[Vision2020] Ped/Bike transportation options

Fri Jun 2 19:30:40 PDT 2006

Dear Jeff: You and I are referring to the same trail.  In fact, I am a
board member of the Latah Trail Foundation (helped craft the quote you
posted), and just today responded to an offer of assistance from the
Manager of Trail Development for the Western Regional Office of the
Rails-to-Trails Conservancy in San Francisco. In case this helps clear
up any misimpressions and inspires you to think twice about the
excellent value we have in our trails system, I offer my correspondence
to Ben (and copied to Mark McNeese, Bicycle Pedestrian Coordinator for
the Idaho Transportation Dept. in Boise):

Dear Ben,

I’m glad to hear that Mark is spreading the good news about our
developing trails system! Our non-profit Latah Trail Foundation has
worked with Latah County Commissioners to pave the 11-mile rail bed
between Moscow and Troy Idaho. Because the line was abandoned so long
ago, the route was ineligible for Rails-to-Trails conversion, and
right-of-way needed to be acquired outright from property owners with
reversionary deeds. With generous private contributions, three Idaho
Transportation Department enhancement projects, technical assistance
from the National Parks Service Rivers and Trails Program, and grants
from State Parks and Rec, we anticipate that project will be fully paved
by fall of 2006 or spring of 2007.

On the east, the Latah Trail connects with Troy’s City path. Our
Foundation aspires to extend the Latah Trail southward along the
abandoned rail bed—Part of the Moscow-Arrow line, I think--through a
beautifully wooded canyon from Troy to the Ed Corkill/Kendrick-Juliaetta
Trail along the Clearwater River. (Who knows? Maybe someday, we’ll make
it to Lewiston ID (home to the levy trail) and Clarkston WA, at the
confluence of the Snake and Clearwater Rivers.)

On the west, the Latah Trail connects with the City of Moscow’s Paradise
Path, a growing network of linear parks and non-motorized transportation
routes across the City. With the help of its volunteer Paradise Path
Task Force and cooperation from railroad and real estate interests,
Moscow recently secured east-west right-of-way across its breadth. Near
the western City limit, where we did have some Rails-to-Trails
participation, the Paradise Path connects with the Bill Chipman Palouse
Trail that follows the rail bed nine miles to Pullman WA, home to the
newly developed Riverwalk system along the Palouse River.

As you may know, the Trail of the Coeur d’Alenes (reclaimed from the
railroad’s Silver Valley superfund site) and the Hiawatha Trail, both
north of us, have been hugely successful in promoting economic
development through tourism and recreational activities. Moscow is home
to the University of Idaho and Pullman is home to Washington State
University, so we have an ideal market for such amenities.

As Mayor of Moscow and a board member of the Latah Trail Foundation, I
am a strong supporter of trails. I will keep my ear to the ground for
projects that may be eligible for Rails-to-Trails assistance.
Regrettably, most of those with which I have been involved were not. I
encourage you to visit www.latahtrailfoundation.org and
http://www.ci.moscow.id.us/PR/PR%20Commission/Paradise%20Path%20Task%20F
orce%20Index.htm and invite you to come explore the growing network of
trails in our region. Thank you again for your interest!

Sincerely,

Nancy Chaney  

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Harkins [mailto:jeffh at moscow.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 6:28 PM
To: Nancy Chaney; vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Ped/Bike transportation options

Hi Nancy,

Thank you for entering this 
discussion.  Apparently we are discussing two different projects.

My comments refer only to my personal 
observations regarding the officially named Latah 
Trail - the trail that runs from Moscow to 
Troy.  This trail, expected to be completed in 
Summer 2005 is now paved from Moscow to near 
Joel.  Further, a section from Troy toward Moscow 
is completed.  Connection of the two segments is 
slated for some time in the future - perhaps you 
know the actual newly determined completion schedule.

I think the trail section you are referring to is 
the Chipman Trail, which does run between Moscow 
and Pullman - which has been completed for some time.

I am rather certain that the Idaho Department of 
Transportation did not provide any funding for 
the Chipman Trail as most of this trail lies in 
Washington - I think a small section in Idaho is 
the Palouse trail - but that may be an incorrect view on my part.

Actually, another trail - which has been 
designated as the Paradise Path (and lies wholly 
within the City of Moscow) connects the Bill 
Chipman trail with the Latah Trail.

Here is a reference from the Latah Trail website 
that provides an extended definition:

"The old railbed over which the Latah Trail lies is now part of the
same railway system that the Bill Chipman-Palouse Trail and the
Paradise Path use.
The Latah Trail will tie seemlessly into the City of Moscow’s Paradise
Path, which in turn, becomes the Bill Chipman-Palouse Trail.
To conserve resources and provide for a smooth transition
between trails, the Latah Trail hopes to share an entranceway
with the Paradise Path. An arch or similar structure could
serve to mark the entrance of both trails. Heading east from
Troy toward Moscow, the arch would read “Welcome to the
Paradise Path”. Trail users heading east would see a
“Welcome to the Latah Trail” sign."

Perhaps you can review my earlier posts, with a 
view to my comments for the Latah Trail.  The 
problems I cite are real and need to be 
addressed, IMHO now, rather than at some future 
point.  If we, as Latah County Residents and 
Taxpayers, are going to invest in additional 
transportation infrastructure, the time to 
involve the citizens is now - long before the funding decisions are
made.

One major issue that I raised a question about 
concerns individuals who use the highway and/or 
the roads adjacent to the completed  portions of 
the Latah Trail.  I am puzzled about that.  And I 
wonder what can be done to encourage some of that use to the trail.

Again, thanks for participating in this dialogue 
- we look forward to your continued input.

At 08:10 PM 6/1/2006, you wrote:
>Jeff: I hope that you will wait until the Latah Trail is fully paved
>between Moscow and Pullman before finally deciding whether it is
>adequately used. A large portion of its funding came in the form of
>three Idaho Transportation Department enhancement projects, required as
>ADA-compliant non-motorized alternatives to complement highway
>transportation projects. Although I anticipate that recreational use
>will be popular, ITD saw fit to recognize the Latah Trail as a means of
>transportation. Federal and State dollars and private donations pay for
>such projects.
>
>The Latah Trail Foundation provided matching funds for grants from
Idaho
>Parks and Rec and through mailings and word-of-mouth, has developed a
>following of loyal supporters. Each of four dinner/auction fundraisers
>generated about $20,000 and at this year's event, Gritman Medical
Center
>pledged $25,000 in match for contributions from the local medical
>community. The Latah Trail is part of a growing network of trails in
our
>region, including Moscow's Paradise Path, Pullman's Riverwalk, the
>Chipman Trail and the Ed Corkill/Kendrick-Juliaetta Trail (so far).
>Together, they entice students to our campuses, protect our
environment,
>enhance our health, attract businesses like Comtech AHA that value
>proximity to such amenities, and provide us means of connecting and
>re-connecting with each other as neighbors and visitors.
>
>If you have not done so, I encourage you to visit
>www.latahtrailfoundation.org to learn more...before you decide.
>
>Nancy Chaney
>Board Member, LTF
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
>[mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Jeff Harkins
>Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2006 6:46 AM
>To: Joe Campbell; vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Ped/Bike transportation options
>
>Joe,
>
>I thought I made it clear in my post - my
>comments about trail non-use referred
>specifically to the Latah Trail section - not the
>Chipman Trail.  Chipman enjoys excellent use -
>although I still see a fair number of bicyclists
>using the Airport Road rather than the trail.
>
>Chipman may be a better investment (from a
>transportation point of view) because it connects
>two specific destination points - UI to WSU.  In
>developing additional trail components,
>destination points may be an important critierion to consider.
>
>It does seem appropriate that as bicycle use
>increases (as a substitute for the high cost of
>driving and commuting) that there is some
>mechanism for taxing bike riders for their share
>of developing a trail network - similar to the
>tax on gasoline is used to build and maintain highways, roads and
>streets.
>
>At 04:50 PM 5/31/2006, you wrote:
> >I ride the trail's often from Moscow (where I
> >live) to Pullman (where I work). Often I ride in
> >the road as well because it is difficult to get
> >from where I live to the trail. There is a trail
> >for part of the way but (a) much of it is gravel
> >and that is hard to ride a bike on, and (b) if I
> >go that route I end up on the wrong corner of
> >Rt. 95 and Rt. 8, which is difficult to pass. It
> >is much faster for me to just ride down Rt. 8.
> >Note that like many of the other speeding cars
> >you see I am on my way to work and just want to
> >get there as quickly as possible.
> >
> >The trails are great but we need more of them if
> >folks are going to complain about others riding bikes on the roads.
> >
> >And it is just false that there aren't a LOT of
> >folks using the trails, even if there are lots
> >on the roads, as well. Take a ride or walk on
> >the Chipman trail from Pullman to Moscow and
> >you'll find out for yourself! LOTS and LOTS of
> >people use those trails. Moscow just has a large
> >number of bike riders and has not dealt adequately with this fact
yet.
> >
> >--
> >Joe Campbell
> >
> >---- Philip Cook <pcook818 at adelphia.net> wrote:
> >
> >=============
> >Jeff Harkins, jeffh at moscow.com, Sat May 27 20:45:57 PDT 2006,
wrote:
> >
> >"Bike trails are an interesting element in the
> >transportation mix.  I had hoped that the Latah
> >Trail would be a real solution for encouraging
> >walking and bike/traffic issues on the east
> >side.  But sadly (and I drive adjacent to the
> >trail at least twice a day) I have seen
> >wholesale disregard for the trail as a traffic
> >solution.  Each day, I see more bikers and
> >runners not using the trail - instead, opting
> >for using Palouse River Drive or Highway 8 for
> >their trek. This is puzzling.  It would be
> >helpful to know why so many folks are not using
> >the trail. Now my post is not intended to infer
> >that no one uses the trail - each day I also see
> >many folks walking with a friend, walking a dog
> >- ie, using the trail - my point is that there
> >are many opting to not use the trail."
> >
> >Response:
> >Any transportation system's function (road,
> >trail, rail, air, etc.) is to get people (and
> >goods) to and from the places they want to go.
> >If more than one route exists to get to those
> >places, then people are usually free to choose
> >their routes based on their own preferences
> >(time, directness, risk, etc.) within legal
> >constraints. Why do some cyclists and
> >pedestrians "disregard" using the Latah Trail?
> >Because it doesn't go where they want to go,
> >and/or they prefer another route for that
> >journey. The Trail is an alternative, not the "solution."
> >
> >"Question, if a more extensive bike trail system
> >were built, would it be appropriate to mandate
> >that bikers and walkers use the trails?"
> >
> >Response:
> >Absolutely not. Among the many reasons:
> >
> >First, it is doubtful that an extensive enough
> >shared-use path system ("bike trails") could be
> >built to fullfill even a fraction of the
> >transportation needs of non-motorized users,
> >particularly in already developed areas where
> >off-street public right-of-ways do not exist.
> >Certainly, more sidewalks within existing street
> >right-of-ways provide a viable alternative for
> >pedestrians, but not so for cyclists. Shared-use
> >paths provide a viable alternative to on-street
> >accommodation for cyclists only under limited
> >circumstances (see, e.g., http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/de/shared.htm;
>and
> >http://itd.idaho.gov/planning/reports/bikepedplan/idt.pdf,
> >Chapter3 and Appendix B). Unfortunately, in some
> >places poorly-designed shared-use paths have
> >been constructed; to mandate their use by cyclists would be
>inappropriate.
> >
> >Second, where shared-use path systems exist,
> >maintainance is often a problem, particularly in
> >winter. This limits path's usefulness as a viable route alternative.
> >
> >Third, and most importantly, cyclists have the
> >same rights as drivers of all other vehicles
> >using the roads (but for a few exceptions; see
> >Idaho Code 49-714 et seq). Mandatory sidepath
> >laws diminish those rights for no good reason. Share the road; it's
the
>law.
> >
> >Philip Cook
> >Moscow
> >
> >_____________________________________________________
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>
>ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿
>½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï
¿
>½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½
> >
> >
> >_____________________________________________________
> >  List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >                http://www.fsr.net
> >           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯