On 12/2/2014 2:15 PM, wrote:
While projects like this breed recognician of cycling as a legitimate means of transport, walking/biking trails usually are slow and tedious.

Often this uses money that would be far better put to use building bike lanes on actual streets and informing drivers of the rights of cyclists as a normal part of road users.


Many rails-to-trails projects were originally justified as part of "rail
banking," or (purportedly) maintaining the right-of-way in case
railroads came back.

Should the railroads want to actually re-use those rights-of-way, I
suspect most of the people who touted "rail banking" will suddenly be
against the idea.

But I don't see much problem in having a MUP next to a 10 mph train,
assuming barriers are between the two. Although I, too, would generally
prefer the money be spend on other things. Convincing drivers of our
rights to ordinary roads is much more important, in my view.

--
- Frank Krygowski