inherently
safe and less
dangerous
than roads.
Crushed
Limestone or Asphalt?
| Crushed
Limestone |
Asphalt |
| PRO:
Cheaper
than asphalt
to build |
PRO:
Holds up
under maintenance
vehicles |
| PRO:
Fewer problems
with weeds |
PRO:
Handles
heavy rains
without
eroding |
| PRO:
Few potholes;
no seams,
patches
or cracks |
PRO:
Ideal for
all bikes,
roller blades,
wheelchairs,
and scooters |
| PRO:
Moderate
and light
rains generally
soak in
|
CON:
Weeds and
cracks require
patching |
| PRO:
Preferred
by snowmobilers |
CON:
Not “natural” |
| CON:
Heavy rains
can cause
significant
erosion |
CON:
Disliked
by snowmobilers |
| CON:
Maintenance
vehicles
on the trail
may create ruts |
CON:
More expensive
than limestone |
| CON:
Difficult
for thin
bike tires
and wheelchairs,
and impossible
for roller
blades |
PRO-CON?:
Snow melts
faster |
According
to the American
Association
of State
Highway
Transportation Officials
(AASHTO)
bicycle guidelines,
under most
conditions,
a recommended
paved width
for two-directional
bicycle path is
10 feet.
Eight
feet is
considered
the minimum
width
but this
width
should only
be used
when there is
low bicycle
usage,
little expected
pedestrian
use, and
no
anticipated
maintenance vehicle
loading
conditions
causing
damage
to the pavement
edges.
Many states have
gone
to a 10
feet minimum
width
for bike
paths
and 12 feet
in
high use
areas.
The AASHTO
Guide for
the Development
of
Bicycle
Facilities
is the primary
guidebook
for facilities
built with
transportation
funds.
The Guide
is
available
for $30
from AASHTO
at 202-624-5800,
800-231-3475,
or visit
http://www.aashto.org/
Prepared
by Kevin
Struck,
UW-Extension
with revisions
by the
Oneida County
Biking |
