I rode Hodges yesterday with a noob, we parked behind the Shell on the east side and rode west. I was bummed to find out the the upper fire road was closed by the San Diegito River Park and marked as private property, new fence put up and everything. We rode on and damn it, the little single track that connects the upper and lower fire roads and comes out just above the lower creek crossing is closed also. I wanted to climb the switchs to the upper creek crossing but being with a noob he didn't want to climb, so I'm not sure if that fun bridge is off limits or not.

There were reports of a guy riding a Panda through there that scared the park authorities.

_________________
Team Chode!

The utility easement (fire road) is actually on private property. The homeowners above the "trail" have complained to the San Dieguito River Park people about pedestrian and bicycle traffic on their land. They even wanted the SDRP to construct a fence on the actual property line, which is below the utility road. So looks like the entitled homeowners get their way and we lose a fun rock roller and a decent section of downhill singletrack. Such is life in San Diego lately.......

-CHEERS

Yep,it's always something. I saw this noise ordinance for North County, basically it's to ban off road activity on your own land.Has noise changed since the last 20 years & I didn't know about.What a joke.

http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2008/10 ... 5fa0a7.txt

_________________
If you have any Real Estate questions, or looking to buy or sell a home, PM me.

Good thing mountain bikes are silent so they can't ban us for noise!

This stuff is getting out of hand but what can you do? The only way it seems to fight stuff like this in California is litigation. Makes it all that more important to work together to get our own areas to ride.

I don't understand it though. That easement road has had No Trespassing signs posted at all entrances for years. NOW they decide to fence/close it out of the blue??!! There must be something else in play to cause it.

Totally agree,was it timing with the construction & hit the city or ???

_________________
If you have any Real Estate questions, or looking to buy or sell a home, PM me.

Sucks too. There were a couple fun features up there. MY 12 year old was trying to get the courage to roll the steep little chute at the end. Oh well.

By the our time kids are our age I hold there's still a place to MTB in the City.

_________________
If you have any Real Estate questions, or looking to buy or sell a home, PM me.

Seriously. It's a sad state of affairs when you say that and you aren't kidding.

So, I did a ninja mission up there Sunday night, at low and behold, the fence that was at the top of the first uphill if you're starting from the 15 side heading west has been moved North about 15 feet, and extended about a million feet in each direction. Also, new fencing is up right above the highway, if you're up on the fire road right below the houses, that blocks the singletrack that used runs down to where the main trail turns to go under the 15/Hodges bridge. There is a new sign at the bottom of the single track that runs between the lower and upper fire road about 100 feet east of the creek crossing that's about a mile west of the 15.

Now here's the weird part. The hole in the fence (yes I realize it's a whole in the fence - no need for some smart ass to point out to me or the other reader of this post that it's a "whole in a fence and probably shouldn't be there" in the first place) that allows access to the upper supposedly closed fire road from the southeast intersection of 15/Via Rancho Parkway is STILL THERE. So WTF????? They fence/sign off the connector trails between the two fireroads, and that's about all they did. All the rest of everything is just like it's always been. The doubles are still there. The wooden bridges that crosses the upper creek crossing is still there. The fun little shute is still there. The rock drop on the upper fire road is still there. Nothing's changed. Hell, I even talked with some nice people who were out walking on the upper fire road. They were supprised to see the new fence and seemed kinda bummed that there was closures going on too, and they were on foot! They were really nice people, I enjoyed hearing the opinion of a couple who's property backed up to the upper fire road. So there you have it.

Yep, this is the kicker. I was enjoying the view from up top of Bernardo Mtn. when a family hiked up and had a picnic. We talked a bit, and they mentioned they lived in the neighborhood below. I asked about the fencing--they weren't even aware of it since the creek crossing is still open.

So the residents of the area get their own "private entrance" to SDRP via the creek crossing? Give me a break. Close it to everyone or open it back up is what I say. I emailed the senior ranger of SDRP (David), but I haven't heard back yet.

I highly doubt the utility road is *on* the resident's property. I'm pulling the parcel maps for the area now just to confirm, though.

Ok. I'm still doing some investigative work, but I am surprised at what I've seen so far.

The first parcel map I pulled does confirm that part of the easement is on private property. It is a very strange configuration. Those people have quite a bit of land...very nice.

In any case, the last parcel map updated for part of the area is 24 years old, but shows the easement as a dotted line marked as "Open Space/Hiking Easement." It cuts through some of the parcels, but it is marked as Open Space. I'm curious how this is interpreted at the county level. Unless the parcels were re-evaluated, I'm guessing it should still be "open space." Also, the entire easement isn't cut through people's land. It appears that the first half of it follows the boundaries of property lines.

I'm grabbing some more parcel maps to get a larger overall picture.

Ok, final message while I'm at work...on this topic...

"Open Space" is a designation used by the County on parcel maps to 'zone' an area as an ecological or biological preserve of sorts. At least, that is how it is typically used. It doesn't grant the public a right to use that land, it's really a means to prevent the land owner from touching it. So in essence, the property owners own that land, but the county won't let them develop it. For exact details on the open space designations in these parcels would require pulling the title work/deed for each parcel. I don't think it's worth the effort to request that right now.

It still seems odd that SDRP didn't close off the creek crossing at the end of the easement.

Oh well. Lump this in with all the other losses lately. What a shame...