by Arborwayfan
Bike trails aren't just recreational: in the right place they are transportation. In good weather (most of the time, around here) I ride a bike to work on a bike trail that is mostly a rail trail (along the route of the Pennsy east of Terre Haute, Indiana). I enjoy it almost as much as riding the train we don't have, but it's not exactly recreation. Of course, it's easy to argue for this particuar trail, since Terre Haute doesn't even have the population for decent bus service, let alone light rail, and the ROW is wide enough to put a single-track line in next to the trail anyway, if anyone wanted to do so. Is there room for a rail line and a bike trail on the Lexington branch, for example? Trails and rails can work next to each other (the South Shore Line in Northern Indiana is a good example for part of its route, although to be fair it has a huge ROW.)
What's worst is when nothing happens, like the last mile or so of the Dedham branch between Readville and Dedham, cut by a fill that replaced a shaky bridge a while ago, so there're rails in the ground but no easy way to put in either a trail or a restored rail line.
More arguments in favor of rail trails: 1. public transit works best when people live in relatively dense neighborhoods and don't feel like they need to own one car per adult. (You save a lot more by not owning a car than by not driving a car you own.) People are much more likely to live in dense urban neighborhoods and own fewer cars if it's easy for them to walk (or rollerblade or bike) around for errands and fun. Bike trails make more people think dense, transit-friendly development is nice to live in. As a bonus, dense urban neighborhoods support more local stores, restaurants, etc., than less dense suburban ones, so bike trails help keep jobs and business. In some places they've even attracted stores and bike shops and restaurants along the trails catering to people on bikes (Yellow Springs, Ohio, is a good example).
2. Rail trails have a constituency that would protest tearing them up to put in rails. (I'm sad when I see the rails come out AND I would be sad if I saw a trail come out.) On the other hand, they keep the abutters from getting used to not having anything going on nearby. Bikes are quiet, but a steady stream of chatting people zipping by is hard to ignore. Reviving a long-dead rail line can face a whole nother set of protests by people who've gotten used to not having anything at the end of the back yard or whatever. (See the Greenbush debates, for example.)
What's worst is when nothing happens, like the last mile or so of the Dedham branch between Readville and Dedham, cut by a fill that replaced a shaky bridge a while ago, so there're rails in the ground but no easy way to put in either a trail or a restored rail line.
More arguments in favor of rail trails: 1. public transit works best when people live in relatively dense neighborhoods and don't feel like they need to own one car per adult. (You save a lot more by not owning a car than by not driving a car you own.) People are much more likely to live in dense urban neighborhoods and own fewer cars if it's easy for them to walk (or rollerblade or bike) around for errands and fun. Bike trails make more people think dense, transit-friendly development is nice to live in. As a bonus, dense urban neighborhoods support more local stores, restaurants, etc., than less dense suburban ones, so bike trails help keep jobs and business. In some places they've even attracted stores and bike shops and restaurants along the trails catering to people on bikes (Yellow Springs, Ohio, is a good example).
2. Rail trails have a constituency that would protest tearing them up to put in rails. (I'm sad when I see the rails come out AND I would be sad if I saw a trail come out.) On the other hand, they keep the abutters from getting used to not having anything going on nearby. Bikes are quiet, but a steady stream of chatting people zipping by is hard to ignore. Reviving a long-dead rail line can face a whole nother set of protests by people who've gotten used to not having anything at the end of the back yard or whatever. (See the Greenbush debates, for example.)