The following is a letter I wrote to Bill Veno in December. It would be great if the topic of simply widening the existing road by 18 inches on each side could be brought up...

Dear Bill,
As you know, my feeling is that "paths", separate but paralleling the roadway are pretty much always a bad idea. Curb cuts are not worth it. O.B.- Edg. path works OK; there are few curb cuts. I'd like to know the accident data from curb cuts on that path. How many such injuries make it worth it?
A path on Chappy would have to be separate from the road, using a completely different ROW. I doubt such a thing will be found. If it does exist, great! (maybe there are few enough curb cuts to be parallel, but my points still remain)
Is it needed? Yes, for 2 months in summer, Chappy residents want to drive their SUV's as fast as they want and not be impeded by pesky cyclists. I'm being sarcastic, sorry...I obviously think it's not needed. Why live on Chappy and be uptight about how fast you can drive the 2 miles to your luxury vacation home?
Simply widen the existing road by 2 feet (18 inches?) on each side. This way cars can pass cyclists safely, the cost and engineering will be way less, and, most importantly, maintenance will be easier and more available. Curb cuts would not be an issue.
Now I know that people say "...if you widen the road, drivers go faster".
The converse being it's wiser to leave the road narrow and let the existence of cyclists slow traffic down. That kind of thinking is downright criminal.
This question about a Chappy MUP exposes the silliness of the whole debate.
People who don't ride bikes (the majority) want the bikes off the road.
People who do ride bikes, (the minority, even in Summer) want to use the existing ROW, as they are entitled to, and be safe in doing so. If a separate ROW is available and is safe and fun to ride, sure! (The State Forest system is great and is a cycling destination, although it sorely lacks maintenance.) But will a cyclist be able to ride it? Will it get the brush cut away when it gets over-grown? Will potholes get filled? Will sand get swept off? Creating a new "roadway" on Chappy, or anywhere on MV will be difficult and expensive. 
Who would these paths benefit most? Motorists.
How many people would rather be on a separate road? Most, as long as it is safe and use-able. That's a huge IF... It sounds good at first, but we have the existing realities of our current MUPs. Some are good, some are bad, some are so-so. The existence of a separate path does not guaranty safety. 
Most folks go to Chappy to get somewhere: either to their home or to sight-see Teddy's Car-Wash. Is that demand enough to justify the enormous cost of construction of a separate path and the cost of that pesky issue: maintenance?
It's not surprising to realize that most of the proponents of these "paths" are usually the non-cycling majority. They want the roads for motor vehicles only. (Citing safety, as if it's not their personal responsibility to accommodate the safety of cyclists or other non-motor transport users on the existing ROW). It's not fair to the minority who do have EQUAL rights to use the existing Right of Way. Accommodations should be made to all road users equally, not just to the motoring majority. So if a path is built that is "perfect", great, I'm all for it. But I still think the roads should be widened to allow for the safe passing of non-motor-transport users. Do that first, since it's cheaper and needs to happen island-wide anyway. Then if a separate path is still needed and do-able, go for it.
My 2 cents...
Thanks,
Craig Hockmeyer
Posted by Craig Hockmeyer on Monday, 1/12/09 @ 4:00pm