"Bicycles traditionally have a recognized place on our highways. Bicycles are expressly authorized by statute to use most public ways. ... When art. 78 was adopted (it was approved by the people in 1948) restricting the use of specified funds to certain 'highway purposes,' bicycles were a part of the legitimate vehicular traffic on our highways. It was therefore not unforeseen ... that highway funds would be expended on roadways that would be used by bicycles.
"Funds used to create bike lanes and bike routes under Senate no. 1534 are to be spent on adapting roadways to use by bicycles, as that use is described in the bill. With respect to establishing bike lanes, only painted lines (or some equivalent to designate an area of the roadway for the exclusive use of bicycles) need be added to a roadway to transform a portion of it into a bike lane. With respect to bike routes, only signs, presumably either expressly authorizing bicycle traffic or regulating bicycle and motor vehicle traffic, need be placed on a roadway to create a bike route. The alterations required to create bike lanes and bike routes do nothing to change significantly the appearance or the use of our highways. They are, in effect, merely steps taken to regulate, in the interests of bicycle and motor vehicle safety, the flow of traffic on the highways.
"Functionally, bike paths are little different from bike lanes and bike routes. All three are intended to provide a safe route of travel for bicycles and so to regulate the flow of motor vehicle and bicycle traffic as to reduce the interference and inconvenience that each type of vehicle might cause to the other. The question arises, however, whether highway funds as provided in art. 78 may be expended properly for the construction of bike paths, as they may be for the establishment of bike routes and bike lanes, in light of the physical separation of bike paths from the paved roadways along which the paths run. We conclude that the physical separation of bicycle paths from paved roadways does not require that such paths be distinguished from bike lanes and bike routes for the purpose of determining whether highway funds ... may be expended for their construction.
[...]
"... In light of the physical proximity and functional interrelation of bicycle paths to highways, we conclude that bicycle paths are directly related to 'purposes connected with roads ... available for use by motor vehicles.'
"Bike paths, as well as bike routes and bike lanes, are also directly related to 'purposes in which owners of motor vehicles ... [are] interested.' The bikeways are designed to facilitate the flow of both bicycle and motor vehicle traffic and to reduce the number of bicycle-motor vehicle accidents. The significance of the proposed bikeways to motorists should not be underestimated and is dramatized by the increase in the use of bicycles in recent years and the concomitant increase in the number of bicycle-motor vehicle accidents. Over 85,000,000 Americans own bicycles ... and the annual sale of bicycles has been steadily increasing. According to briefs filed by both amici curiae, statistics compiled by the Bicycle Institute of America show that annual sales of bicycles in the United States have increased more than threefold in a recent twelve-year period--in 1960, 3.7 million bicycles were sold, whereas, in 1972, 13.9 million bicycles were sold. From 1970 to 1974, there was a forty-two percent increase in bicycle-motor vehicle accidents in the Commonwealth (2,033 occurring in 1970; 2,895 occurring in 1974) according to Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicle statistics cited in one of the briefs. Motorists as well as bicyclists will benefit from the development of a bikeway system that regulates and, where necessary, segregates bicycle and motor vehicle traffic. ... It can be expected that the bikeways will reduce bicycle-motor vehicle related accidents and ensure a 'safe, smooth, [and] direct' flow of traffic. ...
[...]
"As to the costs of maintenance of the bikeways and parking facilities, we consider these expeses to be incidental to the establishment of bikeways and authorized by the provision in art. 78 permitting highway funds to be expended on the 'maintenance ... of public highways.'
"The answer to the question is, 'Yes.'"
Disclaimer