reading a Oregon Land Use Board decision where they reference a project as a "recreational trail". Carfree paths shd never be referenced this way. It diminishes value. We don't categorize roads/hwys this way. It's another example of systemic bias toward cars/driving.

this particular example is a rail-trail that would be built as alternate route to a nearby dangerous rural hwy. It would serve lots of uses (school route, errands, social trips). Thinking of it as "recreational" is inaccurate and insulting.

some folks wonder why I personally don't like/don't use the term "trail" when I write/talk about paved multi-use paths. This is one reason why. "Trail" = fun/recreation to most ppl. Path is better. I'll use path name (w/o "Trail" at the end) whenever possible.