Posted by: switch
The NATS gives an overview of what the DNV is starting to do.
https://www.dnv.org/sites/default/files/edocs/Natural-Areas-Trails-Strategy.pdf
Yeah that's the document that sorta started the most recent discussion.
Lots of buzzwords like "community engagement" and "shared stewardship" - none of that means anything to the average person. Show me a map. Show me what you're looking at doing, physically where it is, and include why and for who.
Posted by: Kenny
Posted by: switch
The NATS gives an overview of what the DNV is starting to do.
https://www.dnv.org/sites/default/files/edocs/Natural-Areas-Trails-Strategy.pdf
Yeah that's the document that sorta started the most recent discussion.
Lots of buzzwords like "community engagement" and "shared stewardship" - none of that means anything to the average person. Show me a map. Show me what you're looking at doing, physically where it is, and include why and for who.
If you missed the DNV Council meeting, its available in its full glory here
https://nsmba.ca/district-of-north-vancouver-natural-area-trails-strategy-update/
Caveat - viewer beware. ☺️
I agree with Kenny. There are a lot of buzz words, but very little concrete actions. Most of the short term actions are more plans. Here is the shortlisted list of actions for the next 2 years.
Short term actions identified for 2024-2026:
Most of those plans will take longer than 2 years to complete. Then if any actions are actually created in the subsequent plans, it will be another few years to implement. So actual movement on new sanctioned trails is 4+ years out...
Seems like a pretty solid theme for the District of North Vancouver... Plans to plan... I'm not sure if they are the best spend of our tax dollars.
I'd also say a big gap in the document is a process to develop new trails...
I've been trying to link the Draft CMHC RAMP, which is a much better planning document because it actually has a map that shows gaps in the network and how they are suggesting to fix them.
I can guarantee you there won't be any new trails. Maybe adoption of some unsanctioned ones but many of those are not in completely in DNV land. I'm actually happy the way things are now tbh. More management by bureaucrats isn't a good thing imo. Everyone has to do their part in maintaining trails or run the risk of losing them.
How about DNV Parks in 2023: Pay staff to build some new wood ramps and much needed rock work on Pangor. Ask the long standing permitted builder how and where to work and report back to him when its done.
This happened, Just not on the internet for everyone to see. I am grateful.
If you want to be in the loop, get yourself in the loop by volunteering time and effort.
Things are changing for the better.
Heckler that's awesome.
For anyone interested, the relevant council meeting video can be viewed here (couldn't get it to load via DNV site)
https://youtu.be/xjeyngA23-Y?si=6wWzz31CjeLkUi_L
There are comments from NSMBA in the beginning, then specific comments about the plan are bookmarked in the video description so easy to jump to.
Mayor Little's comments about the Darkside made no logical sense to me and conflict with NSMBAs comments - basically, make a plan, or it will continue to be the wild west. Went right over the Mayor's head, or he's being intentionally thick for other reasons. A lot of comments on how trails on that side won't work because they "exit onto private property". Rather than welcome solutions he just basically categorizes the whole area as not open for discussion. And that's after also stating himself that current enforcement measures also aren't working (towing people- again doesn't make sense, there's plenty of parking around and people riding Darkside aren't (or don't need to, anyways) park any differently. Kinda wierd.
I don't know how people work in politics. I'd literally stab myself in the face.
The amount of people coming out onto the "private property" (actual DS) is miniscule compared to the users coming out to Indian River Drive (Pauls) which isn't private. There is a problem with riders on IRR as many take the whole lane holding up vehicles which is going to cause issues. I don't see a bike lane there ever as there are huge trees right on the both sides of the road. Can DNV permanently close those trails? Not sure how you can close it long term.
If people keep the trails in good condition, there's less of a chance of them getting closed down. Fix up what you ride.
Yeah I was meaning to make that point as well - from what I can tell via geoweb, the main exits are on DNV land anyways so his comment is at best a little inaccurate.
And again, what would actually ensure the trail systems exit in appropriate locations would be some planning, not just ignoring it and trying to figure out better ways to tow or ticket people.
The issue of bike traffic on IRR with no shoulder either being a safety concern or bothersome for neighborhood residents is legit, but it's a totally solvable one. A connector either above or below IRR linking those exits to BP, or maybe even lower trails below IRR so you can get back down toward parkgate without burning a bunch of elevation on the road would be frickin awesome. Get people off the road, spread out trail users, lots of wins.
But apparently writing it all off as "private property" and generally untenable is the preferred approach. Just super wierd IMO.
Posted by: Kenny
Mayor Little's comments about the Darkside made no logical sense to me
It's politicking. He knows that the majority of the voters won't know any difference and he's aware that the majority of voters that this affects would prefer to see a reduction or elimination of mtb traffic in this area. Either that or it's willful ignorance and an issue that he just doesn't want to deal with so it's easier to blow it off.
Unfortunately it would be pretty easy to build a windy gravel path that parallels the road that would get riders off the road and solve a majority of the issues that people have. I guess the fear though is that this could potentially increase DS use and it would probably piss off some voters that money is being spent on those damn mtb'ers.
Majority of residents in that area (woodlands / sunshine) drive like idiots through the neighborhood as they exit the forest so I have zero sympathy for them having to slow down for a few bikers.
95% speed excessively down to the first stop sign at the bottom of the hill and I take great joy in reporting them all to the north van RCMP.
Posted by: syncro
Unfortunately it would be pretty easy to build a windy gravel path that parallels the road that would get riders off the road and solve a majority of the issues that people have. I guess the fear though is that this could potentially increase DS use and it would probably piss off some voters that money is being spent on those damn mtb'ers.
If you've seen the terrain, it's certainly not easy. So many creeks and undulations you would have to deal with and private property issues. The cost would be huge and riders would still be taking the road as it's easier.
Posted by: LoamtoHome
Posted by: syncro
Unfortunately it would be pretty easy to build a windy gravel path that parallels the road that would get riders off the road and solve a majority of the issues that people have. I guess the fear though is that this could potentially increase DS use and it would probably piss off some voters that money is being spent on those damn mtb'ers.
If you've seen the terrain, it's certainly not easy. So many creeks and undulations you would have to deal with and private property issues. The cost would be huge and riders would still be taking the road as it's easier.
Yeah, I've ridden through there more that a few times. There are a few tricky sections, but a 4ft wide gravel path wouldn't be too difficult imo. Private property wouldn't be an issue due to the boulevards - the property line doesn't run to the edge of the street. When you get down into Woodlands it would be more difficult and of course Sunshine would be a no-go, but like you said earlier the majority of bike traffic isn't down that far.
From the mailboxes up, putting one on the east side of IRD would not be a difficult undertaking. I have no expectation it would ever happen though as the DNV is not going to spend the cash on what would be such a low use project, but it's entirely possible. A little ribbon of singletrack could wind it's way through there too, but I don't see anyone making the effort to put in about 3km of relatively flat singletrack either.
Posted by: syncro
Posted by: LoamtoHome
Posted by: syncro
From the mailboxes up, putting one on the east side of IRD would not be a difficult undertaking. I have no expectation it would ever happen though as the DNV is not going to spend the cash on what would be such a low use project, but it's entirely possible. A little ribbon of singletrack could wind it's way through there too, but I don't see anyone making the effort to put in about 3km of relatively flat singletrack either.
From the mailboxes up should not be an issue.
That is all public road and is heavily used by other users of the forest as well. Parking in that area is at least equally due to hikers / tourists(?) taking the short cut to quarry rock & parking at the baden crossing or under the powerlines. I only ever park out there when I am hiking that zone.
I don't buy that people are parking out on sunshine. If they are they should get towed for sure; or their rims stolen by the locals.
Love the guy sleeping in the background during the Natural Areas Trails Strategy presentation.
Like something outta Parks n Rec :)
Forum jump:
