There's a new paved bike trail coming through my neighborhood...

[Page Turner]

...so I attended a meeting of the River Park Neighborhood Association last night at my wife's request. She did not want to go alone.

I'm not nearly as hooked into the local bike bureaucracy as I once was, having quit the management board of the bike co-op.  So the first news I got about this "proposed" new paved trail on my side of the river was from a handout she brought home, depicting a homeless encampment on the river bank, and suggesting (very skillfully, and without actually saying the words), that paving this area (which is already a public unpaved trail along the toe of the levee) would result in a massive influx of criminals and homeless drug addicts, because pavement.

 

So I told her I would go along with her, even though she was telling me that paving this trail would ruin it for her as a natural walking area, and she were agin' it. *ptoo*

I, of course, being generally in favor of bike trails, felt remarkably neutral about this one.  I feel I'm already well served in that regard in my location. And it's not a big deal for me to ride up to the pedestrian bridge at the college nearby and cross to the other side to use the paved 40 mile trail that's there.  But I was curious, and you know what curiosity can do to a cat.

 

The meeting itself was your typical small volunteer assn monthly meeting: i.e. dreadfully dull and so boring you want to stand up five minutes into it and shout "Kill me now !!!"  But I sat there patiently with my hat pulled over my eyes waiting for the trail issue to come up, which because the guy running the meeting knew was gonna be awful, he held until the end. there were probably 25-30 residents in attendance, at a monthly meeting that rarely draws more than one or two (besides the actual board members).  The vast majority of them were there to stop this intrusion into their previously "safe" neighborhood.

 

At the beginning of the public questions and input period, I asked for an explanation of what was currently known with regard to the project.  There had been a marked reluctance to share anything up until that point because (I surmise) the board president did not want to set off the crowd.  It was pretty obvious that the majority of them were carrying torches and looking for someone to lynch. The one guy in there who knew the most about it turned out to be the guy who is against it and printed up those flyers.

 

Turns out it's been in the works as part of the city's bike infrastructure plan for about 15 years.  And it's in the environmental impact statement and design phase, having already had the funding approved for both of these things.  So it's gonna happen.  However, at the very end, when the board was putting together a committee for a public presentation at the April general membership meeting, and they wanted one community (not on the board) volunteer who was anti, one who was neutral, and one who was pro.  When nobody volunteered as pro, I raised my hand and asked if I was "the only person in the room who rides a bike ?"  Thank god some younger guy across the room who had been holding back raised his hand and blurted out he's a bike commuter,  and the new trail would save him ten minutes daily each way on his five day a week commute.  So they asked him and he volunteered.

I felt like this:

 

Anyway, as punishment I had a very realistic dream where I was back working for the fire department.  That was unpleasant.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Longjohn ★]

I’m retired and home from the gym so I read the whole thing. Parr8 will be in later to ask for cliff notes.  I don’t think my wife has ever asked me to go to a meeting where there would be controversy. Bike trails don’t have to be paved to attract homeless, just ask Petite about the C&O.

[donkpow]

Meetings? I just assumed they spend as much money as they can get as fast as possible.

[Parsnip Totin Jack ★]

Paved trails are not the crime magnets that residents state they are. A study by the Rails to Trails Conservancy, dated January 1998, provides a good argument against that belief. 

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/docs/rt_safecomm.pdf

[Page Turner]

... for certain the homeless thing is just a distractor (but a powerful one).  The homeless do camp along the river here, which also happens to be where the bike trail is located.

But they pretty much stay on the lowest end of it to be near the Loaves and Fishes kitchen and because the police and park rangers herd them down there through enforcement.

[donkpow]

How many people and of what demographic are expected to use the trail? 

[Page Turner]

Just now, donkpow said:

How many people and of what demographic are expected to use the trail? 

...it will be the new shortest, car free, bike route between Sac State, most of East Sacramento, and a good section of Midtown nearest the river to the new regional park they built over the old landfill and eventually the downtown area.  So everyone who wants to go downtown from those areas by bike will doubtless use it.  That's potentially a lot of people, but bicycle ridership as opposed to driving continues to remain low here as a percentage of the overall public

[Wilbur ★]

Hmmm, trailside bike repair...

[Longjohn ★]

4 minutes ago, donkpow said:

How many people and of what demographic are expected to use the trail? 

Didn’t you read the thread? HOMELESS PEOPLE !  

[Kzoo]

29 minutes ago, Page Turner said:

they wanted one community (not on the board) volunteer who was anti, one who was neutral, and one who was pro. 

I noticed that didn't include one homeless.

[donkpow]

16 minutes ago, Page Turner said:

...it will be the new shortest, car free, bike route between Sac State, most of East Sacramento, and a good section of Midtown nearest the river to the new regional park they built over the old landfill and eventually the downtown area.  So everyone who wants to go downtown from those areas by bike will doubtless use it.  That's potentially a lot of people, but bicycle ridership as opposed to driving continues to remain low here as a percentage of the overall public

I see, thank you. Given we are looking at California, I say we should move ahead. This will allow the truckloads of money easy access to the homeless people.

[Page Turner]

23 minutes ago, Kzoo said:

I noticed that didn't include one homeless.

...when we got home, my wife looked at me, told me she had no idea I was gonna come out as a "pro", and I was almost homeless.

[dinneR ★]

I ride bike paths a lot. In Mpls, I lived just off a popular path. I rode it to work and back every day, 25 miles a day year round. I never saw homeless people on the path. I know the greenway had some living under the bridges. 

[Page Turner]

30 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Hmmm, trailside bike repair...

...there's already someone with some mobile van bike repair operation who sets up regularly at Goethe park, over on the other side of the river.

It's  a niche market, and thankfully someone is already in the niche.

 

 

[Rattlecan ★]

1 hour ago, Wilbur said:

Hmmm, trailside bike repair...

Sure. Just be prepared to do it for free or less.

[shootingstar]

I've lived near major city bikepaths that run for over 30-60 km. long in Toronto, Vancouver and Calgary which can be connected to other park paths for a 100 km. day trip in the city. For the past 25 years. I've lived near and cycled those paths starting from home only less than .5 km. or just a few blocks away.  Yea, sure major city fundraising marathons start in the neighbourhoods where I've lived...every year.  Not a big deal either (to me).

It is abit narrow-minded to think that most paved bike-ped paths introduce much/any crime.  In all 3 cities, if there are any homeless people (just few occasionally) they are under bridges for warmth or simply sitting on a bench. Eventually bylaw officers or the police move them along.  

If I see a homeless person on bike with large bags of tin cans, bottles from the dumpsters..I'm HAPPY for them:  because exercise is good for them, independent mobility is good for them and they get to earn pocket money at the recycling depots. They have keep our disposal areas clean.  For certain, I actually feel safer and trust homeless people on bikes because they can ride off their frustrations and anger more easily.  May I suggest:  as a cyclist smile at a cycling homeless person.

I actually believe well-used paved paths lower crime, not introduce it. Because there are more eyes in the neighbourhood, more joggers, cyclists and walkers. 

Ask for night  path lighting ...that is for safety for all commuters and for visibility of those in the park/neighbourhood.

Maybe people in small towns think differently than where I've lived..over 1 million in each people.

As for getting involved in cycling advocacy meetings...I agree dull...but sometimes if you wish to have something long term for the good of the whole community, it takes some participation in the effort. My partner has incredible patience and perseverance for these endless meetings ...it's of greater value, if one offers very practical solutions and action. 

 

 

 

[ChrisL]

54 minutes ago, donkpow said:

I see, thank you. Given we are looking at California, I say we should move ahead. This will allow the truckloads of money easy access to the homeless people.

 

44 minutes ago, dennis said:

I ride bike paths a lot. In Mpls, I lived just off a popular path. I rode it to work and back every day, 25 miles a day year round. I never saw homeless people on the path. I know the greenway had some living under the bridges. 

In my area of CA homeless along the bike trails was minimal for decades. It is a huge problem now as discussed in the SART thread.  

SART was closed to cyclists so the county could clean out the camps but a local judge filed an injunction so it is in limbo.  But I think the injunction just delays the action to allow placement of homeless and not just tearing down the encampments and pushing them off on another city.  

Agree tho, paved or unpaved makes no difference...

[Page Turner]

2 minutes ago, ChrisL said:

 

In my area of CA homeless along the bike trails was minimal for decades. It is a huge problem now as discussed in the SART thread.  

SART was closed to cyclists so the county could clean out the camps but a local judge filed an injunction so it is in limbo.  But I think the injunction just delays the action to allow placement of homeless and not just tearing down the encampments and pushing them off on another city.  

Agree tho, paved or unpaved makes no difference...

...not sure about SoCal, because I've never lived there.  But I can say with some assurance that here, in the Big Tomato, the homeless are down near the river and over behind the Blue Diamond almond processing plant because there are not many other places left where they can have both access to the support facilities they need, like the Loaves and Fishes for free meals, and some place relatively obscure where they can set up a tent overnight (or for a couple of weeks in the winter) without getting chased away.  It's some of the only available open space left within the city limits.

Almost everything else is built out.  Everyone is gonna be somewhere.

[ChrisL]

10 minutes ago, Page Turner said:

...not sure about SoCal, because I've never lived there.  But I can say with some assurance that here, in the Big Tomato, the homeless are down near the river and over behind the Blue Diamond almond processing plant because there are not many other places left where they can have both access to the support facilities they need, like the Loaves and Fishes for free meals, and some place relatively obscure where they can set up a tent overnight (or for a couple of weeks in the winter) without getting chased away.  It's some of the only available open space left within the city limits.

Almost everything else is built out.  Everyone is gonna be somewhere.

I think SART became a popular encampment because it's a law enforcement anomaly. The riverbed is controlled by the Army Corps Of Engineers and goes through 3 counties and numerous cities.  Nobody chased them off as no LE agency claimed jurisdiction and wanted to put resources enforcing it.  

It wasn't until thousands of tents popped up over a 4 mile stretch covering 3 cities that the county sheriff's got involved. Crime and vice was rampant and there were no water or facilities to support that many people so human waste and trash was everywhere.

Really a bad scene...

[Kzoo]

3 minutes ago, ChrisL said:

I think SART became a popular encampment because it's a law enforcement anomaly. The riverbed is controlled by the Army Corps Of Engineers and goes through 3 counties and numerous cities.  Nobody chased them off as no LE agency claimed jurisdiction and wanted to put resources enforcing it.  

It wasn't until thousands of tents popped up over a 4 mile stretch covering 3 cities that the county sheriff's got involved. Crime and vice was rampant and there were no water or facilities to support that many people so human waste and trash was everywhere.

Really a bad scene...

I thought of you and Mr. Beanz when this thread popped.

We have an old rail line between our office building and the river that is in the process of being converted to a MUP to connect lots of miles of MUP on either side.  The homeless have had a camp up river a 1/2 mile next to the river and under a RR bridge along the rail line.  Someone came in last year and removed the rails and ties but nothing since.  It will be interesting to see what happens to the camp as this progresses.  There are a few people that use the rail bed to run on in the summer and a few mountain bike peeps that use it.  Other than a murder vic found at the camp in the river a couple years ago I've never heard of any issues - I don't think the murder had anything to do with the camp.    

[Page Turner]

...jurisdiction is also a confusing aspect of the situation here.  The actual guys with jurisdiction over on the trail and nearby woodlands is the rangers for the American River park. that's like four guys at any given time for an area that runs 40 miles up and down the river.  The city cops will show up for a 911 call if there's a crime in progress, but otherwise they just refer it over to the Park guys.

We used to go in there with fire a lot, because people were forever setting the woods on fire in the dry season.

[ChrisL]

40 minutes ago, Kzoo said:

I thought of you and Mr. Beanz when this thread popped.

We have an old rail line between our office building and the river that is in the process of being converted to a MUP to connect lots of miles of MUP on either side.  The homeless have had a camp up river a 1/2 mile next to the river and under a RR bridge along the rail line.  Someone came in last year and removed the rails and ties but nothing since.  It will be interesting to see what happens to the camp as this progresses.  There are a few people that use the rail bed to run on in the summer and a few mountain bike peeps that use it.  Other than a murder vic found at the camp in the river a couple years ago I've never heard of any issues - I don't think the murder had anything to do with the camp.    

I drive past a stretch of SART daily and can't really take a picture but the rows of tents along the trail is staggering.  I refuse to ride that part of the trail but ride the southern most part of the trail near the beach which is nice.

[shootingstar]

The homeless did have a little camp on riverbank in the park by the MUP. This was near a lovely established neighbourhood with heritage homes, etc. So you can imagine what ruckus it raised. Somehow the encampment was disassembled and people where somewhere else.

There was a little MUP bridge constructed by our municipality..and concern was another for the route homeless to get into areas.  That MUP bridge now is well-used by cyclist, joggers and walkers all times of the day.  

This area is less than 15 min. away from a 10- storey building for the homeless run by a non-profit. It's been around for over a decade....and houses several hundred homeless people.  I have met the director for the facility. The location of the homeless, maybe a difference between northern winter cities and warmer climates:  it is literally dangerous for many homeless to want to hang outside for days in extremely cold winter-snowy temperatures. 

In downtown Vancouver there was a protest encampment in a park for several years...which is even more possible because of Vancouver's milder winters compared to Calgary and Toronto.  It was noticeable to me when I moved from Toronto to Vancouver.  And also visiting Hawaii ...as a tourist.  Perhaps it's "easier" to be homeless in warmer parts of the world.

In downtown Vancouver, the some homeless sleep in their old car, parked on the street in front glittering expensive highrise condo buildings.  We see the odd car, same one all the time, in the morning.  And Vancouver's one of Canada's most expensive place to live, housing-wise.

And yup by signed/painted bike routes.  

The issue of linking crime to just the homeless is narrow distractor from overall benefits of MUPs that are paved with night lights.

 

[shootingstar]

We really need to remember...sometimes those who are homeless may not have good relationships with their family. In our condo building, I went downstairs to our locker room to get my bike. I found a young teenager sleeping on a mattress in 1 storage locker that had not yet been filled with any possessions. I reported it to the condo board. One of the condo board members, politely told him to leave but didn't phone the police. Apparently the teenager seemed young and well-behaved / cooperative.

May our teenagers not want to run away from home when they are underage, etc.  (As a teenager, I  never wanted that...no matter how many arguments with parents. Maybe being in poor family taught me the value of a warm home, food and baths plus general cocoon of family acceptance , with at least siblings.)

[Page Turner]

..well, I went for a ride this evening and on my way back through the 'hood I already saw two colorfully printed "Save, Don't Pave" yard signs on a couple of lawns.

On my ride, I covered about 15 miles of the paved bike trail on the opposite side of the river, all of which runs past neighborhoods.  There are no homeless camped anywhere along it, because the park rangers tell them to go back down to the Almond Factory or Cal Expo at Brushy Lake.

 

I really hope this doesn't get as antagonistic and histrionic as the last big issue, the building out of McKinley Village in the land space across the levee. That got a lot of NIMBY's up in arms, and it didn't do much good. Unless you consider limiting the development to suburban residential only, no local business zoning a good thing.  Which I don't.  *sigh*

[JerrySTL ★]

I can't remember seeing any homeless on our trails. There have been a few crimes but mostly against the users of the trails such as muggings. On one trail there's emergency 911 poles up about every 3 miles.

[Page Turner]

 

The Two Rivers Trail runs adjacent to the American River and connects Jibboom Street and State Route 160 in the redeveloping northern reaches of downtown Sacramento. It provides a connection to the longer Sacramento River Parkway Trail at its western end. Scenic views of the American River await at every turn.

Eventually the trail will be extended farther east along the southern bank of the American River to California State University, Sacramento.

 

https://www.traillink.com/trail/two-rivers-trail/

[dinneR ★]

Looks pretty cool. I bet in the long run, it will be a big success. Typically projects like this are good for economic development. The process can be quite painful though and you hear a lot of nimby arguments.

They are working on some trail projects here. I'm looking forward to the completion. One ride I like to do is about a 55 miles loop. There is about one mile of highway with no shoulder or trail that is treacherous. A trail connector should be finished this year.

[donkpow]

We have the largest continuous paved bike trail system in the US. Just so you know.