The East Bay Regional Park District board held a Trail Study Session on December 2nd. The first half of the session was a summary highlighting some of the parks trails projects. “Trails” include both paved and natural surface trails and width ranging from roads to narrower paths. Paved regional trails such as the Bay Trail serve hundreds of thousands of users due to their close proximity to densely populated areas and serve both recreation and transportation functions. These trails are also often eligible for transportation oriented state and federal funding. Planning, permitting, and construction costs for these trails are often in the $1 million dollar per mile range to deal with wetlands, rail crossings, utilities, and a variety of other issues. Natural surface trails are much less expensive on the order of $50-70,000 per mile and have less funding options. Paved trails tend to dominate the spending and personnel resources.
Some natural surface trail projects of interest included:
* Tyler Ranch – 1.3 miles of multi-use bike legal trail recently opened
* Mariposa & Philip Scholz trails with bike access in Pleasanton Ridge slated to begin construction in 2023
* Garin to Pleasanton Ridge trail connections – in planning and permitting and will provide expanded longer distance routes and Bay Area Ridge Trail connections
* Wildcat Flow – this proposal is in the early evaluation stages and this was the first time it was mentioned as a ‘project’. Preliminary field habitat surveys have been completed and indicated habitat concerns are reasonably manageable. This project is expected to start moving forward into a public input stage.
Additionally Director Coffey supports the addition of bike trails at Contra Loma Regional Park in Antioch which includes bike use in the current land use plan and is an area with less sensitive habitat areas.
The second half of the session was focused more on a discussion seeking board input to staff on direction forward regarding trails. Over the last 2 years the EBPRD convened a Trail User Working Group and has held discussion and workshops with the Park Advisory Committee to get more input from stakeholders. From those efforts and continued staff discussion staff presented 4 principals they think should guide their work forward.
There was significant discussion on bootleg or volunteer trails. We view and advocate that bootleg trails are a strong indication of the public demand for trails. Planned and sustainably designed and constructed trails avoiding sensitive habitat are the best way to protect our natural resources. The lack of substantial changes in bike access to narrow trails for decades while other area land managers are able to manage bike access is a significant driver to the increase in bootleg trails. We don’t promote unsanctioned trail building we understand how people get to that point. Unsanctioned trail building is done by a small portion of the cycling community. Continued prohibition and the lack of new trails penalizes the vast majority of cyclists that follow the rules, respect other trails users and the environment, and advocate within the system. Increased access, bike optimized, and bike specific trails would be a reward to those that have followed park rules and advocated within the system. Mountain bikers want to be legitimized.
Below are the principles presented by Deputy Assistant General Manger Jim O’Conner:
Principle # 1: Trail Related Decisions and Actions Should be based on Data
• Although the District does collect some trail use data from a limited number of trail counters and user surveys, we do not have a comprehensive program to collect and analyze data on trail use or the trail user experience.
• We need to inventory and evaluate our trail network to determine current conditions of our existing official trails and to document the number and miles of un-official user-built trails.
• We need routine monitoring of user-built trails to determine the effectiveness of community engagement, educational, and enforcement efforts and to target closure and restoration activities.
Principle # 2: Create a Comprehensive and Sustainable Regional Trail Network
• Addressing trail crowding and conflict will require a comprehensive regional trail planning effort that considers all opportunities to address user demand, including those of adjacent public agencies.
• Properly designed and built trails have less environmental impact, require less maintenance, and provide for a quality user experience. Thus, the District needs to establish clear design guidelines for trails and routine maintenance standards, to keep trails accessible and functional.
• We need to grow our trail network, but also explore innovative ways to effectively manage use on the existing trails.
Principle # 3: Ensure the District’s Trails are Accessible and Welcoming to All Community Members
• A comprehensive trail planning effort would involve the input of the full range of community stakeholders and perspectives.
• Protecting resources and providing a quality trail user experience will require continuous engagement with community partners and user groups – park staff cannot do this alone!
• Foster collaboration between user groups to provide trail use education and support for District trail management efforts.
• A diverse workforce helps foster a feeling of inclusion and safety.
Principle # 4: Resource Protection is a Priority
• New trail development needs to be based on avoidance of impacts to the greatest extent possible.
• Not all trail use types can be accommodated in every park. Decisions of appropriate use will be based on science based data, local conditions and a regional approach to accommodating user types.
• User-built trails represent a significant impact to resources, thus there needs to be specific resources allocated to prevent this activity including targeted enforcement actions by the District’s police department.
• Effective trail design and maintenance minimizes resource impacts.
• Location of new trails should not further fragment wildlife and habitat corridors.
• Continue and expand District volunteer activities for trail maintenance and restoration of user-built trails
Comprehensive Trail Planning which we promoted during the Trail User Working Group is also a part of their direction forward although what this specifically means is unclear. We would expect this would include identifying a variety of locations across the park district that would be environmentally acceptable to construct a bike oriented trail system similar in size to Crockett Hills. Residents throughout the park district should have bike accessible trails a reasonable distance from their homes. This doesn’t mean a bike oriented trail system in every park. Options to do this include trail networks with a higher trail density to minimize the footprint and reduce potential habitat and migration fragmentation impacts. More concentrated trails systems can also allow for easier separation of users and the addition of bike only downhill directional trails. Comprehensive trail planning would help provide better trail experiences for all trail users, connectivity and coordination between land managers while increasing environmental protection and providing recreation access.
A video of the session is available on the EBPRD YouTube channel
