Singletrack Sidewalks (STS)

This is bizarre. First, it is NOT a "Sidewalk". It is a single-lane dirt trail. There are plenty of dirt-only trails. Selling this as a children's lane is intentionally deceptive. Why build one along a current paved bike/pedestrian trail/sidewalk?
Cyclists could use their energy to advocate for bike lanes whenever new construction of residential or business projects are planned. For example, Eighth Street near the river with NO designated bike lane.

I am opposed to the development of the additional bike path. I do not believe this is a priority for our community, now or in the near term. I am concerned about the same unintended consequences, competing uses, and financial commitments as others in this response.

Why do we need a dirt trail next to an existing concrete trail? And, in an established neighborhood? GiddyUp is so busy promoting this trail as a "beginner" trail for kids that they think we overlook the fact that most of this trail (Kinney Run) is considered advanced. Obviously their main objective is not kids. They want to make a loop from Apex to Lookout and back for experienced bikers. And they claim they will build the STS? Do they think we're stupid? Obviously the bulk of the cost to build and to maintain will fall on the city of Golden. Aren't we lucky to live in a place like Golden with its open spaces that right now can be enjoyed by all .. people, birds, elk, deer, coyotes, bobcats, mountain lions, foxes, snakes, chipmunks and on and on. Mountain Bikers have plenty of trails to use from Apex, to North Table, South Table, Chimney Gulch, Lookout, Green Mountain and on and on. And yet they need more? I do not support this proposal.

JD: You are guessing that GGU is proposing the Kinney Run dirt in order to encourage kids to ride to school, most likely Shelton Elem. But why connect it to Apex where no kids live? This will just attract advanced and faster riders who will be a hazard to beginners. So I still don't see the logic especially since there are so many other places for true STS's connecting schools. Bell and Mitchell come to mind. I just don't get it, sorry.

Again I am opposed to the STS. I do not think this will be a small Mt bike Path for children as stated by dtybor. How can anyone ensure it will be basically for children and used by children? The purpose is to connect Apex with other trails. This means adult bikers will most likely be the main users.

How can Golden Giddyup ensure they have financial resources to maintain the trail indefinitely?

In these comments I see opponents are NIMBY - not in my backyard - too often. Does this mean proponents are IMBY - in my backyard? It seems those using this term should agree and feel each group is only concerned about themselves. I do not think that is true for either group. I think everyone voicing an opinion is simply a concerned citizen.

Further to the concerns expressed about the impact on wildlife habitat - Kinney Run Trail is an eBird (Audubon Founding Partner) designated and maintained "Hotspot" with 97 identified and recorded species. Those species are supported by the existing natural open space environment. Putting a bike trail through that space will clearly have large and negative impact on this natural feature appreciated and enjoyed by many.

The STS installation in Eagle has been referenced repeatedly as a “model” to support the STS Proposal here in Golden, most recently during the PRMAB study session of September 11, 2018.
There are several important points that have been missing from that discussion so far. The information below came out of an extended discussion with Luis Benitez of Colorado Outdoor Recreation Industry Office, who was a speaker at the Public meeting held by, PRMAB on August 28, and who is a mountain biking expansion advocate.
The Eagle STS final design went through approximately 5 different iterations over the course of a year and some months before it was approved by the Town Council. Interestingly, the original proposal apparently tracked through neighborhoods and this was immediately rejected. Council meet every two weeks on this topic and a working group met on the alternate weeks to work through to create a clear objective of purpose served and satisfy public concerns that were addressed from the beginning. This process stands in sharp contrast to what has been done here time to date.
The Eagle STS final design is, by active decision process a “road to nowhere” – specifically intended NOT to be a connector route to other MTB trails so that it would not attract experienced MTB riders. In contrast, the proposal advanced here in Golden will be a direct connector route that will attract experienced MTB traffic going to/from Apex. The proponents in Golden admit that mixed rider traffic will be an issue but suggest they will use “trail design” to discourage the more experience riders. There clearly are other locations to consider that follow the Eagle lead on this issue.
In Eagle, the STS was proposed, as here, by a Non-For-Profit organization that represented they would construct and maintain the trails. The Town Council insisted that the NFP demonstrate, in detail, specific financial capacity to deliver on this commitment. Again, something missing in the Golden proposal.
An issue that Eagle was trying to address in their work was that of eliminating informal "social trails" that had been cut by MTB riders alongside of the existing paved paths - we simply don’t have that issue here on the proposed route.
Eagle also apparently had serious issues with multi use conflicts (hiker/biker). We have said from the beginning that we don’t have these kinds of issues and the current design will create more as it increases the on/off merge traffic between the proposed dirt trail and the current paved trail.
In short, the experience of Eagle informs the topic of successful STS development it makes a compelling case for an approach that is different than has been applied to date in Golden

my kids have ridden that section of kinney run on striders. They push their bikes up it, and they drag their feet and make big swooping turns down it. I'm sure they aren't the only ones.

I don't have answers as to why they proposed this section. I know that when the process started years ago, there were a few proposed areas. Most of the other areas (such as north golden) do not have the same area of city owned right of way, so I'm sure that was part of it. This is also close to an elementary school, with a lot of residential houses, so it would encourage kids to ride to school. I am not involved with the group, I just support the program. I'm sure you could shoot Al Head an email, or post the question in the Q&A.

As i have mentioned, I think it would be great if they could have more of these around my neighborhood.

I don't think you asked your young strider to go up Kinney Run on GGU's proposed sections 4&5 even on pavement. Did you? These sections are steep and would be very difficult and unpleasant for a kid on a strider bike and worse on dirt. It would be pretty steep for even "shredders first time on dirt" on mountain bikes. So it still beats me as to why GGU is proposing this trail for kids when there are so many other better places for them to learn nearby, some which I have called out. Do you know why or can you find out?

I guess I'm a mean parent then. I don't recall advanced skills required in the description, can you point that out to me? I know there were to be options for a variety of skill levels.

Focus on Kinney run will have to be answered by ggu, but my guess is because it works with the goal of getting kids to ride bikes to school, and was identified a few years ago as a good option when this all started.

JD: As you undoubtedly know strider (aka balance) bikes don't have pedals so the youngster pushes along with their feet while straddling the bike. I would be a mean parent imo if I asked my kid to ride up, or down Kinney Run like that. Therefore Kinney Run is not for striders. How about "youngsters learning to ride dirt" as defined by GGU? There will be areas on GGU's proposed dirt singletrack which will require advanced skills so why not have them learn at Apex, STM, or the other places I have mentioned. These seem to me to be much better physically and don't violate the precious and limited open space and won't have advanced Apex riders interfering with their learning.. So why the GGU fixation with Kinney Run? Just don't understand that. Can you enlighten me please?

@ bikerpop,
I like your idea of the path from Splash to Johnson road, it is a great suggestion. I don't know who has rights to the XC course, but I don't believe it is city owned. It would be worth looking into. There seems like there might be more use from middle school students going to bell, or the HS, which doesn't seem to have the same focus on getting younger riders, but it could be a nice addition.

i am a little confused about something though. In a number of other posts, you are saying that we already have well maintained paved bike trails, and no other trails are needed, but the paved path is now too steep for striders? Does that mean it is also too steep for people with strollers or people in wheelchairs? Do you know the grade? What is the slope angle? Please provide me with some evidence that supports your claim.

Switchbacks are indeed designed to lessen the grade, because you are going across the slope, then make a corner. Both are essential parts of learning how to ride a bike on dirt trails.

Yo JD: The present paved Kinney Run trail has a gradient which is beyond the capabilities of striders. As far as 'lil shredders go a dirt trail, manufactured along it especially in GGU's sections 4 & 5, will necessarily have a steeper gradient in spots, the average being the same obviously, and be on a dirt tread requiring advanced braking skills descending and tough climbing. It follows then that it will be a more difficult trail than the paved trail. Oh, you say swichbacks will lessen the grade? These are not "kid friendly" features and if the 'lil shredders can do these they should be over at Apex. Grown ups might be able to do it but it's not for them, eh?
But I have an idea: the beautiful bike trail from Splash to Johnson Rd (along the golf course) would make really nice true STS. And it might continue down Johnson and connect to the CX course. Please go check it out and tell me what you think.

@Mountainmarit, the video that you linked is not a single track sidewalk, those are full on mountain bike trails established in eagle. There is a difference. Golden already has trails similar to this, and this is not in the proposal. If you check the link FROM the video, you will see that the group that built the Single track sidewalk only had a very very small segment that was shown in that video, not all of the trails shown. Here is a link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rCmMuXh7FM that shows a very small section.

The video you linked is not at all representative of what we would be seeing in golden, especially in this Kinney Run area. I'm glad you think the trail is a waste of time, there are others of us that don't. I am one of those folks that live in the north part of town. If you can find us a good spot with similar attributes, please suggest it.

Have you been to the golden bike park? As I have mentioned before, this is not a spot that was designed for striders and beginners, please provide me with some of these "reduntant trails including trails specifically for striders and beginners", as I have found very few of these.

JD, the video shows a pump track that adults really like to use. Is that what's coming here? I thought it was supposed to be a simple little trail parallel to the existing trail for little striders not a pump track for adults.
No new trail is appropriate in the Kinney Run corridor where there is already a trail. It's a complete waste of time, energy and the City's limited funds. At last night's Park Board study session one of the members said that people in the north neighborhood are really jealous and want this there. This was originally proposed for that area so why isn't it going there where there isn't already a trail? Someone really needs to get the story straight about what this really is and why it's so darn important that it go here where there are lots of places in Golden that don't have trails and apparently want them. Or guess what, Golden already has a mountain bike park that has lots of redundant trails including trails specifically for striders and beginners.
And to the other poster, we do have bear in the Kinney Run corridor and sometimes people see evidence of the elusive mountain lion. But those and similar natural wonders will likely cease to be a part of this environment with another unnecessary trail.

If designed properly, and carefully, the trial will be a thoughtful addition to the neighborhood.

I feel the greatest threat to the wildlife on the Kinney Run trial is not a small Mt. Bike path designed for children. The greatest threat are dogs, cats and fences. I've seen off-leash dogs chase wildlife numerous times. There is typically some dog waste along the trail. I've seen cats stalking animals in the bushes. I once saw a cat eating a snake. I hope to teach my children to be far more respectful of the area since it it is intended for everybody to use, and to educate on what impact our domestic animals have on the habitat. A beginner bike trail seems fairly insignificant to the amount of interference to wildlife I've witnessed from people's animals. Also, both sides of the entire corridor are flanked by houses with dogs...not anybody's fault in this case, but it's something that does affect deer and elk's behavior as they traverse the area.

I've seen folks on the KR trail, either walking or biking, that intersect a herd of 40+ elk not too far off the paved trail, and have no idea the animals were ever there. Deer and elk seem to have no problem with the neighbor with the dragsters, and seem unfazed by the tremendous noise those cars make. There is one unintended consequence of the added activity in the natural area though. Bears, lions and moose seem to avoid the area. Those animals would be fun to see, but the neighborhood is too populated for that type of wildlife to coexist safely with.

If we are willing to accept the current interference with the wildlife in the area, than a beginner-friendly bike trial should be accepted as well. In fact, I'd bet that there will be minimal impact by these young riders due to there be an existing impact already present.

The section that would work for me and I'll bet many others is a big beautiful loop on the Mines property. Winding in and out of the drainages would probably yield a nice 5k loop. With no connection to Apex (except for the existent Kinney Run) there would be less concern for damage to the environment and peace and quiet there; no removal of turf, no cutting of trees (yes, by the big rock on #5), no on&off's of the pavenent disrupting both mtb and foot users, and the mountain bikers would have a trail to be proud of. And the youngsters GGU claims to want to provide for will not have Apex riders breathing down their necks or coming fast full on front. Waddya say? BTW: The video you refer to shows a pump track. We have a nice one over at the bike park. Go try it.

@mountainmarit, that video is great, thanks for posting. I wish our trails could be that flowy and so remote around here!

As a note, I was driving around on monday while my youngest was asleep, and my oldest wanted to go to a playground, so we went to heritage dells. I can assure you that I will never drive my car to that neighborhood and try and park with the intention of riding any of these trails. It would take me much less time to park at Apex and ride the trails, than it would for me to try and find parking in the Heritage Dells/ Eagle Ridge neighborhood.

Furthermore, this is a pilot, to see if we could get something like to this work. Lets take an objective look and see if we can both come together and make something work. I propose this- for those of you who are in favor, please provide some info about which sections are most important to you, and which you would be ok not building. Provide your reasoning, and look at it from the perspective of those opposed. Do all the trails need to be built? are there any that would be ok if they didn't exist right away? Give a priority for each segment, and "we need them all for this to work" is not a good argument.

For those opposed- look at this from the perspective of those that are in favor. If this pilot gets approved, and one or two sections would be to get built, please provide your feedback about which would impact you the least, or what your main concerns are? Assume these trails are designed to be sustainable. What can be done to help mitigate your concerns about usage, monitoring, etc. Please provide some solutions to your issues, as opposed to just stating the issue. There were some good questions about metrics, etc which were a great start.

This pilot is not an ALL or Nothing deal, lets try and find something that will work for the majority.

I am very much opposed.
This might be great thing for kids but not appropriate throughout an established neighborhood and an open space sanctuary for beautiful vegetation and wildlife. And it would be just the beginning, over years there will more people using it and more trails needed to accommodate!

Also if kids are supposed to ride this with or without their parents , than once they arrive at the other end or wherever they decide to go to until they stop, how do they get back without turning around? This would create two-way riders on a one way STS. NOT GOOD!!

I feel the real motive is to create a loop for adult bikers to travel from Apex, through the Eagle Ridge neighborhoods and Open Space and then on through Golden and Chimney Gulch - a similar route that they use for the bike racing.

There are so many more reason's why this is not a good idea beside the very important one I just mentioned, but If it's TRULY "for the kids" than why not consider the post I just read by "golden mountain" who wrote:

"I too believe that there isn't a better learning track location than the Old Heritage Square! It is adjacent to their parents trail at Apex. The terrain is ideal to make it easy or complex on the hillside. (Maybe even resurrect the old chairlift, to bring the kids and their bikes up the hill) Parking is plentiful.
Please let me and others know (this is being discussed on Nextdoor) that this is in fact a legitimate alternative proposal that is being considered. Everyone in the area that is opposed to single track seems very agreeable to this proposal!!"

Thank you for your time in reading this and for caring about the long-time residents here enough to ask for comments.

What a great idea for the kids. This proposal is exactly in line with the sprit and mission of the City of Golden to promote healthy outdoor opportunities for recreation.

However, there is a cultural divide on this issue. The proposal along with the Golden Giddy up (led by citizens of Golden) is pro community, pro trail stewardship, pro nature, pro health, pro fun, pro responsibility, and pro youth. The one gripe I do have with the Giddyup is that I never have the chance to volunteer for trail maintenance days....the volunteer roster is always full! This is exactly the kind of group that should be leading the STS pilot. Anybody who says this isn't a trustworthy organization really is not being truthful. There is no hidden agenda. The GG has been 100% honest and transparent with the proposal.

I feel it's unfortunate for those that do have concerns and reservations about the proposal, and have voiced them rationally, are being overshadowed by the NIMBY crowd and some not so honest folks. Golden can do without NIMBYs (people who are only interested in projects that benefit them directly). The Friends of Kinney Run are PRO nothing and against everything that has to do with the proposal. If they were actually pro something than where have they been the last few years? Why are they just targeting MT. Biking youth? Wouldn't it stand to reason that if they are pro Kinney Run than they would encourage the Stonebridge HOA to allow more natural landscaping to encourage wildlife? Using less water and fertilizer on their lawns? Closing the paved trail during elk calving season? Encouraging their neighbors to drive more slowly? No, they are only focused on children riding bikes. I can only conclude that these are NIMBYs in the true sense of the word.