Urban Velo

No More Bike Paths Ever!

LW0727_bikerulesOk, this is an interesting case of which the ramifications are probably no need for concern. Still..

This Salon article details the case of Marvin Brandt Revocable Trust vs. United States, in which the courts ruled in favor of the family who opposed a bike path being laid through part of their land. Here’s the amusing hypocrisy. They are descendants of the owner of a sawmill that built railroad ties, and they stated,

“They want to bring a train through here, that’s fine. We never expected and we never agreed to a bicycle trail.”

To the family, it isn’t that the government is using their abandoned land through right-of-way privileges, but that it’s a bicycle path and not a TRAIN. Umm…OK.

The larger ramifications of this case are more concerning, in the decision undermines the legality of already established bike paths obtained through right of way privileges. But yeah, good luck fighting the established benefits of Rails-To-Trails programs and tearing up all that asphalt.

Read the full article on Salon.com

About Scott Spitz

Commuting, touring, kid hauling, couriering, mechanic work, sales, advocacy, fixed, free—Scott has had his hands in it all over the years.

View all posts by Scott Spitz →

3 Comments

  1. MatthewMarch 17, 2014 at 11:16 pm

    Interesting, up in the Catskills in Ulster County, an ongoing battle has been going on between the tourist railroad and rail-trail advocates. Is this becoming a trend, railroad advocates hating on the rail trail overhauls?

  2. Chris BonnerMarch 18, 2014 at 1:01 am

    Never underestimate the power of pigheadedness.

  3. GrahamMarch 27, 2014 at 10:35 am

    If they want a rail so bad, and others want a bike trail, why not both? It may take up double the land, but it’ll make everyone happy.

    Here’s an example: http://www.pedestrians.org/images/episodes101to110/p4p110.jpg

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

News & Views

City Reports