Municipal Advisory Council gatherings are usually tepid affairs where appointed citizens meet to provide input to the county Board of Supervisors on local issues in unincorporated communities.
Wednesday’s meeting of the East Richmond Heights MAC, which included Hasford Heights residents, however, was different, drawing dozens of people to a local church to hear East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) staff discuss a planned 1.4-mile bike-only trail in Wildcat Canyon Regional Park that would be the only such local trail of its kind. Among their concerns: Potential erosion, lack of parking, increased noise and impacts on hikers, birds and amphibians.
The proposed trail, which would be built in the northwest section of the park, would feature rollers, essentially speed bumps meant to slow bikes, and berms, turnout areas that support riders making a turn so they don’t skid off the trail. But to detractors, the plans are akin to creating a racetrack featured in BMX competitions.
“A lot of my neighbors go to Wildcat for peace and quiet,” said Susan Wehrle, an East Richmond Heights resident. “With this project, there won’t be enough space to park and large crowds … I envision animals getting killed and losing their habitat.”
But just as many supporters spoke up, saying that building the trail would improve safety for both bikers and hikers, reducing the risk of collisions on narrow shared trails.
“Currently, bikers are relegated to only fire roads and a handful of trails and it means that there is friction between users,” said Gordon Gladstone, a Richmond resident and coach of the El Cerrito High School mountain biking team. “One of the great joys of living in the East Bay are these enormous green spaces that our predecessors thought to preserve. A lot of students enjoy these spaces and want to get out and explore them.”
Earlier this month, the EBRPD board voted to conduct an environmental review of the proposed bike trail. But many attendees of Wednesday’s meeting said they had only recently learned of the project and blamed the park district for that. They also criticized the fact that on Wednesday, the two EBRPD representatives, Max Korten, parks deputy general manager, and Sean Dougan, a trails development program manager, appeared on Zoom and not in person.
Wildcat Canyon bike trail idea first explored in 2020
Mountain bikes are allowed in more than a dozen regional parks, but only two of them are in west Contra Costa County: Wildcat Canyon and Crockett Hills. That means local biking enthusiasts have to travel to Briones, which is 16 miles from Richmond, Marin County and beyond to access bike-only trails.
The idea to build a bike-only trail in Wildcat Canyon dates back to 2020, when the Northern California chapter of the National Interscholastic Cycling Association approached the park district with a proposal to expand bike use, specifically a biking trail that students could ride to and from their homes. To do so, they would have to use existing multi-use trails.
In 2022, the district hired an ecology firm to study the area to identify the right location, settling on Mezue Trail. In subsequent years, a conceptual design and more surveys were done. Despite that, park staff repeatedly said that the project was “not a done deal” and that there would be plenty of opportunities to comment on the proposal, including during the scoping period, a time during which residents would have 30 days to provide feedback, and then again after a draft of the environmental impact report is completed. The earliest the project would break ground would be in 2027.
One resident, Frank, said it was important to provide something for everyone at the park, mentioning features such as Tilden Regional Park’s merry-go-round and Little Farm, places that cater to families with young children. But he also worried whether the flow trail, a type of biking trail that features rollers and berms, would be the first of many such trails and draw crowds to this sleepy pocket of west Contra Costa County.
Bara Sapir, an alternate member of the East Richmond Heights MAC, asked why the park district was not adhering to its 1989 Land Use Plan that designates the area “free from intensive, recreational activities and of any development except hiking, equestrian and service use.”
Korten, the parks deputy project manager, called the Land Use Plan “more of a vision plan.”
“The parks system has over 1,000 trails over 126,000 acres. We do 20 projects a year and we don’t go through a land use process for each one of them,” he said.
In an email to Richmondside, Korten explained that, “The project is aligned with park visitation as described in the Land Use Plan, does not create a new use (and) is consistent with the district’s Master Plan designation for Natural Units.”
Additionally, creating a bikes-only trail would help reduce instances of “bootleg trails,” illegal paths carved out by cyclists that often result in erosion, Korten said. “Providing legal sustainable trails is the best way to protect natural resources, prevent illegal trail riding and some of the conflicts we see on the trail,” he said.
Kensington residents Cortis Cooper, a retired Chevron scientist and volunteer mountain biking coach at El Cerrito High, and his wife Barbara Smith have pledged to donate $1 million to the park district if the project is approved. That has drawn criticism from some residents, who are worried that the donation could influence the park board’s decision. But Korten said that it’s common for the district to receive donations and grants to support its work and that receiving money from a donor by no means guarantees a project will be greenlighted. “We have returned funds before,” he said.
Cooper and Smith declined to speak to this reporter, but in emails to Richmondside, Cooper has emphasized that the promised donation agreement has not been signed. As to criticism of it, he wrote that he believes philanthropy is a “good thing” if it helps meet a community need.
Cooper also pointed out that a petition in favor of the project with 2,400 electronic signatures was submitted to the EBRPD as well as endorsement letters from local biking groups and from the local chapter of the Sierra Club, which he said supports further study of the project.
Jen Komaromi, who lives next to Wildcat Canyon park and coaches Wildcat Composite, a club for Richmond, El Cerrito and Berkeley middle school students who ride mountain bikes, said about 300 youths ride these trails several times a week. She sought to allay fears of daredevil young riders knocking seniors off narrow paths and said that the average speed on flow trails was 11.5 mph, much slower than riders on a regular fire road or multi-use trail.
“We’re just looking for something that’s accessible for kids during the week so that they can build their skills,” she said. Isaiah Gonzalez, 15, and member of the mountain biking team at El Cerrito High School, said he has to ask his dad for rides to Joaquin Miller Park in Oakland to access bike-only trails.
“Mountain bikers need their own trail so they don’t collide with someone walking,” he said. “Plus mountain biking is way more fun than sitting around and playing video games.”
Just curious if the same folks worried about the impact on wildlife (killing animals?) feel the same way about all the ongoing cattle grazing that goes on in Wildcat Canyon. My guess is that ongoing grazing has a far greater environmental impact than adding a 1.4-mile trail would.
People seem to labor under a mistaken notion that if they are articulate enough, forceful enough, have enough history in the neighborhood, or that their experience is so precious and they are so well informed that their content should be absolutely foundational and accepted as a truth, that they can sway what is now an altercation.
Whatever “side” it comes from all boils down to “I want things to be like this or that, and these are my reasons.” I’m afraid that most of this is beside the point NOW, no matter what “side” you’re on. Blasphemy? Perhaps, but practically descriptive of the actual circumstance and how the process works. It is not unique to the Wildcat Flow Trail by any means.
Importantly, all of these statements and opinions are documented, metaphorically put in a hopper, collated, and analyzed to create a picture of investments and attitudes to support decision making later in the process. It exposes community “druthers.” Fair enough, but it does not DRIVE the process. The process is already laid out and has been for eons.
What people don’t seem to understand is that any proposition from any quarter can enter into the vetting process for a project. What the process does is challenge the proposal to decide IF IT QUALIFIES. What is being proposed here cannot run afoul of environmental and access laws and policies at the State, Regional, City, County and local level. Each one of those can stop any project in its tracks. Can you pass the inspection? If not; end of discussion. Opinions from the local church rec room don’t figure into it.
ERBRPD is WAY ahead of all of these issues, the reasons, these motivations. Go to their site and read their documents. What they show is that these processes have been explored and managed for a great many years in the context of their responsibilities, directives, and other experiences. These intelligent, especially skilled, citizens work very hard to embrace attitudes and desires in the context of what is actually possible. This is why the EBRPD is so successful over the long run.
Go to the EBRPD site and take a look at the documentation. There you will find a way to sign up to be informed of the process as it occurs and contribute opinions into “the hopper,” get comprehensive information on designs, descriptions, and diagrams from the onsite visits with experts and managers:
https://www.ebparks.org/projects/wildcat-canyon-regional-park-wildcat-bike-trail
A brief look at the Draft Initial Study (66 pages) can give you some idea of the depth and detail; and this is just a draft to get the EIR focused:
https://www.ebparks.org/sites/default/files/3-Env-Checklist-2025-Revised_Refs_Combined.pdf
Community input doesn’t shape the process. The documents, the policies, the laws do that. Those succeeded, what community input then does do is inform the process as a consideration when it comes time to make a decision. Sort of: okay now that all the paperwork is successfully completed, given the “druthers” what do WE want to do, but that is much later.
The process is what it is. What is desired is what it is. Yet what is absolutely essential in embracing this issue by the community is good will. There were folks who simply did not want the project allowed to be tested in the process, based upon their opinion. Or they spuriously challenged adherence to the LUP, not really understanding how it functioned. Misinformation and its’ spread to undermine a position, or leverage success, is the true enemy. Ignorance, enmity, righteous investments, longstanding fears and grudges only serve to cloud the waters and misdirect people. It just creates ill will.
For my part, of course I support this trail; the reasons are just details. However, actuality of the trail, its possibility, and support for the entire community is what interest me. We can disagree but I will fight attempts to subvert the process. For now, we have to let the administrative challenges run their course.
1. While this plan was first proposed in 2020 it JUST came to the attention of the public. Longer than 30 days review seems reasonable. Why rush?
2. Yes, I am concerned about the cows, which colonizers brought. Cows were on included in the CONSENT item on the agenda. They don’t even discuss.
3. I am concerned about one interest group working w our local agency for years, using public tax dollars, on a project clearly out of the scope of the existing agreement of what can be expected.
4. I grew up looking east at the dark East Bay hills. Hardly dark now. This small precious ridge and adjoining areas remain, as I might imagine my ancestors saw it, hundreds and thousands of years ago.
5. A bike park can be placed anywhere, say Golden Gate Fields. It need not require further sacrifice of an already vestigial representation of Ohlone land.
6. California is largely unceded, stolen land. This land is Ohlone. A bit of respect would be appreciated instead of tearing up what little remains which was Intended to be Set Aside, not assaulted.
7. Without any time restrictions predators will avoid the area. I enjoy seeing coyotes while I’m hiking. This activity will clearly detract from enjoyment of wildlife.
In order to ride down Mezue, you have to bike up to Mezue…… not an easy task, especially in the rainy season….
The bikers will ride to the area thru the regular trails, right? So it’s going to have a big effect on wildlife and people who hike there. A trail along the edge of a park, rather than in the middle, seems more thoughtful for all. As a Richmond resident, I understand the value of a bike trail but not in the middle of a quiet natural area.