Opposition to parts of the proposed Bristol Bike Path Connector is completely understandable.

It is very reminiscent, however, of the opposition which started in 1981 to proposals for the East Bay Bike Path. Opposition was very vigorous and actually continued through 1986, even after construction of the bike path had officially begun.

As my late father, Tom Byrnes, known as the Father of the Bike Path, said: “It’s like anything else — if people don’t know what they are getting, they’re leery of it.”f

But many will remember public comments from the opposition like: “idiotic”; “will devalue property”;  “an absolute tragedy”; “means only trouble for neighbors”; a “magnet for motorcycles”, and “it will be a criminals’ highway.”

Also part of that public record are some headlines from the years of opposition:

• “East Bay bike path study evokes an outcry” (Oct. 29, 1982, Providence Journal);

• “Bike Path draws solid opposition” (April 4, 1983, Providence Journal);

• “Petition against path headed to Governor’s office (Warren Times, June 8, 1983).

After a contentious standing-room-only meeting at the Bristol Elks Club on Sept. 8, 1982, the Providence Journal headline was: “Crowd rides roughshod over bike path idea.” In the Bristol Phoenix, the headline was “Bike Path gets cold reception from right-of-way neighbors.”

Also in opposition, as part of the public record at one time or another, were most of the local state legislators from Bristol and Barrington, the Bristol Chamber of Commerce, the Bristol Town Council, the Bristol Town Administrator, the editorial board of the Bristol Phoenix, and groups of abutters from North Farm, Bayside Shores and the Bristol Highlands, as the path would run right along some of their yards.

There were also serious efforts to petition the state to break up the entire length of the rail bed property and to sell it off in pieces to the abutters.

Thanks to many, many local supporters, and the many Bristol residents who signed petitions, participated in events, attended forums and wrote letters, the East Bay Bike Path finally became a reality, and soon after it became a model for the entire bike path system in Rhode Island and beyond.

Only a year later, in June 1987, when the first segment from Riverside Square to Warren was not even completed, the headlines had already started to change: “East Bay Bike Path drawing rave reviews” (Providence Journal).

Hopefully, the due diligence of the supporters of the Connector will reassure those objectors who have concerns, and history will repeat itself!

Judith A. Byrnes
Newport