STORYLINE In the Community

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Close timeline

1 of 8
close

No high resolution image exists...

Progress bar

1 of 8
Loading images
Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image Slideshow image

Council members and community members alike gathered on the Sacramento River Parkway Friday morning, at the Le Rivage Hotel trail entrance, to celebrate the first in a series of new signs to officially “brand” the parkway.

The completion of the project was heralded by many as the beginning of a campaign to bring more public awareness to the Sacramento River Parkway Plan. First adopted by the city in 1975 and revised in 1997, the plan seeks to extend the trail along the Sacramento River levee in the Pocket area, where it is currently closed to the public.

“It’s a way for people to enjoy our lovely riverfront,” said Councilman Rob Fong.

City Council members Angelique Ashby, Rob Fong and Darrell Fong attended, along with members of Friends of the Sacramento River Greenway and Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates.

“It’s important to raise public awareness of the parkway and that there is a city plan for it,” said Dan Gorfain of Friends of the Sacramento River Greenway.

The Sacramento River Parkway is a 13-mile stretch of trail measured from Discovery Park to the south end of the Pocket, though the last six miles that run through the Pocket area are currently closed to the public.

The Parkway currently is open to the public from Discovery Park, where a connection can be made to the American River Trail, travels south along the Sacramento River, and is cut off once the levee reaches the Pocket area.

The trail then leads out to a network of trails throughout the southern end of the Pocket where the trail can be accessed again at Garcia Bend Park and taken to the end of the Freeport Water Intake Facility.

If access is acquired to all parts of the levee, including those behind riverfront properties in the Pocket, the 13-mile stretch of trail would serve as a commuting corridor for those traveling from one end of the city to the other.

“It’s something we have worked toward for a long time,” said Anne Rudin, former mayor of Sacramento and founder of the Friends of Sacramento River Greenway.

Friends of the Sacramento River Greenway is a volunteer, community-based organization that has been working with city officials to ensure continuous public access to the river and its levee’s since 1991.

“The plan was made decades ago to turn the American River trail at Old Sacramento and follow the Sacramento river to the south,” Rudin described. The organization has been working in collaboration with city officials since bike trails were adopted by the city.

“I think it’s necessary and overdue, “ said Tricia Hedahl, executive director for the Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates. “The trail system serves as a highway for bicycles, and that’s the goal - let’s connect our bikeways.”

Though many who would commute along the parkway from the neighborhoods in the south to downtown would most likely do so by bike, the trail is meant for multi-recreational use.

“People found it useful as a commuting corridor. We think it’s important to keep working on it - it belongs to the public and we want them to be able to use it,” she added.

The completion of the Parkway has been long delayed since the beginning of the project due to a lack of funding sources, and a resistance from Parkway trail neighbors.

“One of the reasons why not a lot happens with the implementation of this plan is that the city doesn’t have regular funding for the project,” said J.P. Tindell, park planning and development manager for the Department of Parks and Recreation.

As stated within the 1997 update of the Sacramento River Parkway Plan, residential property owners along the levee are concerned about privacy and security as the parkway is developed further in the Pocket area. Increased trespassing and loss of privacy to trail neighbors is a major concern, and many property owners claim private ownership of the levee.

“You have to have willing sellers if you want to apply for a grant,” Tindell said, “The city has not acquired rights to build a trail or easement through their property.”

Gorfain, who has been working with the city on this project since 1999, said he believes the solution to the property conflict may involve some type of compensation to the property owners. He says that the city may wind up building some type of vegetative screening or fence along the backyards of property owners along the levee for privacy protection.

It seems the plan may be deferred a bit longer in that case, according to Noah Painter, district director for Councilman Darrell Fong.

“The parks department is trying to identify any grant funding as well as having numerous community meetings, but as for right now, the project is at a standstill,” Painter said.

The amount of funding needed to complete the parkway is unknown, though Tindell said it could go into the millions of dollars. The only closed section of trail currently runs behind about 100 houses in the Pocket neighborhood.

Council members Ashby, Darrell Fong and Rob Fong could not be reached for comment regarding the next steps for the project.

“The main thing is to have an open dialogue with property owners,” Gorfain said.

Tindell said that aside from the funding for the signs, no more funding is available right now for the continuation of the project.

Some are still happy with the progress that has been made, however. The Tower Bridge Promenade has been extended to Miller Park, connecting the path to downtown with a spur over Highway 5 at R Street. Le Rivage Hotel, located at 4350 Riverside Blvd, will soon allot a section of their parking lot for a “park-and-ride” feature to the parkway. Several acres of wildlife habitat have been purchased and will be preserved along a bend in the river in the Pocket area.

“This is an example of all parts of the Sacramento government doing something great for the community,” Hedahl said. “We’re creating a community where people can go around with any mode of transportation they choose.”

The $10,500 signage project will place 30 trailhead signs at every public entry to the Parkway and mile markers every half mile for the sections that are currently open to the public.

Though the trails do not currently connect in a continuous stretch along the entire parkway, there is a network of on-road trails that weave throughout the Pocket area for those who wish to commute from the neighborhoods in the South to the central city.

For a map of open trails along the Sacramento River Parkway: Central City Map, Land Park Area Map, Pocket Area Map

Liked this article? Share it with your friends:

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.RSS Feed

Bea
Author thumbnail
September 20, 2011 | 10:22 AM
What about the disappearance of the "parkway" when it hits Old Sac. The trail currently "ends" at the boardwalk in Old Sac and there is no way to ride a bike through to where it starts up again on the other side of the Tower Bridge. This is certainly something that could be easily address as it is owned by the city.
2 0
REPLY
September 20, 2011 | 10:58 AM
You're right, Bea, the parkway does appear to end once it reaches Old Sac. The trail is described as cutting through Old Sac, where bikers may "follow" it along Front Street (which is gravel for the first part, and then cobblestone for the second part) until it picks up again across Capitol at the Tower Bridge Promenade.
1 0
REPLY
September 20, 2011 | 12:29 PM
Being able to stay on the trail for the whole ride to the Pocket would be the best. I know I'd do that ride a lot more often if that were the case.
2 0
REPLY
September 20, 2011 | 1:31 PM
So in order to get their name on a sign Le Rivage Hotel just had to pay for the sign? That's it?
0 0
REPLY
September 20, 2011 | 3:00 PM
I look forward to the day when I can ride from Old Sac all the way to the town of Freeport along that levee. However, I do understand why the trail "disappears" near Tower Bridge -- where would they put it? Not under the bridge, that's for sure.

I kind of enjoy riding through the green belt in Greenhaven, though. You just have to get out of "time-trial" mentality. I take it easy in there.

Maybe -- just maybe -- Darrell Fong can accomplish (a trail between Le Rivage and Garcia Bend) what Waters refused to try. This opens a dispute with a few land-owners, who have deeds that say they own the land all the way to the Sacramento River water-line. If that's truly the case, it means they're already responsible for maintaining the levee on "their" property. Let's go out and tell them that.

Eh, good luck with that. We're still responsible for maintaining "their" property.
2 0
REPLY
September 26, 2011 | 9:15 PM
We have along way to go to get any public agency to deal with completing the parkway. For example here is the reply from the Freeport Intake facility when I asked how it could be that there is no water fountain at a facility that can pump 121 million gallons of water a day through the levee:

We had discussed the installation of a water fountain at the intake site however we had to consider numerous issues:
1. Maintenance
2. Vandalism
3. Request by neighbors not to make the intake facility a destination spot
4. No other location on the levee has a water fountain
and most walkers/bike enthusiasts carry a water bottle or have one with them.
5. Water line in the levee frowned upon by regulatory agencies

Most of these are patently absurd but the last one takes the cake. These "regulatory agencies" must be furious that there is now a fire hydrant in the middle of the levee, let alone the possibility of a 1 inch pipeline for a water fountain. (not to mention the huge pipes that move the intake water through it)
Jim Geary
0 0
REPLY
December 13, 2011 | 4:06 PM
MikeM... a continuous bikeway would be great, but is it worth the cost? I don’t know about Pocket, but I do know about the Little Pocket neighborhood just south of Le Rivage as I lived there when I was a kid. The trail would run through those home owners' property as the property boundary of those parcels in little pocket extends to the water, that’s why they can have private docks .Technically it includes the land under the levee, but not the levee itself as that is owned by either the city or the core of engineers. The city would have to purchase that land/claim eminent domain or force through an easement on the levee resulting in years of litigation (wouldn’t you sue if the city decided to put a public pathway right through your backyard) – either of those would be a very expensive proposition. All that for about a mile of trail - think the taxpayers especially the non-cyclists want to pay for that?

Re maintaining the levee, it makes sense for the core of engineers to continue to maintain that levee as all Sacramento benefits, not just those that live against it, "their property" as you say. If that levee suffered a catastrophic failure, those houses would get wet first, but a few seconds later a whole lot of the rest of Sacramento would be wet as well. I don’t live there anymore and would love to see a continuous trail, but I just don’t see how it’s worth the cost… at least for that small section.
0 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
User icon
Type your comment in the box below Edit your comment in the box below

Type tags into the box below. Use commas to separate your tags.

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Progress bar Forgot Password?

New Users Create an Account Here
Progress bar
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com
Progress bar Login background Tag cloud top Tag cloud background Tag cloud bottom Login manager background