Arana Gulch to be Paved?

Jeremy-
I appreciate your concern, and your fine photo of an AG oak. I'm sorry though, I feel you are misconstruing the true concerns and intention of providing public access to AG. I'm speaking from my experience and of the people I work with. For the past 15+ years I've worked with people in convalescent hospitals. There are a number of large board and care facilities within a half mile of AG. For 8 years I worked with a man who had a degenerative neurological disorder. Each week I would take him out of the godforsaken institution that housed over 100 residents. He was profoundly phsically disabled (from the age of 20 on) and confined to a wheelchair. We had choices of where to go to get a way for a few hours (his only outdoor experience for the entire week). Lets see.... by wheelchair we could go to a cemetery.... oh yes, the Animal Shelter and look at abandoned and lost animals in cages, If school wasn't in session, we could go to the "Green Acres" Elementary School playground.... or we could wait at a bus stop on noisy and busy Soquel Blvd. Hmm... that was about it... for 8+ years! My friend died about 7 years ago (at the age of 44) when there was debate and discussion re. public and bicycle access to the AG area.
He never got to see Arena Gulch, or see a hawk or hear the birds or watch the grass sway or the flowers blooming or even see one of those beautiful old oaks that you photographed, but he did live less than 1/4 mile from Arena Gulch.
Since he died, I've been working with his sister with the same disability whose now been living at that same facility for almost 20 years now. Though she's a real trooper and a sweet soul, she's not doing well right now and I think she too will die without ever having the rich and nourishing experience of hearing the wind blow across the fields or watching a hawk overhead.

I hear your concern and I too am concerned about development and potential disruption of our beautiful open spaces (a relatively narrow path and a small bridge would certainly preferable, maybe even possible!). But I hope you can somehow bring the realization that there are people who may never be able to touch anything like your freedom of experience.

I'd be happy to talk to you directly (or to anyone else who shares your concerns). Maybe we could work out a get together where you could meet a few of the people I work with- but who continued to be denied access to a beautiful and nourishing open space.

Really, we're all in the same boat.

with best wishes

G-rant
426-2292

Yep! We're all concerned about the environment and development. But have you ever tried riding your bike on Soquel? Have you ever tried to get across town with your kids? Without a car? I dare you!


The following is exerpted from the People Power website:

The Case for a Broadway-Brommer Path

Arana Gulch is the city-owned greenbelt property which, at its southern end, consists of two north-south running gulches, with a plateau between. The scaled-down version of a previous plan calls for one bridge (instead of two that were initially proposed) and retains a paved path across the central meadow.

The Plan

The proposed connection would start with a single span bridge from the Bible Church parking lot at the end of Broadway, across Hagemann Gulch. This would get cyclists and other park visitors onto the central plateau. Construction would leave most of the riparian zone below intact, however, a few trees would be cut down. A paved path would go from the Hagemann Gulch for several hundred feet, then join an existing path (also to be paved) that runs north to Agnes Street and south into the upper dry dock parking lot.
The Benefits

The reason this bridge and path are so important is that many would-be cyclists are intimidated when it comes to riding beyond the harbor. It is well known that ridership falls dramatically past Frederick Street. Bike lanes on Soquel are not going to do it for these cautious cyclists. Data from Bike to Work as well as bike counts on other separated path facilities suggest that hundreds of NEW cyclists would ride given a Broadway-Brommer connection. Increasing bike ridership is the impetus for the path, NOT the creation of a LUXURY for those of us who already ride. These new cyclists are crucial for changing societal norms around transportation choices. Once they get used to riding several times a week on better routes, they will gradually do more trips by bicycle. These new riders will then have a stake in seeing better conditions for cyclists in Live Oak. This pattern has been evident on the west side of Santa Cruz over the last few decades. The major obstacle to the spread of bicycle culture from Santa Cruz to Live Oak is the scary and unpleasant roads between them, thus, a simple bike path can be a medium for lessening human-induced environmental destruction.

Another impact of the bridge and path is that they will open up this beautiful greenbelt space to the people of Santa Cruz who paid for its acquisition. Unless you own property adjacent it, the park is difficult to access. This is something that the neighbors of the park are very much attached to, as it essentially creates a private preserve for them. This is contrary to part of the City Parks and Recreation Department's mandate, which is to provide access for recreational opportunities for all residents. It is well known that creating positive ways for people to interact with nature creates a stronger feeling of connection and respect. Building this sense of connection with the natural world is one way to begin to change human culture that is the root cause of environmental damage.
The Damage

In addition to the tree removal already mentioned, paving a path across the plateau would have a small negative impact on the habitat of the endangered Santa Cruz tarplant. Threatened by the impact of non-native grasses, the tarplant has continued to survive in a few specific locations including Arana Gulch. If the path were built, it could disturb 1.5-2.5% of potential tarplant habitat at Arana Gulch. Until the late 1980's, cattle that grazed on the plateau controlled unchecked growth of non-native grasses and spread the sticky tarplant seeds. For the tarplant to survive in this location, grazing and/or specific mitigation measures (i.e. fire, mowing, or scraping) must be implemented. People Power supports these measures, even if they have an impact on bicycle traffic. The future of the tarplant in this location clearly rests on the success or failure of the city to implement such measures, not on whether or not a bike path is built.

Bicyclists and the Environment

Most bicyclists care deeply about our environment. To frame this debate as environmentalists vs. bicyclists is to dismiss the larger issues of destructive human culture. It also misses the reasoning behind choices bicyclists make on a daily basis. While it behooves us all to think carefully before we support any new asphalt, we believe that, in this particular case, the benefits to the environment outweigh the disadvantages. View the Arana Gulch Master Plan and EIR on the web.

You can read more at People Power's Website:

http://www.peoplepowersc.org/newsletter/2006/060520_case_for_bb.lasso

Mr. Underhill,
If you had really explored Arana Gulch's "nooks & crannies" you would've seen the truckloads of trash hidden ijust inside the w. bank tree line along the riparian corridor, left by years uncaring vagabonds. And you would've seen the emerging old dump in the creek bed. If you bothered to really check the history of this "untouched land" you'd know that it had been a ranch (owned by Mr. Arana, later Hagemann, whose house is still there, later the Eastside dairy farm (their broken bottles are in the dump). The aerial photos are available in the UCSC Map Room (in Science Library). If you had actually read the volumnous studies on the SC tarplant you'd know that it is the LACK OF DISTURBANCE, i.e. grazing, fires, raking, mowing that is the most likely cause of the tarplant's decline!

BTW, in the 20+ "scientific studies" & reports on Arana, at a cost of well over $100K, nobody mentioned the deer, whose tracks along the bank are obvious to the most elementary woodsman. Perhaps you NIMBYs and other Floral Majority environmental stormtroopers should quit spreading lies and go do your homework!

First
Wow mr goldwhatever,
I did not mean to be some floral environmentalist nazi! Indeed I know about the other issues concerning the tarplant. yes I have also seen the trash and the old dump but these are the product of civilization not unpaved land and the dump is actaully quite interesting In fact on numerous occassions i have collected the glass bottles to use in my daily existence. Do you think paving huge paths through arana gulch will fix the trash! can you name any other urban located wildland in santa cruz that provides this kind of escape without trash. Do you know where your trash goes??!?!? (a truly undeveloped landscape) there are many problems here but paving this path will answer none and create far more.


2) wheel chair accessibility is in my opinion the greatest argument for the path but we need alternatives! perhaps widening the dirt trail it is very smooth in some places and easy to ride a bicycle or any narrower wheeled vehicle but this should be planned carefully so not to disturb everyones arana experience (including those who would use it by wheelchair)

3) Mr people power I ride my bike everyday across Town! I ride to highschool at harbor on soquel everyschool day!!!!!!! I dont mind going on soquel or taking five minutes of my precious hurried time and going through the safe and sound harbor! there are others ways to get across town than soquel why not improve these! maybe you are impatient and do not ever experience arana gulch for yourself but dont be selfish!

Unsurprisingly, the people clamoring for this path are using the same kind of faulty "environmental" logic as PR flacks for huge corporations--that, or just plain anthropocentric arrogance. Or in one case, an utterly ridiculous fallacy.

Environmental Sacrifice Zone: It's so warm and touching that People Power has decided to "weigh the issue" and cheerfully condemn Santa Cruz city's only semi-wilderness area to be a Global Sacrifice Zone for the good of "the environment." Should we also drill for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge? Or, perhaps lets switch to nuclear power, and dump the radioactive waste onto Native reservations. After all, these wilderness areas should be sacrificed for the greater good (not to the world obviously, as you've just destroyed it; this false concern about the ozone is merely about the survival of General Electric heating appliances).

Humans Uber Alles: This is a common argument, and one that when questioned is backed with jeers of "floral majority stormtroopers" and reactionary ridicule. I think that anthropocentric self-interest is a perfectly natural quality for human beings, just as wolves are concerned first and foremost with wolves. Nothing wrong with that. But when this self-interest becomes full blown megalomania, and you start to destroy everything around you for short-term convenience, my response (based upon my own egotism) is to stop you by any means necessary. I do empathize with the situation of the disabled, but I'm not willing to subject myself and my world to mutilation merely for a special-interest group. And what's the point of access to Arana Gulch if it's going to be a concrete strip with a few scenic trees and shrubs (which will of course have to be removed for someone or another's "convenience"). And keep this in mind: paving a bike path is merely one step away from paving a full-blown road, surrounded by even more shopping centers and suburban houses. People Power obviously may not want this, but their influence is limited to a few petitions and proposals. Once you unleash the psychopathic, foam-mouthed hounds of development, nothing short of death will stop their murderous road-paving spree.

"Disturbance:" The argument that the tarplant's decline is due to lack of disturbance is the worst case of faulty logic I've ever read--the implication is that paving a concrete path will HELP the tarplant. That's like saying that because natural fires help redwoods, we should cut them all down (I'm sure the corporate officers of logging corporations would agree with your logic). My concern is not for the tarplant or even plants in general, but for the entire natural community (including humans) to thrive, civilization and the Bureau of Land Management just needs to FUCK OFF! Obviously, Arana Gulch is not "untouched." That doesn't mean that it needs to be raped by concrete paths!

Keep Arana Gulch a Greenbelt!
http://members.cruzio.com/~arana/

The objections of the Friends of Arana Gulch to the proposed Arana Gulch Park (sic) Master Plan and EIR are numerous. Below is a brief summary of the major ones:

Change in Master Plan from Greenbelt to "Park"
The General Plan of the City of Santa Cruz specifies that a Master Plan will be done for the Arana Gulch Greenbelt property in advance of any project. Presently, the City is proposing a Arana Gulch PARK Master Plan, a change in the scope of the Master Plan that was initiated by the City without public input.

A "greenbelt" is an area set aside from development to preserve its natural character. A "park" is an area developed specifically for human use. The Arana Gulch area was acquired by the City specifically as a Greenbelt under Measure O, passed by residents in 1979,which designated five (5) parcels for public acquisition and retention as open space. Arana Gulch has always been referred to as a Greenbelt in City documents. This change from "Greenbelt" to "Park" is a unilateral decision by Parks and Recreation staff that violates the intent and purpose of the origianl acquisition of this land.

Environmental Impacts
The single build alternative in the proposed Arana Gulch Park Master Plan EIR violates the City's own Riparian Setback Ordinance, which requires 100' setbacks from riparian habitat.


Figure 1. Proposed Creek View Trail Outlet
http://members.cruzio.com/~arana/images/harboreir.jpg

Figure 2. Exisiting Harbor Storage and 100' Setback
http://members.cruzio.com/~arana/images/harbor.jpg

The proposed Creek View Trail outlet from Arana Gulch (Figure 1, based on a 1993 aerial photograph) cuts across the Santa Cruz Harbor Dry Storage area, a secure, locked facility that is asphalt paved and surrounded by an eight foot chain link fence. When the dry storage yard was rebuilt in 2001, the Coastal Commission permit specified that no development be allowed in the 100' setback from the Arana Creek riparian habitat. The north fence of the dry storage yard delineates this 100' set back (Figure 2, cross-hatched area). The paved bike road proposed to enter through the Harbor Dry Storage Yard cannot be built in the 100' setback from the Arana Creek riparian habitat north of the Dry Storage Yard fence.

The proposed 300' bridge through Hagemann Gulch would also violate the City's own 100' setback requirement from riparian habitat, and would require the remove of many heritage trees, protected by City Ordinance.

The proposed route lies within the Coastal Commission's Zone of Influence. This agency has repeatedly expressed their opposition to previously proposed projects on this land in writing (Broadway-Brommer Bicycle/Pedestrian Path Connection EIR), citing the non-compliance with the City's General Plan, the absence of alternatives, and violation of the City's Riparian Setback ordinance (Background on the Broadway-Brommer Project).
http://members.cruzio.com/~arana/background.html

The bikeroad project violates Measure O, passed by residents in 1979,which designated five (5) parcels for public acquisition and retention as open space. Four parcels have been acquired and all others have been accorded "due process," with a full Master Plan process being done in advance of any proposed project being sited on them.

The State of California's Fish and Game Department has, for some years, listed the Santa Cruz Tarplant as endangered. Recently the federal government's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department has listed the tarplant as threatened. The proposed bikeroad would bisect the habitat of this plant into three sections separated by impervious road surfaces and trampled by human and animal foot traffic. The Santa Cruz tarplant grows nowhere else outside this county and Arana Gulch is the most significant tarplant habitat in public hands. Increased traffic will negatively impact tarplant management and recovery efforts, for which the City receives monies from the California Department of Fish and Game.

Arana Creek, which flows along the eastern side of the property, has been listed as a known steelhead trout stream, another species listed as endangered by the federal government's National Marine Fisheries Service. This stream formerly also contained other listed endangered species, the tidewater goby and the coho salmon, though harbor construction and development have made the stream unsuitable for them now. Federal law requires "Section 7 consultations" with U.S. Fish and Wildlife personnel for each listed threatened and endangered species. While four qualifying species would be negatively affected by the proposed project, only 1 consultation has taken place to date. Students at Harbor High School, working with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Natural Resource Conservation District, the Coastal Watershed Council and the Arana Gulch Watershed Alliance have worked steadily to improve conditions in Arana Creek for steelhead.

The potential benefits have been exaggerated. The City's consultant's own figures show a potential time-saving of approximately one minute (based on the previous direct D2 alignment) over existing alternatives. The Regional Air Quality Control Board's opinion confirms that of the consultant that the project would result inno discernible air quality improvement. The number of potential "commuter" bicycle users has never been established, and estimations of potential new bicycle commuters as a result othe project are impossible to verify. "Recreational" bicyclists have several existing alternatives.

Conclusion
This is the only Greenbelt on the East Side of Santa Cruz.

Keep Arana Gulch a Greenbelt!
http://members.cruzio.com/~arana/reasons.html


How you can help save Arana Gulch
http://members.cruzio.com/~arana/howhelp.html

I hope that we can all agree that getting more people onto bicycles is a good thing for the environment and for the health of our citizens. As I have read through these comments, I feel that both sides have some people who overstate their fears. I guess that is just part of living in a democracy. Does anybody out there really think that Santa Cruz Tarplant or any plant for that matter will grow in the hardpacked trail system that exists in Arana Gulch as it exists now? How about the impact of people and their dogs or people on mountain bikes? What about homeless 'bums' leaving their trash and excrement throughout the 'open space'? If people want to use the excuse of the threatened Tarplant, then maybe we should exclude people from the gulch altogether and then impliment a native plant and animal restoration program. I'm sure that this idea won't fly with most people. I personally don't think that we have enough places blocked from the destruction by humans, (that includes native Americans). I happen to have a huge personal interest in native plants and it breaks my heart to see the destruction of our unique ecosystem. I want the Santa Cruz Tarplant to survive. I also want to foster a culture of people powered transportation in our area. A bike path would help bring more bike riders out of their cars. We also need a better program for native plant restoration in our area. We need a balance here. Get poople onto bikes and protect our native plant heritage. It can be done.

Arana Gulch is indeed beautiful, serene and isolated. A small but vocal group of neighbors and extreme environmentalists are doing everything they can to keep it to themselves.
The already scaled-back and low impact Arana Gulch Master Plan/EIR was recently unanimously approved by the City council after many years of planning. This proposal is the best possible compromise that would both benefit and be agreeable to the majority of Santa Cruz citizens.
There will be no structures, facilities or lights—only one suspension bridge, interpretive signs and paths. Calling it “Development” is exaggerating and alarmist. The paved path is 8 feet wide and 1/2 mile long; the other 1 1/2 miles of paths are dirt. Out of a total of 63 acres, you can’t honestly describe this as “paving it over”.
The new West entrance at Broadway and Frederick streets means that this special place will now be accessible to far more people like students from Gault School 4 blocks away and wheelchair users.
The path is designed to avoid the main tarplant area and management measures and funding for them are part of the plan.
It bothers me when people speak against the project, claiming environmental concerns; when you know that they really are just too attached to their private backyard preserve (and off-leash dog park) to open it up to the public.
The Arana Gulch/Harbor area is a huge obstacle to East/West transportation flow, as one mile separates Soquel Ave. and the Harbor Bridge. Only experienced or foolhardy bicyclists will brave either route and “alternatives” are too far out of the way to be feasible. Yet once the bike path connects Broadway and Brommer streets, hundreds of bike riders will feel confident enough to leave their cars at home. Then maybe everyone will forget about widening Highway One.
Because this project is already fully funded, we may never have another opportunity to move people across Santa Cruz in an oil-free and pollution-free manner.
If we look at the larger, over-all environmental picture, the benefits clearly outweigh any disadvantages.

I value open space. My favorite thing is too ride my recumbent bike up to Smith Grade to be away from cars and delight in the environment around me. I risk getting hit by the people that drive too fast (cut corners), talking on their cell phones and other distractions when I pedal up Empire Grade. I would value somewhere closer to get away from cars. If Arana Gulch is defined as a park with a bikepath through it, I don't see the problem. It would allow diabled people (like myself) to get away from automobiles without having to drive to do it. Soquel Avenue and Eaton were not designed for bicyles. We need to make our cities places to live - not places to leave. Disabled people do not have the option to 'pop' in the car and drive to accessible areas. Read about me http://members.cruzio.com/~awwalton/ An "Inconvenient Truth" explores the effects of a transportaion crazy world. I am of the opion that a bicycle path through Arana Gulch is not an evil thing

I am impressed with the amount of caring debate re: Arana Gulch. When I included it in Measure O's protections - I authored the "Greenbelt Initiative" in June/July 1978, not a single person had ever mentioned they thought the land worthy of protection (it was designated for an Auto Plaza in the city's general plan!) and Gary Patton's office requested that I remove it from the measure, which I refused, willing to risk the initiatve to protect the land. It is a beautiful place, and worthy of all of your attnetion...

i have always desired a more bikeable path through santa cruz, to avoid the few dangerous, busy streets we have here, & the long discussed broadway-brommer bike thoroughfare is almost exactly what i've always wished for. leave it to our leaders to dream up this environmental nightmare of a 'solution,' designed specifically to pit us against ourselves, in this quest for safe bicycling. (by the way, what construction company will be awarded the tax dollars of our community to build this? trace the lobbying to find the true purpose of this complicated solution to a simple problem.)
these two streets are definately much safer than the heavily road-raged soquel av & eaton/murray, but why do they insist that we need this tarplant-endangering bridge to make it possible? the only necessary step to make this bike thoroughfare usable is a ramped path from broadway to the harbor. (hauling my bike down the steps at frederick park is not a realistic solution, even with the 6" ramps built along the edge of the stairs.)
bicycling through our home town is already much quicker than driving an auto (also less frustrating, but unfortunately quite a lot more dangerous because of sharing the roads with agitated drivers) & i anticipate even more of us will abandon our gas guzzlers if we're given this safer, secluded option.
don't let the absurd desires of the local government divide us as fellow greener solution seekers.

Americans already have the best system of bicycle paths and lanes in the entire world. Now if we could just get all the cars off of them.

It is alarming sometimes the degree to which we as humans would like to manage every natural thing. I long ago noticed that at the entrance of every national forest, there's a sign that says, "Welcome to the Whatever Forest. Land of many uses." That about sums it up, doesn't it? If we can't figure out a use for something, what good is it, really, to us as a society?

Let some things be wild. Let some things go unmanaged. Let some spaces be unpaved, unlighted, uncomodified. Even those wrecked places that've been molested and clear cut and turned over and mauled -- what if we just let them go wild?

"The paved path is 8 feet wide..."

That's just slightly wider than a police car. Lovely.

Ahh...but to the City Council, it's not about creating a good bike path--you'll have to go through another tedious "petitioning" process for that. It's about development of a natural area, because of course they don't give a FUCK about anything that doesn't mass generate revenue or votes. And it's back to Rico's post from there...

America has a very poor system to support cyclists.