Is there a conspiricy behind the Rails To Trails Movement?

[Anonymous]

Today I had a conversation with MASSBIKE. As some of you know I have been tryng to get theMinuteman trail plowed. When I suggested to the exutive Director that the Trail (Which goes from Alewife T depot to Bedford and Arlington Mass.) Be taken out of Railbank status for Commuter rail and light rail she was very defencive. The Truth is that Railtrail people want to put railroads into railbank status but are loath to make a withdrawl from the bank in the rare cases were Railroad right of ways become viable again. Case in point is the Geargetown connector in Bethasda Maryland were Nimby are fighing tooth and nail against the extention of the METRO

[Modelcar]

...After a named Trail association purchases a rail RoW to construct a bike / walking trail and spends money doing so, I can understand why there might be resistence to uproot it for another purpose. But if the stipulation of the RoW being rail banked for future transportation uses....is in the contract I suppose that is what legally can happen. I'm not speaking of any specifics of the above posts, just relating to trails from railroads RoW's in general.

[mustanggt]

Nope

[Anonymous]

I wouldn't call it a conspiracy, but I don't think the Rails to Trails folks have the best interests of railroads or transit at heart. I'd like to see some demographics about the R2T folks, but I am guessing it looks a LOT more like NIMBY profiles than it does railroaders or those likely to use rail service or transit.

LC

[Anonymous]

Well Money of course is a issue here. The Ohio Canal Trail wants to get 25,000,000 of TEA-21 highway money. That money could be used for a Commuter Rail Projcet along the same corridor

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Clevelandrocks

Well Money of course is a issue here. The Ohio Canal Trail wants to get 25,000,000 of TEA-21 highway money. That money could be used for a Commuter Rail Projcet along the same corridor

Nothing illegal about wanting grant funds. Lets remember the definition of a conspiracy..

LC

[Anonymous]

Is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking?!

[Anonymous]

Three questions:
What exactly is railbanking?
What is "NIMBY"?
What are you thinking, Dougal?

See you around the forums,
Daniel Parks

[Modelcar]

...Question # 1: Unused rail RoW used to construct Trail or similar use and keeps the RoW in place but under contract to return it for rail transportation uses under the agreeded to terms of the contract.

...Question # 2: NIMBY= Not In My Back Yard....

[Anonymous]

Dear Modelcar and Mr. Hemphill,
Thank you very much for clearing that up for me.

Most gratefully yours,
Daniel Parks

[yellowducky]

Would I want a trail through our farm? Only if all hikers or bikers were as respectful as all railfans are. Oh, now you know why NIMBY !

We have a farm with a RoW through it, mostly. My father-in-law plowed up part of it pre-1991, just to ward off any thought of a rail-to-trail, or so I understand.

[ericsp]

QUOTE: Originally posted by trainjunky29

Three questions:
What exactly is railbanking?
What is "NIMBY"?
What are you thinking, Dougal?

See you around the forums,
Daniel Parks

In regards to the third question, all I have to say is "conspiracy". Think about it.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by dougal

Is anyone else thinking what I'm thinking?!

Didn't know you were a big thinker...

LC

[Modelcar]

...Trails from rail RoW's may be a problem in some areas of the country but I can speak from experience of ours here in Muncie, In.....It is now slightly less than 10 years into it's operation and 30 plus paved miles in length....and is used very extensively and is a real asset to our community. It will eventually be 60 plus miles in length. Our ex. CSX Depot sat dormant and was a real eyesore for decades and now is rebuilt into it's original appearance and is used as the Trail headquarters and a small rail museum. It is really great to have it active again and in use and it's great looking. I believe most people think our trail is a real plus for our area. The RoW was abandoned by CSX and was nothing to the area after the railroad was torn up but now the RoW is useful. Don't know if it has a rail banked clause to it all.....

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

In yellowducky's father-in-law's situation, the railroad may have been granted an easement through the property so the usage of the route would have reverted to the owner of the property when the railroad was abandoned.

[kwboehm]

I've heard of an instance outside of Omaha where a bike trail was created on the old Wabash main line in Council Bluffs, IA called the Waba***race. A few years ago the UP was building the Council Bluffs East Connector to get to the Mid America Power Station south of Council Bluffs. Part of the route was supposed to go along the old Wabash route. When it came time to rebuild that area, the people from the Waba***race told the railroad to take a hike, in so many words, and eventually the railroad had to buid next to the old right of way. If you are on I-29 near U.S. 275, to the northeast of the interchange, you can see two bridges. One where the railroad was (the current Waba***race), and the new railroad one that they had to put in. I don't think it would have taken that much of the trail away, so why the bug fuss?

[mudchicken]

NARPO thinks there is a conspiracy.

Yellowducky & F-I-L clearly do NOT understand color of title or what an ICC land schedule tells you.

Rails-to-trails folks need a reality check sometimes when they sign on the dotted line for a railbanked corrididor.