Local

[Print]  [Email]        

Cyclists seek to lay claim to trails

By: Beth Winegarner
Examiner Staff Writer
December 1, 2008

Trying to co-exist: Mountain bikers worked with the Music Concourse Community Partnership to establish some trails within Golden Gate Park, but those plans are stagnant. (Mike Koozmin/Special to The Examiner)

SAN FRANCISCO — Some mountain-bike fans are pining for trails of their own in city parks, but others are taking matters into their own hands, cutting trails in remote areas that neighbors say cause erosion — and danger for the cyclists who use them.

San Francisco’s park system has multiuse trails for bicyclists, however, they’re shared with dog walkers and pedestrians — a setup that makes trails less fun for everyone, according to Dan Schneider, co-founder of SF Urban Riders.

Off-road cycling, including stunt cycling, has become more popular among residents, but San Francisco offers no dedicated space for them, he said.

“Multiuse trails can’t have any jumps or skills features, and you can’t go at the speed of your choosing,” Schneider said. “It’s just not fair or safe to anyone.”

The dearth of space for those pastimes have led some groups to build illegal trails, ramps and other features in treacherous parts of Mount Sutro and McLaren Park, according to Franco Mancini of Friends of McLaren Park.

Unknown cyclists dug trails in a remote area of McLaren and built ramps, chutes and other props for stunts, according to Mancini.

“Nobody objects to bicyclists in the park, but this can cause erosion,” Mancini said. “And if one were to get hurt, emergency personnel would take forever to find them and pull them out of there.”

The push for mountain-bike trails in San Francisco’s parks dates back 10 years or more, according to Andy Thornley, program manager for the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. Mountain bikers worked with the Music Concourse Community Partnership to establish some trails within Golden Gate Park, but those plans have yet to move forward, Thornley said.

“There really aren’t many places in The City to legally ride off-road,” he said. “There’s a better job The City could be doing.”

Schneider has urged cyclists to approach Recreation and Park Department officials to ask for their own trails and features — and to work with The City’s nature stewards to make sure they don’t propose trails in environmentally sensitive areas, he said.

Those officials are hearing the call — and are willing to begin talks with bikers, according to Rec and Park General Manager Jared
Blumenfeld.

“Mountain bikers want something in steep terrain, and BMXers want things that could be accommodated in neighborhood parks,” Blumenfeld said. “I think those activities will get integrated into our parks in some way.”

bwinegarner@sfexaminer.com

Park priorities

55% Locals who want more walking and bike trails
27% Locals who want more swimming pools
22% Locals who want more indoor exercise and fitness facilities
13% Locals who said golf courses are among the top four most important park amenities
11% Locals who said sports fields are among the top four most important park facilities

Sources: 2004 San Francisco Recreation Needs Assessment, San Francisco Bicycle Coalition



To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

Mr. Obvious

Jan 2, 2009

What is with all these San Franciscan's who live in a City and pretend they live out in the country? "Mountain" bikes in an Urban environment? Hey, I want to go Four-Wheeling in Golden Gate Park, anybody want to join me in setting up a track?

 

Mr. Obvious

Jan 2, 2009

What is with all these San Franciscan's who live in a City and pretend they live out in the country? "Mountain" bikes in an Urban environment? Hey, I want to go Four-Wheeling in Golden Gate Park, anybody want to join me in setting up a track?

 

Response to Mr. Obvious.

Jan 3, 2009

You are right that mountain biking should not be allowed in almost all of Golden Gate Park, but McLaren Park doesn't have the urban feel and it would make sense to build mountain bike trails there.

 

ok, I am a bike person

Jan 4, 2009

The article states the need for MORE places for youth of all ages to ride off road. Read the SFRPD Survey at the bottom of article. Multi Use Trails are safe and benefit all users - but have an appropriate shared user etiquette. We need some dedicated places were the kids can have Bike Specific Fun and thus provide a creative alternative so they don't 'DIG' independently in our parks. Bikes are healthy, green, and here to stay... so we need to embrace it and find positive solutions.

 

Ms. Duh

Jan 4, 2009

Mr. Obvious: Mountain bikes are the most commonly sold and ridden bikes in the US. They are most frequently ridden on the road, but they are suitable for riding on dirt. San Francisco has some nice dirt trails. What is so wrong about wanting to ride along those paths to escape some of that feeling of the urban environment? We should be happy with nothing but pavement and gutters in our lives? No opportunity to roll through the woods on leaf-littered dirt? Why wouldn't we want to improve our quality of lives by adding a little nature to it here and there?

 

a bike commuter

Jan 4, 2009

@Mr. Obvious: "What is with all these San Franciscan's who live in a City and pretend they live out in the country?" Exactly. How reasonable is it to demand pristine hiker-only trails in public-owned parks when you live in an urban area (not to mention when you're talking about a non-native park environment -GG Park)? It isn't Yosemite, and you won't find a wilderness experience in San Francisco. Where is the consideration for everyone else who wants to be able to use these limited public resources? It's totally reasonable to expect a safe, relatively peaceful park experience (no motor vehicles) and this is still totally possible if bikes are allowed on some trails. These parks belong to everyone, we should try to be as inclusive as possible.

 

Dave

Jan 4, 2009

I think biking should be a supported and encouraged activity. With a little thought it's possible to have some good bike trails and stunts without having a negative impact on other park users.

 

martinfay@mac.com

Jan 4, 2009

The City needs a velodrome. And, we need skate board space. Look to Pier 32 for both.

 

velomuse

Jan 4, 2009

This is a very strategic period to leverage mountain bikers' generous volunteer hours for trail building, maintenance, and ongoing patrolling to preserve and enhance the park for all users.

 

24elsinore

Jan 5, 2009

Really? There are still people who think Mountain Bikes DESTROY natural habitat? Go visit Bend, Oregon, or Downeiville, CA, and visit some of those multi-use trails, some even Mountain Bike Specific, and see how 'destroyed' they are. There are more SF residents who want bike parks than do not. Lets give the people what they want.

 

24elsinore, again

Jan 5, 2009

I'd really like to see the SF Examiner or other publications bring this emerging struggle to light, and raise community awareness.

 

Steve N

Jan 5, 2009

I think a trail itself, cut for whoever, is naturally erosional. Mountain Bikes should have better trails both in S.F. and elsewhere. It is up to those who design and build the trails to make them "fit in".

 

Steve N

Jan 5, 2009

I think a trail itself, cut for whoever, is naturally erosional. Mountain Bikes should have better trails both in S.F. and elsewhere. It is up to those who design and build the trails to make them "fit in".

 

tom

Jan 5, 2009

As mountain bikers progress they seek out more extreme,"treacherous", terrain to ride. This leads them into portions of our parks least frequented by other users. This unused space is also valued for its relatively undisturbed natural habitat. I believe cyclists can use these areas without causing significant damage, if they are properly educated. Building a few dedicated play areas with jumps and other stunts would go a long way to satisfying riders seeking more extreme challenges.

 

access for all

Jan 5, 2009

Reading the comments, it is clear that considered responses make the most sense. I have seen the various extreme responses by the nimbys starting with the rally of a month or so ago. Looking at the "examples" of the damage from that event, it is abovious that some folks distort the impact of a particular user group. One of the photos showed a hiker path and attributed the wear to cyclists. The recent trail events attended by all users are a realistic solution to multi user impact. The authorities having jurisdiction need to know what the whole constiuency is in need of. Public comment in newspapers and forums help to communicate the needs and desires. Too bad folks like Mr Obvious have to muddy the discussion with sarcastic commentary.

 

access for all

Jan 5, 2009

Reading the comments, it is clear that considered responses make the most sense. I have seen the various extreme responses by the nimbys starting with the rally of a month or so ago. Looking at the "examples" of the damage from that event, it is abovious that some folks distort the impact of a particular user group. One of the photos showed a hiker path and attributed the wear to cyclists. The recent trail events attended by all users are a realistic solution to multi user impact. The authorities having jurisdiction need to know what the whole constiuency is in need of. Public comment in newspapers and forums help to communicate the needs and desires. Too bad folks like Mr Obvious have to muddy the discussion with sarcastic commentary.

 

Aaron @ www.SFMTB.com

Jan 6, 2009

some comments about this article: --The multi-use Mt. Sutro trails were all built legally through a partnership of local volunteers, non-profits and UCSF. It is a beautiful example of an urban open space providing sustainable multi-use trails incorporated with habitat restoration. --Mr. Mancini's quote is out of context. Illegally built fall line trails can cause erosion. Well planned legal countour (sustainable) trails will not erode and will remove users from poorly built illegal trails. And it's not the user group that causes the erosion but the incorrect trail design. --While it would be great to have bike-only skills parks on new trails, what is more needed is access to existing dirt trails for multi-use. It generally doesn't make sense in limited size areas to separate bikes and pedestrians and why should we? the hiker/biker conflict is fabricated.

 

Aaron @ www.SFMTB.com

Jan 6, 2009

Mr. Obvious is completely missing the core issues. We need the trails in the open space within and next to urban area where it is accessible. There are miles and miles of non-paved trails on over 3,000 acres of public land in SF. None of these trails are legal for mountain biking yet hikers can tromp anywhere. Let's link together and improve the existing trails and make them multi-use. Everyone wins: better trails and more access. And there's a huge difference between motorized and non-motorized use. Why should biking not be allowed in GG Park or any SF park? Bring in all the non-motorized user groups -- hikers, dog walkers, bikers, horse riders -- organize a real non-paved trail system that links all the parks, build sustainable multi-use trails, and build city-wide volunteer groups who maintain the trails and restore habitat. It is the perfect solution that makes everyone happy in my opinion.

 

just a joe

Jan 7, 2009

Its about time cyclists get equal treatment as dogs in San Francisco!

 

lou

Jan 21, 2009

Mount bikers get dinged because of some rude and extreme bikers who are not considerate of others on the trails. It is bikers who go full speed around blind curves and buzz within inches of toddlers that make people resistant to shared trails. Realistically, urban parks and trails and hard riding are a recipe for non-bikers getting hit. With real mountain trails just a short ride over the Golden Gate, I wouldn't want to sacrifice good hiking trails for dirt bikers. It is neat the way the Bicycle Coalition aggregated demand for walking and bike trails, I bet there is more demand for foot trails than biking trails.

 

DaveG

Jul 2, 2009

Every user deserves and can be accommodated with better trails in SF.That means Bikes. Dont forget some hikers own bikes, some dog owners own bikes. You would be surprised how many of us there are, and ones that will actually get out and help make a difference with volunteerism. They belong to all.

 

Nov 28, 2009

The most commonly fake handbags goods include upmarket designer clothing,replica chanel,replica gucci,replica louis vuitton,replica shoes,replica chanel,replica gucci,replica louis vuitton designer handbags.

 

Nov 28, 2009

You might not find such good looking replica shoes,Louis vuitton handbags,Replica louis vuitton handbags everywhere.They offer for so many Fake handbags products that are in demand such as Ed Hardy clothing.The ed hardy clothes store provides Ed Hardy,coach handbags,rolex watches and so on,if you have any questions, please contact us!

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Your Name:

Comment:




World

Fortune tellers: Year of Tiger isn't Tiger's year, but Obama to shine

It's the Year of the Tiger, but Chinese fortune tellers say it'll be a rough patch for the world's most famous one: disgraced golfer Tiger Woods. Full story

Local

Notorious penguin Harry survives infection

Fans of The City’s most famous penguins can... Full story

Local

Jackson doctor back in court in April to find out date for next major step in case

Michael Jackson's doctor returns to court in April to find out the date for the next major step in the case — a proceeding that will reveal for the first time the evidence the prosecution believes will show his "gross negligence" was the direct cause of the pop star's death. Full story