‘The Department of the Interior is anti-cycling’
1902 | Wikimedia Commons
Your daily Letter to the Columnist — March 12, 2013
Thank you for your story highlighting the difficulties cyclists are having with the Blue Ridge Parkway Superintendent. I attended a number of public meetings last year regarding trail plans for the Blue Ridge Parkway property.
Although these sessions were intended to allow for public comment the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Department of Interior representatives really had no interest in what we had to say as a cycling community. It could not have been more evident that the Department of the Interior is anti-cycling. If I had to hear “historical use” (read cars only) one more time I thought I might start screaming at officials.
I do not use the parkway to commute, (which I’m sure doesn’t fall under historical use either) but instead wish to enjoy its scenic beauty on two wheels rather than four. It reduces my carbon footprint and provides excellent health benefits for me and my family. Why the cycling community has to continually fight with the Blue Ridge Parkway Superintendent and the Department of the Interior is beyond me.
Weather permitting I ride my bike from my house in Raleigh Court down to the greenway and up and down Mill Mountain on a weekly basis. I’m a mountain biker. The Parkway Superintendent hates me even more than road cyclists. Here’s a story that illustrates that point for you.
The Parkway Superintendent refuses to allow the City of Roanoke to install a trail head sign on the Wood Thrush trail because the trail head is on park service land. Doesn’t matter to them that more than 90% of the trail is on city owned property. I’ve discussed this point a couple of times with Christine, the Mill Mountain Park Supervisor.
Kristine McCormick
ROANOKE
March 12, 2013 - 1:30 PM
OK, you are not going to hear me defend the Obama Dept of the Interior but I missed the anti-cycling part.
Dan I very seldom agree with any of your opinions but this Parkway story does hit me where it hurts. I am not a cyclist but I was a runner in my day and I would use the Parkway for some of my favorite courses. Before they lost so much funding they had more patrol officers and they would come up behind us and turn on their load speaker radios and say “RUN OFF THE PAVEMENT AND IN SINGLE FILE. They did not want runners, walkers or cyclist on the Motorway. The Parkway employees did not consider the Parkway for anything but motorized vehicles they only refer to it as a MOTORWAY.
We were interlopers on the governments property back then. They have tried to close off entry points that were unauthorized for cyclist and other users in the name of safety but since The Parkway has become a goverment castaway it has fallen into disrepair and was only given sparse upgrade for its 75th anniversary. They are not happy to allow the Blue Ridge Marathon access now and the Marathon was started to be a benifit for them. This is an age old mentality passed down from many years that you would think would change as the old timers died off but they have managed to keep the old attitudes in place some how. I don’t see any changes till some employees see the light as the Parkway as a multi-use venue not just a MOTORWAY!
Barry Brewer,
I’ve seen Phil Francis in action a few times over the years and heard exactly what you did — each time he referred to the parkway he called it a “motorway” or “motor road.” Yesterday on the the phone was the first time I have not heard him use those explicit terms.
I started riding last year and the Tuesday ride was great. Starting out and going with a group was exciting going up Mill Mountain and getting on the Parkway. The Parkway could easily lower the speed limit from Roanoke to Vinton as it is a cut through for the commuters and those going to the Walmart. How about adding a bike lane with some paint. The Blue Ridge Cycle club invites people to get out and ride and enjoy the valley and have the experience to assist the inexperienced. I was shocked to learn the parkway wanted to charge a fee and cut some access points out. How about making it a toll road then?
Next thing you know the city will be charging groups to run on the greenway. Thats right that is in the works. Taxed to build it fees to use it. Roanoke should promote people to see its natual surroundings on bikes,running or walking. To try to add fees to groups I disagree.
Perhaps the blame should be on the White House administration who have been advising departments to make cuts where they will be visible to, and felt by the public.
To see what is to come all you have to do is take a look at what has been done to beach access on the Outer Banks. Once this administration took over. . .permits, fees and limited access are the norm. Better learn cyclists;
you have to pay to play. . .wouldn’t surprise me to see fees for vehicles soon.
Raise your level of intelligence, turn off Fox.
I do not consider the Parkway to be wide enough for cyclists or horse riders. It is simply not safe. To go around a rider, a car has to cross the line. If people want to ride, they will have to take their chances, I see no way for money to widen the Parkway.
Of course “the blame should be on the White House administration”, why they could not just cut things you agree with will have to remain a mystery of the modern world.
Once again, it is the Blue Ridge Parkway. It’s a scenic highway. Not a commuter road. What’s the hurry? Shouldn’t you be slowing down to enjoy the views? Sure you have to slow down and yield to bicyclists. I am pretty sure that’s still a topic on your driving test to obtain or renew your Virginia drivers license. If you have a problem with the traffic, just leave your house earlier. I’ve lived beside the Parkway for over 20 years and I too have taken it for granted here and there, but it’s still a scenic highway, a park, and a southwest VA treasure. Treat it as such.
I routinely ride the Parkway during the day in the summer months. When it isn’t being used as a commuter road during “rush hour” there are rarely many cars on it. For a car to pass going across the center line creates no safety issue when there are no cars the opposite direction, as is usually the case.
If another car is coming or it’s on a curve, the driver should be patient (it’s supposed to be a scenic road) and wait the 30 seconds required for it to be safe to pass.
The BRP can be safe for both groups (cars and cyclists) to use together if cyclists ride smart (as far to the right as safely possible without running through gravel, etc.) and drivers drive safely and with the understanding that the BRP is not 581.
Hate bicycles on the parkway. Its a lawsuit waiting to happen. This road is not wide enough to accommodate cars and bicycles and forces unsafe passing situations. The parkway was designed for automobiles. Sadly it will probably take a fatality to make some realize this.
Oh my gosh, Sandi! I think I agree with you…again. The parkway is narrow and for cars only.
-
Bikes should only be allowed on the roads if they can maintain a minimum speed. It is dangerous going up Brush Mountain, with bikers in the right hand side of the right lane, a semi in the right lane, and me passing all in the left.
-
Ride around town, but stay off the four lane roads.
Al, based on your request to stay off major roads where there are trucks and four lanes, I will restrict my riding to two lane roads where commercial vehicle traffic, like semis, is prohibited.
I know of such a road that fits that description perfectly. It runs mostly through scenic country. It has a relatively low 45 mph speed limit. It has limited access for unsafe turns, parked cars, etc. that pose a danger to cyclists. It bans all commercial vehicle traffic, not just semis. It is relatively lightly traveled compared to most roads in the area. The road? The Blue Ridge Parkway.
Al – The parkway is not a 4 lane road, and there are no semis since commercial vehicles are banned.
Thats right. If bicycles can’t go atleast 55mph, ban them! I don’t even want to see a bicycle on the roof of a car or parked on the side of the road! Let’s just outlaw bicycles and go celebrate with a $4/gal fill up, double whoppers and heart attacks! lol.
#11 Roger, do you propose then that the Parkway also be closed to: hikers (which would necessitate rerouting of parts of the AT), runners (I have seen school running teams run on it), horseback riders (a move that would necessitate rerouting of some horse trails), walkers, and even sightseers who pull over onto the shoulder but seemingly never all the way? And since the Parkway was not designed for commuting, should we also abolish that by say closing the rte. 460 and 220 exits which would reduce commuting considerably. And since today’s cars are far larger than those of the era when the road was built, should a maximum allowable vehicle standard be implemented which would ban large vehicles? You think passing a couple bikes is hard, try passing a 40 ft. long, over 8 ft. wide motorhome as it chugs it’s way up one of the Parkway’s hills.
Jesus people, change is inherent in growth. Some folks are just not growing here.
I think from the rider’s perspective the Pkwy. is a better riding venue than say the lesser traveled back roads of the area for several reasons, all related to safety. For one, traffic on the Pkwy. is, for the most part, very low. I seldom ride the 460 to 220 corridor which is more heavily traveled, but except for rush hour it is still not heavy and is probably moderate at most. Many back country roads are less safe as they do not have center lines and traffic tends to drift more there. Their shoulders are not as well maintained as the Pkwy’s which are generally well maintained grass. The road surface itself, though it could be better, is consistently in better shape than country roads. But most important to me, and often overlooked, is the almost complete lack of intersections and driveways. It is approx. 11 miles between rte 220 and the nearest intersection south and there is not one intersection of any type (excluding overlooks) along that stretch. All traffic is either in front or in back of you and that makes it so much safer. I keep my riding on regular roads to a minimum, but I cannot begin to count the number of times cars have pulled out right in front of me even as the driver is looking straight at me. And then there are the cars which pass from behind and then cut right in front of the bike to make a turn. Give me the Pkwy any day.
“…the Department of the Interior is anti-cycling.” is a bit of histrionic overreaction. I think it is more of a case of the BRP management being hide-bound, inflexible, re-active and hoary ( I frequently look for an opportunity to use that word) These are a bunch of old civil servants who are counting the days until they can retire and don’t want to work too hard in the meant time. It’s the “We do it this way because we have always done it this way ” mentality at work. Business as usual with the gummit.
#19 I will say whatever entity within the Park Service responsible for the BR Pkwy. is anti biking. I have discussed on other related threads here the disparity between how bikers are welcomed here (or not) and the Natchez Trace Pkwy., a very similar road maintained by the Park Service. There, biking is encouraged, here not. It’s not a perception but a fact and one I would like too see the Park Service address.
Agree with you though that it’s a “well, that’s the way it’s always been” attitude. This is certainly not an agency searching for new ways to enhance the Parkway experince…