Originally Posted by
CB HI
An interesting exercise for you, would be to look up the funding for your recreational MUPs. If any of the funding came from TEA, TEA21 or any of the related/follow on funding bills of the federal government, then your local government that build the path, certified that the primary purpose of the path was for transportation and not recreation.
If someone walks on the path from A to B, how is that legally not "transportation"? For a path to be only for recreation it would essentially have to be a closed loop inaccessible to homes or business destinations along its entire length.
Here's TEA-21. Could you quote where it matters how people use the path? Do you think there is language in TEA-21 that means the municipalities have to monitor and restrict non-transportation use of trails and return Federal funding if recreational use tops 50%?
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tea21/sumtoc.htm