NSMBA Strategic Plan

^^^

This brings up a good related point about signage and trail head info.  I don't know what it's like at the Fromme lot as I've never parked there but a good sign board at major entry points can help inform people of the trail network options and parking alternatives. I think the trail signs could be better as well by being bigger and showing a map of the immediate area so people are aware of alternatives and where they are generally headed. I know there's the Trailforks option, but good on trail signage can help improve the user experience for all. I guess you could also tack on to that the preferred usage/direction of a trail so people know what to look out for.

Posted by: LoamtoHome

anything that will happen will be slower than a herd of snails traveling through peanut butter.  It took 5 years to get that 30 second new trail in Squamish put in.....

Which trail? The One-Up / Airplane Mode trail only took so long as a few builders built it without machines, building what looks to be a machine built trail. For Mikki's Magic, that got Section 57 approval pretty fast, and was built in no time due to Dreamwizards diggers and the like.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: Coiler

These are just a few thoughts and by no way represent exact trail alignment; yellow for up and blue for down.

If that yellow climb from Pipeline connected to Mountain Highway at the second switchback it would make it insanely popular for beginners. Easy to do a Mountain highway climb to expresso/pipeline, then climb back up and do bobsled, floppy bunny or kirkford back to the parking lot. 

It would also be a good argument for keeping BP as it is, which I really enjoy but isn't a blue connector. Although I enjoy NQ, it's also not beginner friendly at all. Might spread out the ebikes on the climb trails as well.

The Dempsey Connector is an infuriating situation for the entire user community. There’s not only zero way out for riders short of Skull or the ‘other’ routes but there’s zero way out for hikers who are shown a green/beginner hike at the trailhead with no warning that it ends abruptly and to turn around.

Out of all the plans and ideas, I wish that there was a good solution to this for everyone who wants to connect up the dots on this mountain  

According to the DNV, the Dempsey connector to Coleman idea which has so much merit and makes such an obvious, connection, is never going to happen. That entire section is zoned for 6 parcels of land to be sold at some point in the future and is not under park’s jurisdiction.

The original road plan was to connect Coleman through up to Braemar but I think it got stymied by huge sections of granite and small creeks - there’s a set of stairs at the end of Coleman that go nowhere but mirror the pedestrian access from Kilmer to Dempsey. Last year there were DNV surveyors doing site work with theodolites etc and confirmed to me that it’s usually about 5 years from that to ground breaking.

Posted by: syncro

That's pretty presumptive on your part and it ignores getting to the mid and upper level trails. This also isn't about what you or I like to ride, it's about creating more options across the network for all riders. That's part of being cohesive, so that sone people aren't stuck with limited options or to certain sections of the mountain. It also helps to spread traffic out. 

I simply shared my opinion and pointed out an existing connection that seems underutilized and that I think could potentially fill in some of the gaps without the need for new trail construction (DanL in the meantime provided some context on why that situation is the way it is). Part of my view revolves around my impression that some of the new connectors that you propose would only add more incentives to park at the parking lot which is already under high pressure.

You may of course disagree with my opinion and that's totally OK. However, to say my opinion or trail preference is not important is just not constructive. I'm one of the riders in the community and my voice counts just as much as anyone else's. I'm totally fine with the trail network going in a direction that doesn't exactly align with my personal preferences as long as it's representative of the wider community's needs and wishes, not on what a small group of people thinks is the way to go. To know what the wider community wants and needs, a good starting point is listening to everyone.

Posted by: DanL

The Dempsey Connector is an infuriating situation for the entire user community. There’s not only zero way out for riders short of Skull or the ‘other’ routes but there’s zero way out for hikers who are shown a green/beginner hike at the trailhead with no warning that it ends abruptly and to turn around.

Out of all the plans and ideas, I wish that there was a good solution to this for everyone who wants to connect up the dots on this mountain  

According to the DNV, the Dempsey connector to Coleman idea which has so much merit and makes such an obvious, connection, is never going to happen. That entire section is zoned for 6 parcels of land to be sold at some point in the future and is not under park’s jurisdiction.

The original road plan was to connect Coleman through up to Braemar but I think it got stymied by huge sections of granite and small creeks - there’s a set of stairs at the end of Coleman that go nowhere but mirror the pedestrian access from Kilmer to Dempsey. Last year there were DNV surveyors doing site work with theodolites etc and confirmed to me that it’s usually about 5 years from that to ground breaking.

Thanks for providing context, that's too bad really. While I'm personally fine with dropping down Lower Skull this is not a viable option for all riders.

Posted by: [email protected]

Posted by: syncro

That's pretty presumptive on your part and it ignores getting to the mid and upper level trails. This also isn't about what you or I like to ride, it's about creating more options across the network for all riders. That's part of being cohesive, so that sone people aren't stuck with limited options or to certain sections of the mountain. It also helps to spread traffic out. 

I simply shared my opinion and pointed out an existing connection that seems underutilized and that I think could potentially fill in some of the gaps without the need for new trail construction (DanL in the meantime provided some context on why that situation is the way it is). Part of my view revolves around my impression that some of the new connectors that you propose would only add more incentives to park at the parking lot which is already under high pressure.

You may of course disagree with my opinion and that's totally OK. However, to say my opinion or trail preference is not important is just not constructive. I'm one of the riders in the community and my voice counts just as much as anyone else's. I'm totally fine with the trail network going in a direction that doesn't exactly align with my personal preferences as long as it's representative of the wider community's needs and wishes, not on what a small group of people thinks is the way to go. To know what the wider community wants and needs, a good starting point is listening to everyone.

The connectors I proposed would encourage people  to park at Braemar and give them options to mid mountain, lower mountain and upper mountain trails. What you mentioned is mostly about the lower mountain trails while I'm referring to the whole network and creating options to be able to access more of the network from the Braemar area so people don't have to park at the lot. 

I'm not sure what you read earlier, but I didn't say your opinion or preference is not important. I said it's not just about you or me, but "creating more options across the network for all riders", which includes you and me. And if you want to talk about being constructive, you probably shouldn't be telling people what or what not to say - that's presumptive. 

Don't reply "not everyone has the fitness or the desire to ride Dempsey Connector to Mountain View Park and climb up Griffen and King of the Shore". Like I also wrote, lots of quick lap options from Braemer if someone doesn't want to ride all the way up.

Posted by: vantanclub

If that yellow climb from Pipeline connected to Mountain Highway at the second switchback it would make it insanely popular for beginners. Easy to do a Mountain highway climb to expresso/pipeline, then climb back up and do bobsled, floppy bunny or kirkford back to the parking lot. 

It would also be a good argument for keeping BP as it is, which I really enjoy but isn't a blue connector. Although I enjoy NQ, it's also not beginner friendly at all. Might spread out the ebikes on the climb trails as well.

That's a good point and it's easy to include. I've adjusted the map to reflect it. 

Posted by: [email protected]

Posted by: DanL

The Dempsey Connector is an infuriating situation for the entire user community. There’s not only zero way out for riders short of Skull or the ‘other’ routes but there’s zero way out for hikers who are shown a green/beginner hike at the trailhead with no warning that it ends abruptly and to turn around.

Out of all the plans and ideas, I wish that there was a good solution to this for everyone who wants to connect up the dots on this mountain  

According to the DNV, the Dempsey connector to Coleman idea which has so much merit and makes such an obvious, connection, is never going to happen. That entire section is zoned for 6 parcels of land to be sold at some point in the future and is not under park’s jurisdiction.

The original road plan was to connect Coleman through up to Braemar but I think it got stymied by huge sections of granite and small creeks - there’s a set of stairs at the end of Coleman that go nowhere but mirror the pedestrian access from Kilmer to Dempsey. Last year there were DNV surveyors doing site work with theodolites etc and confirmed to me that it’s usually about 5 years from that to ground breaking.

Thanks for providing context, that's too bad really. While I'm personally fine with dropping down Lower Skull this is not a viable option for all riders.

yeah, it's a huge shame because there had been some strategic panning to look into creating a multi use trail from the connector/skull crossing back across to the ladies exit at the gate

Is anyone aware of what the plans are for Neds? There was an ominous instagram posting with a digger “ if you like neds the way it is, better get a ride in soon” 

Posted by: DanL

Is anyone aware of what the plans are for Neds? There was an ominous instagram posting with a digger “ if you like neds the way it is, better get a ride in soon” 

its closed.  Work being done by Dream Wizards. I expect a lot of rerouting with a lot of better drainage.

Posted by: trumpstinyhands

Posted by: LoamtoHome

anything that will happen will be slower than a herd of snails traveling through peanut butter.  It took 5 years to get that 30 second new trail in Squamish put in.....

Which trail? The One-Up / Airplane Mode trail only took so long as a few builders built it without machines, building what looks to be a machine built trail. For Mikki's Magic, that got Section 57 approval pretty fast, and was built in no time due to Dreamwizards diggers and the like.

How long did the Section 57 get approved for Airplane Mode?  I assume some take longer than others.   Boogie Nights got completely rebuilt in a few months with no machines

Posted by: LoamtoHome

Posted by: DanL

Is anyone aware of what the plans are for Neds? There was an ominous instagram posting with a digger “ if you like neds the way it is, better get a ride in soon” 

its closed.  Work being done by Dream Wizards. I expect a lot of rerouting with a lot of better drainage.

Good to hear - I couldn't readily see any info on the nsmba site about it, but it may be in past news sections?

It’s being done by DW and IMBA