Could multiuse paths close London’s pavement gaps? US cities offer a cost-effective model

A growing number of US cities are turning to single-side multiuse paths as a cheaper, faster alternative to traditional two-sided concrete sidewalks to fill ‘sidewalk deserts’ – streets with no pedestrian infrastructure. The approach, detailed in a recent op-ed by Travis Merrigan for The Urbanist, raises questions about whether London could benefit from similar tactics in areas where pavements are missing or incomplete.

While London’s inner boroughs have relatively comprehensive footway networks, many outer-London streets – particularly on arterial and distributor roads – lack continuous pavements, forcing pedestrians to walk on carriageways or grass verges. The US experience suggests that building single-side multiuse paths could be a pragmatic interim solution, potentially saving millions of pounds compared to full two-sided concrete pavements.

The US case for multiuse paths

Merrigan’s analysis draws on cost data from Seattle’s 2021 Pedestrian Master Plan update. Traditional two-sided concrete sidewalk construction in Seattle runs between $700,000 and $1.6 million per block (both sides), while a single-sided multiuse path costs roughly $150,000 per block – four to ten times cheaper. The path uses asphalt rather than concrete, requires only one side of the street, and reduces the need for storm drains, light poles and right-of-way acquisitions.

The space savings are equally significant. A standard five-foot pavement plus 1.5-foot gutter on each side consumes about 13 feet of width. Adding protected bike lanes on both sides mushrooms that to 23 feet. A single multiuse path, by contrast, needs only 10 to 12 feet plus a 1.5-foot gutter, fitting into less than half the effective width. That makes it feasible on many streets where full sidewalks are physically or financially impractical.

The safety argument is strong. According to the Governors Highway Safety Association, 66 percent of pedestrian fatalities in the US occur on streets with no sidewalk. Multiuse paths, when physically separated from traffic by standard four-inch kerbs, can provide a protected space for walking, cycling and rolling. Boise, Idaho, has committed to building 110 miles of such paths over the next decade, and Spokane recently completed a two-mile multiuse path on Sunset Highway for $1.75 million – $1.5 million less than expected.

London’s pavement problem

London does not have a publicly available ‘sidewalk desert’ map comparable to Seattle’s, but the issue is well known to local walking and cycling groups. Outer boroughs such as Bromley, Havering, Hillingdon and Bexley contain long stretches of residential and secondary roads where footways are absent on one or both sides. On roads classified as B-roads or unclassified, the carriageway often runs directly against grass verges, gardens or hedges, with no dedicated pedestrian space.

The London Assembly Transport Committee has previously noted that poor-quality or missing footways disproportionately affect older residents, people with mobility impairments and families with pushchairs. TfL’s Healthy Streets indicators emphasise the importance of safe, continuous footways, but capital funding for new pavements is limited. A 2023 TfL report on street condition estimated that London’s road network includes over 6,000 kilometres of footways, but the data does not map gaps comprehensively.

Where full concrete pavements would be prohibitively expensive – especially on long, low-density suburban roads – the multiuse path model could offer a quicker, cheaper way to close the gap. It would also serve cyclists, who on many of these roads currently share the carriageway with fast-moving traffic.

Could the model work in London?

London already has examples of shared-use paths, though most are recreational or off-road (e.g., along the Thames, Regent’s Canal or through parks). Roadside multiuse paths are rarer, but some exist: the A10 corridor in Enfield has a shared cycle-and-pedestrian path in places, and parts of the Greenway in east London serve a similar function. These are not always built to consistent width or separation standards.

The main challenge is the UK design guidance. The Department for Transport’s Local Transport Note 1/20 (Cycle Infrastructure Design) prefers segregated cycle tracks over shared-use paths, arguing that significant conflict can arise between pedestrians and faster-moving cyclists. Merrigan acknowledges the downside: pedestrians do not always enjoy sharing space with bikes and scooters, and on busy streets, crossing to reach the path can be inconvenient. However, on low-traffic suburban roads where pedestrian volumes are low and cycle numbers modest, a well-designed 10–12 foot path with clear markings and a physical kerb separation from vehicles could be a pragmatic improvement over nothing.

What would need to change

For London to adopt the multiuse path model systematically, several elements would need to align:

• Borough-level pilot programmes: Outer London boroughs could identify candidate roads – those with missing footways, low housing density, and moderate traffic speeds – and trial single-side paths using existing TfL funding streams such as the Local Implementation Plan capital programme.
• Design standards: TfL and borough highway authorities would need to develop a local design guide for roadside multiuse paths, specifying minimum widths, separation kerbs, crossing points and maintenance regimes. Current guidance does not offer a standard template for this typology.
• Stakeholder engagement: Residents and local businesses would need to be consulted on parking, driveway access and tree retention. The US experience shows that single-side paths interfere with half as many driveways and parking spots as two-sided pavements, which could reduce opposition.

The cost comparison is striking. At Seattle’s 2022 estimate of $150,000 per block (about £120,000 per block at current rates), a two-mile stretch of missing pavement could be addressed for roughly £1.2 million, compared to several times that for full concrete footways on both sides. While London’s construction costs, land values and utility constraints differ, the principle of using a narrower, asphalt-based path on one side of the road is transferable.

Source: “Op-Ed: A Multiuse Path Building Spree Can Tackle Sidewalk Deserts” by Travis Merrigan, The Urbanist, 25 July 2026. https://www.theurbanist.org/op-ed-multiuse-path-building-spree/

Datos clave