Report Inappropriate Comments

Not every park-goer "butts heads" with the Parks Department over the Department's plans to widen the Van Cortlandt Park portion of the Putnam rail-trail. In fact, it seems to be only a small, well-heeled group of elite runners who want this section of what is supposed to be a multi-use path to conform to their parochial views.

Consider the trail as it exists today. Far from the "pristine beauty" the article suggests, it is a muddy collection of rocks, tangled brush, and rotting, creosote-covered railroad ties. It is often impassible after it rains. It's a runner's and biker's nightmare, and completely unusable for anyone using a mobility assistance device such as a wheelchair or motorized scooter.

The trail today is toxic. Chemicals from the decades of rail traffic are still in the ground, and chemicals are still leeching into the soil from the rotting ties. The improvements proposed by the Parks Department would remove these dangers, and convert this beloved section of a 50 mile long multi-use path into a joy and benefit for everyone.

The Parks Department proposes to apply a flexible and *non-toxic* material suitable for multi-purpose use by walkers, in-line skaters, and mobility assistance devices as well as bikers. It will not be "paved over", a term which elicits images from the Joni Mitchell song, and grossly inappropriate to this discussion. To especially accommodate runners and joggers, each side of the multi-use portion would be lined with a lane of crushed gravel which is advantageous to runners and jogger only.

The Save The Putnam Trail group would instead have only an 8' wide lane of crushed gravel and nothing else. While a boon for elite runners and joggers, such a surface is dangerous for bikers and skaters, and very difficult on which to navigate mobility assistance devices. Eight feet does not allow for much passing room for anyone or anything other than runners and joggers. 15' allows more varied and higher density usage, in keeping with the City's GreenSpaces initiative.

I appreciate the awards the film has won and they are well deserved. But good cinematography does not make good public policy. The advocates of a runners-only surface represent only a small group. The Parks Department has the greater public's interest in mind. We'll still have paradise, easily accessible and usable by anyone, no matter the way in which they enjoy it.