I could see the trail continuing on the south bank from Moorse Park dam and under MLK on to Riverside Park then perhaps pedestrian/bike trail sharing newly paved public sidewalks past the private property on Moorse River Drive connecting with the trail at Cambridge. There is quite a lot of space at the river bank level in the woods down there from Moores Park to Riverside Park, we used to walk the "Indian Trails" down there over to the pool even though we were not supposed to.
Oh yeah, making it as far as Riverside Park is easy, that's why I suggested it as a point to cross back over the river at. It would also be possible to extend the trail west of Waverly to as far as Creyts seemingly without too much trouble. It's just the stretch between Cambridge and Riverside Park that would require an expensive jaunt across the river and back.
Right; I think we're not even considering that, because it seems really fanciful an ultimately unnecessary. Any bridge(s) they took across the river probably wouldn't look nice, IMO.
I believe that the city has a right of way on the strips of land between the sidewalk and street, so it could be possible to expand the width of the sidewalks a few inches for the trail. If they were to do that I think the south side of the street would be the best place, as the sidewalk on that side goes all the way to Cambridge, the "Mayor's side" does not have a sidewalk. By the way the sidewalks on the north side of Moorse River Dr. are in very bad shape I recently saw a biker take a header right over his handlebars when his wheel got caught in the cracked cement right by the roundabout, he was OK but I think they could put new walks on both sides. I could see a boardwalk type trail crossing under MLK, I believe the other side of the river is rail road right of way so a bridge to a trail on that side would not be very practical or even a nice place for a trail. Just my ideas on this topic! Thanks for all ideas!
I don't see any aesthetic problem with bridges there, even relatively generic ones, there's going to be a fair amount of bridges required to extend the Rivertrail any further going either direction along the Grand River anyway. I do see a culmination of problems that would make it more difficult there, mostly because of the wider river and the riverboat using that section. I wouldn't write off the possibility though, if the trail is extended further southwest that will be a glaring gap in the system. I expect / hope over the coming years the trail millage money will begin to help pay for more expensive things like bridges and crosswalks to avoid trail and vehicle traffic crossing.
While on the subject, my biggest wish regarding the Rivertrail is to see it extended further northwest. Looking at satellite images it looks like there's a relatively easy route at least out to 96/69 and possibly into Grand Ledge if a few property owners don't stand in the way. I know it would require Eaton County to make it happen past Waverly and that may be asking a lot, but extending it to Waverly in that direction should be a priority IMO. It also looks possible to extend the trail along the Red Cedar for a long ways, maybe as far as Fowlerville or beyond, but there are a couple of spots in Okemos near the EL border that I could see there being issues.
Unfortunately Eaton County and parks just don't go together. Too many NIMBYs and "why-should-I-pay-for-that"s there. It's sad because an extension of the South Lansing Pathway west of Waverly Rd would be great, but I just don't see it happening.
What's west of Waverly, though, that would justify this as a priority, though? I guess it just really depend on any individuals vision for the trails. Like, yeah, connect to Fulton and Fine parks in Lansing, maybe cross the river around that way to connect to Woldumar Nature Center. Maybe a Lansing Twp/Delta Twp path connecting everything on Lansing Road to the Waverly Road bridge.
Beyond that, though, I'm kind of happy with the current focus on the city like the path to Bear Lake. After that, I'd love to see a northwest branch. Problem with that has always been the problem's we've had going west: the city doesn't own any of the land on the northside of the river between the current end of the trail and Tecumseh Park, so that'd have to be one long-@ss boardwalk. lol
Yeah, I would only call it a priority to extend the trail southwest as far as Woldumar, you could only get a bit further than that anyway. It'd be nice to someday go as far as Dimondale or Eaton Rapids but there seems to be too many houses close to river, often with docks, to make that very practical. As for the northwest extension, it seems there's a lot of vacant/underused land along the river between those points, I think the city could acquire the land without a ton of trouble and eminent domain is on the table if necessary.
Comments
While on the subject, my biggest wish regarding the Rivertrail is to see it extended further northwest. Looking at satellite images it looks like there's a relatively easy route at least out to 96/69 and possibly into Grand Ledge if a few property owners don't stand in the way. I know it would require Eaton County to make it happen past Waverly and that may be asking a lot, but extending it to Waverly in that direction should be a priority IMO. It also looks possible to extend the trail along the Red Cedar for a long ways, maybe as far as Fowlerville or beyond, but there are a couple of spots in Okemos near the EL border that I could see there being issues.
Beyond that, though, I'm kind of happy with the current focus on the city like the path to Bear Lake. After that, I'd love to see a northwest branch. Problem with that has always been the problem's we've had going west: the city doesn't own any of the land on the northside of the river between the current end of the trail and Tecumseh Park, so that'd have to be one long-@ss boardwalk. lol