Since it seems to be (another) bicycle day in Newton, I thought I would throw this out there:
Like many (hundreds?) of other Newtonites, I ride my bike in the area quite a bit. I ride the Pan-Mass Challenge every summer with several friends, and do what I can to get training miles in. One popular route from newton takes us through Weston, and down Meadowbrook Road by the Weston Country Club. It’s the most direct and on e of the safer routes to Weston Center (and from there, Lincoln, Sudbury, Concord et al).
It turns out residents are hiring a police detail this weekend to turn away cyclists (and presumably other non-resident or club member motorists). This brought up a bunch of questions, and I don’t pretend to know all the answers:
- Meadowbrook Rd is marked as a “Private Way.” Does that give residents the right to block access? I’m not saying it does or it doesn’t; I’m asking, as there seems to be nuanced thinking on the topic. I have also seen conflicting information stating this is a “Private Road” or simply “Private Property,” perhaps the latter designation makes a difference.
- Bicyclists have used this throughway for years without incident (to my knowledge– there may have been, in fact I’m sure Meadowbrook is no more incident-free – or prone – than any other road. I have used it for 5 years without ever being turned away. Why suddenly enforce it now?
- What will cyclists do? It’s a very popular route, but there are alternatives. If I go the Weston-Concord route this weekend, I will likely so that but am curious if other cyclists feel more strongly, enough to challenge this.
Enough people in Newton bike frequently – and through Weston – that I thought this would be of interest. Any thoughts?
Here’s the dope, courtesy of a Boston Bike blog:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/02/10/private_ways_public_access/?page=full
Irony: The Weston Country Club is almost certainly publicly subsidized under the laws that reduce country clubs’ local taxes. They’ll take the public’s money, but not their bikers.
According to Ad’s link, at least by reading of it, they have no legal right to stop bicyclists. I’ve never ridden there but I do hope someone pushes back on this. Its a bad precedent and appears to be illegal.
This is like something out of the 1930’s when the wealthy hired private cops to keep ordinary people out of certain elite communities. Newton still has roads that are labelled “not a public way”, but I don’t believe that residents of that road have any right to stop motor vehicle or pedestrian traffic. I can’t believe this is legal, particularly if any state funds are used to maintain the road.
I stand corrected. It appears that the road has been designated a private road and is maintained exclusively by the Club.
An important question is whether they are planning to stop cyclists just this one time or regularly over the summer.
If it’s just this one time, they may be running a program to prevent adverse possession. It’s common for property with some public access to periodically prevent the public from using the property. That stops the claims for adverse possession.
Or they are just being mean to cyclists.
According to the link above:
If that’s true, they wouldn’t have the right to stop cyclists even for one day, regardless of whether they maintain the road themselves.
Hi Doug – I found your blog posting looking for other coverage of this story. I’ve added a link to your post from mine, where I’ve discussed the article at length.
The Globe article has been re-written quite a bit, and I’m planning on comparing the two. I don’t want to spam your comments, but if you’re interested, finding the post should be easy.
A couple thoughts —
– There are a *lot* of cyclists out there in the community, and a lot of us are Metro West professionals. It’s a huge network of people who know people — whether neighbors or co-workers. I would think if some cycling-friendly Weston Golf Club members leaned on the Club about this, this wrong-headed idea of barring traffic from Meadowbrook Road (which is probably not legitimate to being with) would end, fast.
– Sgt David Tinglof notes the department receives numerous complaints about cyclists in Weston. But as a cyclist (who rides very conservatively), virtually every ride a car does something illegal that endangers my safety — most often an attempted classic “right hook”, or a vehicle overtaking when it is clearly not safe to do so. I’ve been content to live & let live. But maybe cyclists should start logging incidents that take place in Weston and submit them to Weston police? Maybe the Weston P.D. would be helped if we balanced the record with dangerous automobile behavior vs. cyclists.
Unfortunately for cyclists and non-members, they may be within their rights to limit access to the road to their own members. There are gated communities in Mass. which have private roads that are not open to the public. Then there are “statutory private ways” which are roads that are open for public use. Without more information it is really hard to say whether they can lawfully close it. I would hope that the police dept. determined in advance whether it was a private road or a “private way” (though given their history of harassing cyclists that might be optimistic.)
I have now officially exhausted my interest in private versus public roads and hope someone with more land use experience and interest will chime in.
Evidently, in Weston there are public roads, private roads, and then there are “The Weston Roads Trust” Roads.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CFMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fweston.govoffice.com%2Fvertical%2FSites%2F%257B264E11B6-4A4A-4EC0-B631-35FE907B479E%257D%2Fuploads%2F%257B36BDE69F-5A2F-45BD-B767-B3F4C92281D1%257D.PDF&ei=IgO4T53PL4iY6AGv5IHYDg&usg=AFQjCNEfBPiDjxO7EstfIoVTi2h7k5sS4A
For some history on this very posh neighborhood, go here: http://www.wellesleywestonmagazine.com/spring09/quietandnaturalplace.htm
Hi Lisap, great sleuthing!
The legal consensus (at least by casual observers, not official legal advice) is that if there is a property owner that pays property taxes on the land the street uses, that street is private property (think driveway). If the land the road is on belongs to the city/town (no one pays property taxes on it), but is maintained by private funding, it is a private way. The link below shows the Private Rights-of-Way for part of Meadowbrook Rd, and adjoining streets in that part of Weston:
http://weston.govoffice.com/vertical/sites/%7B264E11B6-4A4A-4EC0-B631-35FE907B479E%7D/uploads/%7BC6C27220-F6DD-411D-A55F-1CDB2CF39CC7%7D.PDF
Weston’s parcel maps clearly indicate the private rights of way do *not* belong to the adjoining parcels. So the actual land used by the street either belongs to Weston… or possibly The Weston Roads Trust. Either way the Golf Club itself wouldn’t have the authority to prohibit traffic from using the way (though if the Trust did own the underlying land the road is paved on, it very likely could).
All nice to discuss in theory. I for one wouldn’t want to test the theory by confronting a peeved Weston police officer on paid detail.
Does a police detail who has been hired by a small group of residents have the right to stop, arrest, or in any way act in the capacity of a police(wo)man whose salary is funded with the local taxes? If s/he is hired privately, can s/he wear the official uniform that represents the Weston police? Just questions, but this seems like an odd situation.
I realized today that the answer of the status of Weston’s private roads was right in front of me (in the Weston Assessor’s office parcels) all along. The roads are designated “Private Right-of-Way”. The “Private” doesn’t matter; what does matter is that it is a Right of Way. A Right of Way is a Right of Way is a Right of Way.
Right of way definition: “the right to travel unhindered, to access a route regardless of land ownership or any other legality.” Unless the Weston Assessor’s office mis-marked the parcels (seems very unlikely), that should be the beginning and the end of it.
@jane — Paid detail is perfectly legal — officers are often retained by private parties during their off time to direct traffic, maintain order for events, etc.
Back to rights of way — whether or not it’s enforceable, the police might still be able to “advise” traffic to divert to other routes (but can’t actually force people not to use the roads). One exceptin I can think off — it’s a stretch, but it’d be possible for an officer to claim the road is closed because of hazardous conditions (e.g., flying golf balls), cyclists wearing safety helmets notwithstanding. Officers might ticket or arrest on various charges (e.g., disorderly if someone raises a stink, failure to obey a police officer, trespassing — whether or not it’s legit you can still be charged). An annoyed police officer can hand out a lot of grief, whether or not it were to hold up in court (e.g. how much will that defense lawyer cost you?) That said, the officers I’ve known are decent people who really don’t want to give grief to any folks who practice common courtesy.
Typical suburban NIMBYism. The concerns about the bike path that would have run through Weston from Framingham to Lowell were hilarious. I remember one resident was interviewed and was fearful that people would come from Lowell on the bike paths and commit robberies in the houses. To this day I laugh at the image of someone in a black ski mask riding a bicycle, panting under the strain of a Santa-sized bag of Weston-stolen loot.
I know they’re legal, but I thought that a police9wo)man on a detail was paid as a city/town employee. If the details are paid by private individuals or groups, then I don’t understand why people get into such a lather about the fact that they exist. Police details have been a controversial issue in recent years.
Dulles – (3d try posting this message – the universe is against me . . .)
Massachusetts is rather anomalous in that we have private ways, and ways that are private. The very abbreviated version is that it is entirely possible to have a road which is referred to as a “statutory private way” which is essentially a private way in name only, but which was laid out for use by the public, and then there are private ways which are indeed, private roads. I would not recommend relying on the description at the Assessor’s office to conclude whether the way is open to the public or not, especially if that might lead you into a confrontation with Weston p.d. enforcing what they believe to be the rights of their own.
I also did a little more sleuthing and found that Weston has a total of 83 private roads. They also have a map of “scenic routes” and notably absent, especially given its picturesque beauty, is Meadowbrook Road. As I already mentioned, they also maintain a listing of roads which are 1) public, 2) private and 3) Weston Roads Trust ways.
My take on this is that I do believe that it is very likely a private road (we know it is owned and maintained by the Weston Roads Trust) and that the use of it by the public has been with the permission of the Trust, but they are flexing their muscles and re-asserting their dominion over the road. The properties along the road all seem to be very significant estates and the few that are currently advertised for sale refer to the property being on a “private road”. It seems, from the history of the trust, that the area was developed for individuals with extreme privilege so it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if they have tried to keep the rest of us. Whether and when the road was laid out and whether there has been continuous public use of the road are all factual questions one would need answered in order to clearly say whether it is a private road or open to the public.
Signed – a proud ruffian and rabble-rouser
Lisap
@Jane – I think that the controversy over paid police details relates to details on public construction sites and things like that, not privately paid police details.
Jane,
I lived in Boston for many years and police details always been a pet peeve of mine, so I’ll take a crack at your question.
Police details are controversial for a number of different reasons. While in some specific situations the idea might make sense. In practice it often devolves into a system out of control. In Boston for example, there are are all kinds of construction jobs on the streets that mandate that you must use a very expensive police detail rather than hire a much less expensive flagger as would be done elsewhere.
Aside from the added unnecessary expense that then gets added to every project, the police details are not really answerable to the construction crew. Every citizen of Boston I believe, at one time or another, has fought their way through snarled up traffic to find a detail cop, drinking a cup of coffee, gabbing away, oblivious to the traffic jam that they are supposed to be directing.
Common sense would suggest that a police department would discourage moonlighting by its staff. The Boston police department runs the whole detail operation with full time police “working” 30, 40, 5o hours of police details in addition to their full time police job. It’s an inherently corrupted system where the police unions in concert with the political system undermines public safety and legally extorts money from people doing business in the city.
To give you an idea – I was recently working with the city of Boston to put on a free small family fun event in downtown Boston. We were planning on raising the necessary money privately to fund the event. We needed to drive and drop a trailer onto city property. It would take about three minute. We needed a police detail – four hour minimum, $150 per/hour – add $600 to budget. We’ll need to drive the trailer away at the end of the event – another $600. Three more details for the event itself – another $1800. This $3000 was effectively just a tax payable to off duty police rather than addressing any public safety issue.
@Ben. There have been similar fears of robbers, sneaky drinkers, vandals and all sorts of crazy people using the proposed Upper Falls bikeway to harass residents living in adjacent housing. Just a very few folks in Upper Falls have expressed these fears, but they have been highly vocal about their concerns. All the evidence from other bikeways suggests that the reverse actually happens.
Whatever the legal status of the road, Weston Police’s Sergeant Tinglof really made a hash of it. First of all, the article (in its original form) has him refer to the road as a “private way maintained entirely by club members and residents,” which suggests a public right-of-way maintained by private parties, as nicely discussed in the comments above. He exacerbates the problem by discussing cyclists supposed non-compliance with the law, which is irrelevant if it’s a truly private road; the laws only apply to public thoroughfares. Finally, he doesn’t even get the law right. Bicyclist, in fact, do not have to ride single file.
The article was subsequently updated with accurate descriptions of the law from Mass Bike executive director David Watson, eliminating Tinglof”s misstatements. It’s curious that a police sergeant misstating the basis for a police action is not the story.
The whole thing is a big case of blaming the victim and concern trolling. There’s nothing inherently dangerous about bikes and cars using the same road. Cars just have to be careful. The statement that weekend errands create a particularly large increase in volume is nutty. There are maybe 30 residences that require access by Meadowbrook. As for golf balls, there are three holes on which the road is in play. On one of them, there’s a club parking lot along the length of the fairway! If members feel comfortable parking their cars, it’s probably pretty safe for bikes.
And, as I wrote earlier, there’s something particularly offensive about an organization that receives a hefty tax break for the purposes of maintaining open space from restricting access through said open space.
Well, I came out of all this hearing that the road may very well be private property rather than a private way with public access rights- but that has in no way been determined beyond doubt to my mind.
Biked by that way Saturday morning, but it was before the police detail showed up. A cyclist in front of us went through as usual, our group decided to go around (who needs confrontation when we’re trying to get some exercise). I heard of no confrontations, demonstrations, or protest on either side (feel free to contradict me there), despite the immense popularity of that route.
It has been a great discussion though– especially as it sheds new light on the inability of local PDs to understand cycling laws, the uncertainty of the provate way designation, and Weston’s continued ambivalence to the cyclists it is stuck with whether it like it or not.
Should be an interesting cycling season. Whatever happens, we’ll all live (knock on wood)
Hi Lisap,
We’re totally on the same page, in terms of it not really mattering in the end what the law is. Testing a police officer is rarely a good idea, and one should be prepared to accept the consequences.
There’s also the whole consideration that, regardless of the legality, the cycling community is probably better off showing our willingness to oblige. The Meadowbrook Road situation may due to a bunch of arrogant, entitled such-and-so’s. But all cycling enthusiasts lose if cyclists actively defy the police paid detail, and we are all painted as a bunch of hooligans for it.
One minor quibble: We do know the Weston Roads Trust built and maintains many of Weston’s private roads. But I don’t think Weston Roads Trust claims that it owns the roads (meaning the property the road is built on).
Dulles – I think you’re very wise to take the “high road” on this one (sorry – couldn’t resist the pun.) 🙂
As for ownership by Weston Roads Trust, if you’re really curious you can do some online searching at the Middlesex South Registry of Deeds. Here is the link for you: http://www.masslandrecords.com/MiddlesexSouth/
I took a quick peek and I do see that they file “certificates” for assessments against property owners (these assessments look like municipal lien certificates), and I also found a document (Agreement) in which the trust, as owner of the land under the road, permitted a homeowner to construct a road over the land (a different road though). When you search just enter “Weston Roads Trust” in the “Business/last name” block at the top of the page. You may have to download their software.
This issue has burned up my cycling group’s listserve for the past week; I’m not sure whether the listserve was Doug’s source or not. Ultimately one knowledgeable attorney in our group provided this answer to whether the road could legally be closed to non-residents and non-club-members: “It depends.” Consistent with Lisap’s comments, there are different types of private roads with different rules.
Our group hasn’t solved this mystery yet. But one member (I’ll call him Aldus) who was particularly peeved at the notion of a restriction on what has been a very safe alternative to the very narrow, winding and busy Newton Street, decided to politely put the Meadowbrook weekend road blockage to a test. I will paraphrase his report:
Aldus cycled with a friend to the bottom of Meadowbrook on Saturday and was met by a policeman who stated that Meadowbrook was a private road. Aldus politely asked whether he could pass anyway. The policeman told him yes. They chatted for 10 minutes or so, and after watching several cars and a pedestrian pass without being stopped, Aldus asked the policeman whether only cyclists were being told of the private status of the road…..The policeman responded by stopping and notifying each subsequent vehicle that came along while Aldus remained.
Aldus reported that every driver displayed some degree of irritation at being stopped, and that most every driver expressed some variation of annoyance and embarrassment that cyclists were being discouraged or impeded from traversing Meadowbrook. After some more pleasantries with the policeman, Aldus and his friend left.
So if passage is legal, it would seem that the golf club is simply trying to intimidate and reduce cycling traffic by implying, through the use of paid police details, that free passage is against the law.
If I pick up any other good tidbits I’ll report again!
Steve – The plot thickens! Great report.
@Steve – great update! Kudo’s to “Aldus” for being cool, calm and collected, inquiring whether they were singling out cyclists and, moreover, asking whether he could still pass.
Meadowbrook Road is considered being belonged to Weston Roads Trust, which is not registered with the Secretary of Commonwealth to conduct business – so, above it is described the ambiguous situation of the type “who violates what?”
Steve, I suspect my original source (second-hand) was the same as yours, and I certainly did not see the entire email chain. A friend forwarded the initial info and a subsequent one raising the possibility of the private property vs private road distinction.
Thanks for sharing “Aldus'” experiment. Interesting that the placement let people pass. That says a ton. If you find any other substantive info on this, please share, but I’ll take this as “license” to pass, showing my usual courteousness to any neighborhood I bike through, especially in the early hours.
If the police detail was hired to intimidate (thought it appears the actual duty performed was to inform), one must question if that use was appropriate. And I’m still curious what prompted it now.
I understand the part about police details and public projects, but can you just imagine a private group of citizens hiring a Newton police officer to do their bidding, who could then arrest someone in his/her official city uniform? Imagine the blog threads, the Tab editorials, guest columnists, Anatol calling them NIMBYs! Really-it could keep Newtonites going for weeks and the situation makes perfect sense to the residents of Weston. Fascinating.
Thought I commented before but it didn’t take– Steve, thanks for the update!
Aldus Update: Mr. and Mrs. Aldus, cyclists both, rode Meadowbrook this morning, greeted by birds, other cyclists, and the occasional resident with whom they exchanged sincerely pleasantries. No police, no arrests, no jail, no bail. CSI Weston will have to wait another week.
Have there been further developments? Has anyone actually received a ticket, or has this been a public notice exercise? Permission to pass by the police when asked seems to indicate that there may indeed be a public right to pass.