Burnaby Mountain 2013

the following is a PSA from the Burnaby Mountain Biking Association:

There are some serious braiding issues on one of the burnaby trails known as "Uppercut". This trail was built by the BMBA in co-ordination with the City of Burnaby, and is the ONLY trail that we have been permitted to build and have major input on. It is kind of our flagship trail, and our baby. Not perfect, but we are learning.

Over the past 3-4 months, there have been two braids added - one at the start of the a-frame, and the other at the sharp right hand corner not far from the end of the trail (you ride down the hill, make a sharp right to a technical climb). The second braid bypasses the sharp right, but does not line up with the climb.

It was originally thought that the braid at the a-frame was made to avoid riding the ladderwork when it was wet - that, and the rockwork at the end of the a-frame had deteriorated. So wire mesh was added to the "down" of the ladder, the rockwork was redone, and the braid was blocked. Unfortunately the braid has been slowly reopened, and just recently someone has created a rather large swath through the forest to make the braid into a new line.

As well, the sharp right hand corner referred to above (the original line) was blocked, and the braid beside the corner reopened.

To whoever is doing this - PLEASE STOP. You are jeopardizing our relationship with the City. Both lines in their original state are completely rideable. They are not difficult - Uppercut is a "blue" trail. Both the a-frame, and the technical climb, can be walked (and ridden) in both directions. Both have options for hikers. There is no need to "alter" the trail. The forest devastation is appalling. Yes, it bothers me when ferns are trampled.

These braids will be blocked. Again.

If anyone wants to discuss this, please feel free to send me a pm.

I blocked the second braid with 4 fallen trees that took two of us to lift. I then threw rocks and smaller debris all over it. I don't get that braid at all, it makes the climb impossible, and doesn't really cut much off the trail.

Braids suck, so it is a shame it has happened. My question is, why have a A-frame on that portin of the trail? Seems that trail building is moving away from wood structures. I've always wondered why it was there, as it all it does is kill the flow.

Lady Gravity is right, Naheeno Trail is a bit unique in that it is not within the Burnaby Mtn Conservation Area. It was on City of Burnaby land a long time ago. It ran through Naheeno Park (incl. the kid's adventure playground) and was an official trail. The larger bridges and the steps down to the ring road were built then. It eventually ended up as SFU land and like Naheeno Park in general was left for the forest to reclaim. From what I have learned, SFU would like to pretend it doesn't exist: they don't want responsibility and probably don't want trouble when UniverCity eventually expands and wipes out most of that whole forest save for a few small parklets.

Because they ignore it, the trail has actually seen a decent amount of care over the years and is a fun little flat out run. Over the years, when structures have been damaged or simply fell apart, SFU has not responded. Except Surprise, when the tree came down this winter and damaged the topmost bridge, it was not only cut up but the bridge itself was repaired. This may have been done by a citizen rider, but the bridge work looks like "parks/maintenance department" construction. If SFU did it, it is an odd occurrence.

Another bit of news: a new trail-bed of crush is being laid down (North to South) along the second creek (longer bridge without 1/2 of its railing) after the cut where they just laid a pipe line of some kind (at the new wide mud crossing). There is no indication as to where it is heading. It's odd how close they are putting it to the creek.

Naheno "park" is not really a park in that it has no status, nor is it in the conservation area. The area is outlined on plans as a park but has never been officially designated, so it stays as simply "non-developable" land, which means the trail remains. I sort of like this status. Regardless, much of the trail runs outside of the Naheno park boundaries into what the Burnaby OCP calls the "south neighbourhood." It is most likely that UniverCity will not expand into this area due to environmental constraints and quality of ecosystem health. Discovery Park, may in the future grow along the Nelson Way corridor, but that would not impact the trail in any way - see online campus masterplan.

The new crush trail is along the BC Hydro corridor. A new secondary SFU waterline has been installed under this right of way. Currently, Hydro brushes that corridor every couple of years. As part of the water line installation, the agreement was to eliminate the need to brush this corridor and simply add a crush multi-use trail that can be also used to service the corridor. So this will be a new climbing and pedestrian link along with south flank of the mountain that will run from the parking lots near Discovery Park down to Gaglardi intersection, where you will be able to hook up with the new Sidewinder by next year.

Much disinformation in this thread.

Those Braids on Uppercut suck and are pointless. The climb is best approached from the original line. The fixes to the a-frame are great. It's not all about flow… sometimes it's nice to have an a-frame to mix it up and teach new skills. It's my kids' favourite part of the trail.

Edit to add: the gondola is not shelved. Transit projects simply take time. Patience.

Braids suck, so it is a shame it has happened. My question is, why have a A-frame on that portin of the trail? Seems that trail building is moving away from wood structures. I've always wondered why it was there, as it all it does is kill the flow.

It goes over a large tree? The big issue with people short cutting the A-frame is that riders essentially carry a straight line down through the next two corners, often too fast, and by the looks of all the rock and material littered through the lower turns, heavily on the brakes.

I don't see the A'frame as a 'flow killer'. I see it as a choking point which is sometimes needed. Can the exit and turn be improved to increase the flow? Sure it can, and it possibly may during one of the future trail days that are in the planning stages.

Braiding abounds….The lowest technical section on Lower Snake is another example a braid that is causing heavy damage. Riders have decided they either can't or won't ride that short right to left over the log. Solution? Go straight over the hump to the left, create a huge muddy bombhole at the bottom, and carry mud 30 feet down trail. I guess riders have to create some high speed gnar on a low angle low speed section of an easy blue trail…..:rolleyes:

I want to make sure that this doesn't come across as a pissing match, so if it sounds like it, it's not my intention.

I hate wood work. My kids do as well. My wife loves wood work. All of us like techy natural trails. It doesn't make sense to me to throw in a feature, that causes riders to break heavy into a corner and cause more erosion, hence the need for the stone at the end of the A-frame, that has had to be rebuilt once already. I would get it if we were allowed to do sanctioned trail maintenance on the trails on Burnaby Mountain on a regular bases, but we aren't, maybe thats going to change, but from what I here, thats not going to happen anytime soon.

That A-frame is really tricky on the climb up, and once you crest the peak, it's about the only rest point on the trail, so I like it!

I want to make sure that this doesn't come across as a pissing match, so if it sounds like it, it's not my intention.

I hate wood work. My kids do as well. My wife loves wood work. All of us like techy natural trails. It doesn't make sense to me to throw in a feature, that causes riders to break heavy into a corner and cause more erosion, hence the need for the stone at the end of the A-frame, that has had to be rebuilt once already. I would get it if we were allowed to do sanctioned trail maintenance on the trails on Burnaby Mountain on a regular bases, but we aren't, maybe thats going to change, but from what I here, thats not going to happen anytime soon.

im sorry you don't like the feature. when we designed/built the trail we decided to use the fallen log to create something slightly more challenging. yes the exit gets worn down, and may need regular maintenance (we didn't build it right the first time anyways) but we're ok with that.

also, awesterner has it completely bang on with it being a speed check.

Not sure why your apologizing for my dis like of the feature? It's my opion, no need to be sorry for that. My point is, I don't feel it fits the trail and if you wanted a speed check there's better ways to do it. Throw in a couple of switch backs. Not going help with the braiding but at least it make more sense.

Any idea if there are going to be more trail days this year? If so, I will be there with shovel in hand. Sure would be nice if Burnaby would allow a TAP program.

Not sure why your apologizing for my dis like of the feature? It's my opion, no need to be sorry for that. My point is, I don't feel it fits the trail and if you wanted a speed check there's better ways to do it. Throw in a couple of switch backs. Not going help with the braiding but at least it make more sense.

Any idea if there are going to be more trail days this year? If so, I will be there with shovel in hand. Sure would be nice if Burnaby would allow a TAP program.

I do understand your position on the erosion. The rocky exit is rough, but there actually isn't even a brake bump into the corner. Clearly people are slowing enough since somebody added the wire. Before that, it was extremely slippery coming down, subsequently messing up the exit.

Yes there are trail days coming up, stay tuned:-)

I do understand your position on the erosion. The rocky exit is rough, but there actually isn't even a brake bump into the corner. Clearly people are slowing enough since somebody added the wire. Before that, it was extremely slippery coming down, subsequently messing up the exit.

Yes there are trail days coming up, stay tuned:-)

My bad. I don't ride SFU a lot. Usually ride in the valley. The last time I rode the trail was before the wire and it was basically a shit show on the exit, so I stopped taking the kids down the trail. I usually ride SFU with my kids. That being said, I still think its a odd place for a A-frame, when a chain saw would of dealt with the tree issue and made for a much better corner.

Heading out for a quick ride now, so I will see if my love has changed for the A-frame.

I want to make sure that this doesn't come across as a pissing match, so if it sounds like it, it's not my intention.

I hate wood work. My kids do as well. My wife loves wood work. All of us like techy natural trails. It doesn't make sense to me to throw in a feature, that causes riders to break heavy into a corner and cause more erosion, hence the need for the stone at the end of the A-frame, that has had to be rebuilt once already. I would get it if we were allowed to do sanctioned trail maintenance on the trails on Burnaby Mountain on a regular bases, but we aren't, maybe thats going to change, but from what I here, thats not going to happen anytime soon.

My point is, I don't feel it fits the trail and if you wanted a speed check there's better ways to do it. Throw in a couple of switch backs. Not going help with the braiding but at least it make more sense.

i like wood work but agree with you on the principle of your complaint here. this type of scenario happens too often imo and the result is blown out corners. the issue however is not with the a-frame itself but the trail design before, during and after the a-frame.

that said there's nothing wrong with tight corners, you just shouldn't have them in higher speed sections.

that said there's nothing wrong with tight corners, you just shouldn't have them in higher speed sections.

nothing on burnaby mountain is supposed to be "high speed". the a-frame works fine.

nothing on burnaby mountain is supposed to be "high speed". the a-frame works fine.

it doesn't matter whether it's supposed to be high-speed or not, if a section of trail allows a rider to proceed at "high" speed and then the next section requires them to suddenly apply heaving breaking in order to negotiate the trail that's a trail design issue.

the a-frame in question has an immediate turn at the bottom:

- it's a design that's not overly sustainable due the higher level of braking forces required by many riders to negotiate the corner
- it's a TTF that is above the level of the blue/intermediate trail it's on and does not fit in with the the blue/intermediate level of difficulty that exists on bby mtn.

there's a reason that braid has developed - because many riders who ride the trail have a difficult time with that section. we have to face the new reality of the higher participation levels of mtn biking which is that the old attitude of "if you can't ride it walk it" has gone the way of the dodo and people now will just find their own route. the solution is two fold:

1) qualifying moves at the very start of the trail that help the rider determine whether they're capable of riding the trail. having the most challenging section/TTF of the trail buried in the middle of the trail is going to result in people findning another way around something they can't do.

2. desinging a ride-around option for difficult sections/TTF's so that riders don't have to make a braid - you've already provided one for them.

with far more "uneducated" riders on the trail system the way trails are desinged needs to change of the braids will continue to appear. the other option is rider education, but that begs the question of how to achieve that?

and yes, the a-frame does work fine, it's the section of trail after it that doesn't.