WOW Trail 1st Phase Dedication Set

[RI Swamp Yankee]

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

... I don't think anyone objects to the bike path and most welcome it.There is something ugly and unnatural about a chain link fence

My thought too. A chain link fence is just .... UGLY and in a few years it will be rusty and more ugly!

What about a 2 foot wood post with a log rail on top? I have tried looking but can't find an RSA that requires a chain link fence. If there is one somewhere, why can't the legislature make a change or exception?

BTW: Why is there no chain link fence seperating the Laconia Daily Sun parking lot from the tracks?

[no-engine]

Originally Posted by RI Swamp Yankee

My thought too. A chain link fence is just .... UGLY and in a few years it will be rusty and more ugly!

What about a 2 foot wood post with a log rail on top? I have tried looking but can't find an RSA that requires a chain link fence. If there is one somewhere, why can't the legislature make a change or exception?

BTW: Why is there no chain link fence seperating the Laconia Daily Sun parking lot from the tracks?

Thanks for researching thru RSA. I do not know where to research, but I'd continue.....

Apologies to readers: I mentioned the article, but neglected to attempt to copy it to post. My lack of thought, as I discovered the Sun makes PDF available.

[Skip]

Originally Posted by RI Swamp Yankee

My thought too. A chain link fence is just .... UGLY and in a few years it will be rusty and more ugly!

What about a 2 foot wood post with a log rail on top? I have tried looking but can't find an RSA that requires a chain link fence. If there is one somewhere, why can't the legislature make a change or exception?

BTW: Why is there no chain link fence seperating the Laconia Daily Sun parking lot from the tracks?

Remember, not every rule or regulation is an RSA.

The reason that the specified fence has been required is because the Railroad Division of the NH Department of Transportation has mandated it. They have the authority over that section of railbed and it's adjacent ROW.

There could be a myriad of reasons that they believe the fence is necessary, including a possible requirement by Federal Rail authorities.

In any case those wishing to understand the reasoning behind the fence would have to contact the NH officials at DOT to find out what the rationale was.

[SAMIAM]

Until Harry Mitchell submitted his letter, the discussion about Southdown was fairly civilized. To call the residents elitist, selfindulgent, self-important arrogant, selfish and is a little over the top. Almost hateful.
It seems reasonable for them to not want a chain link fence blocking their view and access to their property and it seems that they are open to a solution.
Mr Mitchell noted that walkers, bicyclists, grandparents "with baby strollers", lake lovers, teenagers, dog walkers & joggers would all suffer because of the greed of the southdown elitists (he forgot to mention cancer victims, minorities, single moms and the homeless).......but it seems to me that all of those victims he described pretty much fit the Southdown residents, themselves.
Also, his argument that the $100 fee for legal expenses could better be used to help the unfortunate could, certainly be applied to the huge expense for building and maintaining the trail itself.
The people in Southdown are just like us.....moms, dads grandparents, working, retired ....pretty unfair to characterize them the way Harry Mitchell did.