wow trail opposed

fatlazyless · 08-05-2008, 03:02 PM

Interesting to see the South Down Shore residents cast a vote yesterday, at their annual meeting, to "oppose the trail coming through anywhere on South Down property."

Front page article in today's Aug
5 Laconia Daily Sun.

The wow trail, Winnisquam-Opechee-Winnipesaukee, www.wowtrail.org, is a proposed 9 mile long, bicycle, walking, cross country skiing, roller skating trail. It will run along the state owned, railroad embankment. directly on the waterfront of the three lakes. It would go from Belmont-Laconia-Weirs Beach-Meredith, almost entirely along the state's railroad right of way.

I think it's an excellent idea because it would create a 9 mile bicycle path. Paved with asphalt, wide enough for a fire truck, and seperated from the existing railroad tracks by a 5' high chain link fence, it would allow the public access to this state owned waterfront access lane.

It is no big surprise that South Down Shore, a gated community, would be opposed and consider it an intrusion onto their leased waterfront area. As an alternative route, South Down could have suggested an alternative route across their property so it would not impact the waterfront. What South Down has suggested, through a vote, is to oppose the trail anywhere on its' property and suggest it get detoured out to Parade Rd, Route 106 with a 45 mph speed limit and heavy traffic. Not too bicycle friendly.

Sounds to me like South Down has an 'it's my way or the highway proposal' attitude.

The three million dollar construction cost is to be shared by federal, state, local, & individual donations.

Depending on the snowfall, it could be used as a nine mile long, asphalt paved, 10' (?) wide, bicycle path from late March to mid-December. It could be a good new venue for safe bicycling along a relative flat path that is entirely on the waterfront.

It would bring a new group of visitors to the Weirs Beach area, bicyclers and roller bladers and walkers-joggers. I suppose it would travel over the already built wood boardwalk as it crosses through the Weirs. People could combine a three hour cruise on the Mount Washington with an 18 mile bike ride, or something. Nine miles of peddling, three hours of eat'n cheeseburgers and watch the views while Cruis'n the Mount, then nine more miles of biking.

Possibly, a bicycle/kayak rental business could succeed at the Weirs? Just like on Martha's Vinyard!

Hopefully, the residents of South Down Shore will reconsider at their upcoming Monday, August 11 meeting.

"(South Down spokesman) acknowledged that the developement does not have the legal authority to prevent the WOW trail from continuing to follow along the state owned railroad corridor."

Hey, it could be a good thing, maybe it's time to give bicycling a try, you might even like it.

Resident 2B · 08-05-2008, 04:25 PM

I think the folks at SDS need to re-think things a bit.

The WOW is funded to some extent by Fed DOT. I believe that part of the SDS marina is on DOT property that is leased by SDS and that Fed DOT has granted right-of-way to SDS so that they can get to the water. Since Fed DOT has money into this project (Phase 1), I would expect they would like to see the whole project completed, all three phases.

The WOW folks are being very patient here since they really do not need SDS permission to move forward. They want to work with the owners at SDS to solve the real problem which is how to have the DOT required five-foot high fence to seperate the WOW trail from the rail bed and still give the SDS folks right-of-way to the water, without having to climb the fence. With the recent SDS move, I would not be surprised if DOT jumps in and tells the WOW folks to just move forward.

The WOW trail is a great project that will help bring more vacationers and their money into the area. It will also provide locals that like to bike or walk, a nice trail with great views of the lake.

I hope the SDS and WOW groups can come up with something that works for all, but in the end, no SDS permission is required. SDS owners do not own the rail bed. Working with the WOW folks to address the fence issue is the best solution to this issue.

Time to compromise folks!

R2B

SAMIAM · 08-06-2008, 09:40 AM

I don't think that they object to the trail itself....my guess is that they don't want a chain link fence running the entire lenght of the waterfront,and I don't blame them.They certainly can't be accused of being snobs since they allow a snowmobile trail to go right through the property. I don't understand why a fence is even needed since it ads to the cost and is an eyesore.Maybe they should consult with the engineers that designed the Moultonborough bike path.....no fence and add crushed stone.

Bear Islander · 08-06-2008, 09:51 AM

I don't understand how this 5 foot fence would work. There would have to be a lot of breaks in the fence to allows cars and pedestrians across the tracks. If there are multiple breaks in the fence then what good does the fence do.

How can you expect a land owner to agree to a fence that blocks their access.

How does this trail get past Maiden Lady Cove, Pickerel Cove, and Moulton's cove? The land inside the coves is private property and the tracks go over a very narrow causeway. And how will they keep people using the trail from climbing the fence to swim at these spots?

Is the boat tunnel at Pickerel Cove going to be twice as long? None of these answers are available at their website.

fatlazyless · 08-06-2008, 09:59 AM

Today's Citizen has an article on it.

That's true, a 5' chain link fence positioned between the waterfront homes and the view out to the water is a major reason to oppose the trail. Replacing the proposed fence with say an 8" high curb made of granite cobbles, or wood, would seem better. Probably, the fence is required by safety rules or insurance rules. ....an invisible fence...how's that work?

These same issues will probably be presented by Grousse Point in Meredith, since that is similar to South Down in Laconia.

Resident 2B · 08-06-2008, 10:18 AM

The 5 foot high fence is a Fed DOT requirement. It is meant to keep the people using the WOW trail away from the train using the state-owned rail bed. I understand the DOT is very rigid on this safety-related directive.

In other such applications, walkway tunnels and in a few cases walkway bridges have been constructed to provide access.

R2B

SAMIAM · 08-06-2008, 10:29 AM

How will they address the many snowmobile access points from the lake? This is starting to look like a bad idea.

jetskier · 08-06-2008, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

The 5 foot high fence is a Fed DOT requirement. It is meant to keep the people using the WOW trail away from the train using the state-owned rail bed. I understand the DOT is very rigid on this safety-related directive.

In other such applications, walkway tunnels and in a few cases walkway bridges have been constructed to provide access.

R2B

I believe that the issues are even more complex:

Since SDC is a private community, a second fence would be required to prevent access to the community. In addition, there is a marina operating heavy equipment to put boats in an out of the water. This operation would have to work with a gate and cross the path. This is a tricky situation, at best. With bicycles etc...that is going to be exceedingly difficult.

It is my understanding that the trail would have to be 12' wide to allow ambulance access and that likely infringes on private property.

There are a number of areas where the trail can not follow the tracks, such as trestles bridges and berms.

Overall, this is an ill considered plan. Running this across the frontage of SDC is problematic from the standpoint of safety and it creates a complete eye sore for a community that is a primary tax contributer to Laconia. A number of properties in SDC are taxes as waterfront and I am sure that with a fence between them and the water, filings for abatements will follow.

I think that SDC has been reasonable visa vi the snowmobile access, but who wants two chain link fences blocking the view and access to the lake. That kinda defeats the purpose of being on/at the lake.

I am sure that SDC is not going to be the only community with this type of issue. A pragmatic solution that circumvents the frontage issue should be worked out. It is in the best interest of everyone involved.

Jetskier

fatlazyless · 08-06-2008, 11:59 AM

What about the rail road tracks? I believe the tracks run from Meredith to the Weirs to Laconia to Belmont and to Franklin, and the Hobo Railroad runs from May to October.

If a railroad train is operating thru the right of way along the South Down waterfront, then a fence for the tracks would seem practical.

jetskier · 08-06-2008, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

What about the rail road tracks? I believe the tracks run from Meredith to the Weirs to Laconia to Belmont and to Franklin, and the Hobo Railroad runs from May to October.

If a railroad train is operating thru the right of way along the South Down waterfront, then a fence for the tracks would seem practical.

No, there are issues:

There have to be gates to allow the marina to function and access to the beach areas. The heavy machinery that runs the boats is going to have to be wary of pedestrians, bicycles, skate boards etc... When the current train comes to SDC, it blows the whistle well in advance of crossing. Pedestrians do not have a whistle. Most users of the trail will not be expecting crossing traffic. This is a safety issue.

In addition, there are crossings all along the route with folks needing to gain access to the waterfront. That crossing traffic will be people, but it begs the opportunity for someone on a bike to run over a child.

This is a bad idea any way you slice it. It would be best to go around.

Jetskier

fatlazyless · 08-06-2008, 12:35 PM

Boston, Newton, & Watertown, Massachusetts share a 12 mile long bicycle path that runs next to the Charles River. It has been there for many years. Other than no motorized vehicles like mopeds, it allows pedestrians, joggers, roller-bladers, skateboarders, bicyclists, unicycles, and pogo sticks. It can get crowded at times, too, especially along the Storrow Drive embankment near the Hatch Shell. It all manages to fit and work. Every once in a blue moon, someone gets creamed by a bicycle and they get hauled off in an ambulance, but not too often.

Are you talking about the loading ramp at Paugus Bay Marina, where it loads boats down its' ramp with a marina forklift from boat rack storage? Does South Down Shore have a boat ramp with rack storage too, or just a launch ramp for boats on trailers?

It would seem that the boat ramps are part of the embankment and that belongs to the state, when it was abandoned, years ago, by the railroad.

jetskier · 08-06-2008, 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

Boston, Newton, & Watertown, Massachusetts share a 12 mile long bicycle path that runs next to the Charles River. It has been there for many years. Other than no motorized vehicles like mopeds, it allows pedestrians, joggers, roller-bladers, skateboarders, bicyclists, unicycles, and pogo sticks. It can get crowded at times, too, especially along the Storrow Drive embankment near the Hatch Shell. It all manages to fit and work. Every once in a blue moon, someone gets creamed by a bicycle and they get hauled off in an ambulance, but not too often.

Are you talking about the loading ramp at Paugus Bay Marina, where it loads boats down its' ramp with a marina forklift from boat rack storage? Does South Down Shore have a boat ramp, too?

It would seem that the boat ramps are part of the embankment and that belongs to the state, when it was abandoned, years ago, by the railroad.

South Down Shores has a private marina with a fork lift (boat lift) that transports boats from the racks to the lake.

I assure you that if someone gets hurt on the trail due to a bike or other means, there will be litigation. That is the world in which we live. Why put someone at risk for this type of endeavor...it is more pragmatic to go around and not have the issue.

Jetskier

fatlazyless · 08-06-2008, 12:56 PM

So, as it exists now, there is occaisionally a train pulling passenger cars that travel across the South Shore Down embankment. It goes slowly, and sounds a whistle when crossing.

The problem is the proposed 12' asphalt path, 5' high, chain link, safety fence and attendant walkers, runners, bicyclers, & cross country skiers.

I don't know, but just like the water in Lake Winnipesaukee belongs to the people of New Hampshire, the embankment railroad right-of-way does, too. The right-of-way gets leased by South Down Shore. When the lease agreement runs out, couldn't the state decide to just not allow South Down to use the state's embankment? Who own's the embankment?

WeirsBeachBoater · 08-06-2008, 01:01 PM

let me throw another monkey wrench in here. How does the new Shoreline Protection act allow a Paved surface along the shoreline of Paugus Bay?

Resident 2B · 08-06-2008, 01:44 PM

FLL,

Some of the shorefront is owned by SDS and the rest is owned by fed DOT and leased to SDS.

WBB,

I think they are considering this a project that was in the planning stages, therefore underway, when the July 1st date activated the new CSPA rules. However, that is a great question! I would guess a private landowner would have a hard time doing this.

I personally like the concept of the WOW trail and I have made a few contributions to the cause, but the questions being raised are great questions that I do not have answers for.

We almost bought at SDS/Long Bay several years ago, but during our "due diligence" phase, our lawyer warned us about the potential for water access issues in the future. His opinion was the shorefront leases were at risk of being discontinued and that the right-of-way across the tracks may also be lost, in time. That impacted our buying at SDS/Long Bay. Personally, I really liked it there, but if the access and docking was lost, it would no longer work for us.

For me, replacing the train with the WOW trail, without a fence and without the access restrictions, is better than having the train, the fence and and the WOW trail. That train makes a lot of noise! Since the state owns the rail bed and the DOT owns some of the waterfront and is insisting on the 5' fence, perhaps they can join in the discussions along with WOW and SDS and get this project moving.

R2B

WeirsBeachBoater · 08-06-2008, 02:52 PM

R2B,

I don't think you will see the train going away, If anything with the renewed interest in Railroads, you may see a push from the south to reopen the tracks to passenger service. I think there was talk about this in another thread. The state owns the rails, the Hobo leases them, I can't see the state giving up that money to put in a wow trail that will pay 0. I like the idea of rail trails, but down in MA, they used extinct RR lines, pulled up tracks and ties, and they have done well. The sticking point is all the lakefront that WOW wants to use. My .02, It won't happen. You will see phase 1, which goes through the city, and maybe phase 2 as it borders mostly commercial or state owned property, But Phase 3 from Lakeport north, Not so Much. It will prove too costly with permitting, lawsuits etc.....

WBB

Resident 2B · 08-06-2008, 03:45 PM

WBB,

You are probably right. Too bad, as that is the nicest part of the proposed WOW trail.

It is very dangerous to mix people and kids with trains without a barrier. Trains cannot stop on a dime! I believe that is why the Fed DOT said that there had to be a 5' fence. And, I can understand and appreciate the SDS folks opinion. Although they do not own the rail bed, they currently have a right-to-cross this rail bed. I realize the SDS is gated, but there are ungated access points through the development that they do not control. So, I see it as mostly gated, or almost gated.

I still hope that some sort of compromise can be reached as I have been looking forward to all three phases being built and biking from the Weirs to Lakeport on the WOW trail. I feel strongly that state resources should be open to as many people as possible, as the land and the lake should be open for all to enjoy. I think the WOW folks have tried to accomplish this with this project.

R2B

no-engine · 08-06-2008, 07:00 PM

I have x-c skied along the SDS RR tracks in winter, from Laconia Country Club to Hilliard Road I think it's called. One can not be stopped for trespassing. Does the sewer line follow the tracks, as I do not recall there. It does in Meredith to Weirs! From there it must be along that side of Paugus Bay! Where else, but the tracks for the interceptor line to the Winnipesaukee River Basin Regional Treatment Plant in Franklin?

Far too numerous to count, I have been on the tracks & adjacent sewer line from Meredith to Weirs and along Scenic Road to Lakeside Road in to the heart of "Weirs" area. All public ways through Grousse Point, Needle Eye Road, Neal Shores areas and other sites along the route. I even chatted with home owners. The time of year has been summer on a bicycle or walking, and winter on X-C skis or snowshoes - never motorized, but there are also snow machines in winter and off road dirt motorbikes bikes in summer. All users I've seen treat neighboring private property with respect, staying on the public ways!

I don't think any land-owner association, land owner, community, or whatever group can possibly say no trespassing, along the RR and/or sewer right of ways.

I've also been on the former tracks now multi-use path in Somerville, Arlington, Watertown, etc. Very nice for all uses!

WOW should move forward and the SDS communities should agree and join in peacefully; in the end it'll actually benefit those unit owners, with the abundance of uses to enjoy!

jetskier · 08-06-2008, 07:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by no-engine

I have x-c skied along the SDS RR tracks in winter, from Laconia Country Club to Hilliard Road I think it's called. One can not be stopped for trespassing. Does the sewer line follow the tracks, as I do not recall there. It does in Meredith to Weirs! From there it must be along that side of Paugus Bay! Where else, but the tracks for the interceptor line to the Winnipesaukee River Basin Regional Treatment Plant in Franklin?

Far too numerous to count, I have been on the tracks & adjacent sewer line from Meredith to Weirs and along Scenic Road to Lakeside Road in to the heart of "Weirs" area. All public ways through Grousse Point, Needle Eye Road, Neal Shores areas and other sites along the route. I even chatted with home owners. The time of year has been summer on a bicycle or walking, and winter on X-C skis or snowshoes - never motorized, but there are also snow machines in winter and off road dirt motorbikes bikes in summer. All users I've seen treat neighboring private property with respect, staying on the public ways!

I don't think any land-owner association, land owner, community, or whatever group can possibly say no trespassing, along the RR and/or sewer right of ways.

I've also been on the former tracks now multi-use path in Somerville, Arlington, Watertown, etc. Very nice for all uses!

WOW should move forward and the SDS communities should agree and join in peacefully; in the end it'll actually benefit those unit owners, with the abundance of uses to enjoy!

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but....

I have ridden the tracks in the winter on my snowmobile and they are not groomed. The only thing to watch out for is other snowmobiles and x-country skiiers.

In the summer, there are trains, marina operations and folks crossing to get to the shore line. Add in a trail with cross traffic and you have way too much going on in a restricted area. As I indicated, there will invariably be an accident and litigation. If you add the blight of fencing to a pristine shoreline, it all becomes a very bad idea.

Jetskier

no-engine · 08-06-2008, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetskier

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but....

I have ridden the tracks in the winter on my snowmobile and they are not groomed. The only thing to watch out for is other snowmobiles and x-country skiiers.

In the summer, there are trains, marina operations and folks crossing to get to the shore line. Add in a trail with cross traffic and you have way too much going on in a restricted area. As I indicated, there will invariably be an accident and litigation. If you add the blight of fencing to a pristine shoreline, it all becomes a very bad idea.

Jetskier

Looks like the entire issue needs many compromises. Can the State the municipal authorities, leaseholders, abutting land owners, and users meet and plan the benefits to all possible ones involved?

Is WOW, in fact, planning fences along the proposed routes? I wanted to attend one of the hearings, but did not. The section in Somerville & Arlington, MA I have been on is fenced with periodic openings. On Cape Cod, I see multi-use trails paralleling the streets in some places, with appropriate signs at crossings and such.

I think I was stating the facts about my personal uses of the right of ways - rail road and adjacent paths including parallel sewer lines. I think my only opinion was that I envisioned an added benefit to the uses of the multi use trail all year long, if I had access if I was near an entry to the trail, or lived within SDS, or any of the previous mentioned communities. In a way, I do have easy access, but do not abut any track or right of way. One can park at Meredith Marina, or along side roads, the bend in Scenic Road just near Tamarack, Lakeport train station and multitude other spots. I did once live in a water front condo apartment: "our beach" was infringed upon, so I very well understand the concerns of people within any community such as Southdown Shores; I also know people living within SDS, Neal Shore Road, Grousse Point and other areas. All of whom I respect what they have in their private community.

The land owners along the waterfront path in Ogunquit, ME survive jointly with people on the path.

Same goes in Newport, RI, where path users are next to high valued private property.

brk-lnt · 08-07-2008, 07:44 AM

This thread, like most of FLL's topics, is filled with conjecture and various misunderstandings.

South Down Shores does not oppose the WOW trail, but there is a very strong desire to route the trail in a manner that allows it to fulfill the original spirit of the concept without creating a security risk or major eyesore to the residents and owners of SDS.

There certainly has not been a "my way or the highway" attitude as FLL insinuated in his first post. The WOW project is also very different from the converted tracks in MA where the trains no longer run and an abandoned track was converted into a walking path. There are certainly similarities, I am not arguing that point, but it's far from a 1-1 case study.

As a South Down resident and someone was has been "aware" of this upcoming issue for some time now I don't see the value in debating this topic much more here, but I do know that mutually beneficial compromises are available.

dpg · 08-07-2008, 10:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brk-lnt

As a South Down resident and someone was has been "aware" of this upcoming issue for some time now I don't see the value in debating this topic much more here, but I do know that mutually beneficial compromises are available.

Well we can say this about alot of things on this forum (in someones opinion.) Isn't that what this forum is about, the LAKES REGION?

Woodsy · 08-07-2008, 11:12 AM

I think the WOW trail is a great idea...

But then the ugly head of NIMBY appears! The sticky point is the shoreline leases... If the WOW trail reroutes around SDS, thus accomodating the owners @ SDS, then every other owner along the trail expects the same treatment.

But here is the real question....

If the SDS residents oppose the plan, will the state decline to renew thier lease on the PUBLICLY owned shorefront?

This will no doubt cause all sorts of issues among the SDS community. If SDS goes to court to block the trail, the state could choose to play hardball, refuse to renew the shoreline leases and build the trail anyway...

Woodsy

no-engine · 08-07-2008, 07:42 PM

COMPROMISES!
Please. I don't know why I come here to read, and then joined.

Right of ways, easements, paths, etc. all exist from compromises. Look at the amount of land improvement investments made within the Grouse Point area! One can walk, bicycle, or whatever down the tracks from either direction. I do not read or hear those people protesting the use of the tracks and accompanying land where sewer line exists. People used to drive autos down the path from the Meredith RR station to the houses at one-mile point, starting after the sewer line went in - illegal, but they did so. They were stopped; now they drive over the hill from Pemi Glass area on Rt 3. There must have been compromises with the developer of that high priced development!

The people at Meredith, Lake Shore Road, Grouse Point, Neal Shore, Needle Eye Road, Scenic Road, Weirs areas, the marinas, Hilliard Road and others on west side Paugus Bay, South Down Shores, and areas farther south, as Mass. Ave. Lakeport all purchased their properties and should have been well aware of their situations with RR and State sewer line. If they were not made aware by their representatives before taking ownership, they have issues with their advisers or lawyers.

Let's quit speculations, and participate in the compromises for the benefit of all, as was posted and asset to the communities.

jetskier · 08-07-2008, 09:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by no-engine

COMPROMISES!
Please. I don't know why I come here to read, and then joined.

Right of ways, easements, paths, etc. all exist from compromises. Look at the amount of land improvement investments made within the Grouse Point area! One can walk, bicycle, or whatever down the tracks from either direction. I do not read or hear those people protesting the use of the tracks and accompanying land where sewer line exists. People used to drive autos down the path from the Meredith RR station to the houses at one-mile point, starting after the sewer line went in - illegal, but they did so. They were stopped; now they drive over the hill from Pemi Glass area on Rt 3. There must have been compromises with the developer of that high priced development!

The people at Meredith, Lake Shore Road, Grouse Point, Neal Shore, Needle Eye Road, Scenic Road, Weirs areas, the marinas, Hilliard Road and others on west side Paugus Bay, South Down Shores, and areas farther south, as Mass. Ave. Lakeport all purchased their properties and should have been well aware of their situations with RR and State sewer line. If they were not made aware by their representatives before taking ownership, they have issues with their advisers or lawyers.

Let's quit speculations, and participate in the compromises for the benefit of all, as was posted and asset to the communities.

You have not answered the question regarding safety, nor the issue regarding the ugly chain link fence. I think that these are the compelling issues. It is easy to discuss the "benefit" to the community and if not for the train and the fence, it might be different. However, they are central to the point. A shoreline with a chain link fence is a blight to all. Today there is grass, trees and the train tracks. It is bucolic. Shall we add a little barbed wire to the top just to complete the effect?

In addition, you need to consider the fact that a number of the properties along the route are being taxed by the communities as "shore front". The tax premium tends to run about 30%. When a fence is constructed, this is no longer legally shore front as there is a constructed impediment between the property and the shoreline. All of these properties will have to be adjusted downward and there will be a reduction in the tax base.

Compromises...hmmm, you have not addressed the issues nor offered any compromises. This is not a simple issue and there is more to it than your singular opinion.

Jetskier

no-engine · 08-07-2008, 09:50 PM

I have no clue that IF the trail path is done, will there definitely be a fence?

There is no fence along tracks/sewer line in many parts that I have personally viewed. Who is saying that I am trespassing if I walk the tracks or sewer line from Meredith to Franklin?

You are right: how can a fence be placed, preventing persons on one side from going to other side of their own property. I know there are some landowners the same on either side of track, but with the easement or right of way through.
I am not a lawyer and never pretended to have an option or a position statement regarding a fence. Just what authority has said that there WILL be fences along all the tracks & sewer line? I have not read that! WHO SAYS THERE MUST OR WILL BE FENCES?

Guess I need to change a thought about cutting one's property in parts; it's been done by placement of an Interstate Highway in places. Of course a whole different matter!

I am not wishing to hold research hearings on all the legalities involved on this forum or any forum; I would like all the issues brought up at the public meetings. Like I said, why is it so difficult for the authorities and informed people to discuss situations and work compromises of differing opinions - yes opinions. Laws and deeds and deed restrictions and easements, etc. need to be made open. I am sure neither I or anyone posting here is aware of all the legal matters involved.

Resident 2B · 08-07-2008, 10:29 PM

I am fully in favor of the WOW trail and I am glad to say that I have contributed to this project.

I realize that there are SDS/Long Bay owners that oppose this project. However, this project benefits all the people that will use the trail. The SDS/Long Bay owners are trying to restrict ownership of public land that they believe they have an ability to control.

I feel strongly that publically owned land should benefit the public, not the few that have limited, but exclusive rights to access. SDS/Long Bay owners do not own the rail bed in question. The state owns the land and the citizens should be the only people that benefit from this ownership.

Although I have been hoping that a good compromise could be worked out between WOW and SDS/Long Bay, it seems to me that SDS is not in the compromising mood. Therefore, I feel WOW should move forward and begin construction of Phase 3 at once.

SDS/Long Bay owners had their say and they refused to look at the big picture benefits of this project. They seem to think that they have a “gated community” and as such, no one should be able to enter their “gated” area. In fact, SDS/Long Bay has to allow access from the rail bed, land that they do not own, so this is not an infringement on their space. I had hoped that SDS/Long Bay would find a way to compromise in this situation, but based upon private emails to me and other public statements that SDs owners have made, I now feel compromise is not on the SDS/Long Bay agenda. Regardless of what some have said, they are clearly stonewalling this project.

This project is a wonderful project using public land for the good of all tax payers. That is what public land should be used for! The views of the water near Lakeport are wonderful and must be part of this project. It clearly brings value to the entire project.

SDS/Long Bay does not own one square foot of this rail bed, but they seem to think that they can stop the entire Phase 3 of this project, thus significantly weakening the whole project. It is time for those with any interest in this project to step up with their positions and opinions. The lake does not belong to owners at SDS /Long Bay. It is for everyone to enjoy, no matter what their financial means happen to be.

Completion of this project will give all residents and visitors a great path to see the lake with unobstructed views without any obstructions.
The public land in that area should be used for the benefit of the public, not for the few that happen to own property at SDS/Long Bay!

NH voters, please contact your representatives and senators about this issue. Public access must take precedence over privately granted leases and temporary rights-of-way. If leases are not in the best interest of all the citizens, they must not be renewed. The full interest of the public has to be considered. In fact, they own the land, not the few at SDS/Long Bay.

Hopefully, a reasonable compromise can be worked out, but the good of all must be given the strongest consideration! If SDS/Long Bay owners are not willing to compromise, then let us move forward in the best interest of all the folks in the public sector that will benefit from this great project. The personal interests of few should not infringe on the rights of many!

R2B

jetskier · 08-07-2008, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

I am fully in favor of the WOW trail and I am glad to say that I have contributed to this project.

I realize that there are SDS/Long Bay owners that oppose this project. However, this project benefits all the people that will use the trail. The SDS/Long Bay owners are trying to restrict ownership of public land that they believe they have an ability to control.

I feel strongly that publicly owned land should benefit the public, not the few that have limited, but exclusive rights to access. SDS/Long Bay owners do not own the rail bed in question. The state owns the land and the citizens should be the only people that benefit from this ownership.

Although I have been hoping that a good compromise could be worked out between WOW and SDS/Long Bay, it seems to me that SDS is not in the compromising mood. Therefore, I feel WOW should move forward and begin construction of Phase 3 at once.

SDS/Long Bay owners had their say and they refused to look at the big picture benefits of this project. They seem to think that they have a “gated community” and as such, no one should be able to enter their “gated” area. In fact, SDS/Long Bay has to allow access from the rail bed, land that they do not own, so this is not an infringement on their space. I had hoped that SDS/Long Bay would find a way to compromise in this situation, but based upon private emails to me and other public statements that SDs owners have made, I now feel compromise is not on the SDS/Long Bay agenda. Regardless of what some have said, they are clearly stonewalling this project.

This project is a wonderful project using public land for the good of all tax payers. That is what public land should be used for! The views of the water near Lakeport are wonderful and must be part of this project. It clearly brings value to the entire project.

SDS/Long Bay does not own one square foot of this rail bed, but they seem to think that they can stop the entire Phase 3 of this project, thus significantly weakening the whole project. It is time for those with any interest in this project to step up with their positions and opinions. The lake does not belong to owners at SDS /Long Bay. It is for everyone to enjoy, no matter what their financial means happen to be.

Completion of this project will give all residents and visitors a great path to see the lake with unobstructed views without any obstructions.
The public land in that area should be used for the benefit of the public, not for the few that happen to own property at SDS/Long Bay!

NH voters, please contact your representatives and senators about this issue. Public access must take precedence over privately granted leases and temporary rights-of-way. If leases are not in the best interest of all the citizens, they must not be renewed. The full interest of the public has to be considered. In fact, they own the land, not the few at SDS/Long Bay.

Hopefully, a reasonable compromise can be worked out, but the good of all must be given the strongest consideration! If SDS/Long Bay owners are not willing to compromise, then let us move forward in the best interest of all the folks in the public sector that will benefit from this great project. The personal interests of few should not infringe on the rights of many!

R2B

Nice diatribe...where in this thread did you read anyone stating that position (SDS and Longbay)? There have been issues pointed out and now espousing anything except complete support for this is an effrontery to god and country. No one has addressed the issues brought up here. It is opinion and opining. Give me a break!

Jetskier

Resident 2B · 08-07-2008, 11:23 PM

You have your opinion and I have mine! Thank God we have a free country!

I have no financial interest in SDS or Long Bay.

I believe I am telling it as it really is.

I would like to see the WOW trail built and I have contributed to this endeavor. I believe this is a great project that will benefit the entire area.

SDS/Long Bay folks are opposed, mostly due to their personal financial interests. They should have done a better "due dligence" study when they purchased their property. That is what I did when I decided to pass on a Long Bay property. You need to know what you are buying when you buy!

That is what this is all about, SDS/Long Bay trying to exert rights on land that is not owned by SDS/Long Bay.

I believe this is important for the general public to know and for any potential SDS/Lond Bay buyer to know.

As a Laconia water-front tax payer with a tax bill well over $10,000, I hope to enjoy riding my bike from the Weirs to Lakeport on state owned land, even if it happens to go in front of SDS/Long Bay owned land.

You own what you own and you live with what you do not own!

Therefore, I choose to continue this interesting discussion.

R2B

no-engine · 08-08-2008, 07:25 AM

R2B and others,

Very well stated on both recent counts. I could not have stated better.
I am Meredith property owner and year round resident, whose land happen to abut the tracks, but has no rights across tracks, where it's private property and another short road, and more homes before the Lake.

Do not be hesitant: walk, bicycle, snowshoe, x-c ski the path (sewer line buried) beside the tracks. Public property!

SAMIAM · 08-08-2008, 08:24 AM

Imagine someone building a 5 foot chain link fence in YOUR front yard (for the enjoyment of the public) ruining the view,that you are heavily taxed for and access to the lake ,which you are heavily taxed for.I know it sounds all fuzzy to think of people jogging and biking along the lake.Seems like those homeowners should have some rights,too. I have never lived in SDS but know a few people who do and they don't object at all to people using the rail bed or trail.It's an ugly chain link fence that they object to,and rightfully so.
If R2B thinks compromise is the answere,let the stae compromise and drop their demand for a fence.

brk-lnt · 08-08-2008, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

Imagine someone building a 5 foot chain link fence in YOUR front yard (for the enjoyment of the public) ruining the view,that you are heavily taxed for and access to the lake ,which you are heavily taxed for.I know it sounds all fuzzy to think of people jogging and biking along the lake.Seems like those homeowners should have some rights,too. I have never lived in SDS but know a few people who do and they don't object at all to people using the rail bed or trail.It's an ugly chain link fence that they object to,and rightfully so.
If R2B thinks compromise is the answere,let the stae compromise and drop their demand for a fence.

Yes, this is the basic issue behind the opposition. Not only is the fence itself ugly, if you look at some of the existing WOW trail, many portions of the fence are already in disrepair and/or have all kinds of debris caught in the fence.

The WOW trail has a nice concept in spirit, but the implementation of the concept is causing a multi-mile long eyesore all along portions of Lakes Region waterfront.

krm · 08-08-2008, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by no-engine

R2B and others,

Very well stated on both recent counts. I could not have stated better.
I am Meredith property owner and year round resident, whose land happen to abut the tracks, but has no rights across tracks, where it's private property and another short road, and more homes before the Lake.

Do not be hesitant: walk, bicycle, snowshoe, x-c ski the path (sewer line buried) beside the tracks. Public property!

I agree that this is owned by the public and we should all have rights to use it but the NH DOT rails, considers it private publicly owned property, aka if a cop is having a bad day he could arrest anyone on the tracks for trespassing. Unless you has a crossing agreement with NH DOT

jetskier · 08-08-2008, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krm

I agree that this is owned by the public and we should all have rights to use it but the NH DOT rails, considers it private publicly owned property, aka if a cop is having a bad day he could arrest anyone on the tracks for trespassing. Unless you has a crossing agreement with NH DOT

Not to belabor this discussion, but there are active trains running on the tracks. If you are on the tracks in the active sections, you really are taking your life in your hands. The trains have limited visibility in many sections and they can not stop very easily.

In the winter, the tracks are used for snowmobiling and x-country skiing as there are no trains or groomers. So, the only thing to watch out for is other users.

So, do not go on the tracks in sections where the trains are running. This is extremely dangerous. I don't want to read about anyone losing life or limb.

Jetskier

chipj29 · 08-08-2008, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jetskier

Not to belabor this discussion, but there are active trains running on the tracks. If you are on the tracks in the active sections, you really are taking your life in your hands. The trains have limited visibility in many sections and they can not stop very easily.

In the winter, the tracks are used for snowmobiling and x-country skiing as there are no trains or groomers. So, the only thing to watch out for is other users.

So, do not go on the tracks in sections where the trains are running. This is extremely dangerous. I don't want to read about anyone losing life or limb.

Jetskier

It is dangerous, as well as illegal.

WeirsBeachBoater · 08-08-2008, 12:13 PM

Small Correction. In the winter there are trail groomers that service Corridor 15. I know, I used to run one! Belknap Snowmobilers grooms from Court St. North to Ashland RR station.

krm · 08-08-2008, 01:14 PM

I believe the reason the tracks are open in the winter is bc an agreement/use and access agreement in place with the NH DOT and the various Snow Mob. Ass.

no-engine · 08-08-2008, 01:24 PM

Quote:

"let the state compromise and drop their demand for a fence." In Part!

From a recent post. I asked point blank, and had no answer in this thread! So, is this the agency (THE STATE) that says there will be fence along all WOW trails? Do all the municipalities through which the planned trail passes agree with a fence?
If so, apparently there need to be funding for maintenance, after installations!!!! Where does funding fall? The WOW organization?

No issue please, just answers, Thanks

fatlazyless · 08-08-2008, 03:44 PM

Here's the solution. An invisable fence just like for doggies. Trail users purchase their own collar that gives them a shock should they stray across the line. Sounds like the answer

.

No ugly fence, no loss of property tax revenue, and the trail costs less to build.

Hey, it works good for dogs so why not people?

Another idea....instead of a five foot, chain link fence...how about those five inch high, granite, rectangular, cobble stones, lined up on the ground without any cement.

A low maintenance, easy to install, almost indestructable, very low profile, landscape fence. Talk about a simple solution.

Resident 2B · 08-08-2008, 04:43 PM

I think I would rather have the WOW trail than the train. With the rail bed washed out in two places, I wonder if God is sending us his idea for the solution. God and I often see eye-to-eye.

I think if the train goes, the fence goes.

R2B

brk-lnt · 08-08-2008, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

I think I would rather have the WOW trail than the train. With the rail bed washed out in two places, I wonder if God is sending us his idea for the solution. God and I often see eye-to-eye.

I think if the train goes, the fence goes.

R2B

Entirely agree with you on that point! Pave the railbed itself and skip the eyesore fencing.

fatlazyless · 08-08-2008, 06:36 PM

Not too familiar with it but doesn't Wolfboro have a 12 mile bicycle path, starting at Back Bay, which travels over an abandoned rail road right-of-way to Sanbornville. It has had all the tracks removed? Believe that it is not paved with asphalt but with some type of fine black gravel.

It works good?

Skip · 08-23-2008, 06:08 AM

Interesting article in today's on-line Citizen detailing the skyrocketing cost of a fence along the proposed WOW trail in Belmont. Entire article can be read HERE!

fatlazyless · 08-23-2008, 06:29 AM

Instead of a chain link fence why not the equivalent of a "virtual dotted line on the ground", constructed very simply with grey granite rectangular cobblestones. People do not need a chain link fence to know where the public trail property line is located. A cobblestone line on the gound would be an attractive solution.

Bicycle paths in the Netherlands which run between roads and canals frequently have a hedgerow or just a strip of grass and do not have an ugly chain link fence.

I'll even be happy to go to nearby Gilbert Block Company in Belmont and donate one grey granite cobblestone which costs about $3.50. So, at nine miles x 3.50 = a whole lot of cobblestones. Any other volunteer cobble donations out there?

RI Swamp Yankee · 08-23-2008, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

.... So, at nine miles x 3.50 = a whole lot of cobblestones. Any other volunteer cobble donations out there?

If each block is 1 foot long:
5,280 feet / mile X 9 miles = 47,520 blocks

47,520 blocks X $3.50 per block = $166,320 (plus labor!

)

Bear Islander · 08-24-2008, 12:37 AM

How does a cobblestone keep a child off the railroad tracks?

This is from todays New York Times
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...55C0A967958260

Trains hit pedestrians or vehicles more than 4,000 times each year. About 500 people are killed while walking on tracks each year. I think this is why the fence is being required.

SAMIAM · 08-24-2008, 08:33 AM

Be serious.....Amtrack trains travel at 70mph plus and our little scenic railroad crawls along at 2 or 3 mph.I've ridden it and you can WALK faster than the train is traveling.To compare a NY commuter train to our scienic railway is beyond ridiculous. I was in favor of the WOW project (and even donated) until I learned of the big ugly chain link fence that would scar miles of shoreline and ruin not only esthetics,but access for hundreds of property owners......please note that BearIslander lives on an island and is not effected.

fatlazyless · 08-24-2008, 01:18 PM

The New Hampshire legislature just passed a bicycle safety law, effective January 1, which amoung other items, creates a 'three foot safety space rule' in that motor vehicles shall not come closer than three feet to a bicycle as both car and bike share the same road.

Why not extend the thinking for bicycling on New Hampshire roads to the WOW trail, and simply require the distance between the WOW bicycle path and railroad tracks to be a minimum determined distance. It could be greater than three feet, such as five or eight or ten feet.

If a three feet safety space is an ok compromise for cars and bicycles, then lets apply the same thinking to this "ugly fence' problem and simply build it without a fence excepting areas where a fence is recommended.

Possibly, a granite cobblestone "fence' would be viewed as an attractive border and abutters could view it as an enhancement and not an ugly fence.

As the Old Man of the Mountain used to say: "granite is naturally good looking," plus a cobblestone is all of just 6 inches high so it will not mess with the view.

.

Bear Islander · 08-24-2008, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAMIAM

Be serious.....Amtrack trains travel at 70mph plus and our little scenic railroad crawls along at 2 or 3 mph.I've ridden it and you can WALK faster than the train is traveling.To compare a NY commuter train to our scienic railway is beyond ridiculous. I was in favor of the WOW project (and even donated) until I learned of the big ugly chain link fence that would scar miles of shoreline and ruin not only esthetics,but access for hundreds of property owners......please note that BearIslander lives on an island and is not effected.

Where is it that Amtrak trains going more than 70 MPH pass within inches of a pedestrian and bike path? I was unaware that was happening.

Please explain what difference it make where I live? Is this thread only for WOW abutters?

Even a slow train can't stop on a dime, or in time to prevent hitting a pedestrian. Nor can you expect children to stay off railroad tracks just inches away from were they are walking unless you have a fence.

And a fence with openings every couple of hundred feet to allow for access is not much better than no fence at all.

I really don't see how this project can be both safe and allow access at the same time.

jrc · 08-24-2008, 08:08 PM

I've been on the train and I've been in Southdown. The train currently coexists with pedestrians quite well. There is no fence along the route now and many people cross the tracks safely.

In Skip's link it looks like the NH DOT requires the fence, maybe they can be reasoned with.

I just can't imagine a ugly chain link fence from the railroad bridge near the Irwins all along the side of Paugus Bay to the Weirs and then along Meredith Bay.

Near my weekday residence in Hollis, we can walk, bike, etc along an abandoned railway to Ayer. It is a nice trail to have. It did and does have opposition from literal NIMBY's. The good seems to override the bad. But in a few places fences were built to keep snowmobiles and ATV off the trails. These fences also cut longstanding access across the trail. These fences are now often in need of repair.

fatnoah · 08-25-2008, 02:15 PM

Personally, I think the trail is a great idea, however not with an ugly fence. While I understand the state's perspective in requiring a fence, it seems that whatever entity came up with that requirement is not too familiar with much of the geography of the line.

The sheer number of grade crossings for roads, driveways, paths, as well as narrow causeways would make so many gaps in the fence it would be pointless anyway...an argument further strengthened by the leisurely pace of the existing rail traffic.

For some numbers about existing rail-with-trails endeavors, check the following link: http://www.americantrails.org/resour...railStudy.html

Based on the URL, I would assume that there is some bias in the study, but it's interesting nonetheless.

SAMIAM · 08-25-2008, 06:48 PM

B. I.....I'm amazed and confused......looking back over your previous posts,you seem to be a guy who loves nature and cares about the enviroment.You have posted about,wildlife,clean water,alternative energy......but you approve of a nine mile chain link fence in front of our precious waterfront. You recently put up a web cam for your little Daisy the duck who was on her nest and we all stood by with baited breath. I put it up on my computer at the office so I wouldn't miss the big moment.My question is this................If you had a 5' fence in front of your property on Bear island,how would little Daisy have reached the water with her little babies?

Bear Islander · 08-25-2008, 10:42 PM

You misunderstand me. I am not in favor of the WOW trail.

It sounds like a great idea at first. However when you get into the details it stops making sense. The way I understand it the only way they will have enough room for the trail is to put it right next to the rails. Even with a slow moving train eventually someone will fall, or zig when they should zag, and there will be a horrible accident.

I can imagine this trail being VERY popular, much more so than similar trails that don't go along a beautiful lake. That means lots of people just inches from a vehicle that can't stop. Not a good idea in my opinion. The only answer is a fence between the tracks and the trail.

However a fence will be seriously ugly. And even if you could find a beautiful fence or an invisible fence.... What good is a fence that has a break every few feet?

In my opinion they are trying to do two mutually exclusive things at the same time. Isolate the trail from the tracks for safety reasons, AND provide hundreds of crossings to allow access. I just don't see how it can be done.

SAMIAM · 08-26-2008, 08:00 AM

Sorry,B.I.......guess I did have you wrong.I thought you approved of the fence....but I do disagree with you about any danger from a slow moving train.If only the DOT would waive the fence requirement everyone would be happy.

kjbathe · 08-26-2008, 09:32 AM

Why are we again trying to legislate personal responsibility? Create the template and paint a warning in reflective paint every 500 feet "DANGER - STAY CLEAR OF ACTIVE TRAIN TRACK" and call it good.

If folks want to get on the tracks, a fence won't stop them. And why incur the maintenance costs and headache of trying to keep the fence intact. Compliment the painted warning notices with a sign at the various entrances to the trail alerting them to the danger of the active track and problem solved.

I listen to these things and thank God we went to the moon in the 60's... Our perpetual hand-wringing today would never allow us to sign off on the idea of strapping three guys into a glorified trash can affixed to the five stories of high explosives needed to hurl them into the void of space. A fence to keep people off the tracks... If you need a fence to impose common sense, perhaps you should be on the tracks when the train comes.

Woodsy · 08-26-2008, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bear Islander

You misunderstand me. I am not in favor of the WOW trail.

It sounds like a great idea at first. However when you get into the details it stops making sense. The way I understand it the only way they will have enough room for the trail is to put it right next to the rails. Even with a slow moving train eventually someone will fall, or zig when they should zag, and there will be a horrible accident.

I can imagine this trail being VERY popular, much more so than similar trails that don't go along a beautiful lake. That means lots of people just inches from a vehicle that can't stop. Not a good idea in my opinion. The only answer is a fence between the tracks and the trail.

However a fence will be seriously ugly. And even if you could find a beautiful fence or an invisible fence.... What good is a fence that has a break every few feet?

In my opinion they are trying to do two mutually exclusive things at the same time. Isolate the trail from the tracks for safety reasons, AND provide hundreds of crossings to allow access. I just don't see how it can be done.

When does the lunacy end?? This is PRECISELY what is wrong with this country today! We have to account for every possible idiot! No personal responsibility allowed! We need to stop dumbing down to the lowest common denominator! I need to stop now before I go on a huge rant!

Should we build the trail YES! Do we need a fence? NO!

The rail traffic on this line is seasonal and very light/very slow moving. It's not like we are discussing mile long freight trains every few hours. People have coexisted with the railroad (no fence) for long, long time, and to the best of my knowledge there have been ZIP, ZERO, NADA injuries! I see people walking right down the middle of the tracks all the time. So why the big deal now? If anything, a nice trail beside the tracks would be much safer!

You need to look at how railroad tracks are constructed. Railroads operate best when the tracks are level. When a railroad is constructed, they use large quantities of gravel to raise the level of the tracks 2' to 3' above the surrounding terrain, depending on terrain conditions. This accomplishes two things, level track height so the train will roll easily and proper drainage. For most of the proposed WOW trail, the railbed will be somewhat higher (approximately 2') than the WOW trail. You would physically have to fall up to the tracks to get struck by the train.

Woodsy

John A. Birdsall · 08-26-2008, 10:56 AM

I think, and because of that I am not in the political arena, that on many roads in NH that giving three feet to a bicycle is outrageous. Giving that a lot of roads are not one way, and sometimes do not seem wide enough for two cars going in oposite directions. Lets see how this works, keep right, but remember the Motorcycles claim between the two yellow marks on the road for there road, now if the bycyles have three feet on each side of the road what does that leave, oh yeah and them kids sometimes ride two abreast.

Mee-n-Mac · 08-26-2008, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kjbathe

Why are we again trying to legislate personal responsibility? Create the template and paint a warning in reflective paint every 500 feet "DANGER - STAY CLEAR OF ACTIVE TRAIN TRACK" and call it good.

If folks want to get on the tracks, a fence won't stop them. And why incur the maintenance costs and headache of trying to keep the fence intact. Compliment the painted warning notices with a sign at the various entrances to the trail alerting them to the danger of the active track and problem solved.

I listen to these things and thank God we went to the moon in the 60's... Our perpetual hand-wringing today would never allow us to sign off on the idea of strapping three guys into a glorified trash can affixed to the five stories of high explosives needed to hurl them into the void of space. A fence to keep people off the tracks... If you need a fence to impose common sense, perhaps you should be on the tracks when the train comes.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

When does the lunacy end?? This is PRECISELY what is wrong with this country today! We have to account for every possible idiot! No personal responsibility allowed! We need to stop dumbing down to the lowest common denominator! I need to stop now before I go on a huge rant!

Should we build the trail YES! Do we need a fence? NO!

The rail traffic on this line is seasonal and very light/very slow moving. It's not like we are discussing mile long freight trains every few hours. People have coexisted with the railroad (no fence) for long, long time, and to the best of my knowledge there have been ZIP, ZERO, NADA injuries! I see people walking right down the middle of the tracks all the time. So why the big deal now? If anything, a nice trail beside the tracks would be much safer!

You need to look at how railroad tracks are constructed. Railroads operate best when the tracks are level. When a railroad is constructed, they use large quantities of gravel to raise the level of the tracks 2' to 3' above the surrounding terrain, depending on terrain conditions. This accomplishes two things, level track height so the train will roll easily and proper drainage. For most of the proposed WOW trail, the railbed will be somewhat higher (approximately 2') than the WOW trail. You would physically have to fall up to the tracks to get struck by the train.

Woodsy

Where's that "Thanks" button when you need it .....

I see a higher likelyhood of injury from mixing bicycles, skaters and pedestrians.

SAMIAM · 08-26-2008, 11:54 AM

Er...Woodsy...that's exactly what Bear Islander said.

Resident 2B · 08-26-2008, 12:22 PM

Personally, I would much rather have the trail than have the train. I do not want the fence either. It will be ugly and it will negatively impact too many good people.

We have lived without the train since the Weirs washout. I do not know of anyone that is inconvienced at all because the train is gone.

I would much rather see many people using a free trail instead of some people using a train that they have to pay a good amount of money to ride. In addition, the train makes a lot of noise with its loud whistle/horn, so those that do not like that noise will be better off without the train.

This is a case of the good of many being served with the trail vs. the good of a few being served with the train. When you add in the ugly fence required to build the trail close to the train, the case for the train being eliminated gets much stronger.

R2B

jrc · 08-26-2008, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Resident 2B

...

We have lived without the train since the Weirs washout. I do not know of anyone that is inconvienced at all because the train is gone.
....

Well the people that run the train have been inconvienced. They leased the tracks from the state and have a right to expect the state to live up to that lease. They invested time and money into their business with a good faith expectation of having their lease honored.

I don't think the trail should be built if a fence is required. I think the train and the trail can coexist without a fence. But the state could always take their business by eminent domain and use the rail bed for the trail.

I think the state may still have dreams of restoring passenger rail service to NH, having real trains on that line would change my opinion on coexistence.

laketrout · 08-27-2008, 06:34 PM

There are a # of logistal and enginnering issues that would have to be solved before this path can be utilized. Southdown is one issue, a 5' fence thats ridicolous; safety issues too and what of "shoreline protection act", a paved road next to the lake within 10-20' feet at points. This makes it more unpleasant looking. As another post put it what about;

Maiden Lady Cove?
Pickeral Cove & Moulton's Cove?

The land to be "used" on the above resides on a "narrow" causeway. Current standards for railroad tracks in the USA are 4' 8" for standard guage track (train track). There is only about 1 or 2 feet clearance on each side of the causeway which is about 200-300+ yards long. Where is this trail supposed to go now? Spends millions to widen the causeway and dredge the lake in that area. What is to be down with the widely used boat tunnel at Pickeral Cove, enlarge that at considerable expense? Beefing up the causeway would cost millions. I don not live in the above coves just go by them in my boat.

Logically for the trail to work in the above areas private property would have to be accessed. Comprimise will have to be sought. The WOW trail debate could go on for years with legal battles etc this can drag it on Ad infinitum.

Skip · 08-28-2008, 04:44 AM

Another article in this morning's on-line Citizen detailing the latest developments in the WOW trail proposal.

Story can be read HERE.

fatlazyless · 11-25-2008, 07:42 AM

Just recently, concern for a personal injury accident between the bicycle-walking-roller skating-running-cross country skiing, non-motorized use path and the summer-time, Winnipesaukee railroad train prompted the deciding NH authority to continue its' requirement for a 5' high, safety chain-link fence, despite hope to the contrary by local trail advocates.

Apparently, hope for a trail without the safety fence is not too high, at this time.

Which leads me to to make the observation that the residential waterfront homes at South Down Shore, and that other expensive place in Meredith....what's the name....Grousse Point...both expensive developements are built on medium to very steep hillsides, have huge setbacks from the water, and are situated high above the trail's location....all of which...means that their views easily look out ABOVE the proposed five foot fence.

Therefore, a five foot chain link fence will not be such a big deal of a problem. Probably it could be dark green vinyl coated, as opposed to silvery galvanized steel, so's it will easily blend into the grass, trees, fields, and lake and not be an eyesore. It will grow on you!

Hey, it's not like Laconia or Meredith or Belmont will be renting fence space to advertisers for sponsoring the little league, or something.

Thankyou and goodnight!

brk-lnt · 11-25-2008, 09:28 AM

Considering the fund-raising required for the WOW trail and the current economy, I'm not too worried about it at this point.

laketrout · 11-29-2008, 09:42 PM

Yeah the econmy stinks at this point. South down sits on the level with the tracks Grouse pt. merdith sitsup on a hill, a fence is eyesore-- period from the land or water. Lets talk money, any of these communties that are "rich" can and I would guess fight this and in my experience this could go on for years if not decades- aka "court battles"...SDS houses are cheap compared to others- rich? dont think so Grouse PT is more pricey.

The 1/3 mile long causeway at Pickeral cove near the Weirs would have to dredged and the railbed that is currently in use would have to be widened, and where the tracks currently sit would require tons of fill/gravel and boulders, not to mention tons of "cash" big bucks-do I smell another bailout- dont think so- if you have ever used a waterfront construction company they charge a ton of cash to fix a dock-or a breakwater, hundreds of dollars an hour..Pickeral cove--also require new tunnels for boat traffic and all this for a walking path?

jetskier · 11-29-2008, 11:18 PM

I would think in these economic times that there are higher priorities than the WOW trail. Personally, I think that the trail would be an eye sore and detract from the lake in many ways. The stretch of the trail along Winnisquam is ugly and not maintained. The construction cost of the trail along the waterfront will be phenominal. There is also a tressel bridge along Pickeral cove that will not accommodate the trail...is a special bridge going to be built? This thing will cost millions of dollars. In this economy, let's concentrate on donating to the hungry, animal shelters etc...socially, that is the responsible thing anyhow.

Jetskier

fatlazyless · 03-12-2009, 05:59 PM

Here's an interesting new twist on the building of the W.O.W. Trail, as reported in the Laconia Daily Sun a few days ago. The WOW sections in Laconia and Belmont apparently should qualify for federal cost sharing for WOW Trail construction.

It's been noted that a lot more of New Hampshire federal taxpayer money leaves the state than comes back in, so the WOW Trail is a very welcome project.

It is proposed to travel along the waterfronts of Belmont, Laconia & Meredith.

brk-lnt · 03-12-2009, 06:53 PM

Interesting. I heard this project was all but dead. Seems some (many) of the pledged donations aren't coming through as planned.

fatlazyless · 03-13-2009, 07:12 AM

No doubt, there wil be some more newspaper articles on the prospects of getting construction money from the federal government.

Belknap County has the state's second highest unemployment rate after Coos County, which is the northern most county. To employ additional workers, maybe the federal gov can demand WOW Trail construction digging all done by hand with no machine back-hoe diggers.....just locals with picks & shovels & wheel barrows...the feds is hiring....it's time to go get on that there shovel gang...and start swing'n a pick and digg'n the ground on up wit a shovel....Probably, when the railroad built the embankments 125 years ago, it was all done by hand labor.

What's the NH minimum wage now.....is it $7.15/hour?

Seems like the WOW Trail should qualify as a "shovel-ready" project.

Hey there....here's a shovel....now, go get busy!

fatnoah · 03-17-2009, 12:15 PM

It seems like the real issue is that a compromise is needed. On one hand, I sympathize with the SDS types who don't want a fence, but on the other hand, the train was there well before SDS. If I was buying lakefront property for the views, I would be very concerned that a strip of land I don't own is between me and the water.

As another poster said, there must be a better way to keep kids, etc. from running onto the tracks without installing an eyesore.

fatlazyless · 03-18-2009, 07:14 AM

Today's Laconia Citizen has a brief article titled "Laconia's WOW trail said to be high on stimulus fund list" as it meets the three requirements of the federal stimulus fund.

The very recently passed American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 has designated 129 million dollars for New Hampshire. Out of this, 3.9 million is allowed for transportation enhancement, and the WOW Trail which is seeking $700,000 for the Laconia section seems to meet the requirements.

It could help to extend the tourist season at the Weirs as a bicycle trail can be used from late March to early December. Snow melts faster on an asphalt paved trail.

With regard to the objections to South Down Shore to a 5' high, chain link, safety fence. Looking at SDS from across Paugus Bay it looks like every waterfront home is not really located right on the water where it would be close to the fence. The homes are all situated way uphill and set back enough so their view would not be impaired by a 5' see-thru, chain link fence. Hey, if they are real unhappy with the fence, SDS can always plant some roses and turn the fence into a green vinyl, chain link fence with roses growing intertwined through the fencie-wencie. That could be very nice looking in that situation, don't you agree!

.......
From today's March 18 Laconia Daily Sun: headline;

W.O.W Trail should get nice shot of stimulus money

Here's the opening and closing sentence from a nine paragraph article.

(1st) LACONIA- The Winnisquam-Opechee-Winnipesaukee (W.O.W.) Recreational Trail stands to be a major beneficiary of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) in the Lakes Region.

(last) "This is really-good news...Phase two will happen much sooner than we anticipated."

bobio · 03-18-2009, 08:46 PM

I have read many posts submitted by Fatlazyless over the past few years and I have to admit that most seem to be very sarcastic. I wonder what problem he has with SDS. As suggested in a prior post, maybe he should walk the rail bed on the SDS waterfront to see how a fence would impact what many feel is one of the most important parts of the community.

fatlazyless · 03-18-2009, 09:16 PM

I've never been to the South Down Shore waterfront so I don't know but it sure seems that a 12' wide, paved asphalt, walking-biking-cross country skiing-roller blading-non motorized used, public trail proposed to be buit on the state owned railroad right-of-way would be welcomed as a major recreational enhancement to the Lakes Region. Available at no charge to the user, it will create a nine mile long x 12' wide, paved asphalt trail along three lakeside waterfronts in Belmont, Laconia and Meredith with Weirs Beach in a central location.

Sounds excellent to me.....what's not to like? The initial building of it creates jobs...and it can attract a new demographic of tourist visiter; bicyclers who could spend a day biking the nine miles plus combine a three hour Mount Washington cruise. Bicycling is good exercise for ages one to 101. Hey, when was the last time you pedalled along a mostly flat and highly scenic, waterfront bike path? Who knows, once you see it and try it, you might even like it?

!

Resident 2B · 03-18-2009, 11:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

I've never been to the South Down Shore waterfront so I don't know but it sure seems that a 12' wide, paved asphalt, walking-biking-cross country skiing-roller blading-non motorized used, public trail proposed to be buit on the state owned railroad right-of-way would be welcomed as a major recreational enhancement to the Lakes Region. Available at no charge to the user, it will create a nine mile long x 12' wide, paved asphalt trail along three lakeside waterfronts in Belmont, Laconia and Meredith with Weirs Beach in a central location.

Sounds excellent to me.....what's not to like? The initial building of it creates jobs...and it can attract a new demographic of tourist visiter; bicyclers who could spend a day biking the nine miles plus combine a three hour Mount Washington cruise. Bicycling is good exercise for ages one to 101. Hey, when was the last time you pedalled along a mostly flat and highly scenic, waterfront bike path? Who knows, once you see it and try it, you might even like it?

!

FLL,

I totally agree with you and I hope that they can get at least the first phase of the WOW Trail completed.

It provides jobs, it supports the tourist business that is critical to our area and it appears it qualifies for the federal money intended to help the economy. Seems like a great thing to do to me and I hope it moves forward quickly. In the words of a great American: "Lets Roll!"

I even like your suggestion of planting roses to climb the fence.

Agreeing with you id scary, but I think you are "spot on" with this.

R2B

SAMIAM · 03-19-2009, 05:33 AM

What could be uglier than 5 miles of chain link fence......not just in front of SDS,but the entire western shore of Paugus Bay?This is a foolhardy idea that should have been scrapped as soon as the fence requirement became known.Because of the hilly terrain,there are few bike enthusiasts in the lakes region,while there are thousands of snowmobilers who will now have access to the lake restricted.
Stop for a moment and quickly name all of the people that you know that ride bikes on a regular basis(I can think of only two and I've been here most of my life) This is just a bad idea.

fatlazyless · 03-19-2009, 07:32 AM

Yes, it's certainly true that the local hills combined with narrow shoulder lanes are a challenge to bicyclers. Isn't that all the more reason to utilize the state owned, railroad right-of-way and turn it into an incredibly scenic, waterfront, public use, bicycle-walking path.

Once it get's built, how popular will it be, and how long will it be in use......10-20-50-100 years?

Bicycling up a hill is indeed very strenuous. Bicycling along a mostly flat, waterfront scenic trail, without the danger of cars & trucks is much more appealing so all the more reason to build it. Good bicycles can be found at yard sales for low prices, and can last for many years. A decent bike can cost from $25 used, to $1000 for the new, light weight, skinny machines. Build a local wow trail and it could attract plenty to come use it.

Twelve feet is the standard width for a New Hampshire automobile lane, and is also the proposed width for the wow trail which would have two-way traffic, as I understand. Boston and Cambridge, Massachusetts, have bicycle-walking paths on both sides of the Charles River that run out to Watertown, about 12 miles away, and these paths seem to be 12' wide or less. It all works ok even with some very heavy use at times.

no-engine · 03-19-2009, 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fatlazyless

I've never been to the South Down Shore waterfront so I don't know but it sure seems that a 12' wide, paved asphalt, walking-biking-cross country skiing-roller blading-non motorized used, public trail proposed to be buit on the state owned railroad right-of-way would be welcomed as a major recreational enhancement to the Lakes Region. Available at no charge to the user, it will create a nine mile long x 12' wide, paved asphalt trail along three lakeside waterfronts in Belmont, Laconia and Meredith with Weirs Beach in a central location.

Sounds excellent to me.....what's not to like? The initial building of it creates jobs...and it can attract a new demographic of tourist visiter; bicyclers who could spend a day biking the nine miles plus combine a three hour Mount Washington cruise. Bicycling is good exercise for ages one to 101. Hey, when was the last time you pedalled along a mostly flat and highly scenic, waterfront bike path? Who knows, once you see it and try it, you might even like it?

!

Those who have never been on public property that has proximity to The Lake should avail themselves of what we have - such a great asset.

When snow is there, x-c ski, snow shoe, walk, etc. When the snow is gone, WALK from Weirs to Meredith in vicinity of Marina. Or borrow a bicycle designed with tires for off-road. Some of the trail will be rough grass like the rough on golf course, some like lawn mowed grass, some like a dirt road, or gravel road, and some will be paved. In other words a large variety of surface exists.
As if walking in the National Parks, respect the publicly owned property: carry in / carry out. Respect the private property you observe nearby.

I am not rendering a position that it be fenced or not fenced, but WE HAVE SUCH AN ASSET. I do not understand why such childish arguing.
As a shoe company says: JUST DO IT!

fatlazyless · 03-23-2009, 09:40 PM

For the wow trail to be built without the dreaded 5' high, chain link fence, there's a bill in the senate which would help make this possible. What it does is to treat railroads that share their land with a free public trail similar to private landowners who share land for public snowmobile trails. Sounds interesting and is currently under review....so perhaps the shoreline residents of Paugus Bay will not be burdened with a chain link fence, after all.

What with federal stimilus money and this legislative bill relieving the rr of some liability, maybe the wow trail will actually get built.

boat_guy64 · 03-24-2009, 01:42 AM

As an avid snowmobiler, I know very well what this area from Laconia to Meredith looks like. It isn't wide enough at many places to do this. For instance, there is at least one railroad bridge on Paugus Bay about 1/2 mile south of the Weirs. A seperate bridge would have to be built. Several streams and drainage culverts would have to be buried and bridges built. (Some of the same ones that washed out last year) Many trees at water's edge will have to be removed. The route 3 bridge at the Weirs would have to be ripped down and widened to safely get to Weirs beach. (it has about 2 feet of space on each side for the train) From the Weirs to Meredith, you would have to fill in hundreds of feet of Winnipesaukee and wetlands to make the trail wide enough. In many of these areas the RR bed isn't more that 4 feet wider than the RR tracks on each side. I know that because you can barely ride a snowmobile outside of the RR tracks without falling into the lake or the ponds/wetlands on the other side. (A snowmobile is 4 feet wide)

It seems that with all of the environmental laws of today, this will go way over budget and be in for a long legal battle.

fatlazyless · 03-24-2009, 06:58 AM

Let's take a look at the Weirs Beach bridge which includes a tunnel for one railroad rack. About 150 yards in from DW Hgwy, down Channel Lane, the rr tracks pass behind the Weirs drive-in movie screen and head downhill a short distance towards the tunnel. It would seem that rebuilding the tunnel to accomodate both the path and the rr racks is not at all doable, so a bike path route traveling along the perimeter of the drive-in property, and then crossing the DW Hgwy with an existing crosswalk would seem to be a path of least resistance. The drive-in would be losing an unused, 12' sloping embankment covered with small trees, and the lakes region would gain a beautifull wow trail and a replanted perimeter area.

Does this seem like a good trade-off to you?

laketrout · 04-17-2009, 09:35 AM

Yes as I wrote last year: The 1/3 mile long causeway at Pickeral cove near the Weirs would have to dredged and the railbed that is currently in use would have to be widened, and where the tracks currently sit would require tons of fill/gravel and boulders, not to mention tons of "cash" big bucks-do I smell another bailout- dont think s

o- if you have ever used a waterfront construction company they charge a ton of cash to fix a dock-or a breakwater, hundreds of dollars an hour..Pickeral cove-- would also require new tunnels for boat traffic and all this for a walking path? Not to mention the enviromental issues of filling in the Railroad causeway (tunnels) with fill into Paugus bay. Unless the trail is re-routed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by boat_guy64

As an avid snowmobiler, I know very well what this area from Laconia to Meredith looks like. It isn't wide enough at many places to do this. For instance, there is at least one railroad bridge on Paugus Bay about 1/2 mile south of the Weirs. A seperate bridge would have to be built. Several streams and drainage culverts would have to be buried and bridges built. (Some of the same ones that washed out last year) Many trees at water's edge will have to be removed. The route 3 bridge at the Weirs would have to be ripped down and widened to safely get to Weirs beach. (it has about 2 feet of space on each side for the train) From the Weirs to Meredith, you would have to fill in hundreds of feet of Winnipesaukee and wetlands to make the trail wide enough. In many of these areas the RR bed isn't more that 4 feet wider than the RR tracks on each side. I know that because you can barely ride a snowmobile outside of the RR tracks without falling into the lake or the ponds/wetlands on the other side. (A snowmobile is 4 feet wide)

It seems that with all of the environmental laws of today, this will go way over budget and be in for a long legal battle.

DJS-Laconia · 06-09-2009, 06:11 PM

Couple of questions that need answering.

-Who watches for the crime? Not all homes are occupied all week / all seasons.

-Who does it get reported to? Police won't care.

-Is the police dept going to care what happens on the trail. Unless severe damage or someone is hurt enough for a report I dont think they will.

-Who will pick up the trash and debris? There is none now.. But there will be. And you cant say volunteer's will because you can't count on anyone to do free work in this economy.

-Who is going to pay the claim when someone gets hit but a train?- fence no fence.

-When people try to use the water access, Who will stop them? The whole shoreline beside the track is rocky at best with bolders and debris left from the railroad over the years. Someone will get hurt.

-Who is going to replace the fence when it gets cut up or destroyed by kids or angry homeowners that are forced to look at it?

The trail brings crime and undesirables and would need to be watched by police constantly. On the trail you speak about in Arlington and Lexington MA there have been cases of sexual misconduct on the path. The most extreme being a middle aged man, completely nude laying in leaves watching pretty girls jog by. Can you imagine what he was doing...

Bike week would be a nightmare for residents all along the trail. People would be camped out up and down the trail. Oh and by the way, That SLOW train clips along 3 times faster on Bikeweek.

The money would be better spent toward the red flagged bridges and roadways that need replacement or will need replacement in the near future.

As far as the state owned land being opened to the public you are very wrong. The land is owned by the RR and only people with a lease and a hefty insurance policy have the right to cross the track in front of their abutting property only. Everyone else is trespassing...

*** The best solution would be to fund more needed projects and deed the land to the people that abut the tracks. If the train goes Bankrupt then the increased revenue in Taxes will fund other projects in the town/city for years to come.

DJS-Laconia · 06-11-2009, 07:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by no-engine

I have x-c skied along the SDS RR tracks in winter, from Laconia Country Club to Hilliard Road I think it's called. One can not be stopped for trespassing. Does the sewer line follow the tracks, as I do not recall there. It does in Meredith to Weirs! From there it must be along that side of Paugus Bay! Where else, but the tracks for the interceptor line to the Winnipesaukee River Basin Regional Treatment Plant in Franklin?

Far too numerous to count, I have been on the tracks & adjacent sewer line from Meredith to Weirs and along Scenic Road to Lakeside Road in to the heart of "Weirs" area. All public ways through Grousse Point, Needle Eye Road, Neal Shores areas and other sites along the route. I even chatted with home owners. The time of year has been summer on a bicycle or walking, and winter on X-C skis or snowshoes - never motorized, but there are also snow machines in winter and off road dirt motorbikes bikes in summer. All users I've seen treat neighboring private property with respect, staying on the public ways!

I don't think any land-owner association, land owner, community, or whatever group can possibly say no trespassing, along the RR and/or sewer right of ways.

I've also been on the former tracks now multi-use path in Somerville, Arlington, Watertown, etc. Very nice for all uses!

WOW should move forward and the SDS communities should agree and join in peacefully; in the end it'll actually benefit those unit owners, with the abundance of uses to enjoy!

You are wrong... This is not an opinion. This is fact. The public can not walk on the track or on the railroad property at all. You need a lease and an insurance policy to cross the track. There should be no trespassing signs but it is fairly obvious that it is not a path but a Railroad...

Woodsy · 06-11-2009, 09:23 AM

DJS...

You are obviously a property owner that is directly affected by the WOW trail. Your idea of deeding property owners waterfront access is ludicrous at best. Why would that be in the interest of people of NH? A one time sale of a valuable asset is NEVER a good thing! Once that shoreline is deeded to people like you, the rest of public will no longer have access!

Its amazing the amount of wrong information your posting as facts...

1. The RR ROW (Right of Way) belongs to the STATE OF NH (and by default the citizens of NH), not the RR. The Hobo RR leases the tracks from the state. The STATE owns most of, if not all of the waterfront that abuts the RR ROW. (There is a thread here about shoreline leases... its good read. I am sure that battle will be revived soon enough)

2. The RR ROW along the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee is a Corridor Trail and as such can be used in the winter (once the NH Trails Bureau has posted it OPEN) for recreational purposes such as snowmobiling, XC skiing, hiking etc.

3. The Public is prohibited wallk ALONG the RR ROW, however, it is allowed to cross the RR ROW in certain instances... Just ask all the folks who lease the land on the other side from the state! SDS is one of the bigger developments that lease the shoreline from the state.

4. There is a Bill that has passed or is about to pass that will indemnify the RR from injuries that may occur trailside... This alleviates most of the legal entanglements and insurance liability costs of the WOW trail.

5. The Laconia PD has some of the best bicycle cops in the business, I am sure the WOW trail will get the same proffesional attention as the rest of the city does.

The fact is that the residents of SDS and others don't OWN the waterfront or the RR ROW. Its in the best interests of the Citizens of NH to insure access to all, not just a priveledged few. I can understand thier position, however they bought thier property knowing that there were no guarantees to water access.

Woodsy

Resident 2B · 06-11-2009, 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

DJS...

Its amazing the amount of wrong information your posting as facts...

1. The RR ROW (Right of Way) belongs to the STATE OF NH (and by default the citizens of NH), not the RR. The Hobo RR leases the tracks from the state. The STATE owns most of, if not all of the waterfront that abuts the RR ROW. (There is a thread here about shoreline leases... its good read. I am sure that battle will be revived soon enough)

2. The RR ROW along the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee is a Corridor Trail and as such can be used in the winter (once the NH Trails Bureau has posted it OPEN) for recreational purposes such as snowmobiling, XC skiing, hiking etc.

3. The Public is prohibited wallk ALONG the RR ROW, however, it is allowed to cross the RR ROW in certain instances... Just ask all the folks who lease the land on the other side from the state! SDS is one of the bigger developments that lease the shoreline from the state.

4. There is a Bill that has passed or is about to pass that will indemnify the RR from injuries that may occur trailside... This alleviates most of the legal entanglements and insurance liability costs of the WOW trail.

5. The Laconia PD has some of the best bicycle cops in the business, I am sure the WOW trail will get the same proffesional attention as the rest of the city does.

The fact is that the residents of SDS and others don't OWN the waterfront or the RR ROW. Its in the best interests of the Citizens of NH to insure access to all, not just a priveledged few. I can understand thier position, however they bought thier property knowing that there were no guarantees to water access.

Woodsy

Woodsy,

Great posting of the facts!

I have no idea where DJS is getting his or her information, but it is clearly incorrect. Your post certainly clears up the misinformation supplied by DJS.

It is looking more and more like the WOW trail from the Weirs to Laconia will be happening. I think this will be a great addition to the recreational venues offered to the citizens of NH and to the tourists who's money helps so many local businesses.

R2B

fatlazyless · 06-11-2009, 12:52 PM

The biggest problem with bicycling in the lakes region are the hills and sharing the road with car traffic. The WOW trail would be nine miles long x 12 feet wide asphalt pavement, mostly very flat, and free of car traffic.

Most everyone can ride a bicycle till they turn 101 when their knees start to get a little stiff. It's good exercise, low cost, and bike trails get used as soon as the snow melts off them in late March.

It would be a business booster for locally owned small businesses like bike rentals-repair, and food in the Weirs. As it is now, the Weirs has a very long, winter off-season.

krm · 06-11-2009, 02:23 PM

How much are they projecting the wow trail will cost? Is that accurate 9 miles long with 12' feet of asphalt?

DJS-Laconia · 06-11-2009, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Woodsy

DJS...

You are obviously a property owner that is directly affected by the WOW trail. Your idea of deeding property owners waterfront access is ludicrous at best. Why would that be in the interest of people of NH? A one time sale of a valuable asset is NEVER a good thing! Once that shoreline is deeded to people like you, the rest of public will no longer have access!

Its amazing the amount of wrong information your posting as facts...

1. The RR ROW (Right of Way) belongs to the STATE OF NH (and by default the citizens of NH), not the RR. The Hobo RR leases the tracks from the state. The STATE owns most of, if not all of the waterfront that abuts the RR ROW. (There is a thread here about shoreline leases... its good read. I am sure that battle will be revived soon enough)

2. The RR ROW along the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee is a Corridor Trail and as such can be used in the winter (once the NH Trails Bureau has posted it OPEN) for recreational purposes such as snowmobiling, XC skiing, hiking etc.

3. The Public is prohibited wallk ALONG the RR ROW, however, it is allowed to cross the RR ROW in certain instances... Just ask all the folks who lease the land on the other side from the state! SDS is one of the bigger developments that lease the shoreline from the state.

4. There is a Bill that has passed or is about to pass that will indemnify the RR from injuries that may occur trailside... This alleviates most of the legal entanglements and insurance liability costs of the WOW trail.

5. The Laconia PD has some of the best bicycle cops in the business, I am sure the WOW trail will get the same proffesional attention as the rest of the city does.

The fact is that the residents of SDS and others don't OWN the waterfront or the RR ROW. Its in the best interests of the Citizens of NH to insure access to all, not just a priveledged few. I can understand thier position, however they bought thier property knowing that there were no guarantees to water access.

Woodsy

Ok, Lets back up here. I do not need you to tell me who I am and where I live.

This is where it gets interesting... A few posts advise that the Water access is the right of the NH people. If a Bike path were to go in, it would be a bike and walking path only. It would not be a swimming trail. Have you been to the shore of Paugus Bay? Bolders and rocks and railroad debris line the shoreline. No one will have access to the water. After all, arn't you purposing a "BIKE PATH"

So you do agree that a lease is needed to cross the track? So where is your lease? Can I see a copy of your lease? Can I get a copy of your insurance policy to cover injury when crossing the track?

I value your opinion on the Police Bike Taskforce but when a home is broken into or vandalized it is simply going to be a case of.. Maybe we will catch them next time.. please fill out this report. So, will the WOW trail people pay for the detail officers needed for ALL of bike week. They usually need to bring in Campus police and the National Guard for help. But now we will have a 9 mile path of crime to monitor.

I am not associated with SDS but I do know that Southdown only leases a small amount of land from the state. Most of the waterfront is owned. No one, not even the Pope would have access over thru or under the tracks. It may be a good idea if you drive down to City Hall in Laconia and see the SDS plot plan. Only the area that is leased and not owned by SDS is where the docks are located. The public will NEVER have access to the water for that whole stretch of land.

The idea of deeding the property to the land owners is a good idea. Before the railroad came into Laconia it was taken from the property owners. Why shouldn't it be deeded back in the same way. Why should they need to "share the land with you". I do think that it should be deeded back and that the land be then taxed as waterfront.

A bike path is a complete waste of taxpayers money. Fix a bridge, Fix a road, Maybe a school system.

When you say that it should be open to all and not the privileged few. It is available to you at a cost. Work Hard, Save your money and buy a place on the lake and stop waiting for another Bail out!!!

krm · 06-11-2009, 02:44 PM

There is no way it is worth the bill...
9 miles x 5280 LF x 12' wide = 570,240 SF / 9 =63,360 SY x .057 x 3" thick asphalt = 10,834 tons of asphalt @ $90/ton = $975,110 just for the asphalt and that is @ $90 per ton they will be very luck to get that price once this thing gets off the ground. The trail will have at least 9" of crush gravel =570,240 SF x (9/12) /27 = 15,840 CY (this price may very but on the cheap side lets say $18 in place) so 15,840 CY x $18 = $285,120. I could go all day if people are interested, on top of this 1.26mm you need to do cut/fill, treatment swales, bioretention cells, the list goes on...

Personally it sounds great but I don't feel like paying taxes for it

chipj29 · 06-11-2009, 02:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJS-Laconia

Ok, Lets back up here. I do not need you to tell me who I am and where I live.

I value your opinion on the Police Bike Taskforce but when a home is broken into or vandalized it is simply going to be a case of.. Maybe we will catch them next time.. please fill out this report. So, will the WOW trail people pay for the detail of officers needed for ALL of bike week. The need to bring in Campus police and the National Guard for help. But now we will have a 9 mile path of crime to monitor.

I'm sorry, but the bolded cracked me up.

A 9 mile path of crime????

jrc · 06-11-2009, 03:00 PM

So the bike path will be on the lake side of the tracks right? And the fence will be between the path and the tracks. Are you seriously saying that no one will swim from the bike path? No one will bike down the path, find a nice spot and dive in? That is one good reason to build the trail.

I see dozens of people walking down the shoulders of the track today and swimming. BTW I never checked there leases or insurance.

Woodsy says that the track is open to the public in the winter, is he lying? Or do all those winter people have to have leases and insurance.

Personally I think that fence component of the bike path makes it ugly and very undesirable. But I love the idea of a hiking trail along the waterfront.

Lets face facts, the tracks and the land that they are on belong to the state of NH. Eventually the tourist railroad will lose interest and their lease will expire, they can't be making that much money and tourism is a fickle industry.

At that point, should the state give away 9 miles of prime water front? The land owners may have lost that land to eminent domain years ago but they were compensated, maybe they will pay to get it back or maybe it will become a 9 mile long park.

On the crime front, it's hard for me to believe that crime will be a big issue. The track/trail is right out in the open.

krm · 06-11-2009, 03:08 PM

you absolutely need a crossing agreement in place with NH DOT or you are trespassing in the summer. Trust me on this.

ILoveWinnipesaukee · 06-11-2009, 03:09 PM

OK, let me see if I have this right, just because they are suggesting a 9 mile long bike trail, that will immediately make it a dangerous place with high crime.

OK, a bike track, the last thing I knew, bike trails are usually visited by bicyclists and most of the bicyclists are local folks or vacationers who bring their bikes with them to enjoy Lake Winnipesaukee.

I do not see that the locals that will be enjoying the safe car free trails and the vacationers automatically committing crimes, just because they are on the 9 mile bike trail.

I unfortunately am physically unable to bike or walk the trail, but would love to be able to bring my scooter chair up and enjoy the trail along the lake.

jrc · 06-11-2009, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by krm

you absolutely need a crossing agreement in place with NH DOT or you are trespassing in the summer. Trust me on this.

I really didn't mean to get into that discussion, I'm sure some of those people are tresspassing. I was really trying to address the swimming from the trail point. People will swim from the trail, they already do.

And just because they may be tresspassing, doesn't mean they are commiting a crime, in NH criminal tresspassing requires that you know that you are tresspassing.

brk-lnt · 06-11-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrc

I really didn't mean to get into that discussion, I'm sure some of those people are tresspassing. I was really trying to address the swimming from the trail point. People will swim from the trail, they already do.

And just because they may be tresspassing, doesn't mean they are commiting a crime, in NH criminal tresspassing requires that you know that you are tresspassing.

Much of the Paugus Bay shoreline along the tracks is very rocky and not very "swimable".

There are a couple of private beaches in SDS, but those are private and would be no more open to random swimmer usage than any other privately owned beachfront along the lake.

The 9 mile crime trail statement is a tad extreme, but also rooted in reality. As was mentioned elsewhere, similar trails in MA *HAVE* seen a concentration of crimes. Of course it is not vacationers coming to commit crimes, it is local people taking advantage of people who do not know the trails and surroundings very well.

The speculation that this trail is the ONE thing missing in the lakes region to stimulate the economy and getting all NH citizens out in the happy sunshine enjoying their birthright is a complete pipedream.

Most people are in favor of public recreational developments, provided that those developments are well thought out and do not become unmaintained eyesores. The existing portions of the WOW trail already have disrepair of the fences, trash and debris collected along the trails, and when I've looked in on them at random times, do not seem to have any measurable usage.

As a disclaimer, I am an SDS homeowner. I do not have any real problem with normal law-abiding people who want to stroll along the water way (which they can mostly do today). I *do* have a very real concern that a group of socialite activists is going to come through and plop in some pavement and an ugly fence, and then move on to some other "cause" while the WOW trail becomes the "Wow, look at that decrepit pathway" trail.

DJS-Laconia · 06-12-2009, 07:45 AM

I agree with brk-int,

But I think the crime would be worse than a bike path in a non vacation area. People on vacation come to visit and lets face it, If you do not have a vested interest or don't plan on visiting a again then why would they care. Trash will be a major issue. Debris from picnics, food wrappers and plastics would all end up in the water.

I am also going back a little bit to an earlier post where someone had mentioned that this project could be classified as shovel ready and it could be all done by hand with shovels using the unemployed or those seeking jobs. Lets be a bit more realistic, Only about 3% of the unemployed or job seeking crowd would be able to keep up for more then 1/2 day of that kind of work. It is 2009, and people are lazy. Plus, why would people work on a project for a low wage to be then out of a job when it is complete. That just prolongs the issue. Why not use some of the stimulus money for job-retraining. That way someone in a career path with no job outlook could switch to a new career. I am sure that this exsists today but it should be funded more, especially in this economy.

If you think the land owners were compensated for the state comming thru with a railroad you are crazy. It was taken and used to support the growing state and countries rail system. That was a much more noble cause than this project to make sure everyone gets a swim.

ITD · 06-12-2009, 08:33 AM

I think you are grasping at straws with the crime angle. I live in a community with a rail trail, and there has been very little crime associated with the trail. I am on the trail at least once a week and there is no litter, just many people enjoying many different types of recreation.

There were many predictions like you have made before the trail went in, none have come true, the trail is one of the few things the government has done right in Massachusetts.

As far as everyone being lazy, well you're wrong there too. As far as digging it by hand, I missed that comment, it must have been a joke.

Ah, just found the dig it by hand comment, it was Less, that guy is funny.

jrc · 06-12-2009, 08:49 AM

I'm not a big fan of a paved, fenced in trail either. But that doesn't means I agree with weak arguements against it. I too live near and frequent a rail trail. The trial starts at the Nashua/Hollis line and goes along the Nashua river into Mass. It's a nice trail and always clean. Many points are deep in the woods and secluded, crime could happen. There are sexual predators in the world. But come on you could make the same arguement about the Mount Major hiking trail.

Less is a jokster, no one thinks shovel ready means work gangs of the unemployed. It means ready for the governement to give money to a contractor. Now is that a good use of goverment funds, well that's a different discussion. There are worse uses currently occuring.

Sman · 06-12-2009, 09:40 AM

I haven't read every detail of this post, but if you have ever been on a bike trail that is well planned out and provides access to more than just a view, they are real great. I biked more on a long weekend in Indiana last yr than I have in the yr since. The trail in Indiana was in great shape, we biked about 10 miles each way from the apartment to get a plate of muscles and a cold beer and there were shops etc, no need for a car. I think they make more of an effort out there because they can and they don't have all the other cool stuff, ocean, mtns etc. Other places I can think of that I have been, The Erie Canal in NY has one that goes for miles. Washington DC has them...etc. Locals and visitors use them.

08-05-2008, 03:02 PM	#1
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	wow trail opposed Interesting to see the South Down Shore residents cast a vote yesterday, at their annual meeting, to "oppose the trail coming through anywhere on South Down property." Front page article in today's Aug 5 Laconia Daily Sun. The wow trail, Winnisquam-Opechee-Winnipesaukee, www.wowtrail.org, is a proposed 9 mile long, bicycle, walking, cross country skiing, roller skating trail. It will run along the state owned, railroad embankment. directly on the waterfront of the three lakes. It would go from Belmont-Laconia-Weirs Beach-Meredith, almost entirely along the state's railroad right of way. I think it's an excellent idea because it would create a 9 mile bicycle path. Paved with asphalt, wide enough for a fire truck, and seperated from the existing railroad tracks by a 5' high chain link fence, it would allow the public access to this state owned waterfront access lane. It is no big surprise that South Down Shore, a gated community, would be opposed and consider it an intrusion onto their leased waterfront area. As an alternative route, South Down could have suggested an alternative route across their property so it would not impact the waterfront. What South Down has suggested, through a vote, is to oppose the trail anywhere on its' property and suggest it get detoured out to Parade Rd, Route 106 with a 45 mph speed limit and heavy traffic. Not too bicycle friendly. Sounds to me like South Down has an 'it's my way or the highway proposal' attitude. The three million dollar construction cost is to be shared by federal, state, local, & individual donations. Depending on the snowfall, it could be used as a nine mile long, asphalt paved, 10' (?) wide, bicycle path from late March to mid-December. It could be a good new venue for safe bicycling along a relative flat path that is entirely on the waterfront. It would bring a new group of visitors to the Weirs Beach area, bicyclers and roller bladers and walkers-joggers. I suppose it would travel over the already built wood boardwalk as it crosses through the Weirs. People could combine a three hour cruise on the Mount Washington with an 18 mile bike ride, or something. Nine miles of peddling, three hours of eat'n cheeseburgers and watch the views while Cruis'n the Mount, then nine more miles of biking. Possibly, a bicycle/kayak rental business could succeed at the Weirs? Just like on Martha's Vinyard! Hopefully, the residents of South Down Shore will reconsider at their upcoming Monday, August 11 meeting. "(South Down spokesman) acknowledged that the developement does not have the legal authority to prevent the WOW trail from continuing to follow along the state owned railroad corridor." Hey, it could be a good thing, maybe it's time to give bicycling a try, you might even like it. __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake! Last edited by fatlazyless; 08-05-2008 at 03:33 PM.

08-06-2008, 09:59 AM	#5
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	Today's Citizen has an article on it. That's true, a 5' chain link fence positioned between the waterfront homes and the view out to the water is a major reason to oppose the trail. Replacing the proposed fence with say an 8" high curb made of granite cobbles, or wood, would seem better. Probably, the fence is required by safety rules or insurance rules. ....an invisible fence...how's that work? These same issues will probably be presented by Grousse Point in Meredith, since that is similar to South Down in Laconia. __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-06-2008, 11:59 AM	#9
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	What about the rail road tracks? I believe the tracks run from Meredith to the Weirs to Laconia to Belmont and to Franklin, and the Hobo Railroad runs from May to October. If a railroad train is operating thru the right of way along the South Down waterfront, then a fence for the tracks would seem practical. __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-06-2008, 12:35 PM	#11
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	Boston, Newton, & Watertown, Massachusetts share a 12 mile long bicycle path that runs next to the Charles River. It has been there for many years. Other than no motorized vehicles like mopeds, it allows pedestrians, joggers, roller-bladers, skateboarders, bicyclists, unicycles, and pogo sticks. It can get crowded at times, too, especially along the Storrow Drive embankment near the Hatch Shell. It all manages to fit and work. Every once in a blue moon, someone gets creamed by a bicycle and they get hauled off in an ambulance, but not too often. Are you talking about the loading ramp at Paugus Bay Marina, where it loads boats down its' ramp with a marina forklift from boat rack storage? Does South Down Shore have a boat ramp with rack storage too, or just a launch ramp for boats on trailers? It would seem that the boat ramps are part of the embankment and that belongs to the state, when it was abandoned, years ago, by the railroad. __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-06-2008, 12:56 PM	#13
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	So, as it exists now, there is occaisionally a train pulling passenger cars that travel across the South Shore Down embankment. It goes slowly, and sounds a whistle when crossing. The problem is the proposed 12' asphalt path, 5' high, chain link, safety fence and attendant walkers, runners, bicyclers, & cross country skiers. I don't know, but just like the water in Lake Winnipesaukee belongs to the people of New Hampshire, the embankment railroad right-of-way does, too. The right-of-way gets leased by South Down Shore. When the lease agreement runs out, couldn't the state decide to just not allow South Down to use the state's embankment? Who own's the embankment? __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-05-2008, 04:25 PM	#2
Resident 2B Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North Shore, MA Posts: 1,352 Thanks: 987 Thanked 310 Times in 161 Posts	I think the folks at SDS need to re-think things a bit. The WOW is funded to some extent by Fed DOT. I believe that part of the SDS marina is on DOT property that is leased by SDS and that Fed DOT has granted right-of-way to SDS so that they can get to the water. Since Fed DOT has money into this project (Phase 1), I would expect they would like to see the whole project completed, all three phases. The WOW folks are being very patient here since they really do not need SDS permission to move forward. They want to work with the owners at SDS to solve the real problem which is how to have the DOT required five-foot high fence to seperate the WOW trail from the rail bed and still give the SDS folks right-of-way to the water, without having to climb the fence. With the recent SDS move, I would not be surprised if DOT jumps in and tells the WOW folks to just move forward. The WOW trail is a great project that will help bring more vacationers and their money into the area. It will also provide locals that like to bike or walk, a nice trail with great views of the lake. I hope the SDS and WOW groups can come up with something that works for all, but in the end, no SDS permission is required. SDS owners do not own the rail bed. Working with the WOW folks to address the fence issue is the best solution to this issue. Time to compromise folks! R2B

08-06-2008, 09:40 AM	#3
SAMIAM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 2,839 Thanks: 326 Thanked 1,626 Times in 562 Posts	I don't think that they object to the trail itself....my guess is that they don't want a chain link fence running the entire lenght of the waterfront,and I don't blame them.They certainly can't be accused of being snobs since they allow a snowmobile trail to go right through the property. I don't understand why a fence is even needed since it ads to the cost and is an eyesore.Maybe they should consult with the engineers that designed the Moultonborough bike path.....no fence and add crushed stone.

08-06-2008, 09:51 AM	#4
Bear Islander Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bear Island Posts: 1,757 Thanks: 31 Thanked 429 Times in 203 Posts	I don't understand how this 5 foot fence would work. There would have to be a lot of breaks in the fence to allows cars and pedestrians across the tracks. If there are multiple breaks in the fence then what good does the fence do. How can you expect a land owner to agree to a fence that blocks their access. How does this trail get past Maiden Lady Cove, Pickerel Cove, and Moulton's cove? The land inside the coves is private property and the tracks go over a very narrow causeway. And how will they keep people using the trail from climbing the fence to swim at these spots? Is the boat tunnel at Pickerel Cove going to be twice as long? None of these answers are available at their website.

08-06-2008, 10:18 AM	#6
Resident 2B Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North Shore, MA Posts: 1,352 Thanks: 987 Thanked 310 Times in 161 Posts	The 5 foot high fence is a Fed DOT requirement. It is meant to keep the people using the WOW trail away from the train using the state-owned rail bed. I understand the DOT is very rigid on this safety-related directive. In other such applications, walkway tunnels and in a few cases walkway bridges have been constructed to provide access. R2B

08-06-2008, 10:29 AM	#7
SAMIAM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 2,839 Thanks: 326 Thanked 1,626 Times in 562 Posts	How will they address the many snowmobile access points from the lake? This is starting to look like a bad idea.

08-06-2008, 01:01 PM	#14
WeirsBeachBoater Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 709 Blog Entries: 9 Thanks: 39 Thanked 148 Times in 65 Posts	let me throw another monkey wrench in here. How does the new Shoreline Protection act allow a Paved surface along the shoreline of Paugus Bay?

08-06-2008, 01:44 PM	#15
Resident 2B Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North Shore, MA Posts: 1,352 Thanks: 987 Thanked 310 Times in 161 Posts	FLL, Some of the shorefront is owned by SDS and the rest is owned by fed DOT and leased to SDS. WBB, I think they are considering this a project that was in the planning stages, therefore underway, when the July 1st date activated the new CSPA rules. However, that is a great question! I would guess a private landowner would have a hard time doing this. I personally like the concept of the WOW trail and I have made a few contributions to the cause, but the questions being raised are great questions that I do not have answers for. We almost bought at SDS/Long Bay several years ago, but during our "due diligence" phase, our lawyer warned us about the potential for water access issues in the future. His opinion was the shorefront leases were at risk of being discontinued and that the right-of-way across the tracks may also be lost, in time. That impacted our buying at SDS/Long Bay. Personally, I really liked it there, but if the access and docking was lost, it would no longer work for us. For me, replacing the train with the WOW trail, without a fence and without the access restrictions, is better than having the train, the fence and and the WOW trail. That train makes a lot of noise! Since the state owns the rail bed and the DOT owns some of the waterfront and is insisting on the 5' fence, perhaps they can join in the discussions along with WOW and SDS and get this project moving. R2B

08-06-2008, 02:52 PM	#16
WeirsBeachBoater Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 709 Blog Entries: 9 Thanks: 39 Thanked 148 Times in 65 Posts	R2B, I don't think you will see the train going away, If anything with the renewed interest in Railroads, you may see a push from the south to reopen the tracks to passenger service. I think there was talk about this in another thread. The state owns the rails, the Hobo leases them, I can't see the state giving up that money to put in a wow trail that will pay 0. I like the idea of rail trails, but down in MA, they used extinct RR lines, pulled up tracks and ties, and they have done well. The sticking point is all the lakefront that WOW wants to use. My .02, It won't happen. You will see phase 1, which goes through the city, and maybe phase 2 as it borders mostly commercial or state owned property, But Phase 3 from Lakeport north, Not so Much. It will prove too costly with permitting, lawsuits etc..... WBB

08-06-2008, 03:45 PM	#17
Resident 2B Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North Shore, MA Posts: 1,352 Thanks: 987 Thanked 310 Times in 161 Posts	WBB, You are probably right. Too bad, as that is the nicest part of the proposed WOW trail. It is very dangerous to mix people and kids with trains without a barrier. Trains cannot stop on a dime! I believe that is why the Fed DOT said that there had to be a 5' fence. And, I can understand and appreciate the SDS folks opinion. Although they do not own the rail bed, they currently have a right-to-cross this rail bed. I realize the SDS is gated, but there are ungated access points through the development that they do not control. So, I see it as mostly gated, or almost gated. I still hope that some sort of compromise can be reached as I have been looking forward to all three phases being built and biking from the Weirs to Lakeport on the WOW trail. I feel strongly that state resources should be open to as many people as possible, as the land and the lake should be open for all to enjoy. I think the WOW folks have tried to accomplish this with this project. R2B

08-06-2008, 07:00 PM	#18
no-engine Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: West side Winnipesaukee, Lakes Region Posts: 516 Thanks: 20 Thanked 52 Times in 40 Posts	I have x-c skied along the SDS RR tracks in winter, from Laconia Country Club to Hilliard Road I think it's called. One can not be stopped for trespassing. Does the sewer line follow the tracks, as I do not recall there. It does in Meredith to Weirs! From there it must be along that side of Paugus Bay! Where else, but the tracks for the interceptor line to the Winnipesaukee River Basin Regional Treatment Plant in Franklin? Far too numerous to count, I have been on the tracks & adjacent sewer line from Meredith to Weirs and along Scenic Road to Lakeside Road in to the heart of "Weirs" area. All public ways through Grousse Point, Needle Eye Road, Neal Shores areas and other sites along the route. I even chatted with home owners. The time of year has been summer on a bicycle or walking, and winter on X-C skis or snowshoes - never motorized, but there are also snow machines in winter and off road dirt motorbikes bikes in summer. All users I've seen treat neighboring private property with respect, staying on the public ways! I don't think any land-owner association, land owner, community, or whatever group can possibly say no trespassing, along the RR and/or sewer right of ways. I've also been on the former tracks now multi-use path in Somerville, Arlington, Watertown, etc. Very nice for all uses! WOW should move forward and the SDS communities should agree and join in peacefully; in the end it'll actually benefit those unit owners, with the abundance of uses to enjoy!

08-07-2008, 07:44 AM	#21
brk-lnt Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: South Down Shores Posts: 1,939 Thanks: 533 Thanked 568 Times in 334 Posts	This thread, like most of FLL's topics, is filled with conjecture and various misunderstandings. South Down Shores does not oppose the WOW trail, but there is a very strong desire to route the trail in a manner that allows it to fulfill the original spirit of the concept without creating a security risk or major eyesore to the residents and owners of SDS. There certainly has not been a "my way or the highway" attitude as FLL insinuated in his first post. The WOW project is also very different from the converted tracks in MA where the trains no longer run and an abandoned track was converted into a walking path. There are certainly similarities, I am not arguing that point, but it's far from a 1-1 case study. As a South Down resident and someone was has been "aware" of this upcoming issue for some time now I don't see the value in debating this topic much more here, but I do know that mutually beneficial compromises are available. __________________ [insert witty phrase here]

08-07-2008, 11:12 AM	#23
Woodsy Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Weirs Beach Posts: 1,950 Thanks: 80 Thanked 971 Times in 433 Posts	I think the WOW trail is a great idea... But then the ugly head of NIMBY appears! The sticky point is the shoreline leases... If the WOW trail reroutes around SDS, thus accomodating the owners @ SDS, then every other owner along the trail expects the same treatment. But here is the real question.... If the SDS residents oppose the plan, will the state decline to renew thier lease on the PUBLICLY owned shorefront? This will no doubt cause all sorts of issues among the SDS community. If SDS goes to court to block the trail, the state could choose to play hardball, refuse to renew the shoreline leases and build the trail anyway... Woodsy __________________ The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.

08-07-2008, 07:42 PM	#24
no-engine Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: West side Winnipesaukee, Lakes Region Posts: 516 Thanks: 20 Thanked 52 Times in 40 Posts	COMPROMISES! Please. I don't know why I come here to read, and then joined. Right of ways, easements, paths, etc. all exist from compromises. Look at the amount of land improvement investments made within the Grouse Point area! One can walk, bicycle, or whatever down the tracks from either direction. I do not read or hear those people protesting the use of the tracks and accompanying land where sewer line exists. People used to drive autos down the path from the Meredith RR station to the houses at one-mile point, starting after the sewer line went in - illegal, but they did so. They were stopped; now they drive over the hill from Pemi Glass area on Rt 3. There must have been compromises with the developer of that high priced development! The people at Meredith, Lake Shore Road, Grouse Point, Neal Shore, Needle Eye Road, Scenic Road, Weirs areas, the marinas, Hilliard Road and others on west side Paugus Bay, South Down Shores, and areas farther south, as Mass. Ave. Lakeport all purchased their properties and should have been well aware of their situations with RR and State sewer line. If they were not made aware by their representatives before taking ownership, they have issues with their advisers or lawyers. Let's quit speculations, and participate in the compromises for the benefit of all, as was posted and asset to the communities.

08-07-2008, 09:50 PM	#26
no-engine Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: West side Winnipesaukee, Lakes Region Posts: 516 Thanks: 20 Thanked 52 Times in 40 Posts	I have no clue that IF the trail path is done, will there definitely be a fence? There is no fence along tracks/sewer line in many parts that I have personally viewed. Who is saying that I am trespassing if I walk the tracks or sewer line from Meredith to Franklin? You are right: how can a fence be placed, preventing persons on one side from going to other side of their own property. I know there are some landowners the same on either side of track, but with the easement or right of way through. I am not a lawyer and never pretended to have an option or a position statement regarding a fence. Just what authority has said that there WILL be fences along all the tracks & sewer line? I have not read that! WHO SAYS THERE MUST OR WILL BE FENCES? Guess I need to change a thought about cutting one's property in parts; it's been done by placement of an Interstate Highway in places. Of course a whole different matter! I am not wishing to hold research hearings on all the legalities involved on this forum or any forum; I would like all the issues brought up at the public meetings. Like I said, why is it so difficult for the authorities and informed people to discuss situations and work compromises of differing opinions - yes opinions. Laws and deeds and deed restrictions and easements, etc. need to be made open. I am sure neither I or anyone posting here is aware of all the legal matters involved.

08-07-2008, 10:29 PM	#27
Resident 2B Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North Shore, MA Posts: 1,352 Thanks: 987 Thanked 310 Times in 161 Posts	I am fully in favor of the WOW trail and I am glad to say that I have contributed to this project. I realize that there are SDS/Long Bay owners that oppose this project. However, this project benefits all the people that will use the trail. The SDS/Long Bay owners are trying to restrict ownership of public land that they believe they have an ability to control. I feel strongly that publically owned land should benefit the public, not the few that have limited, but exclusive rights to access. SDS/Long Bay owners do not own the rail bed in question. The state owns the land and the citizens should be the only people that benefit from this ownership. Although I have been hoping that a good compromise could be worked out between WOW and SDS/Long Bay, it seems to me that SDS is not in the compromising mood. Therefore, I feel WOW should move forward and begin construction of Phase 3 at once. SDS/Long Bay owners had their say and they refused to look at the big picture benefits of this project. They seem to think that they have a “gated community” and as such, no one should be able to enter their “gated” area. In fact, SDS/Long Bay has to allow access from the rail bed, land that they do not own, so this is not an infringement on their space. I had hoped that SDS/Long Bay would find a way to compromise in this situation, but based upon private emails to me and other public statements that SDs owners have made, I now feel compromise is not on the SDS/Long Bay agenda. Regardless of what some have said, they are clearly stonewalling this project. This project is a wonderful project using public land for the good of all tax payers. That is what public land should be used for! The views of the water near Lakeport are wonderful and must be part of this project. It clearly brings value to the entire project. SDS/Long Bay does not own one square foot of this rail bed, but they seem to think that they can stop the entire Phase 3 of this project, thus significantly weakening the whole project. It is time for those with any interest in this project to step up with their positions and opinions. The lake does not belong to owners at SDS /Long Bay. It is for everyone to enjoy, no matter what their financial means happen to be. Completion of this project will give all residents and visitors a great path to see the lake with unobstructed views without any obstructions. The public land in that area should be used for the benefit of the public, not for the few that happen to own property at SDS/Long Bay! NH voters, please contact your representatives and senators about this issue. Public access must take precedence over privately granted leases and temporary rights-of-way. If leases are not in the best interest of all the citizens, they must not be renewed. The full interest of the public has to be considered. In fact, they own the land, not the few at SDS/Long Bay. Hopefully, a reasonable compromise can be worked out, but the good of all must be given the strongest consideration! If SDS/Long Bay owners are not willing to compromise, then let us move forward in the best interest of all the folks in the public sector that will benefit from this great project. The personal interests of few should not infringe on the rights of many! R2B

08-07-2008, 11:23 PM	#29
Resident 2B Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North Shore, MA Posts: 1,352 Thanks: 987 Thanked 310 Times in 161 Posts	You have your opinion and I have mine! Thank God we have a free country! I have no financial interest in SDS or Long Bay. I believe I am telling it as it really is. I would like to see the WOW trail built and I have contributed to this endeavor. I believe this is a great project that will benefit the entire area. SDS/Long Bay folks are opposed, mostly due to their personal financial interests. They should have done a better "due dligence" study when they purchased their property. That is what I did when I decided to pass on a Long Bay property. You need to know what you are buying when you buy! That is what this is all about, SDS/Long Bay trying to exert rights on land that is not owned by SDS/Long Bay. I believe this is important for the general public to know and for any potential SDS/Lond Bay buyer to know. As a Laconia water-front tax payer with a tax bill well over $10,000, I hope to enjoy riding my bike from the Weirs to Lakeport on state owned land, even if it happens to go in front of SDS/Long Bay owned land. You own what you own and you live with what you do not own! Therefore, I choose to continue this interesting discussion. R2B

08-08-2008, 07:25 AM	#30
no-engine Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: West side Winnipesaukee, Lakes Region Posts: 516 Thanks: 20 Thanked 52 Times in 40 Posts	R2B and others, Very well stated on both recent counts. I could not have stated better. I am Meredith property owner and year round resident, whose land happen to abut the tracks, but has no rights across tracks, where it's private property and another short road, and more homes before the Lake. Do not be hesitant: walk, bicycle, snowshoe, x-c ski the path (sewer line buried) beside the tracks. Public property!

08-08-2008, 08:24 AM	#31
SAMIAM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 2,839 Thanks: 326 Thanked 1,626 Times in 562 Posts	Imagine someone building a 5 foot chain link fence in YOUR front yard (for the enjoyment of the public) ruining the view,that you are heavily taxed for and access to the lake ,which you are heavily taxed for.I know it sounds all fuzzy to think of people jogging and biking along the lake.Seems like those homeowners should have some rights,too. I have never lived in SDS but know a few people who do and they don't object at all to people using the rail bed or trail.It's an ugly chain link fence that they object to,and rightfully so. If R2B thinks compromise is the answere,let the stae compromise and drop their demand for a fence.

08-08-2008, 12:13 PM	#36
WeirsBeachBoater Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 709 Blog Entries: 9 Thanks: 39 Thanked 148 Times in 65 Posts	Small Correction. In the winter there are trail groomers that service Corridor 15. I know, I used to run one! Belknap Snowmobilers grooms from Court St. North to Ashland RR station.

08-08-2008, 01:14 PM	#37
krm Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 39 Thanks: 1 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	snowmob I believe the reason the tracks are open in the winter is bc an agreement/use and access agreement in place with the NH DOT and the various Snow Mob. Ass.

08-08-2008, 03:44 PM	#39
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	...the invisable fence! Here's the solution. An invisable fence just like for doggies. Trail users purchase their own collar that gives them a shock should they stray across the line. Sounds like the answer. No ugly fence, no loss of property tax revenue, and the trail costs less to build. Hey, it works good for dogs so why not people? Another idea....instead of a five foot, chain link fence...how about those five inch high, granite, rectangular, cobble stones, lined up on the ground without any cement. A low maintenance, easy to install, almost indestructable, very low profile, landscape fence. Talk about a simple solution. __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-08-2008, 04:43 PM	#40
Resident 2B Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: North Shore, MA Posts: 1,352 Thanks: 987 Thanked 310 Times in 161 Posts	No train for a while I think I would rather have the WOW trail than the train. With the rail bed washed out in two places, I wonder if God is sending us his idea for the solution. God and I often see eye-to-eye. I think if the train goes, the fence goes. R2B

08-08-2008, 06:36 PM	#42
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	Not too familiar with it but doesn't Wolfboro have a 12 mile bicycle path, starting at Back Bay, which travels over an abandoned rail road right-of-way to Sanbornville. It has had all the tracks removed? Believe that it is not paved with asphalt but with some type of fine black gravel. It works good? __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-23-2008, 06:08 AM	#43
Skip Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Dover, NH Posts: 1,615 Thanks: 256 Thanked 514 Times in 182 Posts	Proposed WOW trail costs skyrocketing... Interesting article in today's on-line Citizen detailing the skyrocketing cost of a fence along the proposed WOW trail in Belmont. Entire article can be read HERE!

08-23-2008, 06:29 AM	#44
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	Instead of a chain link fence why not the equivalent of a "virtual dotted line on the ground", constructed very simply with grey granite rectangular cobblestones. People do not need a chain link fence to know where the public trail property line is located. A cobblestone line on the gound would be an attractive solution. Bicycle paths in the Netherlands which run between roads and canals frequently have a hedgerow or just a strip of grass and do not have an ugly chain link fence. I'll even be happy to go to nearby Gilbert Block Company in Belmont and donate one grey granite cobblestone which costs about $3.50. So, at nine miles x 3.50 = a whole lot of cobblestones. Any other volunteer cobble donations out there? __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-24-2008, 12:37 AM	#46
Bear Islander Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Bear Island Posts: 1,757 Thanks: 31 Thanked 429 Times in 203 Posts	How does a cobblestone keep a child off the railroad tracks? This is from todays New York Times http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...55C0A967958260 Trains hit pedestrians or vehicles more than 4,000 times each year. About 500 people are killed while walking on tracks each year. I think this is why the fence is being required.

08-24-2008, 08:33 AM	#47
SAMIAM Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Moultonborough Posts: 2,839 Thanks: 326 Thanked 1,626 Times in 562 Posts	Be serious.....Amtrack trains travel at 70mph plus and our little scenic railroad crawls along at 2 or 3 mph.I've ridden it and you can WALK faster than the train is traveling.To compare a NY commuter train to our scienic railway is beyond ridiculous. I was in favor of the WOW project (and even donated) until I learned of the big ugly chain link fence that would scar miles of shoreline and ruin not only esthetics,but access for hundreds of property owners......please note that BearIslander lives on an island and is not effected.

08-24-2008, 01:18 PM	#48
fatlazyless Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 8,532 Blog Entries: 1 Thanks: 297 Thanked 957 Times in 698 Posts	The New Hampshire legislature just passed a bicycle safety law, effective January 1, which amoung other items, creates a 'three foot safety space rule' in that motor vehicles shall not come closer than three feet to a bicycle as both car and bike share the same road. Why not extend the thinking for bicycling on New Hampshire roads to the WOW trail, and simply require the distance between the WOW bicycle path and railroad tracks to be a minimum determined distance. It could be greater than three feet, such as five or eight or ten feet. If a three feet safety space is an ok compromise for cars and bicycles, then lets apply the same thinking to this "ugly fence' problem and simply build it without a fence excepting areas where a fence is recommended. Possibly, a granite cobblestone "fence' would be viewed as an attractive border and abutters could view it as an enhancement and not an ugly fence. As the Old Man of the Mountain used to say: "granite is naturally good looking," plus a cobblestone is all of just 6 inches high so it will not mess with the view. . __________________ ... down and out, liv'n that Walmart side of the lake!

08-24-2008, 08:08 PM	#50
jrc Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: NH Posts: 2,689 Thanks: 33 Thanked 439 Times in 249 Posts	I've been on the train and I've been in Southdown. The train currently coexists with pedestrians quite well. There is no fence along the route now and many people cross the tracks safely. In Skip's link it looks like the NH DOT requires the fence, maybe they can be reasoned with. I just can't imagine a ugly chain link fence from the railroad bridge near the Irwins all along the side of Paugus Bay to the Weirs and then along Meredith Bay. Near my weekday residence in Hollis, we can walk, bike, etc along an abandoned railway to Ayer. It is a nice trail to have. It did and does have opposition from literal NIMBY's. The good seems to override the bad. But in a few places fences were built to keep snowmobiles and ATV off the trails. These fences also cut longstanding access across the trail. These fences are now often in need of repair.

08-25-2008, 02:15 PM	#51
fatnoah Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 37 Thanks: 0 Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts	Personally, I think the trail is a great idea, however not with an ugly fence. While I understand the state's perspective in requiring a fence, it seems that whatever entity came up with that requirement is not too familiar with much of the geography of the line. The sheer number of grade crossings for roads, driveways, paths, as well as narrow causeways would make so many gaps in the fence it would be pointless anyway...an argument further strengthened by the leisurely pace of the existing rail traffic. For some numbers about existing rail-with-trails endeavors, check the following link: http://www.americantrails.org/resour...railStudy.html Based on the URL, I would assume that there is some bias in the study, but it's interesting nonetheless.