 |
Re: RE: Another D... Trail?
Author: Bit
Date: 07-09-2007 - 17:59
"Q" responds with passion but not facts...
In the case of the Eureka / Arcata trail it will benefit a lot of people. There is a significant number of bicycle commuters on that stretch of 101. Trail banking would allow the construction of the trail with a binding obligation to replace the tracks if the NWP ever returned. In addition that particular piece of ROW is in bad disrepair. Much of it runs on top of a dike that has suffered erosion. Several small bridges would not support a train. What is at question is the logic that the NCRA is not making that section a priority. Rebuilding that right of way to include a trail along side and on top of the ROW would be doable. The 2 projects could coexist and benefit from more funding sources.
In the case of the Eureka / Arcata trail it will benefit a lot of people. There is a significant number of bicycle commuters on that stretch of 101. Trail banking would allow the construction of the trail with a binding obligation to replace the tracks if the NWP ever returned. In addition that particular piece of ROW is in bad disrepair. Much of it runs on top of a dike that has suffered erosion. Several small bridges would not support a train. What is at question is the logic that the NCRA is not making that section a priority. Rebuilding that right of way to include a trail along side and on top of the ROW would be doable. The 2 projects could coexist and benefit from more funding sources.
