Singletrack Sidewalks (STS)

Unfortunately, given that this meeting is in direct conflict with the Mitchell Elementary Parents' Night as well as the Golden Bicycle Cruise, AND the Mobility and Transportation Advisory Board meeting, it's unlikely there will be even representation at this meeting. I know that scheduling and planning these is very difficult, so I'll try to leave my comments here.

As a resident of Eagle Ridge and person with two young children, as well as a design professional who designs very similar projects in other locations, this has been a first-hand way to find out why folks stay out of public involvement! There is a very particular subset of folks who have the time to follow hundreds of comments and review 22 additional documents (although I do appreciate Golden staff posting those) necessary to get the "full picture" of what's proposed, what work has gone into this to date, and what the viewpoints are.

Given the limited time I have been able to expend on researching this (and I'm sure I'm not alone), I think this concept is reasonable, and would gladly take myself (running, walking, or biking) or my children on these facilities. A few notes, given my bicycle master plan and facility design experience:

- I wouldn't predict that this would be such a big draw locally or regionally that volumes on the trail or parking would increase significantly
- people on bikes who were riding the path in an irresponsible or discourteous manner previously will continue to ride the corridor that way, either on the paved path or the soft surface path. I don't believe this trail would increase or decrease those interactions.
- there are many trails in the region where this type of facility is provided (whether by design or organic "social trails"). They provide a different type of facility for folks of all ages and abilities to experience and help relieve congestion (if there is any) by providing additional "width" for those on foot or bike to use. They also provide additional potential for conflict, which is usually not significant on lower volume trails like this.
- trail presence near residences has been repeatedly shown to increase property values.
- some folks have expressed environmental concerns - an environmental review or professional should be (and I believe is) included in this design process. It's an important component to any design process and should absolutely be considered - I love the wildlife and environment we have in my neighborhood as well. However, I think we should leave the environmental recommendation to those professionals who have knowledge and experience in that area.
- With any trail project, continued maintenance is an important factor to consider. I think it should be considered and planned for, but shouldn't be a deterrent unless a maintenance plan and agreement cannot be made.
- If we were to apply the "but we already have a facility that a bicyclist can use" argument was used regularly, a significant portion of our regions trails wouldn't be in place because the vehicular cyclist view would still be prevalent. If we truly want to increase opportunities for users of all ages and abilities, continuing to look for opportunities to provide different types of facilities is critical.

In summary, I'm in support of this project as long as we proceed cautiously.

I like the idea and I strongly encourage the development of more recreational trails for the increasing population that uses our trail systems in Golden, that is for all non-motorized activities. I like the idea of trails for children and beginner riders. I know runners will also love the trail. I have no doubt that my kids would spend a lot of time on the trails. I live on 19th/Lookout Mountain Road, and it has been a pleasure being able to watch and be a part of the road biker community. We even put a bench out for the road bikers to rest on, not that many of them need it. I think adding recreational activities and opportunities such as this in our neighborhoods is a fantastic away to build community. I say that because this surprised me moving into my house. I thought being on such a busy road would be a downside but in reality it has been really fantastic. I challenge anyone afraid that this is going to bring more people into an open space near your home to reconsider, you might be surprised at the pleasantness of having young children riding their bikes on the dirt trail as you go for your walks.

I'm a 30 year old mountain biker and resident of the Eagleridge neighborhood. I don't support this project and worried it's giving mountain bikers a bad name as selfish and short sighted. Many of really do appreciate the open space, find the existing paved trail more than adequate and believe this proposed new trail should not reach reality for all the reasons that everyone on this site have said. My parents were mountain bikers (still are) and had me on a mountain bike at an early age - didn't have striders yet - usually on concrete paths and I managed to become a competent and skilled rider. Dirt isn't the key for kids, it's parents, and frankly, this, too, seems to be all about the parents and adults, not the kids. Give it a permanent rest, Giddyup, it doesn't belong here.

STRONGLY OPPOSE!
I am a Colorado native and a current resident of the Stonebridge at Eagle Ridge neighborhood. However, I have not been a life-long resident of Golden and was not here when the decision was made to sell the Tripp Ranch to developers who to subdivided the area for residential housing. When I was transferred to this area for work, I found the Eagle Ridge community and was willing to pay a $70,000 lot premium to back to open space because a promise was made to me by the builder and the City of Golden that no construction would occur behind my house “in perpetuity.”
After living here 15 years, I have been delighted with the natural beauty and the varied wildlife that still call this valley their home. Elk frequently sleep in my yard in the winter, eat my flowers and rough up my trees by rubbing the silk off their developing racks. Rabbits dig dens, skunks elicit their smells, fawns are born in the scrub oak, coyotes and bobcats build their dens and raise their cubs and eagles and hawks soar overhead looking for their next meal. None of this bothers me in the least. This all happens in the remaining relative quiet of a neighborhood that works hard to live in concert with what was once a completely wild place. We are guests in the home of the wildlife, not the other way around.
I found out about the special interest group’s (Golden Giddyup) proposal to build a secondary mountain bike trail along the existing paved Kinney Run Trail from a neighbor who found out about the plan through a chance encounter with a surveyor, not from communication from Golden Giddyup or the City of Golden. This was disconcerting.
However, even in our current polarized political environment, I decided to withhold judgement on the issues until I knew the facts. Therefore, while I was displeased to learn of a plan to build anything behind my house, I took steps to learn more about what Golden Giddyup had in mind. I attended several meetings as well as Al Head’s recent tour of the proposed trail to see for myself the possible benefits and drawbacks of the plan. Since doing so, I have heard nothing that has convinced me that the STS proposal is a good idea. As Al referenced in a recent posting on Nextdoor, I approached the tour with “an open heart and open ears.” I appreciate the tour, but have not been persuaded that the proposal will benefit more than a handful of specialized users.
Some of the commenters on this site seem to feel that those in opposition to this plan are stingy hoarders and buzz killers. In spite of starting my life with next to nothing, here I’ve been branded an “elitist.” I am a life-long educator and have dedicated my life to raising my own children and teaching lots of other peoples’ kids, but here, I am told I hate kids. Neither of those statements are true. In addition, I do not mind sharing the existing paved Kinney Run Trail with runners, bicyclists, dog walkers, children, teenagers and adults. The Kinney Run was built for everyone and for multiple uses.
To conclude, after careful study, I see no reason to inflict yet another human scar upon the land. There are already plenty of bike paths for users of all skill levels. It’s easy to usurp more and more of our natural surroundings, but it’s not so easy to undo the damage caused by one more path, one more parking lot, one more excuse to steal from the wildlife around us. Experienced mountain bikers refer to what they do on trails as “shredding.” I’m asking that we reserve shredding to the mountain bike trails that already exist in and around Golden.
CW

I am a resident of Eagle Ridge and I oppose the Singletrack Sidewalks because it is redundant to create more trails when we already have a huge surface path that is already FUN (as noted as a main feature of the singletrack in the proposal). I commute to work in downtown Golden from my house via BIKE on Kinney Run trail every single day. When I get home, I run to Apex or walk my dog along Kinney Run and I've never experienced any issues sharing or passing other trail users because the paved path is already wide enough. I see a variety of wildlife including the herds of elk, rabbits, deer and bobcats along the side of Kinney Run and the singletrack seems like it would be an unnecessary addition to the environment that we share with them. My leashed dog is also a daily Kinney Run trail user and I don't want to prevent her from sniffing along the side of the trail or walking in the grass areas where she prefers to defecate (especially between Heritage Dells Park and Apex). I wouldn't feel comfortable picking up her feces out of the singletrack because I would have to worry about bikes flying through and hitting me. It’s currently easier to be a responsible dog owner and pick up her feces on the side of the paved path and out of the way of any other trail users. The proposed areas that would be converted into dirt between Heritage Dells Park and Apex are where my dog defecates and this would force us to change our daily, basic trail uses and habits which we enjoy as a members of the Golden community. My husband and I don't have children but when we do, I wouldn't think twice about how fortunate we are to have such great access to the trails that are already established and FUN to use.

The proposed STS trails have become a contentious issue partly due to the fact the public was not adequately informed that a proposal to put mountain bike trails along the already established Kinney Run Trail was being considered.

The proposal was brought to the attention of the residents of Stonebridge by pure happenstance. A resident happened to be walking the Kinney Run Trail at the end of May, when she encountered a gentleman doing a survey on behalf of the city. She brought it to the HOA Board and a notice was put in the next June HOA Newsletter. A group representing the community went to the Park's & Rec Advisory Board meeting on July 17, to learn more. At the meeting we learned that a Public Meeting was in the works for the following week. At that time, no information was readily available to the public. Guiding Golden had just been launched as a new public commentary outlet a few weeks prior to the meeting. Many people were not aware of the existence of the website. No postcards had been mailed yet as a firm date for the public meeting hadn't been set. The group asked for the meeting to be postponed until school was back in session so more people could attend and learn about the proposal and the new site Guiding Golden. This postponement was granted. A date was finalized for August 28th, postcards sent and an article in the Golden Informer, August addition, mailed.

Due to the extra time, much research was done and many concerns have risen and been given voice. Many residents of this South End of Golden are deeply upset and concerned about the trail proposal. There are no set plans for how the trails will be built, maintained or monitored. People that oppose the trails do not hate mountain bikers, we just don't feel the trails are a necessity. We have many mountain bike trails easily accessible for riders young, old, experience, novice. We already have a beautiful concrete trail that takes you from Apex to downtown Golden and beyond. We treasure our open space that is home to wildlife, birds, flora and gorgeous views. We are very concerned that neighborhood voices along the proposed STS trail are not being heard.

An article on the website bicycleretailer dated August 23, 2018 talks about the proposal and that GiddyUP is collecting comments on its website. Does this mean that people that don't live here have a say? How can people who don't live in Golden, don't pay taxes, don't support our city and precious open space, get to express their opinion on the STS trails?

Friends of the Kinney Run

It is not correct to charge that the people who live near Kinney run do not want to share it with outsiders. That is why we invested in a trail that can be used for many purposes. It is the single track sidewalk people who want a path which is of use to a limited number of people. We are happy to share but must we change things. Come and enjoy Kinney run with us, but let’s not spoil it.

I am opposed. Children are easily distracted. Anything along the trail that is interesting they will investigate. Don’t think they will stay on the trails. Who will police them and keep them off of the difficult trails? There has been a golden eagle within 50 yards of the kiln for at least 18 years. There are two calfing areas for elk and deer, in the same segment as the eagle nesting area.

I am opposed.
just finished the survey on this website and I was shocked at how slanted three of the
questions were. They were phrased in a very bias way. Leaning of course in favor of Golden Giddyup and
this STS. Here are the questions:
Question:
"Do you feel STS will provide new, fun amenities for Golden families"?
(This question presumes that the STS is defiantly going to provide “fun” for Golden families” and if the
person answering say's “no” than it is like they are being spoil-sports and do not want families to have fun.

QUESTION:
"Do you feel STS will help alleviate rider/hiker conflict on the existing paved path by providing alternate routes"?
(This question presumes that rider/hiker conflict is a major issue, which it is not. And the question therefore states a false premise).
If the person taking the survey answers ”no” than it is like saying that person doesn’t mind conflict.

QUESTION:
"Do you feel STS will provide much-needed beginner and kid-friendly riding opportunities in south Golden"?
(This question is presuming that the STS is desperately needed for kids. If the person answering says “no” than it’s like they don’t care about kids riding opportunities when actually there are other alternatives like The Bike Park or even a possible alternate route that doesn’t go through peoples neighborhoods and infringe on the open space.

These questions show that the City of Golden is very much on the side of Golden Giddyup.
This is so wrong and unfair that the City seems to have already made up their mind to side with this
special interest group and throw the homeowners and resident that oppose this, under the bus.
The article in The Golden Informer does the same thing by reporting all the great things about this
proposal and none of the concerns people have who don’t want it. In reality, Golden Giddyup wants this for their own selfish reason to be able to connect with Apex and create a loop. Not a good example “for the kids”, when there are people that have lived here for years and are told they must now live with this dirt trail for the rest of their time her and probably pay for it in the end with tax dollars, so that a few of them can have their “fun”!

I am glad you are taking comments on the website, but it doesn’t give me much confidence that you haven't already made of your mind City of Golden. The three guys in the Golden Giddyup group have been planning this for years (since 2011), and you’ve known about it City of Golden, long before we have!

I am worried about the meeting at Shelton also being slanted. Golden Giddyup, I’m sure will give a planned presentation. And just like on your website, they will speak about all of the benefits they want us to believe. It will be used as another tool to indoctrinate the public into seeing their side of it. I just hope and pray that people will see through the deception that “it’s for the kids”

I am opposed to this entire project. On Saturday, August 25, parents who are involved with Giddyup Golden explained to residents that they need this trail because “ it’s too hard to put kids and bikes in the car and it’s too far to drive to the mountain bike park in Golden”. We should not build trails because parents are lazy.
I live in Stonebridge.

I submitted something this morning - It did not contain bad language of any kind. Why was it not posted?

Thanks for considering the STS project. I think it's forward-thinking in a recreation-oriented city to try new ideas. This is just a pilot, and the building work and maintenance will be taken care of by volunteers. Golden Giddyup has built a solid reputation for trail stewardship and advocacy; having them on board to get this going sounds like a win for Golden! Our second-grader would love a beginner-friendly trail like this to build her confidence on the dirt. It sounds like some nearby neighbors are concerned about erosion and environmental degradation, but on the plans, it looks like some of the proposed STS follows social trails that already exist. I also think the concerns about an influx of aggressive adult mountain bikers inundating the neighborhood's backyard open space may be unfounded. Advanced riders may use this trail to "commute" to Apex, but I'm dubious it would be a destination in and of itself for that audience.

VKK-- residents in surrounding neighborhoods, cities, towns, even the whole state (and country), have every right to comment on this proposal. It concerns open space public lands which serve the public, not just those in immediate proximity to the project. Those opposing that live nearby are a perfect example of misplaced NIMBY-ism.

This is an emotional and passionate topic because this is where we live and has everything to do with other unsightly and badly executed projects. With other easy bike trails in the area I don’t see the need to create one running through the neighborhood, it seems unnecessary at best and will cause erosion and drainage issues. Reminds me of the "road bike sidewalk" on Heritage, as evidenced by the lack of use, also unnecessary.

Is it feasible to continue this trail along 6th Avenue after segment 6? If not then it won’t even connect to other larger bike trails. The supporters and builders want it for their kids, so I wonder how overall use will be policed? Frankly, if supporters clear a dirt trail running through my neighborhood, I'll use it as a running path for me and my dog. Although this is city property, shouldn't the residents in the immediately surrounding neighborhoods be the ones commenting? Why are there folks in Pleasant View and 6th Ave Estates commenting?

I strongly SUPPORT this proposal and commend the City for its continued efforts to make Golden a healthy, active, vibrant, bike-friendly community. More bike commuting options means fewer car trips in and out of the neighborhoods, which is good for people, the environment and wildlife.

1) The "kid" arguments for the project are a tad bit misleading. Some of the sections look pretty tough. I'd rather ride with my kids out to the bike park at Tony Grampsas, why don't we focus on a trail out to that park? It's great out there for kids (and there's beer nearby too).
2) We definitely need a trail through the Bachman property over to Wrigley's and to the two schools in the office park. Great idea.
3) What I am hearing from the neighbors is that they don't like certain sections. Why not split the baby and do a few sections but not all. That way, it's a win for the proponents and a win for the neighbors.
4) I understand that CSM turned this project down. They must have had some good reasoning behind their decision. Just an observation--but Council should know that it is ok to say no too.
5) I think the scope of the project goes way beyond a "pilot" project. Yet another good reason to do just a few segments. Just like paved bike paths, they do not always have continuous surfaces and sections. Some sections are separated, some are on existing roadways. Sometimes one has to ride a street to get to a path!

Thanks for providing a forum for feedback.

I strongly support this proposal. Being opposed to new trails to Golden, which have been fully vetted by environmental consultants, and which are going to be paid for--not by taxpayers--by by the Golden Giddyup--is insane. This is Golden, Colorado. Those opposed should seriously consider a move to Centennial, or somewhere that their suburban ideals are fully supported. Stop with your NIMBY-ism. This isn't about you, it's about the public. The public is not defined by those that live in close proximity to this proposed singletrack. I intend to donate $5.00 to Golden Giddyup for each person that publicly opposes this project.

As a parent of small kids who supports this project, I would like to point out that the meeting time is in conflict with parent's night at Mitchell Elementary. This conflict will remove from the meeting many parents with small kids who would otherwise come out in support of this project. I can think of several families, in addition to mine, who support the project who will find it difficult to be in two places at once. Could we have a second meeting where those of us with elementary-aged children could also attend?

Thank you.

SUPPORT

I have lived in Golden for 18 years. I lived in Beverly Heights until my wife died then moved to a smaller place by Mines. For many years I bicycle commuted up Kinney Run on my way to my office in Ken Caryl. When my kids were born I would pull them in the bike trailer to the park. Now my boys and I ride the bike path to the park. We love to explore along the way. It is a wonderful valley. I can understand why many neighbors are concerned about it being destroyed.

But, will this project destroy the valley? It is a dirt path. It is being designed responsibly. This is not some giant construction project. It is another way to enjoy our fantastic surroundings. It is in keeping with the spirit of the good healthy living that is golden. I have two small boys. We will absolutely use these STS. We are excited about the idea of beginner-level trails within Golden city limits. Please build this?

I have to wonder if the lovely people who are against this project are really against sharing this public space with "outsiders"? They seem to want to live in an exclusive community without considering the rest of the town. Perhaps, even, their values are out of step with the majority of us who live in this city?

One comment against the project by VBA on Monday- August 27, 2018 states "If the city allows this path it would set the precedence for building more paths in other open spaces'?" Isn't this what most of us in the community want? Isn't this is a good thing? Evidently there are some very vocal people who have a very different set of values than the rest of us.

Another common complaint is that the path will destroy open space. This is silly on its face. There are hundreds of examples of trails in open space along the front range. I can think of no examples where trails have destroyed the wildness of these places.

City council, please ignore the noise of these selfish people who want to keep this beauty to themselves? We live in a community where we share. Limiting access to only those who live in the neighborhood is not fair to the rest of us who live in the community. I share my sidewalk by keeping it shoveled. I share my view by building within established setbacks. Sharing is part of the community experience. Building the STS is a project that will benefit the whole community much more than it will negatively affect a few elitist residents who are out of step with the rest of their community.

Thank you

My family and I live in Eagle Ridge. I am opposed to the STS proposal and pilot.
I just took the survey and I am shocked that a few of these the questions are slanted in favor or this proposal. For instance:
Question:
*Do you feel STS will provide new, fun amenities for Golden families?
(This question presumes that THE MOST IMPORTANT issue is a few people's "fun" without any consequence to the homeowners in the area, environmental concerns we have, financial burden to the taxpayers after years of ongoing use, traffic and parking problems, trail congestion and children's safety, on and off the trail, enforcement of trail "rules" etc. - if people answer "no" it's like saying they are the spoil-sports and against "fun")!
Next Question:
*Do you feel STS will help alleviate rider/hiker conflict on the existing paved path by providing alternate
routes?
(This question presumes that the STS is necessary because of conflict. Sometimes there might be a slight conflict here or there but no reason to tear into the hillside to build another trail just for this special interest group and their friends and pass it off as "for the children")!
Next Question:
*Do you feel STS will provide much-needed beginner and kid-friendly riding opportunities in south Golden?
(This question also presumes that there is a desperate need to put in this trail for children when there is already The Bike Park funded by Golden taxpayers. If people answer "no" then its like they are against important riding opportunities for children, when that is absolutely not what this is about in spite of what Golden Giddyup tries to say. Their group desperately wants a connection to APEX to complete their loop. This is their true motive). How about asking THAT question to visitors on this website?

These three questions show the bias of The City of Golden that leans towards approval in spite of all the homeowners and the neighborhood resident's objections. The article in The Golden Informer also clearly showed their bias as the writer told of all of the benefits and advertising it as only "for the kids"!
It is wrong and its deceptive. Just like the fact that this was discussed among themselves and the City for years!

The City is clearly "in bed" with Golden Giddyup on this project and it seems as if they have already made up their minds! On Tuesday the 28th, there will be a meeting at Shelton Elementary. I would bet Golden Giddyup will be giving a presentation of how great this proposal is and giving their one-sided answers to their insincere, made up questions, like the ones they have on their website. Maybe, possibly The City might allow the other side a tiny window of time to give their objections, but I fear that this meeting will be City of Golden and Golden Giddyup's way of indoctrinating the pubic even further!