"This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 44 of 44
  1. #1
    sunnyside up
    Reputation: knobbyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,193

    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"

    "The existing trail system provides no mountain biking access. This plan proposes opening existing trails and developing new routes to provide 23 miles of trails for mountain biking. . . Of the 23 miles of trails, 3 miles will be open to mountain bikers and hikers only. The remaining mileage is on shared multiple use trails. These trails vary in width from 4 to 10 feet."

    The plan was approved by the Board of Supervisors in May, 2007.

    Name this plan, and the park it affects.

  2. #2
    aka baycat
    Reputation: Ryan G.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    8,478
    Mt. Tam

  3. #3
    Founder: Dirty3hirties
    Reputation: ddraewwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    2,023
    I heard that Skeggs would opening more terrain but 23 mi is a lot so I doubt it's that.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: TahoeBC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    6,098
    Castle Rock?

    Edit: I meant Sanborn, but was thinking Skyline to the Sea Trail

  5. #5
    190lbs of climber
    Reputation: Menso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,450
    Sanborn/Skyline
    ye' old trailblog: www.most-excellent-adventures.com THE BAY AREA... WHERE IF IT'S FUN, IT'S ILLEGAL

  6. #6
    fc
    fc is offline
    head minion Administrator
    Reputation: fc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1996
    Posts
    33,681
    They are connecting Fremont Older to the Pacific Ocean. All singletrack, night riding allowed .

    fc
    IPA will save America

  7. #7
    sunnyside up
    Reputation: knobbyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,193

    Ding ding ding!

    Quote Originally Posted by Menso
    Sanborn/Skyline
    We have a winner!

    I just thought I'd remind you all, that sometimes you do get new access. It takes time (in this case at least nine years to get the plan, and now another probably 8 or more to get all the trails opened), and a group of committed advocates.

    If you are one of the people thinking of going to the meeting tonight about Vargas Plateau, GO. You will be glad you did. People who get involved in advocacy can make a difference. People who don't, well, they don't.





  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Carl Hungus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,028
    Quote Originally Posted by knobbyknees
    We have a winner!

    I just thought I'd remind you all, that sometimes you do get new access. It takes time (in this case at least nine years to get the plan, and now another probably 8 or more to get all the trails opened), and a group of committed advocates.

    If you are one of the people thinking of going to the meeting tonight about Vargas Plateau, GO. You will be glad you did. People who get involved in advocacy can make a difference. People who don't, well, they don't.

    I'd like to extend a thank you for all the work you do. Seem like a pretty substansial amount of trails. Exciting stuff.

  9. #9
    Resident Curmudgeon
    Reputation: Buzz Cut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,565
    cool, Sanborn Skyline, another place to ride legal dirt less than 200 yards from my front door
    Warning: Consumption of alcohol may make you think the person on the barstool next to you is attractive

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,545
    So? When it would be open to MTB?
    I used to run tubes like you are, but then I got thorn in my wheel.

  11. #11
    Let's ride
    Reputation: rensho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    7,125
    It wasn't looking very open to bikes only a few months ago. Hopefully they got to work real quick, like.

    Yes, Patty, we do greatly appreciate all the work you put in for our local trails. Keep telling us how we can help.

  12. #12
    Groveland Trail Heads
    Reputation: scheckler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    1,897

    I'd leave

    Quote Originally Posted by francois
    They are connecting Fremont Older to the Pacific Ocean. All singletrack, night riding allowed .

    fc
    Santa Cruz for that
    My beat box is bumpin' and my rhymes are fresh...
    www.grovelandtrailheads.org

  13. #13
    sunnyside up
    Reputation: knobbyknees's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    1,193
    Quote Originally Posted by Stalk
    So? When it would be open to MTB?
    Depends. They have work to do to widen the ridge trail to that ginormous dimension of 4 feet. They tried recruiting mountain bikers for it on Nov. 3rd. I had a conflict and couldn't attend. Seems everyone else did too.

    I'll keep you all posted on when the next workday is. Hopefully we can get a good turnout. Maybe, say a "Critical Mass"??? Otherwise, we will have to wait for access until who knows when.

    Patty

  14. #14
    I'm disrespectful to dirt
    Reputation: JustJeff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    479
    There's a very nice and large lawn/picnic area in Sanborn. When there's the next trail building day, we'll have to set up an MTBR work and BBQ crew.

  15. #15
    diskus
    Guest
    I noticed this effort some time ago, its a major plus for area riders especially ones from Los Gatos like myself. A big round of applause. I hope the Sierra Azul \ Bear Creek planning efforts will be as successful.

    I actually rode Sanborn years ago. I honestly didnt know the trails were closed to bikes, no one said a word. I only realized years later it was wrong LOL

  16. #16
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,545
    Quote Originally Posted by JustJeff
    There's a very nice and large lawn/picnic area in Sanborn. When there's the next trail building day, we'll have to set up an MTBR work and BBQ crew.
    Keep in mind that you can legaly consume alcohol here
    I used to run tubes like you are, but then I got thorn in my wheel.

  17. #17
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Biking Brazilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,679
    Quote Originally Posted by scheckler
    Santa Cruz for that
    Stay in-county. Henry Coe for that!

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Biking Brazilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,679
    I've always wanted to ride Skyline/Sanborn, especially that trail that goes from Lake Ranch Reservoir to Black Road. They should open that one up ASAP since it's a huge fireroad and doesn't look like it needs much to get it ready for bikes.

    They should also talk to PG&E and open up the fireroad from the Lake Ranch Reservoir to Montevina, although there's a private driveway where it branches off from Montevina. I suppose they can get an easement similar to what's on Sheldon/Overlook now.

    It'd be nice to be able to get from LG to Saratoga Gap on a trail.

  19. #19
    M070R-M0U7H FR3NCHI3
    Reputation: Acadian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,584
    Quote Originally Posted by francois
    They are connecting Fremont Older to the Pacific Ocean. All singletrack, night riding allowed .

    fc
    no more sleeping for me...I'm riding around the clock...

    so no ETA as to when this trail will be open?

  20. #20
    Takw/agranofsalt
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,532
    Quote Originally Posted by knobbyknees
    Depends. They have work to do to widen the ridge trail to that ginormous dimension of 4 feet. They tried recruiting mountain bikers for it on Nov. 3rd. I had a conflict and couldn't attend. Seems everyone else did too.

    I'll keep you all posted on when the next workday is. Hopefully we can get a good turnout. Maybe, say a "Critical Mass"??? Otherwise, we will have to wait for access until who knows when.

    Patty
    Patty,

    I know a bunch of bikers that have volunteered in Demo that would be willing to help but haven't been aware of these new developments. Any way to spread the word to all of us? (I'll do my part )

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    They should also talk to PG&E and open up the fireroad from the Lake Ranch Reservoir to Montevina, although there's a private driveway where it branches off from Montevina. I suppose they can get an easement similar to what's on Sheldon/Overlook now.

    It'd be nice to be able to get from LG to Saratoga Gap on a trail.
    Neither PG&E nor the county parks owns the land that is the PG&E easement from Ranch Lake to Montevina Road. The park has a property in between but there are a dozen property owners on that trail. Ask me how I know. One of them called the Sheriff on me who was waiting for me at the bottom by Lake Ranch. Once you're on that trail, there is no way off of it so they got you.

    The Sheriff said I violated California Penal Code 602L and the park ranger said even he isn't allowed to be on that road. Nobody is except the homeowners and PG&E.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Biking Brazilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,679
    Quote Originally Posted by woodrock View Post
    Neither PG&E nor the county parks owns the land that is the PG&E easement from Ranch Lake to Montevina Road. The park has a property in between but there are a dozen property owners on that trail. Ask me how I know. One of them called the Sheriff on me who was waiting for me at the bottom by Lake Ranch. Once you're on that trail, there is no way off of it so they got you.

    The Sheriff said I violated California Penal Code 602L and the park ranger said even he isn't allowed to be on that road. Nobody is except the homeowners and PG&E.
    Do you live there? (Possibly not, as your brand-new-as-of-yesterday Strava account says you're from Houston, Texas. Your brand-new-as-of-yesterday MTBR account only says 'USA'.) Are you sheriff? PG&E employee? Pot grower?

    If none of the above, thanks for the PSA. We'll be more wary.

  23. #23
    rho
    rho is online now
    Life is strange
    Reputation: rho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,981
    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    Do you live there? (Possibly not, as your brand-new-as-of-yesterday Strava account says you're from Houston, Texas. Your brand-new-as-of-yesterday MTBR account only says 'USA'.) Are you sheriff? PG&E employee? Pot grower?

    If none of the above, thanks for the PSA. We'll be more wary.
    There has been some talk about the landowners around that area getting a bit more aggressive about their property boundaries for the past year...

  24. #24
    Over it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    Do you live there? (Possibly not, as your brand-new-as-of-yesterday Strava account says you're from Houston, Texas. Your brand-new-as-of-yesterday MTBR account only says 'USA'.) Are you sheriff? PG&E employee? Pot grower?
    Hey now. Let's be nice. He could just be a zombie thread archaeologist!



    (but the fact that his bike is listed as a generic Specialized does raise suspicion)
    Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice--pull down your pants and slide on the ice.

  25. #25
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Biking Brazilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,679
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtvert View Post
    Hey now. Let's be nice. He could just be a zombie thread archaeologist!

    (but the fact that his bike is listed as a generic Specialized does raise suspicion)
    He's on a mission: Also posted on a few zombie Strava rides that touched this segment. Gotta be more going on than just a concerned fellow rider giving us all a heads up.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    Do you live there?
    I don't see why where I live matters as that is a personal question completely unrelated to the information I posted, but, yes I do live in that area. Why do you ask where I happen to live?

    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    (Possibly not, as your brand-new-as-of-yesterday Strava account says you're from Houston, Texas. Your brand-new-as-of-yesterday MTBR account only says 'USA'.) Are you sheriff? PG&E employee? Pot grower?
    That's interesting as I am currently finishing up my vacation travel, and I am in Texas (although not Houston) but again, I don't see why my personal life matters so much to you as a topic for this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    If none of the above, thanks for the PSA. We'll be more wary.
    I mainly ride the Castle Rock Ridge area but I wanted to see if I could use that new extension of the John Nicholas Trail down that goes up to Skyline where it used to only connect to Black Road before, about 3.5 miles up from where Black Road meets Montevina Road along the Lexington Reservoir spur.

    Quote Originally Posted by rho View Post
    There has been some talk about the landowners around that area getting a bit more aggressive about their property boundaries for the past year...
    The guy had a shovel in his arms because he was working on the road. I thought he was just a worker but he didn't look like what typical landscapers look like (he was pretty fat for one thing). He was gruff but he didn't threaten me physically so I just went right by him without stopping. I don't actually know that he called the cops on me though but you should just be forewarned.

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtvert View Post
    Hey now. Let's be nice. He could just be a zombie thread archaeologist!
    I'm not sure if that's on topic, but I will say that I found this thread by reading up on all the rides in the area.

    Quote Originally Posted by dirtvert View Post
    (but the fact that his bike is listed as a generic Specialized does raise suspicion)
    It's a Specialized RockHopper which I picked up in Los Gatos (it was made in the area). However, I still don't see why what bike I ride has any merit on the topic of this conversation though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    He's on a mission: Also posted on a few zombie Strava rides that touched this segment. Gotta be more going on than just a concerned fellow rider giving us all a heads up.
    Maybe you know something I don't know because you're implying that the ride is legal and everyone that talked to me was pretty explicit that the ride is not legal.

    Maybe you or someone should check out what I said and let others know since you don't seem to believe me? That's fine by me. If I'm wrong, then that opens up a good ride.

    But if I'm right, then you should just know what you're doing when you're doing it.

    I suspect once you can get past the landowners you're probably ok once you get onto the PG&E service road; but there are houses above that on El Sereno and on the parallel lower slopes of Castle Rock Ridge along Gist Road that can see you so all they have to do is call the sheriff and they'll be waiting for you at the bottom since there are no turnoffs.

  27. #27
    190lbs of climber
    Reputation: Menso's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,450
    Quote Originally Posted by woodrock View Post
    I suspect once you can get past the landowners you're probably ok once you get onto the PG&E service road; but there are houses above that on El Sereno and on the parallel lower slopes of Castle Rock Ridge along Gist Road that can see you so all they have to do is call the sheriff and they'll be waiting for you at the bottom since there are no turnoffs.
    Good answers. I think we all thought you were a land owner trying to scare people off, but now I'm pretty sure you're a mountain biker like the rest of us and just doing some research as to why you got ticketed. Thanks for the info!
    ye' old trailblog: www.most-excellent-adventures.com THE BAY AREA... WHERE IF IT'S FUN, IT'S ILLEGAL

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by Menso View Post
    Good answers. I think we all thought you were a land owner trying to scare people off, but now I'm pretty sure you're a mountain biker like the rest of us and just doing some research as to why you got ticketed. Thanks for the info!
    Moe Ped and I are on another thread where someone mentioned the ride didn't look legal but wanted to be sure over here:
    Thread: los gatos trail question
    http://forums.mtbr.com/california-no...on-197500.html

    Moe Ped pulled up some parcel maps, where he confirmed there are a dozen private properties.
    I can confirm there are at least a score of no trespassing signs.
    Plus there are signs at the entrance to Montevina/Sherrys Way and at the entrance/exit to the park at the bottom.

    But signs don't make land private.
    The ownership makes it private.

    Moe asked for someone to Sherlock this so I will call the county today if I can find their real estate office phone number. Nobody else is going to be able to answer the question I don't think.

  29. #29
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    2
    How about posting a picture of the ticket you received . I would like to see a violation California Penal Code 602L citation. Feel free to block out your personal information.

  30. #30
    YOUREGO ISNOT YOURAMIGO
    Reputation: GoGoGordo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by mr. montevina View Post
    How about posting a picture of the ticket you received . I would like to see a violation California Penal Code 602L citation. Feel free to block out your personal information.
    Hey slacker, Google is your friend.
    Sheesh, first post?
    Now stay off my property!!

    https://www.google.com/search?client...UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Biking Brazilian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    1,679
    Here is your opening line on a comment on a 3-year-old ride on Strava:

    This ride documents & proposes illegal activities.
    Maybe consider your diction before unleashing your multi-website attack? As others have implied, seems to be more going on here than a simple altruistic PSA to protect ourselves from ourselves.

  32. #32
    mtbr member
    Reputation: aliikane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    1,410
    It makes sense to just build more trails on existing land rather than trying to acquire new land that is so scare in the Bay Area. I know a lot of parks in the Bay Area that have a ton of excess land that new trails could be built in existing parks.

    It is very cool that they are expanding Calero, Rancho de Oro, and Almaden trail systems to link all the parks. It would be very cool to open up new trails at Santa Teresa as there is a lot of land in that park that I see could be possible great mountain bike trails. Haha.

    The next obvious level would have directional trails and ratings for trails. Haha.

  33. #33
    Over it
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    3,792
    Quote Originally Posted by Biking Brazilian View Post
    Here is your opening line on a comment on a 3-year-old ride on Strava:



    Maybe consider your diction before unleashing your multi-website attack? As others have implied, seems to be more going on here than a simple altruistic PSA to protect ourselves from ourselves.
    C'mon. He had a perfectly normal choice of words.



    (for a narc)

    Btw, when's the last time you heard of a sheriff and/or ranger making somebody go retrieve an ID before they'd release the perp? (never)

    And after all of that they let him off without a ticket?! Also, does it seem plausible that while he's DROPPING the PG&E road (maybe a mile) a homeowner calls the sheriff--and the sheriff--and a ranger--magically appear by the time he reached the bottom? I'm pretty sure this guy is just one of the disgruntled property owners trying to scare mtbers out of the area (he doesn't realize what a small percentage of riders are on Mtbr!). Anyway, that's my rainy-week conspiracy theory! Prove me wrong and I'll gladly eat crow.

    Edit: And then he says this: "I notified the park and I wrote up a thread just now warning other bikers." Bikers? I don't wear leather!
    Last edited by dirtvert; 01-12-2017 at 09:31 PM.
    Ladies and gentlemen, take my advice--pull down your pants and slide on the ice.

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,071
    Diction. That is a perfectly cromulant word.
    94 Specialized Rockhopper

  35. #35
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    Sorry for my "diction" as the only thing that matters is figuring out what is, as what I think doesn't really matter one bit, so I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings by whatever choice of words I used in a post.

    I also apologize that I haven't responded sooner but I was traveling, and then I arrived to a house with no power due to the storm, and then, on Highway 17, they have the southbound lanes blocked due to a mudslide at Poet's Canyon (or is that one Wildcat Canyon, just south of the Cats but north of Trout Creek Canyon?).

    We're doing a lot to flesh this out on the other thread, where we've talked with the senior park ranger at Sanborn and the land rights managers at PG&E and with the real estate office of the county parks. We have the names and addresses of the affected parcels for the new bike trail up to the Montevina Connector Trail.

    Moe Ped even talked to "Greg the trails guy at SCCParks" so there's no sense in repeating that information here unless new information comes up here.

    I'll check this thread periodically but the most up-to-date information is here.
    Thread: los gatos trail question
    http://forums.mtbr.com/california-no...on-197500.html

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    This morning I rode up from Saratoga to Sanborn Road where Highway 9 was closed off:
    https://i.cubeupload.com/zXWYfj.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-zxwyfj.jpg

    They have the bridge across the creek that empties from Lake Ranch Reservoir closed off but they allow you to ride up Sanborn Road:
    https://i.cubeupload.com/WmkAjC.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-wmkajc.jpg

    Sanborn Road itself was closed but they let me ride anyway:
    https://i.cubeupload.com/YK2109.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-yk2109.jpg

    There was a paper sign at 8am saying that the John Nicholas trail was closed ABOVE Lake Ranch:
    https://i.cubeupload.com/xRELiN.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-xrelin.jpg

    However, BELOW Lake Ranch, there was a huge landslide that wasn't there just a day or two ago, and, in fact, it was still moving!
    https://i.cubeupload.com/7NdBRr.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-7ndbrr.jpg

    I notified the park and I wrote up a thread just now warning other bikers.
    Thread: Landslide completely closes Los Gatos Lake Ranch Trail Sanborn Park 8am 1/12/2017
    https://forums.mtbr.com/california-n...a-1032178.html

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtvert View Post
    Also, does it seem plausible that while he's DROPPING the PG&E road (maybe a mile) a homeowner calls the sheriff--and the sheriff--and a ranger--magically appear by the time he reached the bottom? I'm pretty sure this guy is just one of the disgruntled property owners trying to scare mtbers out of the area (he doesn't realize what a small percentage of riders are on Mtbr!). Anyway, that's my rainy-week conspiracy theory! Prove me wrong and I'll gladly eat crow.
    I'm not sure one way or the other about your theory but the PG&E trail gate to gate is about 2.5 miles with 450 feet of climbing from Sherry's. You drop down a long way quickly but then it's mostly climbing to get to the gate at the other end. Most people are going to take at least 20 minutes.

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    228
    Bummer, so much for a JN ride tomorrow at lunch, thanks for the heads up!

    Anyway, the 2007 Sanborn Park Plan is unbelievable! Imagine, a trail from Lake Ranch to Lexington - all dirt down thru the canyon. There is still a remnant today of something off at the south dam picnic bench, but it is too steep for a bike and barely a deer trail. Anybody know this history or plan? Was it ever a hiking trail or just exploratory trail building attempt that started out as the original Faultline trail? The 2015 plan is far less ambitious ,but it still shows a different Faultline trail as part of the plan. Ironically, this trail looks to use much of the PG&E road in question and be planned to go up near the Sherry/PG&E road intersection, but too fuzzy to tell on the map. https://www.sccgov.org/sites/parks/P...ust18_2015.pdf

    Then another proposed trail shown in the old plan connected MidPen to SCC between Bohlman Road and Montevena that seems to be part of the BA Ridge trail. It descended due west and basically right to Lake Ranch. A remnant road across these properties can be seen on google maps that would make this pretty easy peasy and all connected between MidPen and SCCP owned lands.

    And finally the development of Stewart Ridge Park on Bohlmann Road with a connection from Aquinas Trail and then either over to Sanborn or back down to Saratoga thru Via Montalvo. Unbelievably half of this is still on the 2015 plan, yea!

    Back in the original 1995 and then thru 2008sih there was clearly somebody on board who understood loops vs a dreaded dead ends that MidPen currently believes is acceptable. Here is a link to the current plan.
    https://www.sccgov.org/sites/parks/P.../STMP-Ch3B.pdf
    But then something happened, but what?

    My love/hate weekend loop is up past Lexington, over to Black Rd and up pavement to 35, North on pavement to Castlerock, back south on dirt along Skyline trail to JN, north at the lake to Sanborn HQ dirt, down pavement to Hwy 9, then down pavement to Saratoga and back home to LG. A grand total of maybe about 25 miles and only 5 or 6 on dirt. All this, just to make it a loop and not grind on FR the whole way (Kennedy).

    Please speak up if you have any info (past or current) on this area, this is my backyard and I should know this stuff....need to get more edjumakated. Also need to get more involved with SCC Parks. I may have a chance to see some of the trails before I die.

  39. #39
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by dirtvert View Post
    I'm pretty sure this guy is just one of the disgruntled property owners trying to scare mtbers out of the area (he doesn't realize what a small percentage of riders are on Mtbr!). Anyway, that's my rainy-week conspiracy theory! Prove me wrong and I'll gladly eat crow.
    Actually, I'm a disgruntled dog who is upset that I'm not allowed on the PG&E service road with my best friend, the horse (at least according to all the park signs on the park portion of that PG&E service road).
    https://i.cubeupload.com/u6wgF1.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-u6wgf1.jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Bummer, so much for a JN ride tomorrow at lunch, thanks for the heads up!
    You're quite welcome. I wish others would have told me, but I seem to be the first person to see the landslide. Good thing it happened before I got there!

    I guess it should have been a clue to me that Sanborn Road was marked closed, and that when I passed Walden West, the creek had overflowed over the road onto Sanborn Road.
    https://i.cubeupload.com/CNgd1v.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-cngd1v.jpg

    This actually was only an overflow of that creek, as the creek is on the other side of Sanborn Road, so that shows you how much water was running down the hill off of Sanborn Park:
    https://i.cubeupload.com/agigO3.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-agigo3.jpg

    Another ominous sign was that the park was closed long after it is normally open.
    https://i.cubeupload.com/YEOfpX.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-yeofpx.jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Anyway, the 2007 Sanborn Park Plan is unbelievable! Imagine, a trail from Lake Ranch to Lexington - all dirt down thru the canyon. There is still a remnant today of something off at the south dam picnic bench, but it is too steep for a bike and barely a deer trail. Anybody know this history or plan?
    I know exactly what you're talking about at the park bench east side of the Lyndon Creek where there seems to be the beginning of a trail, but when you take it, it peters out with a few bits of toilet paper to give you an idea of what most of the traffic is mostly due to.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Was it ever a hiking trail or just exploratory trail building attempt that started out as the original Faultline trail?
    I doubt that this is a bona fide trail, because it is normal to see such stuff at populated areas such as at that park bench. Adult to adult, two things happen at places like that, both of which involve genitalia but only one of which doesn't involved sex. Be that as it may, that whole Lyndon Canyon is right in the middle of the San Andreas Fault Line as You seem to be aware of.

    On the other end, today, I snapped these pictures of the spillway from that side of Lexington Reservoir into the other side;
    https://i.cubeupload.com/TrhWGm.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-trhwgm.jpg

    Normally that spillway is almost empty where you cross to the other side of the highway, but then again, even the San Jose Water Company elevated pipes that come from Lake Ranch are almost under water today.
    https://i.cubeupload.com/pxXpAF.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-pxxpaf.jpg

    Even the Alma Bridge Road path over to the dam is almost at the water level now:
    https://i.cubeupload.com/6Od1Sx.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-6od1sx.jpg

    We've been keeping watch over the dam which recently spilled over:
    https://i.cubeupload.com/f2kQM1.jpg
    "This plan opens 23 miles of trails for mountain biking"-f2kqm1.jpg

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    The 2015 plan is far less ambitious ,but it still shows a different Faultline trail as part of the plan. Ironically, this trail looks to use much of the PG&E road in question and be planned to go up near the Sherry/PG&E road intersection, but too fuzzy to tell on the map. https://www.sccgov.org/sites/parks/P...ust18_2015.pdf
    I have been researching this exact topic where there seem to be only two planned trails on the Juan Bautista plan, neither of which is funded, and both of which require purchase of land or easements.

    The first goes up from INSIDE the park off the PG&E service road up to about half way between where the gates currently are between Bohlman and Montevina on the Montevina Connector Road to the Aquinas Trail. That one only requires purchase, as far as I can tell from talking to the county this week, of two properties or easements through those two properties.

    The second trail is much nicer, and I've been on it, although it's nothing more than a game trail at the moment. It starts at Sycamore Farms almost at Lexington Reservoir, and then it winds its way up the mountain until it crosses Montevina Road and then goes up and over that first ridge, and then down into the Trout Creek Canyon below the power lines and then back up the other side of the canyon exactly at where the PG&E power line road picks up on the mountain and then it junctions with the Vista Trail (I think that's the name) that hits the Aquinas Trail which then goes down to Sheldon and Overlook into Los Gatos proper.

    I've hiked that trail, but I'm probably the only one on the planet who has done that, but I'd love to get to know others who have. You can ride only a small portion of that trail when it crosses Montevina Road, for about a quarter mile of a very pretty bulldozed flat, but it drops steeply from there such that it's impossible any way except on foot. If you ever want to hike it with me, let me know but it's an arduous hike with lots of poison oak and it goes up the inner ridge of the mountain, and then down, and then back up the outside ridge, and then down that into the town. Took me about 5 hours last time I tried it and I'm a damn good hiker.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Then another proposed trail shown in the old plan connected MidPen to SCC between Bohlman Road and Montevena that seems to be part of the BA Ridge trail. It descended due west and basically right to Lake Ranch. A remnant road across these properties can be seen on google maps that would make this pretty easy peasy and all connected between MidPen and SCCP owned lands.
    That's the one trail of the two that are planned, but not funded, and which require either purchase of property or easements. Seems to me they could get around both those requirements simply by routing the trail backward (north) and then east, but they want to go direct I guess, using the existing trails.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    And finally the development of Stewart Ridge Park on Bohlmann Road with a connection from Aquinas Trail and then either over to Sanborn or back down to Saratoga thru Via Montalvo. Unbelievably half of this is still on the 2015 plan, yea!
    That one I'm not familiar with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Please speak up if you have any info (past or current) on this area, this is my backyard and I should know this stuff....need to get more edjumakated. Also need to get more involved with SCC Parks. I may have a chance to see some of the trails before I die.
    It's my backyard also in that I cross both the Lyndon Canyon and the Trout Creek Canyon, up to Poet's Canyon at the south end and the tip of El Sereno down to Quito Road along the creek.

    Mostly I hike since there are few trails, but sometimes I bike but that requires existing trails.
    Most of this land isn't marked so you never know whose property it is under your wheels or feet.

  41. #41
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    At dawn today, I rode up highway 9 to Sanborn to look at the landslide at Lake Ranch Trail:


    I then tried to get to the other side at Lake Ranch by riding up Ambrose which hit McGill where I was looking for the connector down to the PG&E trail on the other side of that landslide on Lake Ranch Trail.


    I must have missed the turnoff point down to the PG&E trail because I ended up on Bohlman instead.


    But I noticed these signs on McGill which, I guess, means that McGill is yet another trail that is off limits to us?


    Or do we have the permission they talk about in the signs?

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    228
    The biker/hiker trail sign looks to be new, haven't seen it myself yet. Anyway, believe it or not, you almost posted a picture of the access road you missed down to PG&E/Lake Ranch. It is the shot with the half made gate and the spot in question is about 100 yards downhill. Unfortunately, I think they are slowly building an automatic gate out there and this will make the sign a bit more real going forward.

    As for the proposed connection down from Aquinas to Lake Ranch, the trail is mostly there except at the very top. You will not have to trespass...the lands are connected, albeit at two opposing corners of the land parcels. The private road, McGill again, crosses the MidPen lands, not visa versa, so it must be a shared easement. The bad news is that the upper trail would be pretty steep for MidPen to ever pull it off based on their trail guidelines so that upper end may never happen. However a little known MidPen factoid is that hikers are not required to stay on trail so hike away. I am not immune to PO nor ticks so I try to stay out of the thick chaparral.

    I myself live on a private road and legal counsel confirmed that if I do not make a documented concerted, i.e., stop offenders and tell them, have signs etc, effort to keep people of my road/driveway (which I don't want to do), I am fully liable for any law suit (accident, wipeout, dog etc). It is just the way liability works; like someone slipping on your front porch.
    Last year a dirt bag roadie cussed me out because my dog barked at him (as he was in my driveway) and then later called the pound to report a 'dangerous' dog. I kindly told the guy that he was on my property and the dog does not like people racing thru in her backyard. Oddly, it was then his buddy that starting cussing me out after hiding from around a corner. I thought nothing of until the next day a Pound Officer called and wanted me to fence in the dog or I would be fined for having a, "loose and dangerous dog." I said the road has no public access on either end of the property and he said I should gate the road. In either case I am sure my dog is now officially registered cause of this ass hat. People ride, run and walk my driveway every day and I don't want to put up a gate. Last week, WAYS put a bunch of cars on my road due the Hwy 17 issues and sure enough a guy busted over my rock wall and into a tree as multiple cars were trying to get by each other. Long story short, I now have busted rock wall and I am liable.

  43. #43
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    208
    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    The biker/hiker trail sign looks to be new, haven't seen it myself yet.
    In another thread where the mods deleted many of the maps and posts, we found out after much research and talking to the park and to PG&E and to the county that by recently opening up Sanborn to cyclists, a few cyclists started causing problems thinking they owned the place.

    So, the landowners may have put up those signs only recently. Same thing is happening on the PG&E trail it seems, where someone called the sheriff on me so I can vouch for that myself as a first-hand experience (where my pictures of the no-trespassing signs and locked gates proving what I say were deleted by the mods).

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Anyway, believe it or not, you almost posted a picture of the access road you missed down to PG&E/Lake Ranch. It is the shot with the half made gate and the spot in question is about 100 yards downhill. Unfortunately, I think they are slowly building an automatic gate out there and this will make the sign a bit more real going forward.
    Thank you for the factual advice. We both need to be careful here because the mods deleted all the facts in that other thread, so I won't be posting any more extremely detailed pictures and maps (which took me a long time and which are now just gone, poof!).

    Suffice to say that the other thread revealed that the McGill cutoff to the PG&E service road is off limits to the public and we'll leave it at that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    As for the proposed connection down from Aquinas to Lake Ranch, the trail is mostly there except at the very top. You will not have to trespass...the lands are connected, albeit at two opposing corners of the land parcels.
    From that other thread, where the confirmation to Moe Ped from the parks officials and all the parcel maps that Moe Ped posted were deleted by the mods, this is not a correct fact it seems.

    The correct fact is that there are two private parcels that the county is in negotiation with owners which are required for that connector. The other thread detailed exactly where those parcels are and where the proposed trail is with respect to those parcels and Open Space at the top - but all those parcel maps and annotated google maps are deleted by the mods today so, again, just take it as a fact that the proposed connector crosses private property, which is a fact that I can't show with pictures because they'll just get deleted if I do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    The private road, McGill again, crosses the MidPen lands, not visa versa, so it must be a shared easement.
    It's not.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    The bad news is that the upper trail would be pretty steep for MidPen to ever pull it off based on their trail guidelines so that upper end may never happen. However a little known MidPen factoid is that hikers are not required to stay on trail so hike away. I am not immune to PO nor ticks so I try to stay out of the thick chaparral.
    I am an expert on urushiol (poison oak) so much that I know everything about it (I was writing a book about it but other things got in the way), and I removed two ticks just this week (mostly I think from my habit of lying down to take short breaks on long rides). So if you need any advice on either, I'm pretty good at the chemistry, immunology, and prevention (where I stick to facts and I don't do old wives tales since I'm a scientist and engineer by trade).

    The one fact I'd like you to flesh out is your statement that MidPen allows hikers off trail. Are you sure of that? I had a guy in an Open Space meeting about allowing dogs on the trail say that everyone, including hikers, has to stay on the trail. I didn't doublecheck what he said though.

    Are you sure hikers don't have to stay on the trails in the related Open Space lands at the top of El Sereno?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    I myself live on a private road and legal counsel confirmed that if I do not make a documented concerted, i.e., stop offenders and tell them, have signs etc, effort to keep people of my road/driveway (which I don't want to do), I am fully liable for any law suit (accident, wipeout, dog etc). It is just the way liability works; like someone slipping on your front porch.
    I did a lot of research after the sheriff talked to me sternly, and I've learned what you say is very true in that, in the US anyway, property law is such that you need to protect your property or someone will glady take it away from you for free.

    As one example, I was once riding down the Aquinas Trail onto Sheldon when I got into a conversation with a property owner at that culdesac (the property owner lived on the branch off that culdesac who uses it to make a right turn and I happened to be stopped in the middle of the culdesac, not realizing they use it to make a sharp right as they come up Sheldon).

    The owner said everyone on Sheldon was upset at the Open Space for not holding up their side of the bargain to restrain cyclists (and cagers who park in the culdesac). She said the community was strong armed into agreeing to the request to hand off their property rights, for free, to the community for the better good of the community.

    So it appears that the universally bad experience at Sheldon is a lesson to be learned from the Ambrose/McGill, PG&E service road, Sherry's Way, and Sanborn Road property owners.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Last year a dirt bag roadie cussed me out because my dog barked at him (as he was in my driveway) and then later called the pound to report a 'dangerous' dog. I kindly told the guy that he was on my property and the dog does not like people racing thru in her backyard. Oddly, it was then his buddy that starting cussing me out after hiding from around a corner. I thought nothing of until the next day a Pound Officer called and wanted me to fence in the dog or I would be fined for having a, "loose and dangerous dog."
    I know of a neighbor with a very similar experience with two older cyclists.
    If I can, I will PM a photo of each one of them to you, to see if they are the same two cyclists who told my neighbor she could "take her private property and shove it up her ..."

    It's cyclist like those two who think they can roughshod over property rights which are the problem for the rest of the community.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    I said the road has no public access on either end of the property and he said I should gate the road. In either case I am sure my dog is now officially registered cause of this ass hat. People ride, run and walk my driveway every day and I don't want to put up a gate.
    I have been researching this a lot so here's what I've learned.
    Note to MOD. These are facts. Please don't delete my hard efforts just because the facts aren't pretty. I won't post pictures or maps. Just facts.


    1. The fundamentals of US "common law" are that you have to protect your property or you lose rights to your own property (e.g., prescriptive easements).
    2. Private property is private property, with or without signs.
    3. California trespassing levels go from infraction all the way to felony.
    4. If you want to prosecute someone for trespassing, the DA will have a burden of proof to meet.
    5. Some of that burden of proof "can be" trailcams, witness reports, the offender's own words, etc., but also simply putting up appropriate visible signs has long been established as meeting the conditions for the burden of proof.
    6. If your burden of proof is going to be the signs, then California Penal Code (mostly section L) is what you will mostly deal with, since that section of the code explains what signs constitute satisfactory proof sufficient for a successful prosecution.
    7. It may take more than one infraction to satisfy a DA that the burden of proof has been met, so, as a property owner, you would probably wish to warn trespassers that they are trespassing (if they persist after being warned, their infraction can rise from an infraction to a misdemeanor to aggravated trespass and even to a felony (under certain conditions).
    8. While the burden of proof can be met in a variety of ways, the simplest way is stated in the statute where it says you only need to catch people trespassing after you have put up appropriate signs to inform people that they are trespassing.
    9. Specifically for that method of proof, the signs on a road or trail simply have to be at the beginning and end of the property and at least one every third of a mile.
    10. California defines a specific wording for the "perfect" sign, but many common signs (like "keep out" and "no trespassing) are acceptable alternatives for this level of proof.
    11. For areas that are not obvious trails or roads, you have to put the signs along the perimeter, at the same distances.
    12. With or without signs, trespass is trespass, and liability is liability, but, in general, if you don't notify or enforce your property rights, you can lose them (e.g., by prescriptive easement) and you are always at risk that anyone on your property can sue you for anything at any time no matter what they are doing on your property.


    Quote Originally Posted by Tommybees View Post
    Last week, WAYS put a bunch of cars on my road due the Hwy 17 issues and sure enough a guy busted over my rock wall and into a tree as multiple cars were trying to get by each other. Long story short, I now have busted rock wall and I am liable.
    I am sorry for that as I completely know how desperate people were just a few days ago where 17 south was closed (or barely open) just south of The Cats at the chicken wire after the backstop.

    What made that 17 closure worse was that Highway 9 was closed at Sanborn Road, and even if people figured out that Redwood Gulch allowed one to bypass the Highway 9 closure, they found out that Black and Gist were blocked, and then they found out that Skyline didn't work either and that Bear Creek Road was blocked, so they ended up in Felton, and then returned by Highway 17 northbound!

    Given that the normal 1 hour commute took 5 to 7 hours for everyone involved, I can see how they would climb over your rock wall in sheer desperation. I'm in Saratoga so I was mostly unaffected, but all my friends up by Summit were doomed. Many spent the night in the valley since the power was out in a lot of places anyway, so, there was just a dark home to go back to.

    So, without detailed maps and explicit pictures, which the mods deleted, we need to just stick to the most basic facts, which are pretty clear even with the deleted posts now all gone.

    1. The John Nicholas trail from Lake Ranch to Black Road is open to cyclists, equestrians, and hikers; but it was closed to all earlier this week due to a washout in one of the canyon curves

    2. The new John Nicholas trail from Skyline to Lake Ranch is open to cyclists, equestrians, and hikers.

    3. The Ambrose/McGill to Bohlman route except perhaps at the very bottom where the road weaves in and out of park property, is almost completely off limits to the public, with multiple gates, one of which, about in the middle, is permanently locked.

    4. The McGill to PG&E cutoff is in private property at the top where McGill and the cutoff meet. At the bottom at the large transmission line pole, it's park property, which is clearly marked by the park as open only to hikers and not to dogs, horses, or cyclists.

    5. The PG&E service road within the park has three signs showing that the section of the service road that is on park property is only open to hikers but not to dogs, horses, or cyclists. The park property boundary is clearly marked at a padlocked gate, where one side says entering park boundary while the other side says leaving park boundary.

    Since this park boundary is so critical for our discussion, we should note that on the same poles that have the park signs, there are also "no trespassing" and "keep out" signs on the side looking toward the private property which Greg Bringelson (SCC Trails Coordinator) confirmed are not in error.

    6. The PG&E service road outside the park is signed by a few dozen signs saying "private property" and "keep out" and "no trespassing" for the entire length that it travels through exactly one dozen private property parcels.

    7. The Sherry's Way road (i.e., the pavement at the top) is completely in private property, with two gates, one of which is permanently locked, and multiple "private road", "no trespassing", "keep out", and "private property" signs at both ends of this paved road.

    8. The Lake Ranch Trail from Sanborn Road to Lake Ranch is currently obliterated about half way from the road and the lake; therefore it is closed to the public (but is normally open to cyclists and hikers but not equestrians).

    Those are the facts we painstakingly determined in the course of investigating many leads as described previously in this thread.

    Facts such as these should not hurt the cycling community; they should help cyclists be informed responsible members of the overall community.
    Last edited by woodrock; 01-14-2017 at 05:46 PM.

  44. #44
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    228
    [QUOTE=woodrock;12996914]In another thread where the mods deleted many of the maps and posts, we found out after much research and talking to the park and to PG&E and to the county that by recently opening up Sanborn to cyclists, a few cyclists started causing problems thinking they owned the place.

    So, the landowners may have put up those signs only recently. Same thing is happening on the PG&E trail it seems, where someone called the sheriff on me so I can vouch for that myself as a first-hand experience (where my pictures of the no-trespassing signs and locked gates proving what I say were deleted by the mods).

    All good points and is the same reason why MTBR has to delete these details ....or they become liable. Wouldnt it be great if MTBR had a an active area of current status....MOD's how about being part of the solution?


    The correct fact is that there are two private parcels that the county is in negotiation with owners which are required for that connector. The other thread detailed exactly where those parcels are and where the proposed trail is with respect to those parcels and Open Space at the top - but all those parcel maps and annotated google maps are deleted by the mods today so, again, just take it as a fact that the proposed connector crosses private property, which is a fact that I can't show with pictures because they'll just get deleted if I do.

    Bummer - but I guess facts and opinions are at the discretion of the Mod's. We must have agreed to something when we signed up . Just kidding and not complaining.



    I am an expert on urushiol (poison oak) so much that I know everything about it (I was writing a book about it but other things got in the way), and I removed two ticks just this week (mostly I think from my habit of lying down to take short breaks on long rides). So if you need any advice on either, I'm pretty good at the chemistry, immunology, and prevention (where I stick to facts and I don't do old wives tales since I'm a scientist and engineer by trade).

    That is very cool, I feel like I am an expert as well but for the wrong reasons, having got is so many times. Maybe start a thread on this topic, might be pretty popular in a few months, especially this next year. My regiment is a warm shower with Dawn and gentle scrubbing 2x per day for 3 days with new drying towels each time.

    The one fact I'd like you to flesh out is your statement that MidPen allows hikers off trail. Are you sure of that? I had a guy in an Open Space meeting about allowing dogs on the trail say that everyone, including hikers, has to stay on the trail. I didn't doublecheck what he said though.

    Are you sure hikers don't have to stay on the trails in the related Open Space lands at the top of El Sereno?
    Here are the R&O's copied from MidPen
    Rules for bikes:
    502.1
    Closed Areas. No person shall possess or operate a bicycle, unicycle or
    similar device on District Lands except on trails or roadways designated by the District for such use.

    Here is the general ordinance
    805.7
    Off Trail Use. No person shall enter or remain in an area off of a designated trail, when they are on District Lands in an area or preserve that has been designated or signed to prohibit off trail use. Violation of this sub-section is punishable as a misdemeanor.

    I was also told directly by park staff that off trail hiking was actually encouraged and part of the original mission statements. The way I interpret the text is that bikes can only travel on areas designated for bikes (everything is 'closed) and for foot traffic it is the opposite, unless there is a message that an area is closed it is open for off trail use.


    So it appears that the universally bad experience at Sheldon is a lesson to be learned from the Ambrose/McGill, PG&E service road, Sherry's Way, and Sanborn Road property owners.

    Good citizens do not result in laws or lawsuits, it is the bad apples that cause loss of rights, loss of access etc. Midpen and all public agencies are hosed cause they cannot control the bad guys, but what does happen is that they get blamed for everything from both sides and just lock up to become ineffective and stop further progress. I don't condone Midpen's personality, as they have some misguided assumptions of recreation, but would certainly not want to be in their shoes.

    There are a lot of good cyclist out there that just want to pass thru without harm, impact or notice. For me it is about 2x per year that a jerk comes thru and makes me think of adding the gate on my road, but the rest of the year is great and I meet a lot of great families, runners, bikers etc. love it!



    So, without detailed maps and explicit pictures, which the mods deleted, we need to just stick to the most basic facts, which are pretty clear even with the deleted posts now all gone.

    Make copies when posting, it will come up again and maybe in our lifetime be legal. This is the history that we need to preserve. Again, maybe the Mod's will become enlightened, maybe talk to their lawyers, and preserve the running history.

    Cheers

Members who have read this thread: 1

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.