A history of the Tunnels saga from 2008 to 2010 for those that need a refresher, along with a more detailed account of what has occurred in the last few months and what we are now asking for:

2008
The city surprised the Los Peñasquitos Citizen's Advisory Committee (CAC) with a push to have the Resource Management Plan (RMP) approved after a revised edition had been silently posted on the city website. Nobody on the mailing list nor anyone on the CAC was notified that it had been posted for review. An uproar followed that more time was needed. I attended and expressed along with Erik Basil and others a grave concern that the trail map below showed only service roads as approved "trails."


Representing the San Diego Mountain Biking Association (SDMBA), I joined with the Multi-Use Trails Coalition (MTC) to map out all the existing trails and put together a trail plan that included the most essential trails and closed over 60% of the existing trails. This plan was presented at the special Sept. 2008 CAC meeting:


In response, the city set out to gps all the trails and review them for sustainability, impact to sensitive species or vernal pools, land ownership or redundancy - and rejected many routes based on these criteria. Just a few examples:
- Tunnel 5 was said to have deer bedding areas
- Eucalyptus Ridge was redundant to Switchbacks
- East Ridge impacted an ecotone (transitional area between habitat zones)
- Mesa Loop was on private property

October 2009
The city releases a trail plan that adds Deer Canyon Trail, Tunnel 1, Switchbacks, Bowtie Trail and Tunnel 2.



To gain a better understanding of the environmental constraints in the area and specifically why certain trails are being denied, I teamed with the The Chaparral Lands Conservancy to review the trails one by one. Together we identified which trails had little impact and could be included. We put together a "compromise" trail plan which included an east-west connection, Sidewinder and the eastern Rim Trail, but these were removed for consideration by the city and agencies, so my support for that plan was also then removed.

January 2010
The city releases another trail plan that adds the Lookout Point Trail.


February 2010
Another special CAC meeting is held and input gathered. While a handful speak for fewer trails, the vast majority voice a need for more trails in this area surrounded by homes.

October 2010
The Zamudio property is acquired by the city, and several of us advocate for inclusion of the Mesa Loop Trail, with an alternate entrance that I identified that avoids a large vernal pool complex.

April 2011
A new trail plan is released with modifications based on further public comment. Tunnel 4 is put in to replace the dangerously loose and steep SDG&E service road, but Tunnel 2 is removed. The western Rim Trail is added. An additional connection is added to the Torrey Santa Fe community, but their HOA refuses to allow any trails that cross their land and opt to lock their gates and close the affected trails.


City presents the plan to the affected community planning groups for Carmel Valley, Rancho Peñasaquitos, Del Mar Mesa as well as the PQ CAC. In it were breakdowns of the process, why certain trails have been added and why many were refused.

My major concerns:
• There is no east-west connection in the southeast portion of the Preserve
• Without either Tunnel 3 (Rocking Horse) or Tunnel 5 — the most popular trails for mountain bikers — the plan is not manageable
• The lack of an approved connection to Duck Pond Trail (Sh*tz) severs the main connection to the Preserve from Peñasquitos Canyon

The concern over the lack of an east-west connection was brought to the attention of the Carmel Valley and Rancho Peñasquitos Community Planning Groups by the chair of the DMM group during those presentations, and in response:
• The Carmel Valley Community Planning Group voted yes on the RMP with the exception that an east-west connection be included, that they would defer to the Del Mar Mesa group to determine.
• The Rancho Peñasquitos Community Planning Group voted the same, yes on the RMP with the exception that an east-west connection be included that they would defer to the Del Mar Mesa group to determine.

I joined with the Del Mar Mesa planning group trails subcommittee to discuss east-west options, and we came to a consensus on some additions we'd like to see. Because the DFG continues to refuse bicycle access to their fenced vernal pool preserve land, we indicated a "hiking only" trail through there with a final route that can be determined by DFG. I identified a route for bicycle access around the fenced area that uses the Mesa Loop Trail, down upper Tunnel 3, then up lower Tunnel 2, then turning left on an old migrant trail before it gets to the DFG fence, and connecting to Tunnel 1.

July 2011
The chair of the DMM planning group and I met with City of San Diego, US Fish & Wildlife and Department of Fish & Game representatives to convey the need for these east-west connections for both bikers and hikers. They looked at our proposed trail additions and said they could not consider the additions until:
• The Vernal Pool HCP is completed. The HCP is a specific conservation plan for vernal pools going through the city now, but may not be finished for a year, two, maybe more. It will specify what type of recreation is allowed near pools. By the way, the city would like us to comment on this plan. See it here: http://www.sandiego.gov/planning/mscp/.
• The Rhodes Crossing development plans are made more clear. The Rhodes Crossing development is where Tunnel 1 dead ends in the city's trail plan, and where the future Darkwood Canyon Trail will need to cross, and there is no set date for final plans there as the land is for sale. They say they need to get a better idea what connections can be made through there.

The lack of a connection to Duck Pond Trail was explained by saying it is not an official trail in the PQ master plan, so the city can't connect to it. But by following that logic, if they tried to update the PQ Master Plan to include Duck Pond Trail, there wouldn't be a trail designated in Del Mar Mesa Preserve to connect to if it isn't included now. So at a DMM Community Planning Group meeting we started by looking at their Community Trail Plan, and it was riddled with errors such as missing trails, incorrect user designations, and even outdated road routes. They requested my assistance in correcting the map and it has been submitted to the city, along with our requested additions in DMM Preserve and the service road that connects to the top of Duck Pond Trail. In addition, I have requested that the city include it now that any concern about sustainability, erosion and widening seem to have been resolved with Rich J.'s excellent work on it. The Del Mar Mesa Community Planning Group has not yet voted for an official position on the updated map, but should prior to the special CAC meeting.

To make the current City of San Diego Trail Plan more clear, I've put in my own map:


And here is the city's plan with SDMBA's requested additions:


The east-west biking route accomplishes four big goals:
• It creates an east-west connection that allows for a larger perimeter loop
• It provide a connection to the future Darkwood Canyon Trail without dipping all the way down to the bottom of the canyon
• It includes Tunnel 3 (Rocking Horse), perhaps the most popular trail in the Preserve, as well as the super flowy Mesa Loop Trail
• It avoids vernal pools!

My feeling is that without these additions the trail plan is unmanageable, as people will seek their own connection across the mesa. The city and agencies have already posted cameras to monitor usage so they know where to patrol. They are looking into using California State Wardens to patrol the entire area rather than just the fenced DFG land once the trail plan is released. How the state comes up with these funds when campgrounds are being shuttered, I don't know.
• What are your thoughts on the city's plan?
• What would be your thoughts on that plan with adding an east-west biking link using Mesa Loop, upper Tunnel 3 and lower Tunnel 2, a hiking trail through the DFG land and, of course, the service road connection to Duck Pond Trail?

By providing trail users the natural experiences they are seeking with high quality trails, they are far more likely to remain on those designated trails, protecting habitat and species. Of interest to the city and agencies might be whether the public would comply with their trail plan with our requested trail additions.

Your input at the meeting will be immensely valuable:

Los Peñasquitos Canyon Preserve Citizens Advisory Committee
Special Meeting on Del Mar Mesa Trail Plan:
Wednesday October 19, 7:00 to 9:00 pm
Park Village Elementary (Multipurpose Room/Auditorium)
7930 Park Village Road
San Diego, CA 92129

Thanks Robo. I'm 100% in nuthugging agreement.

wow robo. bravo!! thank you for putting that whole story together.


a couple of comments, questions:
1. t2,t3 to t4 connector. the lower end of t2 (after merging w/t3) was originally approved, then swapped out for t4. a good exchange, but if it was okay as a trail before (ie, little to no enviro impact), why is it now out? it is a wonderful connecting trail to the e-w section of t4, and also to get back up to the intel/housing area. this connector is a very short trail, but important for connectivity.

2. t5. a biggie! as you mentioned one of the 2 major interests in these trails. the deer bedding has been a controversial if not dishonest attempt to close this trail. could the addition be pending a new appraisal of the area, now that the leveling of the mesa for the housing project is completed?

3. migrant map. if you are to show these trails plans at the public meeting, and i am hoping you do as it will put everyone in the audience on the same page, do you still have the (in)famous 'spaghetti' trails map of all the migrant trails you gps'd in 2007(8?)? this serves two purposes, to show we have not built 'new' trails in the area, and the initially requested trail plan (which looks congested relative to the current plan) is actually a carefully thought out plan which, as you mentioned, substantially reduced the trails as determined by sustainability, use, enviro concerns, etc.


very well done. thank you again.

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

This is an important connector, and is probably my biggest concern with the proposed additions to the trail plan. It will be incredibly hard to close. But the city is emphatic about having an uninterrupted core habitat area, and by leaving this portion out we can achieve that. I have mentioned to the city and agencies that I would support using this lower portion of T2 (or lower T3 depending on how you name it) instead of using T2 going up and east if that route is deemed too problematic (it crosses USFWS land).



We have continually argued about this study, but no one is budging on it. I feel including T5 would vastly ease trail management.



I still have the map and will probably show it again at the meeting.

yes, i can see that point. was not a core area of concern before when this t2 trail was approved (before the t4 swap)?
another point is that bikers do not leave the trail area, as do hikers. if this were a continuum of the bikers trails link, a narrow 2 ft wide trail does very little to disturb the habitat. i think the current dogma of a small trail as contaminating an entire region is a wrong and unproved assumption.
btw, this trail is well used by the neighborhood residents as well. will they also be subject to $400-500 tickets, or just those riding bikes?




an excellent point.

as for the study, a scientific study of poor or compromised data is an invalid study. period. trust me on that one. that should be the starting point. if there is no current valid study where the data wasn't compromised by heavy machinery, a known deterrent to animals, then there is simply no valid study. anyone promoting such a study or the 'nat'l avg. trails density' poop which was promoted last public meeting should have his intelligence and/or integrity put into question, and recused from further participation in this matter.




good. i love spaghetti!

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

"That's not the baseline"

AWESOME work Robo, and the Post of the Year for our Advocacy forum hands down!!

Just for the heck of it, has anyone mentioned the fact that these 'migrant ' trails (tunnels) have been there for in some cases maybe thousands of years, used as connecter trails from one migration route to another by the Kuumeyay? I heard that from an Elder out at Viejas.

Of course, they didn't have horses, so there was no need to cut those trees. The canopy was just fine!

I look forward to seeing you, E, and J at the meeting. I'm bringing the entire posse.

_________________
Scum on a Bike

Good news / bad news from a city update at last night's Del Mar Mesa Community Planning Group meeting:

- The service road connection to the top of Duck Pond Trail ("Sh*tz") has been approved and added to Del Mar Mesa's community trail plan, and it should therefore follow that it is added to the Preserve's trail plan.

- The east-west hiking trail access was refused by CDFG through the fenced area for now. Perhaps when the Vernal Pool HCP and Rhodes Crossing project are finalized, this can be revisited.

- The east-west biking route of Mesa Loop (across the old Zamudio property) to Tunnel 3 to upper Tunnel 2 was denied because, according to the City of SD: "Zamudio mitigation parcel paid for by SANDAG & CalTrans - they will transfer to City with an easement that prohibits all trails except Tunnel 4." It was brought up this trail existed when it was purchased.

I have updated the maps below to include the service road as approved and included in green, and kept the trails we are seeking. I am seeking info for the contact at SANDAG/CalTrans.

Interesting (Zamudio). Hmmmmm . . .

At this evening's CAC meeting for Los Penasquitos, the committee voted 7-6 to approve the Del Mar Mesa Trails (Closure) Plan, which formally closes more than 85% of the existing trails and specifically excludes the east-west connectors, either through the CDFW land or using Tunnel 3-to-2 to connect across the southerly side of the area. Well over one hundred members of the community were present and not one, other than particular members of the CAC, spoke in favor of the resource management plan, but many spoke publicly out of concern that this plan represents a current and pending failure in land and resource preservation.

The many who oppose this plan believe it is inadequate to protect the habitat and provide public access to diminishing open space, in that it doesn't provide appropriate trails for public access and will result in the criminalization of the public who overwhelmingly oppose the level of trail closures. Note that THERE ARE NO NEW TRAILS, but this is about how many we close. This plan is two trails short and with those two trails will have far less “Trail per acre” than the Carmel Mountain Preserve.

Tomorrow, City staff will represent to the LPQ Task Force (Lighter, DeMaio, Slater-Price) that the CAC has approved the plan and that the Del Mar Mesa, Carmel Valley and Penasquitos community planning boards have also. In the case of the planning boards, their published minutes establish otherwise: they voted NO UNLESS an East-West Connector was added. None has been.

If you believe the DMM Resource management Plan should be rejected by the City Council members and County Supervisor who comprise the “Task Force”, then you must take the following actions, NOW:

1) FAX and Call each of: Carl DeMaio, Sherrie Lightner, Pam Slater-Price, Mayor Sanders and the Union Tribune before 1:00pm tomorrow, October 20th. FAX is better than email these days. LIGHT UP THE PHONES.

2) Come to the Task Force public meeting, tomorrow October 20th at 2pm, downtown, and voice your opinion. Be concise and polite, but firm and honest.

3) Get as many persons as you can to do the same.

4) Look for a report on the Task Force's action and prepare to continue contacts.

The address for the Task Force Meeting is the room right next to City Council Chambers, located at:

12th Floor, Room A
202 C Street
San Diego, 92101

The meeting starts at 2pm. Parking is available in the Concourse and in nearby Ace lots. You must have cash for the concourse.

The contact points for you are:

Sherrie Lightner, Council District 1
Phone: (619) 236-6611
From North County:
(858) 484-3808
Fax: (619) 236-6999
Email Sherri:
sherrilightner@sandiego.gov

Carl DeMaio, Council District 5
Telephone: (619) 236-6655
Fax: (619) 238-0915
Email: carldemaio@sandiego.gov

Supervisor Pam Slater-Price, County District 3
t: (619) 531-5533
(800) 852-7334
f: (619) 234-1559

Mayor Jerry Sanders
Phone: (619) 236-6330
Fax: (619) 236-7228
JerrySanders@sandiego.gov

"Carmel Valley Road extension" should probably be "Camino Del Sur extension."

http://www.delmartimes.net/2011/10/25/f ... onnection/


Fish and Game could consider east-west connection

Karen Billing
Staff Writer

Randy Rodriguez, of the California Department of Fish and Game, said that an east-west connection for Del Mar Mesa is a possibility, although not at this time. He said CDFG is waiting on several projects, such as the Carmel Valley Road extension and other developments in the area, to go through in order to establish the best access point.

“We never said there can’t be access from the east,” Rodriguez said. “We’re basically seeing how to accommodate the work with those projects before we put something on the ground. We want to do good planning so we come up with the best access from the east. It may or may not be crossing Fish and Game land.”

The Fish and Game land is mitigation from Caltrans and is home to a very sensitive vernal pool habitat in one of the core resource areas in the city, said Rodriguez, who used to work for the city of San Diego and has been working on this issue for 12 years now.

The land has suffered a lot of damage, Rodriguez said, “A few bad apples out of the whole bushel” causing problems and prompting CDFG to have wardens patrolling the area and issuing citations. Gaining control on damaging use will go a long way toward the possibility of adding new trails, he said.
Rodriguez noted that more trails would also require a community plan amendment from Del Mar Mesa, a detail that often gets forgotten. He said the intent of Del Mar Mesa’s original community plan was to keep the area as a preserve with no public access.

“It’s a tough situation, it really is. I think we achieved a workable balance for this first phase,” said Rodriguez. “That area in the city has the most access to trails than any other area in the city besides Mission Trails. It’s hard to believe that there’s not enough bicycle trails and facilities.”

I suppose that could be read as good news, but the Mission Trails comment was the coup de grace to his credibility . . . .

_________________
There is a kind of beauty in imperfection.
-- Conrad Hall

well played politically- both 1) hands tied and pass the responsibility to some other organization, and 2) kick the can down the road to avoid any immediate consideration.

and by "has been working on this issue for 12 years now", i read that as the land has suffered 'considerable damage' due to the complete neglect of the parcel for decades.

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

please explain

_________________
Ambition is a poor excuse for not having sense enough to be lazy. ~Milan Kundera

The "good news" is that use of the DFG land as an east-west connector is not completely foreclosed, but his using Mission Trails as some kind of model area with open access to bikes is ludicrous.

_________________
There is a kind of beauty in imperfection.
-- Conrad Hall