New posts

New Kilmer Creek Bridge on the Baden Powell on Fromme - Why no bicyle ramp like the old one?!?

Sept. 17, 2019, 2:58 p.m.
Posts: 75
Joined: April 26, 2004

Posted by: TheWasp

Posted by: AlanB

Posted by: TheWasp

I wouldn't miss the Stairs of Despair that's for sure.

There's no despair left in those stairs!!!

Ha! To be honest I've avoided that piece of trail for a long time. Has it been smoothed out?

To be clear we're talking about the same thing .... last part of BP before it joins Mountain Highway at the water fountain?

they are just after the high point of trail heading east of the Big Stupid / Ladies Exit

they have been dumbed down ~5 times since the 1980s, but even back in the 1980s, people (not me) were riding them on rigid 26ers with canti's (lots of carnage too)


 Last edited by: taprider on Sept. 18, 2019, 7:39 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Sept. 17, 2019, 5:03 p.m.
Posts: 25
Joined: June 9, 2017

Hey team - 

All land manager contacts live here: https://nsmba.ca/contact-us/

I wouldn't consider emailing Council "full nuclear" - they're just where Staff get their directives and priorities. But infoweb is the best place to start if you're not comfortable with Council. You can also try the "report a problem" DNV website function. 

And agreed - there's not nearly as much despair in the stairs these days! I'm not sure I miss it, though?

Sept. 18, 2019, 9:39 a.m.
Posts: 158
Joined: Feb. 13, 2016

Posted by: cooperquinn

Hey team - 

All land manager contacts live here: https://nsmba.ca/contact-us/

I wouldn't consider emailing Council "full nuclear" - they're just where Staff get their directives and priorities. But infoweb is the best place to start if you're not comfortable with Council. You can also try the "report a problem" DNV website function. 

And agreed - there's not nearly as much despair in the stairs these days! I'm not sure I miss it, though?

Thanks for that contact info.  I just wanted to get the story from DNV staff first to know if a) I need to contact Council, b) how to frame this email to council so I don't sound like an uninformed whiner.

Sept. 18, 2019, 11:56 a.m.
Posts: 1318
Joined: Feb. 26, 2015

Remember the Baden is not a mtb primary, so if they didn't put a ramp in possibly there is a reason for it. I trail run thru there frequently and it's still a pretty narrow bridge. Not a lot of room for foot and bike traffic to pass each other, especially with the bar widths we are rocking these days.

Sept. 18, 2019, 12:25 p.m.
Posts: 1524
Joined: July 11, 2014

Posted by: taprider

Posted by: TheWasp

Posted by: AlanB

Posted by: TheWasp

I wouldn't miss the Stairs of Despair that's for sure.

There's no despair left in those stairs!!!

Ha! To be honest I've avoided that piece of trail for a long time. Has it been smoothed out?

To be clear we're talking about the same thing .... last part of BP before it joins Mountain Highway at the water fountain?

they are just after the high point of trail heading east of the Big Stupid / Ladies Exit

they have been dumbed down ~5 times since the 1980s, but even back in the 1980s, people (not me) were riding them on rigid 26ers with canti's (lots of carnage too)

I really enjoy the BP from high point/Stairs of Dispair back to the parking lot. It's been smoothed out for sure in a few places but is still a fun technical ride and is pretty easy on modern bikes. It's a fun challenge to go fast on (*in a safe manner, yielding to all foot/bike climbing traffic, saying hello to hikers/runners etc.)

Sept. 21, 2019, 11:40 a.m.
Posts: 158
Joined: Feb. 13, 2016

I traded emails with a District of North Vancouver staff member over the new bridge this week.  My take away is:

  • They have some strange and seemingly (IMHO) completely unrealistic safety? structural? environmental? criteria (they wouldn't say exactly what the issue was other than alluding to the difficulty in creating a proper foundation beside the creek for an additional bike ramp and possible environmental impacts) that they claim they "couldn't" come up with a solution to.
  • They aren't really that interested in entertaining ideas other than their own that don't meet these mystery criteria.

  • They don't understand mountain biker's desire for flow and to not have to stop and get off our bikes.

Basically it sounds like they just need a little help getting from "can't be done" to "can do".

I really encourage others to write in to infoweb@dnv.org' and let them know we don't need a fancy ramp that can hold a full tank brigade, just something that serves the same function as the old ramp did.  I'm about to fire off my own short email to DNV council as well and hopefully someone will look into this further on their end.  @cooperquinn (NSMBA) is optimistic this will get solved, but I believe even another 3 or 4 emails from others to the DNV will help expedite this process.

Sept. 21, 2019, 3:17 p.m.
Posts: 12
Joined: May 29, 2007

Went by there yesterday. "Someone" has cut out the section of handrail where the old ramp was. Didn't look like DNV work as there were no signage to indicate work in progress. Took a pic but can't figure out how to upload it on here. 

Looks like rogue work to me. All this does is piss off the powers that be, and makes them even more difficult to deal with.

Sept. 27, 2019, 9:34 a.m.
Posts: 158
Joined: Feb. 13, 2016

I'm bumping this thread again to encourage others to write in to 'infoweb@dnv.org' and 'council@dnv.org' to let them know that putting a single use bridge on this heavily trafficked multi-use section of the Baden Powell is not a long term solution.

I stopped to take a closer look at this last weekend and still can't understand why they didn't design the new bridge with a bicycle ramp exit in the first place. It certainly would have made more sense than what they are faced with now.

I've done what I can and suspect any further emails from me will just be ignored so now its up to others to keep this on DNV staff and council's radar.


 Last edited by: Xorrox on Sept. 27, 2019, 9:37 a.m., edited 3 times in total.
Reason: clarity and grammatical errors
Oct. 11, 2019, 1:53 p.m.
Posts: 877
Joined: June 26, 2012

Looks like it’s getting fixed:

https://www.instagram.com/p/B3feT3oHvJL/?igshid=1d4j2iusjl2wj

Oct. 14, 2019, 3:24 p.m.
Posts: 158
Joined: Feb. 13, 2016

Yep, just rode it today. The fix was so simple, I’m not really sure what DNV’s objection was or why they did not plan this from the beginning. The ramp is mostly ‘gold’ dirt so it will still need maintenance from time to time but still...  Kudos to the NSMBA for making this happen!


 Last edited by: Xorrox on Oct. 14, 2019, 3:25 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Oct. 14, 2019, 7:50 p.m.
Posts: 771
Joined: Nov. 18, 2015

I’d be interested in hearing how the fix went down. I also traded emails with DNV - they outlined why the previous bridge came down and why the initial design was what it was. 

The cut railing that showed up one night was vandalism, not the result of feedback. They may have built off of it but it started out differently. 

Hope that the fix works and sticks and was also DNV action.

Oct. 15, 2019, 6:47 a.m.
Posts: 158
Joined: Feb. 13, 2016

Posted by: Ddean

I’d be interested in hearing how the fix went down. I also traded emails with DNV - they outlined why the previous bridge came down and why the initial design was what it was.

The cut railing that showed up one night was vandalism, not the result of feedback. They may have built off of it but it started out differently.

Hope that the fix works and sticks and was also DNV action.

I can't see this happening without DNV at least washing their hands of the whole thing. Given the somewhat minimalistic nature of the fix ( I'm definitely not being critical - I'm a big fan of the KISS principal) I'd guess that we / the NSMBA made the DNV so sick of hearing about this that they gave the builders permission to put in a 'temporary' fix to limit further stream bank erosion as long as it did not impact the structure and supports of the new bridge. That way they limit their liability while making all the complaints go away.


 Last edited by: Xorrox on Oct. 15, 2019, 6:48 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Reason: sentence structure mistake
Oct. 15, 2019, 9:17 a.m.
Posts: 1318
Joined: Feb. 26, 2015

Posted by: Xorrox

Posted by: Ddean

I’d be interested in hearing how the fix went down. I also traded emails with DNV - they outlined why the previous bridge came down and why the initial design was what it was.

The cut railing that showed up one night was vandalism, not the result of feedback. They may have built off of it but it started out differently.

Hope that the fix works and sticks and was also DNV action.

I can't see this happening without DNV at least washing their hands of the whole thing. Given the somewhat minimalistic nature of the fix ( I'm definitely not being critical - I'm a big fan of the KISS principal) I'd guess that we / the NSMBA made the DNV so sick of hearing about this that they gave the builders permission to put in a 'temporary' fix to limit further stream bank erosion as long as it did not impact the structure and supports of the new bridge. That way they limit their liability while making all the complaints go away.

Hate to say it but this thread makes us look like a bunch of entitled whiners. It was only six steps, so we had to jump off our bike for 3 seconds. Is it worth annoying the crap out of the DNV? I'm sure Digger and Co were on top of it.


 Last edited by: Brocklanders on Oct. 15, 2019, 9:29 a.m., edited 1 time in total.
Oct. 15, 2019, 12:43 p.m.
Posts: 771
Joined: Nov. 18, 2015

I strongly disagree

They put a single use bridge on a multiuse trail - silence is the fastest way to perceived irrelevance. If its only NSMBA vocalizing concern, pretty soon the big picture (that they represent thousands of members and also share views of many more thousands of non-members) is lost.

Decision makers need to consider how each decision will impact all the user groups (which includes riders in this specific case) when they determine a path forward; if they loose sight of that, they need to be reminded.

Oct. 15, 2019, 3:17 p.m.
Posts: 158
Joined: Feb. 13, 2016

Posted by: Brocklanders

Hate to say it but this thread makes us look like a bunch of entitled whiners. It was only six steps, so we had to jump off our bike for 3 seconds. Is it worth annoying the crap out of the DNV? I'm sure Digger and Co were on top of it.

I agree that in 'the grand scheme of things' this was only a minor inconvenience, definitely a prime example of a 'first world' problem, and that there are probably any number of more pressing DNV related advocacy issues facing the NSMBA.

However, the main reason I felt like I personally should address this is what the decision to replace a multi-use bridge with one that is essentially pedestrian only says about the DNV's priorities, focus and understanding of the mountain biking user group. The DNV has previously spent money studying how the multi-use nature of these sections of the Baden Powell could be improved and has committed to working in that direction. However, when it came to this bridge replacement, they decided it was not a high enough priority to plan for a multi-use replacement given the difficulties involved. To me that means that one or more people at the DNV who were involved in this decision (and who would also likely be involved in other mountain bike trail related issues) probably needed a bit of a reminder that mountain bikers as a group are here to stay, that the decisions the DNV makes that impact us are noticed, that we care, and that we will make our voice heard on issues (large or small) that affect us. If I need to be a little annoying to accomplish this so be it.


 Last edited by: Xorrox on Oct. 15, 2019, 3:17 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Reason: spelling

Forum jump: