Archive for the ‘Los Angeles’ Category

FHA Plans for Mueller Tunnel, Mt. Lowe Fire Road

Monday, January 24th, 2011

Mueller Tunnel 2006, Mount Lowe fire roadThe Mueller Tunnel has long been a right-of-passage for many mountain bikers riding the outstanding front country trails of the Angeles National Forest.  It is near Eaton Saddle along the Mount Lowe Truck Trail. The tunnel was closed after a landslide almost sealed the western end of the tunnel in 2009. The area has experienced many rock slides over the years. The steep, rocky terrain above the tunnel and fire road remain unstable and unsafe.

There has also been significant damage to the retaining walls which support the fire road next to the tunnel. Several years of heavy rain, and the subsequent Station Fire have kept the area closed for some time. In its current condition, the Mount Lowe Fire Road would remain closed even if the Station Fire closure order was removed.

Mt. Lowe Fire Road provides mountain bikers and hikers access to the Mt. Lowe trail, Sam Merrill Trail, Idlehour trail, and was a popular shuttle option from Mt. Wilson road. It was originally constructed in 1942. It also provides volunteer trail crews like CORBA’s convenient access to those trails for trailwork.

The Federal Highway Administration and the Angeles National Forest are proposing to reconstruct a portion of the roadway adjacent to the tunnel, to restore through access for Forest Service and fire fighting vehicles as well as for hiking, mountain biking and equestrian use. The construction would involve a new retaining wall to tie in to what remains of the existing retaining wall. The objective is to restore the fire road to existing roadway widths and stabilize the road.

Mueller Tunner riders, 2006, Mt. Lowe fire roadThe Federal Highway Administration is requesting public feedback on the project.  Feedback should be sent in by March 4, 2011 to Mr. Micah Leadford (HFPM-16), Federal Highway Administration, 12300 West Dakota Avenue, Suite 380, Lakewood, CO 80228 or by email to micah.leadford@dot.gov; by telephone at 720-963-3498.

CORBA will be submitting our feedback in the comings weeks.

Revised Station Fire Closure Order Issued

Saturday, January 22nd, 2011

The forest service has just issued a revised closure order, going into effect tomorrow, January 22, 2011.

The only changes are the opening of the Red Box picnic area and Millard Campground. Though forest visitors will be able to stop, park and picnic at Red Box, all the surrounding trails remain closed. This order is in effect through January 21, 2012. The official notice and a map are available from the Forest Service web site.

According to the Forest Service, the area is still unstable and subject to slides, especially after events like the December storms. Canyons are also subject to flash flooding. Volunteer groups including CORBA have not been allowed to do any additional trailwork in the burn areas since the first rains of the winter season. However, much of the area is showing good signs of recovery.

Highway 2 remains closed between La Canada and Clear Creek, though it is now possible to drive to Red Box and Clear Creek from Upper Big Tujunga Canyon road.  Caltrans has not announced an expected opening date.

Park to Playa Trail Feasibility Study Public Workshop on January 25

Wednesday, January 12th, 2011

The Park to Playa Vision

In 2000, the “Park to Playa” vision was first articulated: a seamless trail connecting urban residents with the natural coast. The trail will connect approximately 13 miles from the Baldwin Hills along Ballona Creek to the Ballona Wetlands and the beach bicycle path. The Ballona Creek portion of the trail is now implemented. The current study will define the location and design of the eastern portion of the trail, passing through several parks and jurisdictions in the Baldwin Hills area, starting at the Stocker Corridor to the east and connecting parts of the trail systems of Ruben Ingold Park, Norman O. Houston Park, Kenneth Hahn State Recreation Area, and Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook to the west.

When: Tuesday, January 25   7pm-9pm

Where: Kenneth Hahn State Recreation Area Community Meeting Room
4100 La Cienega Blvd
Los Angeles, CA

Directions: The community meeting room is located in the Community Center past the park entrance gates and Gwen Moor Lake on the south side of the road.

Click here to open pdf flyer

Mountain bikers are still unwelcome on many L.A. trails

Sunday, January 2nd, 2011

A comprehensive update of the city’s bicycle plan still gives precedence to hikers and equestrians. The issue reflects animosity born of anecdotal reports of unpleasant trail encounters.     

Not long after mountain bikers spun onto the scene in California in the early 1980s, dustups erupted with hikers and equestrians who found dodging hell-bent-for-leather cyclists on narrow trails unpleasant and at times dangerous.     

Don Wildman, founder of Bally's Total Fitness, peddles his mountain bike into the hills near his Malibu home in 2009. A comprehensive update of the city of Los Angeles' 2010 bicycle plan was approved in December by the Planning Commission, but the issue of bikes sharing the trails with hikers was sidestepped. (Al Seib / Los Angeles Times)

Heeding those complaints, the city of Los Angeles prohibited bicycling of any kind on trails designated for hikers and equestrians. Despite mountain bikers’ efforts over the years to win access to dirt trails in Griffith Park and other open spaces, the ban has remained in effect — except for Mandeville Canyon Park, where cyclists do share trails.    

Other major cities such as Philadelphia, New York and Phoenix have figured out how to let hikers, equestrians and cyclists coexist on the dirt. But Los Angeles officials and planners have all but sidestepped action on the issue in a comprehensive update of the city’s 2010 bicycle plan that was approved in December by the Planning Commission.    

The update will be reviewed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa‘s office before City Council consideration early this year. It calls on the city’s Department of Recreation and Parks to study best practices in other locales and collect data. That marks some backpedaling from earlier bicycle plans that recommended pilot programs for mountain bikes on city trails. No such programs were implemented.   

“There is nothing in the new proposed bicycle plan that would expand mountain bikes’ usage on city parkland or on mountain trails,” said Ken Bernstein of the Department of City Planning.   

Bernstein, a principal planner, said the mountain biking debate remains a tiny piece of the overall bicycle strategy, which calls for new bikeway networks encompassing more than 1,680 miles, a jump from the current 339 miles. The plan also commits the city to implementing 200 miles of bicycle facilities every five years.   

“We think the bigger story is the fact that the Planning Commission adopted a very far-reaching and, we think, state-of-the-art new bicycle plan for the city that has tremendous support,” he said. “Overall, the plan makes very bold statements … including the goal of making every street in Los Angeles a safe place to ride a bike.”   

Ted Rall / For the Times

The unwillingness of many hikers and equestrians to budge on the bike issue reflects animosity born of anecdotal reports of trail encounters that have injured hikers and horses. In 2005, a horse trying to dodge three mountain bikers on a Santa Barbara trail fell down a canyon, broke its back and was euthanized. In September 2009, a 74-year-old hiker on the Betty B. Dearing trail in Fryman Canyon reported that a speeding mountain biker clipped her on the shoulder and sent her sprawling on the gravelly path.   

“It’s been a more serious issue in California than elsewhere,” said Stuart Macdonald, editor of American Trails magazine and its website. “People take more extreme positions, and they seem to not have this kind of culture of ‘People have a right to be there, and we need to figure out how to solve the problem.'”   

In the months before city planners finished the draft bicycle plan, a consultant tried unsuccessfully to find middle ground between equestrian and mountain bike representatives.   

Many hikers and equestrians assert that mountain biking poses two main problems: danger to cyclists and others on the trail and the potential for trail damage.   

“My feeling as a member of the Griffith J. Griffith Trust [which distributes money for Griffith Park improvements] is that mountain bikes do not mix on the trail with hikers, horse people and runners,” said Clare Darden, the hiker who was knocked down on the Dearing trail. “In parks in urban settings where people are on foot or on a horse and somebody comes speeding down a trail and cannot stop on a dime, you’re at risk of serious injury.”   

As for trail health, Joe Young, a civil engineer and hiker on the executive committee of the Sierra Club’s Angeles chapter, contended that “trails in Griffith Park could be obliterated by a relative handful of mountain bikers.”   

Cyclists have found research to bolster their side.   

Jim Hasenauer, a Cal State Northridge professor who volunteers for the International Mountain Bicycling Assn., said equestrians fear that cyclists will have “negative impact on animals, rip up trails, kill native plants … but that’s not what the research says.” The association cites data showing that cyclists cause about as much damage as hikers and less than horses.   

Hasenauer said cycling groups were disappointed that pilot programs were excluded from the updated plan but took heart that the city “still has to do the studies and start dealing with some fact-based decision-making.”   

Given the Department of Recreation and Parks’ staunch opposition to allowing mountain bikes on city trails, it remains to be seen when or whether it will take up the cause of researching best practices.   

Claire Bowin of the city’s Planning Department said parks officials should start the research as soon as they have “the will and funding.”   

“I feel today in our society we have to find common ground across a wide variety of people,” said Bowin, a road cyclist. “Something this plan has tried to embrace is how to accommodate a range of cyclists. Mountain bikes are part of that family of cyclists.”   

Notes from CORBA on this story…   

This article was published in the LA Times on January 2, 2011 and also online. As of late afternoon on Jan 2, there are 85 comments to their online article, many of the vitriolic towards mountain bikers. Here’s an example:   

I want to empathize with mountain bikers, but for the life of me I cannot. Unfortunately, it seems the majority of mountain bikers are really rude. They barrel down trails at very fast speeds without regard to the safety of hikers and their animal companions. They also have a tendency to ride past hikers very closely, so much so that hikers get clipped and animals get spooked. I don’t know what the solution is, but perhaps some courtesy and understanding on both sides might help.   

If you have a view about hikers and equestrians sharing trails with mountain bikers, the best way to express it to write a short, reasonable letter to The Times at letters@latimes.com.

LA Planning Commission Approves Bike Plan

Friday, December 17th, 2010

The City of Los Angeles Planning Commission passed the proposed bike plan yesterday December 15, 2010.  It now goes to the Mayor for 30 days, then to the Transportation Committee of City Council, then to the full Council.  Mark Langton and Steve Messer of CORBA, and Jim Hasenauer of IMBA attended.  Langton and Hasenauer spoke before the Commission.

Of particular interest to mountain bikers is section 3.3 of the plan which focuses on ongoing studies of off-pavement cycling in City parks. Langton and Hasenauer spoke in favor of the section and urged the Commission to keep it intact. Several people affiliated with equestrian or hiking groups spoke in opposition of section 3.3 of the plan. They cited similar, if not the same arguments as in the past—that it is a transportation not a recreation plan; bikes are a threat to public safety; bikes travel too fast; there are many injuries; bikes have adverse environmental impacts; allowing bikes will lead to motorized vehicles on the trails; etc.

Hasenauer commented that the plan didn’t go far enough and that planning staff should have treated mountain bike advocates with the same engagement they gave road advocates.  He asked to also restore the pilot program language of the 1996 plan.  Langton said that the recreation vs. transportation dualism is a false dichotomy and talked about The Conejo Open Space Conservation Agency’s (COSCA) 20-plus years of shared use success. Several members of the LACBC also took time to argue in favor of section 3.3 (click here to see their report).

After the public hearing, staff responded that the plan does not advocate for opening trails to bikes: It advocates for study, inventory, an identification of standards so that a decision about off-pavement cycling in parks would be comprehensive and well-informed; that studies around the country indicate that some trails are feasible for bikes; and that illegal riding was a function of not having any legal places to ride.  Staff concluded that ultimately 3.3 is a “step in the right direction.”

Barbara Romero and Diego Cardoso of the Planning Commission supported keeping section 3.3 in the plan.  Romero asked why the pilot programs were removed and was told “at the request of City Parks.”  Cardoso said the city has a diverse population, including families who ride bikes.  He said that not everyone can afford horses, and for many people “a bicycle is an affordable horse.”

Michael Woo of Planning Commission said he was initially worried about section 3.3, but after hearing staff’s recommendations is now more comfortable with it.

The Plan including section 3.3 passed unanimously.

The Mayor’s office will now have 30 days to review the plan before it is passed to the transportation committee, and ultimately the full City Council.

Off-pavement advocates’ next steps are to ensure that section 3.3 stays in the plan. When the plan is passed, it will be imperative that the Department of Recreation and Parks includes the study process in their work plan.

Rails to Trails Petition to the AAA

Monday, December 6th, 2010

Southern California has several successful rail to trails conversions, with the potential for many more.  You can see existing Southern California Rail-Trails at http://www.trails.com/stateactivity.aspx?area=14932

The president of AAA Mid-Atlantic recently advocated for the elimination of existing federal programs that help build bicycle and pedestrian trails and sidewalks from the trust fund that finances transportation. These funds have helped create more than 19,000 miles of trails, walking and bicycling facilities across the country—including some in Southern California.

There are 19,872 miles of rail-trails around the country—with 9,232 more in the planning stage. Very few of these would have been built if AAA’s position had taken hold decades ago.

AAA Mid-Atlantic suggests that an $89 billion annual highway fund shortfall can be blamed on investments in walking and bicycling. But those investments total less than $1 billion annuallyand produce tremendous benefits for everyone, including drivers.

CORBA is joining with the Rails to Trails Conservancy in calling for the for the AAA to retract the statements made by the AAA Mid-Atlantic region President.  We ask CORBA members and supporters to sign the Rails to Trails Conservancy petition at http://www.railstotrails.org/AAA

To prepare for that delivery, the petition will be closed at midnight on Wednesday, Dec. 8.

Thank you for having already signed the petition. We’ve asked this of you a lot lately, but since it’s so important, please forgive us: would you spread the word however you can, one last time? Just ask a friend or two to visit www.railstotrails.org/AAA.

Postscript (December 27, 2010): 51,000 people signed the petition. See the full story…

Elsmere Canyon Now Public Land

Saturday, November 6th, 2010

The city of Santa Clarita recently closed escrow on the 842 parcel of land known as Elsmere Canyon. Elsmere was slated to become the largest landfill in Los Angeles during the 1990’s, before Senator Barbara Boxer and Congressman Howard McKeon fought to prevent the devastating landfill project.

Elsmere Canyon Map

(more…)

Rim of the Valley Study Comments

Friday, October 29th, 2010

As we reported back in August, the National Park Service has been holding public hearings on the Rim of the Valley Special Resource Study.  The public meetings have provided an opportunity for many to voice their support and/or concerns for the concept study.  Until midnight tonight, you can email your comments to the National Park Service.

Rim of the Valley Study Area Map

Rim of the Valley Study Area

The Rim of the Valley is comprised of the open spaces that surround the San Fernando, La Crescenta, Santa Clarita, Simi and Conejo valleys. This area spans both Los Angeles and Ventury County, and a bevy of land managers from different agencies. CORBA fully supports the prospect of having these various land managers come together under the direction of the National Park Service, with the goal of permanently protecting this vital ecological and recreational resource.

(more…)

Pinecrest Gate to the Mt. Wilson Toll Road

Friday, October 29th, 2010

For those of us who ride the Mount Wilson toll road, we’ve all faced the prospect of racing to beat the closure of the gate at Pinecrest Avenue at dusk.

Unofficial-looking, hand-made signs on the Pinecrest GateMountain bikers are not the only ones affected by this troublesome and potentially hazardous gate. Hikers, equestrians and dog walkers also face the prospect of being trapped behind the gate after dark.

For cyclists, this is especially troublesome as there is no alternative legal place for cyclists to exit without backtracking up the Mt. Wilson Toll road or Altadena Crest Trail to an alternate trailhead. Bicycles are prohibited in Eaton Canyon, which is in itself a hazardous journey after dark for all trail users.

The Altadena Crest Trail Restoration Working Group has recently made their feelings on this foreboding gate known to the Mayor of Pasadena and other key government officials. CORBA fully supports their position, demanding that the gate be removed or replaced. Our official letter to the Mayor of Pasadena and other officials is below and continues after the break.

We encourage all concerned trail users to write to the Pasadena’s Mayor and City Council to express your feelings about the Pinecrest Gate situation.

The Pinecrest Gate, as seen on Google Street View. The now-repaired landslide is visible if you rotate the image to the right:


View Larger Map

A PDF copy of the letter is available for download, or read on below:

October 26, 2010

Hon. Bill Bogaard, Mayor
City of Pasadena
100 N. Garfield Avenue, Room S228
P.O. Box 7115
Pasadena, CA 91109-7215

Re: Pinecrest Gate at Eaton Canyon Park

Dear Mr. Mayor,

We urge you to remove or open the Pinecrest Gate to allow full 24/7 recreational access to the Altadena Crest Trail, the Mount Wilson Toll Road and Angeles National Forest.

As a non-profit serving and representing off-road cyclists from the greater Los Angeles region, CORBA has received numerous reports from our concerned members about the condition of the Pinecrest gate. The Pinecrest trailhead is a historically significant and popular access point to the Angeles National Forest for off-road cyclists, hikers and equestrians alike.

(more…)

LA Bike Plan to go before Planning Commission

Thursday, October 28th, 2010

The 2010 Bicycle Plan staff report and related documents for the City Planning Commission (CPC) meeting are now available on the LA Bike Plan project website (http://www.labikeplan.org).

The Staff Report which accompanies the plan states specifically that the anti-mountain bike lobby were  more vocal in their opposition, and nothing in the plan changes the status quo regarding mountain biking being off limits in Los Angeles City parks. The only change to the plan in Chapter 3, section 3.3 (Bicycling in City Parks) is the removal of the word “Unfortunately.”  That pretty much sums it up. It isn’t even considered unfortunate that kids, adults, families, disadvantaged youths, and those seeking alternatives to riding bicycles on the street within the City of Los Angeles, all lose out in this Plan.

Here is the pertinent excerpt from the staff recommendation letter to the planning commission:

4. Mountain Bikes/Off Road

The appropriateness of including policies about mountain or off-road bicycling within the Bicycle Plan, which is a chapter of the Transportation Element, has been long disputed by some constituents. The concerns stem back to the adoption of the existing Bicycle Plan in 1996 which included specific policies to study the feasibility of developing mountain bicycle trails elsewhere within the City park system.

Despite mediated meetings with stakeholders (mountain bicyclists, hikers, and equestrians) during the development of this Plan, to discuss options and potential solutions, no consensus was reached. Mountain bicyclists continue to advocate for increased access to off-road park facilities, and hikers, environmentalists, and the equestrian community continue to articulate concerns about risk of accidents on shared use facilities and the potential for environmental damage to ecosystems.

In testimony and written materials submitted at the public hearings, several persons expressed concern about the impact of allowing bicycles on equestrian trails. Additionally, some commenters took exception to the “tone” of the text and the policies relating to off-road bicycling and multi-use trails. The language and policies as originally written gave some members of the public the impression that mountain bicycling would be allowed in City parks and that the Plan was undermining the Department of Recreation and Parks’ authority over bicycles in City parks.

Although the organizations and members of the public who have spoken and written against allowing bicycle on trails have been more vocal in their oppositions, a fair number of comments supported expanding the use of mountain bicycles on trails.

Proposed Changes:

The Department has reviewed the text relating to mountain bicycling and has made adjustments to clarify the intent of Objective 3.3 (see Appendix A). The City will continue to gather data on the issue and will not look to repeal the Department of Recreation and Parks’ authority over bicycles within City parks. Furthermore, none of the policies or programs within Objective 3.3 call for the expansion of bicycle mountain access beyond where it permitted today (Mandeville Canyon Park). Additionally, the policies contained in the 1996 Bicycle Plan explicitly state that the City will embark on allowing access in certain City parks have not been carried over into this Plan.

CORBA, in our official comments on the current revision of the plan, presented arguments refuting almost every aspect of this portion of the recommendation letter. The one thing that remains irrefutable is that the anti-mountain biking lobby were more vocal in their opposition. Nearly one thousand supporters of off-road cycling wrote to the City after the initial draft of the Plan was released in 2009. Clearly this wasn’t enough, though it represents but a small minority of off-road cycling enthusiasts in the City of Los Angeles.

The City Planning Commission Meeting on the 2010 Bicycle Plan (Case No. CPC-2009-871-GPA and ENV-2009-2650-MND) will take place on Thursday, November 4, 2010, after 8:30 AM at City Hall, Room 1010, 200 N. Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012. The CPC agenda will be available after Thursday, October 28 on the Department of City Planning website (http://cityplanning.lacity.org).

The Planning Commission will be making their recommendations regarding the plan to the various planning committees in late November. Sometime in December the City Council is scheduled vote to adopt or reject the plan.

It continues to be in our best interest as off-road cyclists to remain engaged and to attend any and all public meetings and hearings. This is, after all,  just a planning document. The City’s past record with following their plans has been abysmal, and though nothing was gained for us in this plan, nothing has really been taken away. We didn’t have  trail access in City Parks before it. We need to remain engaged with the City Council, the Mayor’s office and the Department of Recreation and Parks as the decisions that affect us, irrespective of the plan, come from them. Encouragingly, the Mayor himself has expressed his support of allowing bicycles on City Park trails.

Other aspects of the Plan for on-street cycling have been well-received by the bicycling community. Again, the City’s ability to execute is what counts. The proof is in the pudding, as they say.