New posts

Cypress - New Survey is up - TRAILS ABOVE 1200ft IMPACTED

Sept. 24, 2021, 3:49 p.m.
Posts: 891
Joined: Nov. 18, 2015

DWV has opened a new survey regarding the future of Cypress Village. Please find it and supporting information here: https://www.westvancouverite.ca/upperlands

There have been some things floating around social media pointing out that Single Lane Traffic and Roach Hit are being proposed to turn into pedestrian paths, and that's correct, but there are less obvious implications that I feel people need to be aware of before they take the survey.

Firstly, please be aware that this land is owned by BPP and it has a right to develop it, but ONLY below 1200ft. BPP is prohibited from developing above that elevation; it will be very difficult to present a credible argument for trails below 1200ft. Not sure how we can save Wutang, SLT, RH and the bottom of 5th. My strong suggestion is to pick our battles and focus on whats happening above 1200ft. It might not look like anything, but look again.

My biggest concern is the creation of a Multiuse Path (in light blue) that uses BLT/PowerLine Rd but circumvents the steepest grades on it for shallower routes, many of which are occupied by trails.

It might not look like it at first glance, but this multiuse path:

  • takes out SOB completely,

  • takes out middle SexGirl completely,

  • it crosses PullTab near the bottom, and

  • uses the same line occupied by the top of Roach Clip.

  • It then goes on to use the same route as some stuff that doesnt appear on TF.

Net result is that we are loosing at least three additional mid-level trails that were not part of the discussion prior on top of all the ones below 1200ft. Aside, because the new multiuse trail seeks out the shallowest grades, its selectively hitting the "easier" lines on Cypress too. Those who want to ride more gentle grade trails are loosing those options.

Please consider the above when you take the survey. Questions 5 and 6 directly relate to your support of the recreational paths being proposed, and the seemingly benign but extremely damaging multiuse path is part of that.

Its hard to follow but Ive superimposed a transparent TF maps onto DWV Plannings map for your enjoyment.


 Last edited by: Ddean on Sept. 24, 2021, 4:23 p.m., edited 2 times in total.
Sept. 24, 2021, 5:31 p.m.
Posts: 139
Joined: May 13, 2014

And you're surprised that bike trails are an afterthought or getting screwed outright......  maybe they intended this trail for that very purpose.  Again...liability.  I have said it before.  Cypress is a lost cause.  Enjoy it now because it will be gone and most likely sooner than you think.

Sept. 25, 2021, 3:23 p.m.
Posts: 1223
Joined: Dec. 3, 2003

It's great that the survey leaves room for comments.

Question #5 is whether you support the proposed recreation areas and #6 asks you why. I wanted to know the alternatives to closing Roach Hit and expressed concerns about the security of a relocated staging area. That plus there's no plan to maintain trails above Fern Tail.

Sept. 26, 2021, 7:15 p.m.
Posts: 9
Joined: Aug. 20, 2010

thanks for the heads-up

Sept. 27, 2021, 9:32 a.m.
Posts: 780
Joined: Jan. 31, 2005

Wow their plan doesn't leave much behind. I liked the original idea of a commercial center at the first switchback. A place to go after a ride and have a coffee or a beer. Once they eliminate most of the trails I won't be coming to Cypress for any reason.

https://i.imgur.com/h2E37Koh.png

edit: sorry I can't seem to get the photo thing to work.


 Last edited by: craw on Sept. 27, 2021, 9:33 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Sept. 27, 2021, 10:05 a.m.
Posts: 102
Joined: March 13, 2017

Thanks for the update Dave, I will get the survey done.

Sept. 27, 2021, 11:21 a.m.
Posts: 891
Joined: Nov. 18, 2015

Posted by: craw

Wow their plan doesn't leave much behind. I liked the original idea of a commercial center at the first switchback. A place to go after a ride and have a coffee or a beer. Once they eliminate most of the trails I won't be coming to Cypress for any reason.

https://i.imgur.com/h2E37Koh.png

edit: sorry I can't seem to get the photo thing to work.

Correct - the area around the first Switchback is a lost cause BUT theres absolutely no reason why they need to reach above that 1200ft line with a bike path that nobody needs. Think about this: they want to put a gentler climb up Cypress than BLT and they are destroying the easier trails in the process. Makes no sense as I dont know anyone who has a problem climbing BLT AND by the time this is put in place ebikes will likely flood the mountain and theyre already able to go straight up BLT at 30kph+ (a few times).

I think that this path was considered with good intentions but its very damaging, unnecessary and, unfortunately, misguided.

EDIT: I also dont mind and might even enjoy the area around the first switchback. It could be a lot of fun, and we sure could use an additional vibrant area in West Van. BUT this death by a thousand cuts will leave us with nothing eventually; it needs to stop at the 1200ft line.


 Last edited by: Ddean on Sept. 27, 2021, 11:30 a.m., edited 2 times in total.
Sept. 27, 2021, 3:39 p.m.
Posts: 1677
Joined: July 11, 2014

Responded (as a resident of Vancouver, visitor for recreation to the area and "interested in living in Cypress Village").

Sept. 27, 2021, 5:25 p.m.
Posts: 19
Joined: May 27, 2018

Thanks Dave. Have responded and forwarded to several others to get the word out.

Sept. 27, 2021, 6:27 p.m.
Posts: 780
Joined: Jan. 31, 2005

Posted by: Ddean

Posted by: craw

Wow their plan doesn't leave much behind. I liked the original idea of a commercial center at the first switchback. A place to go after a ride and have a coffee or a beer. Once they eliminate most of the trails I won't be coming to Cypress for any reason.

https://i.imgur.com/h2E37Koh.png

edit: sorry I can't seem to get the photo thing to work.

Correct - the area around the first Switchback is a lost cause BUT theres absolutely no reason why they need to reach above that 1200ft line with a bike path that nobody needs. Think about this: they want to put a gentler climb up Cypress than BLT and they are destroying the easier trails in the process. Makes no sense as I dont know anyone who has a problem climbing BLT AND by the time this is put in place ebikes will likely flood the mountain and theyre already able to go straight up BLT at 30kph+ (a few times).

I think that this path was considered with good intentions but its very damaging, unnecessary and, unfortunately, misguided.

EDIT: I also dont mind and might even enjoy the area around the first switchback. It could be a lot of fun, and we sure could use an additional vibrant area in West Van. BUT this death by a thousand cuts will leave us with nothing eventually; it needs to stop at the 1200ft line.

A handful of guys riding bikes downhill aren't really part of their demographic considering the economic scale of this plan. And for all that it's still super hard to build legal trails up there, which is astonishing considering how much terrain there is.

Sept. 27, 2021, 8:56 p.m.
Posts: 102
Joined: March 13, 2017

I have responded as well, in question 6 comment I put the following, not specific to mtn biking. "I do not believe there should be any manufactured "gravel pathways" above the planning area. This terrain should remain as close to natural as it now is."

Sept. 29, 2021, 8:53 p.m.
Posts: 1189
Joined: May 4, 2006

Hmmm, I'm ambivalent about the proposed gravel path. Let's face it, by the time the District actually get around to doing anything, as opposed to pushing out endless surveys or studies, most of use will be too old ride!

Trying to think of the bigger picture, if the District builds the climbing trail it would be nice that they support the construction of some DH trails (like RMOW machine built Into The Mystic whereas WORCA hand built LOTS).

I'd add my support for a proposed change if that happened. And do we really care if all the easier terrain is used for climbing? It's a good argument that Cypress retains its difficult trails.

Having said that, I'd be pissed as a trail builder if the District provided nice easy access to "my trails" yet didn't sanction the descending trail either (but I'm referring to stuff above 1200ft, and I have no idea what the plans are, if any, for those trails...)

Sept. 29, 2021, 9:25 p.m.
Posts: 1189
Joined: May 4, 2006

The active transportation network will provide continuous connections for pedestrians and cyclists throughout Cypress Village and connections to other areas of West Vancouver, including the Rodgers Creek area, the future Cypress West neighbourhood, Caulfeild, and the future trail network in the Upper Lands.


 Last edited by: SixZeroSixOne on Sept. 29, 2021, 9:27 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Stupid forum software does not allow responses outside the quote area....
Sept. 29, 2021, 10:07 p.m.
Posts: 486
Joined: April 11, 2011

Posted by: SixZeroSixOne

Hmmm, I'm ambivalent about the proposed gravel path. Let's face it, by the time the District actually get around to doing anything, as opposed to pushing out endless surveys or studies, most of use will be too old ride!

Amen.  I'm tapped out on these Cypress surveys as well.  I went to the Cypress open house in 2012 and left feeling encouraged.  How many bullshit surveys/studies since? My son is pictured in the colorful hat in the background of the photo with the guy in glasses, signing his life away.  The little guy started high school this year...

https://nsmb.com/articles/5071-cypress-open-house-report/

Sept. 30, 2021, 8:26 a.m.
Posts: 18067
Joined: Oct. 28, 2003

Big money can wait us all out…. 

The younger generation needs to take up the fight if they want a place to ride.

Forum jump: