Creek Corridor Trail Project

The City of Citrus Heights is evaluating the feasibility of creating a paved trail system within the creek corridors and ways that a trail could fit within the neighborhoods.  Paved trails would create better access  for walkers, cyclists and for those who use wheelchairs or other assisted means.  Paved trails would also create various recreational opportunities (hiking, nature walks, cycling, etc) as well as safer routes to schools, parks and/or work by alternative transportation means.  Lastly, paved trails also permits utility maintenance workers, police and fire fighters, easier access to the creek corridor.

Please click here to access the draft feasibility study.

The City’s goals for the study include:

  • provide connections to key destinations for cyclists and pedestrians
  • improve access to the creek corridors for all residents
  • increase opportunities for safe recreational walking and biking opportunities
  • increase transportation choices within the City

Comments are now closed.  Thank you for your valuable feedback!

View proposed trail segments in your neighborhood!

Click on each neighborhood area on the map to view proposed trail segments within your neighborhood and provide specific feedback.

Click here to view images of an existing trail system and see how it fits within a neighborhood.

Area 1 Area 2 Area 3 Area 4 Area 5 Area 6 Area 7 Area 8 Area 9 Area 10 Area 11

Neighborhood Areas:

  • Area 1 – Northwest Neighborhood
  • Area 2 – Rusch Park Neighborhood
  • Area 3 – Citrus Heights Association Number Three (CHANT)
  • Area 4 – Arcade Creek Neighborhood
  • Area 5 – Park Oaks Neighborhood
  • Area 6 – Sunrise Ranch Neighborhood
  • Areas 7 & 8 – Citrus Heights Area Seven and Eight (CHASE)
  • Area 9 – Sunrise Oaks Neighborhood
  • Area 10 – Sylvan Old Auburn Road (SOAR)
  • Area 11 – Birdcage Heights Neighborhood
Image 00 Image 1 Image 2 Image 3 Image 4 Image 5 Image 6 Image 7 Image 8 Image 9 Image 10 Image 11

70 thoughts on “Creek Corridor Trail Project

  1. Public Comment

    1. The planned trail (paved two way road, 12 feet wide road and 21 miles long) will divide some private properties (in Area 3) into two parts including mine. Some sections of the trail is only 5-10 feet away from the building structures and decks in the private back yards. If the trail is built we will have strangers and transients in our backyards day and night! I would like to be very safe when I clean other side of my property and remove dead weeds to reduce fire risk.
    QUESTION: Does the City of Citrus Heights build security fences with security gates with locks on both sides of the trail road to protect the residents? If requested by the home owners especially with high decks for privacy, does the city install 12 feet high solid security fence on sloped terrain or on the flush flood zones?
    QUESTION: The trail is planned on non-easement and within the building envelop zone, too. If the owners oppose the trail project on their properties (within the building envelop zone), does the Citrus Heights City exercise EMINENT DOMAIN to take the land? Almost all of my backyard is planned for the trail project.

    2. The trail will be built on flood zone easement in Area 3 where seasonal flush floods occur 10 times (+ – 5) every winter(map- http://citrusheights.aimwebtool.com/area-3/). During heavy rains, flush floods have occurred 5-15 times every winter past 22 years in Area 3. The flush floods have brought all types of debris including mud, large logs (14 inch diameter, 8 feet long), tree branches, tires, trash, etc. I have seen some serious soil erosion along Cripple Creek. If the debris on the trail is not removed right away or soil erosion is not corrected right away, the trail is unsafe and unusable for police cars, fire engines, bikers and hikers. According to the draft feasibility study, page 2, the maintenance cost is $3,000 -$4000 per mile per year. The city’s estimate maintenance cost shows about $300/mile for removal of debris and mud, fixing damaged trail sections and mitigate soil erosion if 10 flush floods occur every winter. The cost estimate is unbelievably very low. The corridor trail should not be built on flush flood zones due to high maintenance and unsafe conditions it likely creates after heavy rainfalls.

    QUESTION: Explain why the estimate ($300/mile) is so low. Why is CH City planning 12 feet wide paved trail road on flush flood zones of very small backyards of residential homes in Area 3?

    3. BETTER use of out Tax Revenue: The recurring expenses to maintain the corridor trail can be used instead for the better causes; additional police protection for the Citrus Heights citizens, or building a gymnasium for every elementary, middle or high school in Citrus Heights, or removing asbestos & lead-based paint from the old school buildings, etc. Citrus Heights should invest in our future generations, instead spending money on maintaining trails in flush flood zones. The corridor trail should not be built on flush flood zones due to high maintenance and unsafe conditions it likely creates after heavy rainfalls.

    4. If the corridor trail is built, tens thousands stranger and transient people will be on backyards of private properties in Area 3 day and night. The trail is planned on the very small backyards of many private properties, some cases 5-10 feet from the private homes; house and deck structures. All Citrus Heights residents especially senior citizens I talked to are against the trail (road ) project.
    QUESTION: What measure does the city plan to protect nearby residents from thefts, burglaries, rapes, assaults, robberies, trespassing, invasion of privacy, noise day and night?
    EXPLAIN: Please explain STEP BY STEP how to prevent the trail project in small back yards of many residents in Area 3 (from Indian River to Shadow Hawk Dr). At minimum, how many signatures do you need from us to stop the project along Shadow Hawk Dr, Citrus Heights, CA 95621?
    5. Some section of the trail is planned only 5 feet – 10 feet away from houses and decks. Trail should not be built so close to residential homes in Area 3. A stretch of 12 feet wide trail road needs wide open spaces and buffer zones like American River Trail. The trail should have at least 20 feet buffer from the residential structures (especially bedrooms). There are not enough space between residential homes and Cripple Creek in Area 3. The designed corridor trail is not well thought from many angles. The planned 2 feet buffer zone between private homes and the trail road is not good plan, tragic accidents and crimes are a matter of time.

    QUESTION: Why the city designed the trail road right off the private building structures and in their small back yards? Did the City explore other options which are safer, less capital and maintenance costs instead building the trail two-way roads on flush flood zones? Better options exist.

    6. How often does the city plan to clean trash and debris on or patrol the trail on our backyards? Are you hoping for volunteers do cleaning? Are you going to install security fences, gates with locks and security cameras so the residents adjacent to the trail road are protected?

    7. In Area 3, there is no (zero ) parking for the trail users along the planned corridor trail. The trail users will park their cars in the residential areas day and night. If the corridor trail is built, the residents in Area 3 or walkers along Indian River Drive will be easily targeted for crimes such as burglaries, robberies, rapes, assaults, trespassing, and so on, especially at night. A city official told me that the only nearby residents would use the trail so there would be no issue with additional parking. That’s not true.

    QUESTION: What measures will the city plan to prevent increased adverse effects (crimes listed above) from the trail project?

    8. Since the property owners lose some space (minimum 14 feet by 80 feet) from their small backyards (less than 2000 sq feet) and safe living to the trail project, are property owners compensated ? Because of the proximity of the trails to the residential homes, all senior residents along the trail I talked to expressed their fear of strangers in their own backyard day and night, 24 hours, 7 days/week and 365 days.
    QUESTION: Why not the city plan the trail project on open areas, instead of paving trail roads on private small backyards(less than 0.05 acre)? For this trail project, what is the minimum width of buffer between the trail (basically it is two-way road with two center lines) and residential building structures?

    The Citrus Heights City’s planning Dept’ responses to the above questions will be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much.

  2. Public Comment

    Tremendous idea…
    Lets make Citrus Heights more convenient for bike and pedestrians by adding connectivity between destinations otherwise requiring a vehicle trip. Safer cyclists, less traffic and a more wholesome community. Provides an amenity that will no doubt draw and/or retain residents looking for these trails.

    For worried about “losing property” to the trail I would assume these trails would utilize non-privately held land and would be landscaped and maintained better than in its current “natural” state and if properly funded, policed with more frequency.

    Just do it!

  3. Public Comment

    I love this idea as long as it doesn’t hurt current home owners that live near the creek. My family and I enjoy paved paths for bike riding and currently we have to drive to other nearby cities to use them. I think this could be an asset to our city.

    1. Public Comment

      Thanks for your consideration! We are very affected by this! They did not hold any public forums for us to express our concerns. Many of us are only a few yards from the creek in this narrow flood plain and will be faced with a 12 foot paved road through our back yards. We ares appalled at both the concept and the lack of deference we have been given.

    1. Public Comment

      I hope you have read the other posts regarding how your neighbors will be negatively impacted by this.

  4. Public Comment

    We love living in Citrus Heights but the one reason that I have considered moving was the lack of pedestrian friendly pathways. This plan would solve that issue for me. I am definitely in favor of this project.

    1. Public Comment

      Have you read the other posts regarding how this 12 foot wide paved road project through a narrow and fragile flood plain will affect both the wild life and the residents who live only yards away from it? How would you feel if the city decided to use your property without involving you in the process?

  5. Public Comment

    We live in Area 8 – Cripple Creek meanders through the middle of our back yard and in places, within a few feet of our home. We adamantly oppose having a trail through our yard and near our home. I suspect the majority of those commenting that they’re in favor of this, do not have the creek in their backyard and/or will not loose a substantial part of their yards for this project. They live some where in the neighborhood and will not be negatively impacted by this.

    I understand their desire for a convenient trail near their homes, however I prefer that it not be at the expense of our family. We appreciate the benefits of utilizing outdoor trails and regularly use the existing public trails ourselves for bike riding and walking.

    People are commenting about safety for those using the trail, and that concerns us too. But, as residents residing along the creek, we’re more concerned for our children and our own safety with strangers having access so close to our home.

    We hope the Planning Committee will utilize the SMUD Corridor and bypass private property.

    1. Public Comment

      “We appreciate the benefits of utilizing outdoor trails and regularly use the existing public trails ourselves for bike riding and walking.”

      Where? Roseville where you are invading someone else’s back yard?

      You would prefer to ride and walk under the power lines?

      Strangers already have access close to your home. Now they have to sneak through the bushes to get there. With a trail you have more good people watching out for bad guys.

      Think of the whole community on this issue if you can. Please.

      1. Public Comment

        The city has not committed to patrol or service this 12 foot road that will be constructed through our back yards as they do our streets. Do you not see there will be far more foot traffic than is currently on our roads.Do you really believe that having this put on us will inspire us to take on the job of public safety?

  6. Public Comment

    Walking and bicycling are heathy activities for the body and the environment. Safe and pleasant places to walk and bike in suburban communities are not always available. When not available, people tend to stay inside more and use their cars more. Getting outside is one of the best cures for depression and using cars less helps everyone. Citrus Heights is fortunate in having an extensive creek corridor network that could fill these human needs. It is a shame NOT to utilize these corridors for places of exercise, keeping in touch with nature, and pedestrial transportation. I am very proud of Citrus Heights planners to have done such a detailed and complete study to accommodate trails in our creek corridors. This is truly an unselfish undertaking for a city for its citizens.

    The concerns for safety, security, and after hours use are not historically valid. The trails put more eyes on our valuable creeks and have shown in many other cities to have actually reduced crime and problems in these areas. I visit other cities based largely on their pedestrian accommodations. Without exception, every city that I have visited that has built an offroad trail system has been a wonderful, safe, and memorable experience.

    Thank you Citrus Heights planners. I wholeheartedly approve of the use of my taxes and your committment to this important project.

    1. Public Comment

      This is not all a “corridor” as you suppose. It is a narrow flood plain to provide protection for our area. Many of our homes are just yards from the 12 foot wide asphalt and concrete road that is being proposed. We are not excited about the invasion nor the prospect of having to be the public safety for those who have little or no respect for the wild life here or our safety. Since I have never felt it was my (or the government’s) right violate the privacy and property of others, I have had a difficult time comprehending others who have such little concern. I suppose what goes around will eventually come around. In other words, there will be likely a time ahead in your life where you will be faced with something similar to what we are facing. I guess that is how most of learn to put the shoe on the other foot so to speak.

  7. Public Comment

    Below are responses to all the positive opinions that have been submitted:

    Opinion: There is no evidence that a Trail will increase vandalism or create safety problems.

    Response: Maybe because there is not a trail yet. Do you want to become the first evidence?

    Opinion: There is little if any evidence that bike trails increase crime or vandalism. There is history for local governments improving communities with the addition of Parks libraries trails, bike trails etc.

    Response: Who wants to start that history? There has been some recent serious crime in this area. If this goes through you may want to ride with a group of men.

    Opinion: I think it’s a great idea! The areas along the creeks are beautiful and underused. I can’t wait to go for a bike ride close to my house instead of having to go to the American River Parkway, Miner’s Ravine in Roseville, Lake Natoma in Folsom, etc.

    Response: You are willing to disrupt the narrow and fragile eco-structure of the flood plain so you don’t have to drive ten to fifteen minutes to wider and more beautiful riding areas?

    Opinion: I am in full support of the Creek Corridor Trail Project. This is exactly the type of addition to a community that enhances the value of that community for all residents. Of course when there is change in our lives, those most affected often react with fear. . .Fear won’t accomplish anything, fact based knowledge will accomplish positive additions to our Community. I would encourage those who are afraid of the trail to look at other communities who have greenbelt access near their homes and how it has enhanced their communities.

    Response: Where are your facts? What other communities with narrow flood plains have had bike paths installed long after the community has been established?

    Opinion: I can appreciate the enjoyment that you get from having a private nature habitat behind your home. However, you don’t own the habitat you so enjoy. I’m sure that others would also get so much enjoyment as well. I’m hoping that you can understand, that like a park, it is a place for all to benefit from.
    Response: It is a narrow flood plain not a park. There are more enjoyable actual parks nearby. If you would like to enjoy it so much-save your money buy a home there with flood insurance.

    Opinion: I think it’s a great idea. The areas along the creeks are beautiful and underused. I look forward to using it.

    Response: How do you know they are “beautiful and under used”-you must be using them.

    Opinion: First, I want to support and encourage the proposal for Segment B-12 to put a prefab steel bridge across Brooktree Creek near the end of Woodleigh and extend a trail to Shadow Lane to the north. . . .Second, I want to offer an alternative to avoid some difficulties with Segment B-12. . .

    Response: Lots of great ideas. Have you thought how this would affect resident wildlife and humans?

    Opinion: First of all, I didn’t attend the Jan 14 meeting. So don’t know what was said. . . We felt like this was our own country preserve. Kids, adults, even equestrians shared a common “wilderness” area. Then, someone came in and built your homes, cutting of our access to “our” countryside. I have long thought a paved trail along some of the creeks would be great as I still ride…or try to..on the rough paths. However….I don’t know if there is anything here that will work for everybody. It is a shame, really. Citrus Heights could have gotten it right….looks like its too late now.
    Response: Good observation!

    Opinion: I live in area 2. I think a walking/biking trail would be wonderful. It would get more people out and moving. As for the people who do not want the path right behind their homes, I would think this would be an asset. Add a gate to your back fence and you are on the trail. Like the bike path along Folsom Lake, I’m sure there would be some problems related to the homeless and crime, but the good would far outweigh the bad. More people would buy homes in Citrus Heights, if a walking/bike trail was in place.

    Response: Do you think the good would outweigh disruption of wild life, robberies, rapes, murders, etc.?

    Opinion: My husband and I live in the Area #2, along with our 3 year old son. I STRONGLY APPROVE of the paving and expansion of the trails. We visit Rusch Park every weekend and would use the trails on a consistent basis.
I understand that people that live by the creek oppose this but please consider the big picture. In order to compete with other cities in the Sacramento area we need to be able to provide amenities for people searching for a place to live, work and raise families. Every city needs an increase of purchased homes and new business added in order to provide economic strength.
There are ways to preserve the natural beauty of the creeks without destroying what is there (for example: the bike trails along Highway 50). The community as a whole can take the responsibility of the trails and help out when needed.


    Response: This is not Rusch Park. It is a narrow, fragile flood plain with many exposed residences only a few feet away from the path. Here is the “big picture:” There is no plan to patrol or protect people who use it. As you can read nearly everyone who lives along this creek is strongly opposed to it. If this gets forced upon them-it will not be a very friendly park environment you will be riding through.

    Opinion: The I live in area 10 and won’t be able to attend the meeting. I think having creekside walking paths would be wonderful . . . I love the dirt trails for a little bit more of a back to nature feel.trail would be a great way to get adults and children more active.

    Response: It will be paved requiring the tearing up of trees and other wildlife to do it.

    Opinion: I am writing to express support for the four study goals listed above. I live in Area 4 “Crosswoods Community”. . . I witness people driving into the community on a daily basis for the sole purpose of walking, jogging and bike riding. The improved trails that now exist add to the beauty of our city. Expanding trails throughout our city will only add to the sense of community developed since the onset of Citrus Heights.

    Response: How will more out of town crowds “add to the beauty of our city” much less “the sense of community?”

  8. Public Comment

    I also oppose the plan, even though I’m in a wheelchair and will supposedly benefit from the construction. I do not want to see the meadows adjacent to the creek paved over with asphalt. I would much prefer planting more oak trees and protecting this habitat. If the project simply must go forward, I advocate a much narrower asphalt walkway to minimize the impact, and again plant more oak trees.

  9. Public Comment

    I am opposed to destroying what little habitat is left for wildlife in Citrus Heights. Our regrettable indifference to other species has left huge whole in our life experiences. Because we as a community failed to incorporate bike trails and parks in our growth plan does not give us the right to take more. Money should be spent to improve our community and I strongly believe this will not improve. I also believe that we should respect our neighbors that have the good fortune to live near wildlife “sanctuary’s” .

  10. Public Comment

    WE ARE AGAINST THE PAVED TRAIL. WE LIVE ON CRIPPLE CREEK BY BONNIE OAK AND CRESTMONT.
    WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY 15 YEARS AGO NOT FOR THE HOUSE BUT WHERE IT IS, ON THE GREENBELT.
    IT IS OUR PERFECT DREAM, NICE NEIGHBORHOOD, CLOSE TO CITY AND STILL SURROUNDED BY NATURE.
    WE PAID A HIGHER PRICE FOR OUR HOME BECAUSE OF THE BEAUTY,THE NATURE, PRIVACY. IT NOT
    FAIR THAT THE CITY KEEPS COMING AND DISTRUBING EVEYTHING. IF PEOPLE WANT TO ENJOY NATURE
    THEN PLEASE LEAVE IT NATURAL. PLEASE, WE LOVE OUR CREEK , ALL THE TREES, ALL THE ANIMALS.
    DON’T DESTROY THE FEW NATURAL AREAS WE HAVE LEFT. PLEASE LEAVE OUR SMALL AREA ALONE.
    I AM ASKING ANYONE AGAINST PROJECT TO POST A SIGN AT HOME AND CREEK AREA TO SAY NO.
    WE ALL SHOULD BE IN CONTACT WITH EACH OTHER. LET’S ALL TRY TO PULL TOGATHER TO SAVE THE CREEK.

  11. Public Comment

    A project of this scope and magnitude needs to be completed before you build out the corridor with homes, commecial buildings and other structures. As part of a long-range plan the municipality should acquire the land necessary to complete the project and then zone areas for residential or commercial construction adjacent to the trails. This allows prospective buyers to evaluate a potential purchase knowing what is adjacent to the property they are considering buying. That is not the case here. The city is proposing to “force” this project into a corridor after much of the land bordering the proposed trails has already been developed. Not surprisingly, affected property owners strongly oppose this project as they should. If you had a trail proposed for your backyard you would not be happy about it either.

  12. Public Comment

    I oppose this project! I live in area 7 and I have lived here for 21 years. I grew up directly across the street from our greenbelt, I have played in our creeks and greatly enjoyed the nature within our little suburb corner of the world. I hate the idea of tearing down our beautiful oak trees! In order to fit a 14 foot concrete pathway you’d be tearing down and destroying what nature has built. Think about the huge machines you will have to fit in our tiny creek area just to complete the work you are proposing. You are going to do more damage to our God given land than good. There are plenty of bike trails near by for people who want to ride or run, don’t destroy more beauty.. Please do not move forward with this project. I’m begging you. It’s not worth it.

  13. Public Comment

    I’ve lived directly across the creek for 18 years. The new construction proposal is not appealing to me. It’s tearing into what I’ve grown up in and have played in. Bike jumps I’ve built and rode for years. Making a local park of my childhood and many other kids childhood. The current path existing through the creek is not a difficult path to follow, nor is it dangerous. Following the marked trail that they will take 14′ from, shows that they will be taking down hundreds of trees in order to lay a 10′ asphalt path. What sounds good about that? A safer path to follow? I have never seen any severe injuries come from the path, so why should they make a path skimming houses? From the creek path, you are able to basically see into people’s back yards and into their houses. Making the trail even more public could be considered an invasion of privacy. I’m sure more of the friends and families that I grew up with in this neighborhood would more than agree. I hope that they share their opinion in time before our home is invaded.

  14. Public Comment

    I think it’s a great idea! The areas along the creeks are beautiful and underused. I can’t wait to go for a bike ride close to my house instead of having to go to the American River Parkway, Miner’s Ravine in Roseville, Lake Natoma in Folsom, etc.

  15. Public Comment

    I am in full support of the Creek Corridor Trail Project. This is exactly the type of addition to a community that enhances the value of that community for all residents. Of course when there is change in our lives, those most affected often react with fear. I’m seeing quite a bit of “fear” reaction from many of those who will be closest to the trail corridors. Fear won’t accomplish anything, fact based knowledge will accomplish positive additions to our Community. I would encourage those who are afraid of the trail to look at other communities who have greenbelt access near their homes and how it has enhanced their communities.

    1. Public Comment

      Fear has very little to do with this project. Opponents do not want to see the natural beauty of these areas destroyed forever. If this trail was going through your back yard you would have a different opinion.

  16. Public Comment

    I must strenuously object to this trail proposal.

    I am a 4-decade resident of a home backing onto the flood plain just downstream from the bridge on Brooktree Drive in area 5. I purchased my home exactly for what I currently enjoy; the privacy, peacefulness and tranquility; the frequent visits into my backyard from squirrels, raccoons, skunk and even the occasional opossum. In addition, over twenty species of birds, many of which shy away from high traffic areas and require brushy hiding areas, (including a small flock of wild turkeys), use this area for feeding and nesting.

    While this ‘feel good’ project may make the originators warm and fuzzy the trail proposal is destructive and I fear will destroy the benefits currently enjoyed by the actual local residents and carry with it a host of unintended consequences.

    The trail construction with associated facilities and building of elevated bridges above the flood level will require clearing of vegetation, leveling of land, and paving which will require the use of heavy construction equipment that will in the short run create a disturbance to the immediate neighborhood and in the long run permanent damage to the riparian environment.

    Easy access also brings with it many problems. Not all those using the trails will be families with children. Those who have no vested interest in the area or those with ill intent can also use the trails. From this we can expect a loss of privacy, an increase in noise and trash, an increased vandalism and burglary rate, a much higher potential for fire, and picnickers and homeless encampments. I am also certain the path will be seen as an invitation to skateboarders, motorcycles and quite possibly, off-road ATV type vehicles.

    It could also be detrimental to the City itself. It increases your liability exposure to lawsuit from any injuries that may occur as the result of an uneven surface or debris. This would mean instead of building the path then leaving it there will have to be constant maintenance performed to inspect and clear the surface along with vegetation and tree trimming – a true waste of money.

    Currently, much of the greenbelt is shown on Yahoo maps and already has visitors. Quite often non-resident vehicles can be found parked in the vicinity of Brooktree bridge while their owners explore the dirt trail on foot or use it for bicycling.

    Do NOT turn these few remaining miles of waterways and wild zones into public parks.
    Many years prior to the incorporation of Citrus Heights, the County referred to these waterway areas as ‘urban wildernesses’ let’s keep them that way and use OUR tax dollars for worthwhile purposes instead of pipe dreams.

    1. Public Comment

      I can appreciate the enjoyment that you get from having a private nature habitat behind your home. However, you don’t own the habitat you so enjoy. I’m sure that others would also get so much enjoyment as well. I’m hoping that you can understand, that like a park, it is a place for all to benefit from.

      1. Public Comment

        Just so you know, a lot of us do actually own the creek area. It runs right through my backyard and I own property on BOTH sides of the creek.

  17. Public Comment

    Is the trail design going to incorporate any specific features that may increase eligibility for other potential grant funding? Examples could be for flood mitigation tie in through OES/DHS, new tie in with any relevant old Dry Creek Flood Mitigation project within the city limits, mosquito control through local vector district and county in conjunction with DPH with the state, grants for tie ins with law enforcement for grants for solar powered 911 callers or to put in solar powered cameras for public safety. Even putting in spare conduits when the physical trail is designed is significant. Have you already arranged for project specifications to be be drawn up that can be used later for anticipated bid submittals to avoid duplicity? I think this plan is visionary, and the key to the next 30 years in Citrus Heights.

  18. Public Comment

    I think it’s a great idea. The areas along the creeks are beautiful and underused. I look forward to using it.

    1. Public Comment

      I agree that the areas along creeks are underutilized and can be made a valuable resource for the city of Citrus Heights

  19. Public Comment

    No,No,No! The large amount of money would be better spent on roads, parks, and maintenance. We don’t need all the problems this will bring.

  20. Public Comment

    First, I want to support and encourage the proposal for Segment B-12 to put a prefab steel bridge across Brooktree Creek near the end of Woodleigh and extend a trail to Shadow Lane to the north. This trail extension would provide access to Shadowcreek Park for the residents of the large apartment complexion the southeast corner of Auburn Boulevard and Greenback Lane. Currently they can reach the park only by circuitous routes on city streets. The proposal would make the trail in Shadowcreek Park more of a through route.

    Second, I want to offer an alternative to avoid some difficulties with Segment B-12. The creek bank next to 6017 Parkoaks Drive at the bridge is very narrow and is being undermined by the creek flows. This place is probably too narrow for the kind of trail you are considering.
    The space for the existing dirt trail behind 6306 and 6312 Parkcreek Circle is also too narrow. I measured the width as just five feet between the concrete wall behind the houses and the vertical drop off of the bank into the creek channel. This does not seem to have enough room for the kind of trail you are considering.

    The feasibility report talks about using bridges to replace the three concrete dips with culverts which cross the creek channel downstream from the alley access from Parkcreek Circle. These dips are designed to survive flood flows that wash over them. The dips replaced bridges that were washed out by a flood many years ago. Putting in three bridges over the dips and possibly removing the concrete work would be expensive.

    These problems could be avoided by using a different alignment. You could put the trail along the south bank of Coyle Creek starting from the Parkoaks Drive bridge at Parkoaks Park and extending to the big grassy field in Shadowcreek Park just downstream of the confluence of Coyle Creek and Brooktree Creek. This bank is wider and involves no stream crossings. There is one narrow place where a backyard fence comes within six feet of the bank drop off into the channel. This fence looks like an encroachment. It comes much closer to the channel than any of the other yards along the creek. The fences behind the other yards are aligned in a fairly straight line well back from the creek. You might want to check the parcel map for the area along Hilltop Drive just west of Parkoaks Drive. The map could show whether all the parcels have a straight property line along the creek or whether one parcel is bumped out into the creek area. You could reclaim public property for the trail.

    The one difficulty with this alternative is that it would not be in the City of Citrus Heights. From the maps I have seen, the city boundary runs either along the back property lines of the lots on the southern part of Parkcreek Circle or the boundary runs along the center of Coyle Creek. On every map I have seen, the south bank of Coyle Creek would be in county jurisdiction in Carmichael. But the bank would still be within the jurisdiction of the Sunrise Recreation and Park District, one of the cooperating agencies for the trail project.

    Using the Coyle Creek alignment would call for on-street travel along Parkoaks Drive from the Meadowcreek Way intersection to the Coyle Creek bridge at Parkoaks Park. This would tie in well with an on-street alignment on Meadowcreek from Dewey Drive to Parkoaks Drive. In any event through traffic would probably need to use the on-street route along Meadowcreek because part of the public property along Brooktree Creek between Dewey Drive and Parkoaks Drive is too narrow for a trail. The trail shown in the feasibility report for this segment of Brooktree Creek is a dead end.

      1. Public Comment

        I think this comment is exactly accurate. Anyone on here needs to know who opposes this and who is willing to stand up and try to stop this. I second that motion! I will do everything I can to stop this project as well. It is a waste of time, money, and other resources!

  21. Public Comment

    I live in Area 3 and strongly object to the project for many reasons including:

    - Invasion of privacy (many parts of the trail would back up to homes in areas that cannot be fenced)
    - Reduced safety for homeowners and increased crime (increased risk of theft, burglary, home invasions etc. as a a result of undesirables using trails at night)
    - Impact on the environment and habitat (need to remove many native oaks; building bridges, retaining walls, paving trails, etc.; many animal species call the greenbelt areas home and would be driven out by the increased human traffic)
    - High cost of construction, reconstruction, and maintenance (many areas where trails would be located are on private property and are not easily accessible, have steep slopes, flood repeatedly with any sizable storm).

    It may be better to invest these resources in activities designed to restore and protect the natural areas along the creek corridors rather than conduct a project that seems likely to adversely impact them.

    1. Public Comment

      There is little if any evidence that bike trails increase crime or vandalism. There is history for local governments improving communities with the addition of Parks libraries trails, bike trails etc.

  22. Public Comment

    I live in Area 3. I used to live near the Am River Bike Trail. I am against this path plan, traffic, safety, crime, trash, vandalism, cost, maintenance etc. etc. etc.
    Local Government is to provide police and fire, streets and utilities….not feel good projects like bike trails.

  23. Public Comment

    First of all, I didn’t attend the Jan 14 meeting. So don’t know what was said. But I’d like to make a few observations here. I live in Area 3, the vicinity of Navion, Skylane, Stearman, etc. I’m also a bike rider of some 60 years running now. Citrus Heights is definitely a bike unfriendly city. Other than the very short “Costco” trail, there are no other dedicated, off-street bike…or hiking trails. When I moved here, in 1970, I could ride safely all over the area, even down Antelope Road to the railyards. Now….I don’t ride the streets much as they are unsafe. And don’t tell me “bike lanes” are any good. They”re a waste of paint. Won’t stop a distracted, texting driver from sending you into eternity. Problem is, Citrus Heights “built out” before any thought was given to open space, meaningful greenbelts, or bike trails. Roseville, on the other hand, got it right. their network of paths and trails are excellent and I’ve never heard of any real problems there. I’ve even seen deer along a couple of the trails. The drawback for me is I have to truck my bike 3-5 miles to the nearest trail if I want a nice, safe ride. Now, I understand problems homeowners might have, especially where the homes are very close to the creeks. Trails would not be practical there.I do get a sense of …elitism here though. “I have my greenbelt, everyone else stay out!” Well…I have an idea how you feel. When I moved here in 1970, there was nothing south of Skylane Dr. but countryside. Lots of trees, wildflowers, winding creeks right up to the Van Maren Ranch. We felt like this was our own country preserve. Kids, adults, even equestrians shared a common “wilderness” area. Then, someone came in and built your homes, cutting of our access to “our” countryside. I have long thought a paved trail along some of the creeks would be great as I still ride…or try to..on the rough paths. However….I don’t know if there is anything here that will work for everybody. It is a shame, really. Citrus Heights could have gotten it right….looks like its too late now.

    1. Public Comment

      It is not to late to implement a city wide comprehensive trail system. It can be done in a way to address most concerns.

  24. Public Comment

    I live in area 3, and certainly do not approve of this project. It would almost certainly increase burglary, as burglars would have another way to leave quickly. It would also reduce privacy of anyone who lives on the greenbelt near the creek. Many children and elderly people live near the creek, and it would not be right if people used the trail to do drugs or have sex at night. If people want to go on a trail, use the American River Bike Trail. The difference between that and the Citrus Heights creeks is that there is much more room along the American River Bike trail, and it is further away from homes. Instead of blowing tax money on this trail, maybe use it to finish re paving Greenback, or any other roads.

  25. Public Comment

    I attended the CH Creek Corridor Trail Project “Final Community Workshop (meeting #2) last night, 1/14/2014. The meeting was very well attended and based on comments, discussion, opinions I overheard amongst attendees, the audience was strongly against the creek corridor trail project, particularly on and adjacent to private property. I heard that the trail is also unwanted on public land where it will expose citizens to personal and property crime.

    The problem was that after a brief introduction by city staff, the discussion and information portion of the meeting was led by Foothills Associates and the public relations company, AIM Consulting, which has “managed” the creek project before it was even announced publically. (It was their post card that launched the PR effort.) It seemed like the meeting was held so that the project could “check off” the milestone and prove that people “had the chance to voice their concerns.” There was not a true opportunity to “share thoughts or concerns” and thoughts and concerns were certainly not addressed with factual information, numbers, dates, data, etc.

    The Foothill Associates representative insulted the audience by saying that the draft feasibility report was “very long and complex.” Her comments seemed to discourage people from reading it at the same time she deflected questions by telling people to read the report. A circular argument that provides no fact-based answers as the report includes mostly pro-trail talking points. She disagreed that constructing a trail in backyards would devalue property and quipped that it was “subjective” to think that a public road in your backyard would decreased home value. (Loud groans were heard from the audience.)

    Unfortunately, the PR consultant used the tactic of making the audience wait until the end of the meeting to ask questions, then at the end, she only gave vague, dismissive PR answers to about two questions only, even though many audience members were standing up to try to ask questions and waving their hands to ask questions. These people were all shut down. (Again, another classic PR tactic used to stop opposition to the project.) At one point this PR consultant caused a man/homeowner to be laughed at because he made a statement against putting the creek trail on his property and the PR consultant caustically quipped, “Is there a question there?” (Very unprofessional and disrespectful.)

    The audience was then told to disburse to the separate area tables and talk to area representatives. (But these reps really had no answers or facts either.) The audience was not allowed to hear fellow citizens voice their concerns in this public forum (which would have been informative and edifying) and get their questions answered by those leading the meeting. In addition, there really were no straight answers! The questions I heard asked were deflected and dismissed with talking points and the pro-creek-trail propaganda script.

    The audience was told that there is no money for the creek corridor trail project, however, the city will pursue grant money to make it happen even though it is unwanted. Based on what I observed at this meeting, I believe there is very strong opposition to constructing roads through the remaining CH natural habitats and there is strong opposition to developing and changing all creeks into public roads.

    Instead, the city should focus on spending money and/or getting grants for improving existing pedestrian and bike trails and on police protection and crime prevention.

  26. Public Comment

    As a general matter, I like the idea of off street trails for public use. I have used the bike trails that run through park corridors in Davis and think they add value to the community. To lessen opposition to proposed trails from adjacent landowners, it would be good to stress that eminent domain would not be used, that private property would be purchased only from willing sellers, and that the city would work with homeowners to plant visual screens were desired.

    I spoke with two people who made angry comments at the meeting on January 14, 2014. One became very open to discussion and was relieved to learn that no trail was proposed behind his house which is located just downstream from Dewey Drive along Brooktree Creek. He had suffered a break in from a burglar who came over his back fence from Brooktree Creek. The creek corridor there is too narrow for a trail, so the project would not affect him. I handed the second person a comment card and urged him to write down everything he said to make sure there is a record of his concerns.

    In Area 4, I think building public trails connecting Sylvan Road to Van Maren Lane would add value to the community. The trails should tie into the existing trails behind COSTCO and Walmart. Your proposed project should be expanded to include a connection between the existing trail on the south side of Arcade Creek and the south end of what we call the “COSTCO Bridge” at Stock Ranch Drive. Currently there is a short, well beaten dirt trail from the south end of the bridge to the paved trail to the east. This “volunteer” trail should be paved, and a culvert should be added at the low point where water runs steadily most winters. Currently the drainage is dry.

    I have concerns with Segment B-12 on Brooktree Creek between Parkoaks Drive on the east and Higgins Street on the west. To begin with, the creek alignment shown on your map does not match the creek on the ground. The map shows the creek too far to the north and straighter than it is. After flowing past the houses facing Parkoaks, the creek curves to the south and makes a 90 degree turn behind the first house fronting Parkcreek Circle. After flowing behind this and another house, the creek makes another 90 degree turn to the north. Then it makes another sharp turn to the west. These bends do no appear on your map, and they affect the feasibility of a trail at these locations.

    A walk along the creek going downstream from the Parkoaks bridge over Brooktree Creek would show that the bank beside 6017 Parkoaks Drive is too narrow for the kind of trail you are proposing. If you propose to go ahead with the trail there, the trail would need to be much narrower than your general description or you would need some heavy work widening the bank and putting a wall into the creek. The feasibility report does recognize that the creek is undermining the bank next to 6017 Parkoaks Drive. One time at the request of the property owner, I went into the creek there wearing hip boots to examine the hole in the bank. I pushed a rake handle fully into the void before it touched solid dirt. This is a problem. Maybe the trail proposal can serve as a catalyst for bringing together several agencies including the city to fix the problem.

    Where Brooktree Creek makes its right angle turn behind the houses facing Parkcreek Circle, again the bank is too narrow for the kind of trail you are proposing.

    The feasibility report talks about replacing the three “low flow” crossings in Shadowcreek Park. These are concrete dips that go down from the bank into the channel, over culverts that pass normal flows in the creek, and climb up to the bank on the other side. The dips are designed to allow flood flows to pass over them without washing them out. They replaced bridges that were washed out by a flood more than 20 years ago. In thinking about bridges, you need to consider the magnitudes of the floods that the creeks in the planning area can be expected to carry. With the large area of the roofs, streets, and parking lots now in the city, floods rise more quickly and peak higher than they used to with the same amount of rain.

    At the downstream end of Shadowcreek Park, there is a bridge between Higgins Street in Carmichael and Camden St. in Citrus Heights apparently designed to provide emergency access or exit from the Camden development. For some reason a fence was constructed at the bridge to prevent people from walking from the creek side trail onto Higgins St. I hope the trail project can lead to changes in the fence to allow easy public access there. The fence provides little security — it is a nuisance to the public and is no obstacle to teenagers.

    At your next meeting, I think you need a presenter who is more skilled at responding to angry members of the public.

  27. Public Comment

    Private property owners are a major and very important stakeholder in this 45 million dollar proposed creek corridor project. The greatest impact is on them. Private property comprises about 60% of the proposed trail area.

    However, I have been unable to find any indication that there is or has been a representative private property stakeholder involved in the Trail Advisory Group (TAG) or planning groups. This is a glaring omission.

    The creek corridor trail project feasibility study dated 1/6/2014 really does not address the concerns of private property owners with any details or specifics. It looks like the object is to get this creek construction project and development/destruction of almost all Citrus Heights creeks, quickly approved and incorporated into the General Plan, then the private property owners will be stuck with this proposed taking and unwanted development of private land.

    More time is needed before a final vote by the TAG or planning commission or city council on this 45 million dollar infrastructure proposal. OR, at this time, ONLY PUBLIC land should be included in the proposed creel corridor plan and general plan. DO NOT included private property.

  28. Public Comment

    Please consider this as formal written opposition to City of Citrus Heights Creek Corridor Trail Project at Cripple Creek along Moss Oak Avenue – Area 7 Location C07 – (Document Name: CTP_20130711_MeetingMap_36x42).
    In July 2001, I purchased my home primarily due to location of my property adjacent Cripple Creek greenbelt which provides an unobstructed view to all the beauty and wonders nature has to offer. The City of Citrus Heights Creek Corridor Trail Project would generate an adverse impact to Native Habitat, Rural atmosphere, Environmental and Safety along Cripple Creek @ Moss Oak Avenue per below:

    • Cripple Creek ecosystems and preservation: natural environment and habitat impact (save the grassland, trees and wildlife)
    • Obstruct my current view of creek and greenbelt
    • Loss of privacy (path to close to my backyard and chain fence)
    • Increase traffic (walkers, joggers, wheelchair users, bicyclists and other non-motorized uses) Note: already have issues with illegal motorbikes on dirt trails!
    • Increase in traffic equates to more litter and noise in greenbelt (adjacent my backyard)
    • Increase in undesirable elements place for youth to drink alcohol or smoke on trails in greenbelt
    • Discarded cigarettes or lighters will increase risk of fire danger (particularly during drought or dry season)
    • Increase in traffic flow vs. dog’s natural instinct to protect property barriers ~ whereas City of CH can anticipate an increase in call volume to address neighborhood complaints of dogs barking
    • Lack of annual budget and funds to maintain greenbelt as is– Creek Corridor Trail Project would be an added sustainable financial burden

    Though I believe there are many areas of Citrus Heights that may be suited for multi-use trails, my position will remain steadfast in opposing the Cripple Creek greenbelt area being altered in any way along Moss Oak Avenue and should be excluded from this project. I sincerely hope my opposition will be considered in your evaluation to identify areas suited (or NOT) for the City of Citrus Heights Creek Corridor Trail Project.

    Concerned Homeowner

    1. Public Comment

      I am in complete agreement. This area of Cripple Creek already has a serious problem with illegal motor bikes & general illicit nighttime activity,. I’ve walked my dogs in this area at night & there is always someone parked along sections of the greenbelt doing who knows what in their vehicle. The leftover trash is a disgrace. This project will create an even more attractive nuisance. For those who disagree, take a walk in the neighborhood from 8:00-10:00 & you’ll gain a true perspective. Save the money for something that is truly needed, such as traffic/speeding controls in this neighborhood.

  29. Public Comment

    I personally, I think citrus heights should get control of their crime problem before tackling such a questionable project that will in danger local citizens that will live by the path. I live on Sylvan Valley Way and my property borders arcade Creek. We have had so much crime on my through Street, my house and car being broken in two weeks ago and my car being vandalize or broken into three other times in the last 2 years. I can just imagine how much more crime we will have to endure with un patrolled footpath running through our backyards. I know it sounds great for anybody that is not going to be inpackage by this path but for those who have to deal with the loss of land and the ramifications of having undesirable homeless populations moving through my property really puts my family at risk. if you can’t protect my family with the street that we already have, how are you going to patrol these 26 miles of paths. Case in point being the American River Parkway. it has become a magnet for homeless encampment crime drugs and violence not during the day but as soon as it gets dark its not a safe place to be. I will be at the meeting tonight and I look forward to hearing how the problems that have happened on the American River Parkway are being addressed and will not be recreated in my backyard.
    sorry for the grammar issues I wrote it on my phone on the way to a job this morning.

  30. Public Comment

    Bad bad idea. It would open our backyard to everyone, not the least of which is the burgeoning homeless population in this area that border the city and the county. Law enforcement already has issues on how to handle the homeless issue in this area because of the boundary. We have had issues already with break-ins and attempted break ins. Our neighbors across the street having their daughter threatened while she was alone at home studying and a person trying to break into their back patio door, after having come up through the creek area. Squatters in one of the houses in our court that was unoccupied for a while. Things being stolen in the neighborhood. Someone waking to find a homeless person standing over them in their bedroom. To further expose the homeowners to this would be tantamount to insanity. I will and I know many, if not all of us, will oppose this effort with every legal means at our disposal.

  31. Public Comment

    I live in area 2. I think a walking/biking trail would be wonderful. It would get more people out and moving. As for the people who do not want the path right behind their homes, I would think this would be an asset. Add a gate to your back fence and you are on the trail. Like the bike path along Folsom Lake, I’m sure there would be some problems related to the homeless and crime, but the good would far outweigh the bad. More people would buy homes in Citrus Heights, if a walking/bike trail was in place. Thank you.

  32. Public Comment

    At the December 4 Trail Advisory Group meeting that I attended as an observer, Coleen McDuffy of CItrus Heights Planning staff told me that I could not have a copy of the trail document that was handed out to the TAG. To me this means that the city is not receptive to residents who make an extra effort to be informed about what’s going on, controls input, and is not interested in having informed input into the project.

  33. Public Comment

    I live in area 3 with no back yard fence. I like the open view of the green belt in my back yard. I bought my house in 1992 because of the green belt. The green belt was lush, green shrubs, tall trees and mega privacy. There were wild turkeys, raccoons and other wild critters. Over the years the green belt has started to disappear. Now I see strangers walking the path, many of them with loose dogs. I have an unobstructed view! I would like to see the green belt restored instead of wasting money on a paved trail. What can homeowners do to stop this project??

  34. Public Comment

    I live in Study Area 10. The upper portion of Cripple Creek is alongside riparian areas and a horse pasture. This would be a remarkable section for a walking or bike path. Old Auburn Blvd is a dangerous stretch of roadway heavily used by bicyclists. Bicyclists could use a new path instead of Auburn Blvd which has no sidewalks.

  35. Public Comment

    Living in area 7 along Cripple Creek for the last 27 years, I have really come to appreciate the nature we have. We bought our home entirely because of the greenbelt. We walk it daily. We have seen it mature to the wonderful place it has become. Many people are enjoying it regularly. I understand the desire for all to be able to enjoy it, but in many areas, including ours, the area is not wide enough for what the city wants to do. It would destroy the area they want to share. If I’m reading correctly the paved path is 8-12 feet with 2 feet on either side of that. There are many areas along the creek that are too narrow not to be destroyed in this process. That being said I would love to see it preserved and fear that a multi-purpose trail would harm the area.

    I use the American River Parkway on a regular basis and have seen what happens when you try to mix bikes with walkers, not always a good outcome. I think the city needs to complete the bike paths along the strrets so people can get to work, school and shopping. Make biking safe.

    Don’t pave the creek trails. Upgrade them as necessary to connect them. Enjoy nature as we have it now, don’t try to improve it.

  36. Public Comment

    Bike trails around are a “neat” idea, but after reviewing all the information, I find it to be EXTREMELY expensive! For roughly 12 miles of trails that have the potential to be flooded and need annual rebuilding, you want to spend an ESTIMATED 30 MILLION DOLLARS?! That’s ridiculous! We all know estimates run over by millions too! You say you want to bring people to nature along the creeks, but all that’s going to end up happening is having trash extend through all parts of the creek areas. We are underfunded already and no one cleans the creeks up to begin with. We just don’t have the money to do it. And don’t tell me the Army Corps of Engineers does a good clean up job once a year, because when they “clean up” the creek in my back yard, they leave all the stuff in my yard! In turn, that just goes back in to the creek when it floods again because I can’t pick it all up either. Stop spending our tax dollars on a project that tries to pretend we’re along the American River with lots of cyclists! These creeks are as “rural” as it gets around here and you’re going to destroy them!

  37. Public Comment

    established neighborhoods, such as mine, Area 11, could be made significantly safer by establishing bike lanes on most surface streets and not just the few trafficked streets. A single bike lane on other streets, such as Kingswood, Uplands, Westgate with no parking on the side with the bike lane between the hours of say 7am to 6pm would make all neighborhoods bike-able and within reach of the creek corridors.

  38. Public Comment

    A very large amount of money, time, resources, and effort has been spent on the public relations aspect of this Citrus Heights Creek Trail project. The goal of PR is to convince the community that the project is a good idea and to quash and/or dismiss the opposition. Make no mistake about it, while the City touts this project as the way to “preserve and protect” nature areas and creek areas, it is in reality, clearly a DESTROY and DISTURB construction and infrastructure project that will harm the nature and creek areas affected and drive away wildlife.

    This project is really a multi-million dollar INFRUSTRUCTURE and CONSTRUCTION project. The proposed paved “trails” with the associated utilities, fences, walls, bridges, tunnels, pet stations, restrooms, parking lots, etc., are really ROADS that will be put through sensitive nature/creek areas. This construction, destruction, and disruption of nature and the creeks areas, with the resulting hordes of people on bikes, skateboards, with pets, etc., will certainly drive away wildlife, not preserve, protect, and provide a place for people to view wildlife. The only wildlife left will be birds and rattlesnakes. This is exactly what occurred in Roseville on its trails.

    It is wrong for the city to plan and construct roads through and adjacent to private property. Private property owners are very concerned about increased crime, fire danger, liability, littering, devalued property, personal safety, illegal activity, vagrancy, lack of backyard privacy, water runoff and flooding caused by proposed paved areas, etc. There has been no respect for private property rights.

    Information about these trails will be put on the Internet to entice more people to visit, which is an invitation to criminals that is global in reach.

    Just like along Roseville, Folsom, and Sacramento trails, there really won’t be a police presence. The police will not be staffed along the tail. The police will arrive reactively after the fact, after a crime, after an assault. They can’t be everywhere to stop crime from happening.

    Perhaps the City, at this time, should only be making plans for the use of PUBLIC land and PUBLIC nature and creek areas. The city has NOT addressed the very real and specific concerns of private property owners. At this time, private land should NOT be included in the proposed creek trails (ROADS) plan or in the General Plan.

  39. Public Comment

    I am not in favor of this project…. we should live our creeks and other people proprety alone. no access should be aloud to the public, save the habbit for the wildlife that is suggling to servie now, not give access to there home.

  40. Public Comment

    Unless this system is well patrolled and includes provisions for security and control of illegal activities, it will make our lives more risky and make people feel frightened to live along such a corridor. How many more police will be added to the existing police force to accomplish this patrol and enforcement? Right now, Shadowcreek Park is patrolled by a private security force, because the Citrus Heights police do not have the time or resources to patrol it. The private security force doesn’t do routine patrols, but they do come out when called, if they do not have more pressing issues.

    Don’t make the mistake of thinking that more access will only bring desirable law abiding users. Once it becomes well known, it could become a corridor to the backyards of potential burglary and assault victims. This must be addressed.

    If you cannot add police, don’t make this change.

  41. Public Comment

    My husband and I live in the Area #2, along with our 3 year old son. I STRONGLY APPROVE of the paving and expansion of the trails. We visit Rusch Park every weekend and would use the trails on a consistent basis.
    I understand that people that live by the creek oppose this but please consider the big picture. In order to compete with other cities in the Sacramento area we need to be able to provide amenities for people searching for a place to live, work and raise families. Every city needs an increase of purchased homes and new business added in order to provide economic strength.
    There are ways to preserve the natural beauty of the creeks without destroying what is there (for example: the bike trails along Highway 50). The community as a whole can take the responsibility of the trails and help out when needed.
    The trail would be a great way to get adults and children more active.

    1. Public Comment

      The big picture is more crime and less privacy. We live along an area that is too narrow for this kind of access. And it is an area that borders the city and the county, already making it hard for law enforcement to handle the burgeoning homeless population. Evidently you don’t have these issues where you live – the small picture. There are people that have serious issues like this in other areas – the big picture. Please refrain from preaching to the rest of us.

  42. Public Comment

    We live in Area 3. Cripple Creek runs through our backyard. There aren’t any fences between several properties because the creek rises in the rainy season. We are opposed to trails going right through our backyard. We will have no privacy and if people are out with their dogs it is not right that we would not be able to enjoy the privacy of our backyard with our dogs if there is public access to this area. There are several homeless street beggars that also wander through the creek area and trails are simply going to give them more unrestricted access to property, others belongings etc. We feel that spending money on this extensive trail system is not the right place to be spending it now. In addition, when these trails are being constructed you are also giving workers the opportunity to see and have access to other people’s backyards. Unfortunately, not all workers are honest and in known cases they report possible targets for easy thefts to their friends. Very few people would use the trails for commuting or shopping. There are enough beautiful trails in the Sacramento County to enjoy without having to excavate and destroy the natural beauty of the creeks.

  43. Public Comment

    See my email of 12/15 sent to ALL city council members, mayor, etc – none of whom has ever replied.

    We strenuously OBJECT to this project for the many reasons………we are original creekside home owners (Oct 1980), having bought house because of the greenbelt and no neighbors behind us. And the manner in which the homes were sited where next door neighbors could barely see into your backyard pool/patio area. Many homes have a similar configuration and these trails would be a totally unacceptable INVASION of our privacy.

    Also, homeless folks do frequent the creek bed. A trail would be an open invitation for them to “case-out” our homes, see in anyone is home, leaving us vulnerable to BURGLARY. Several of us have open-weave “chicken wire” type fences and some with no fences at all – are we going to have to built and live behind a solid wall fence so those walking along the trail can’t see in? – I hope not. Plus the dogs would go bonkers.

    And our creeks do flood occasionally – necessitating repair and replacement of the trails. This might be on-going project – have the funds been budgeted for this?

    Thanks for listening – William McCrory and Michael Jon Foft

    1. Public Comment

      Right on gentlemen. Completely agree. You already have to deal with our barkers when people walk down our street. It strains my comprehension to think that there’d be more of this.

  44. Public Comment

    Do not waste tax payer money on this….your job is police and fire security….streets, etc……NOT pathways that cause more problems than they solve.. PS I do not live on a pathway.

    1. Public Comment

      I disagree, our city should provide more than a safe environment, i.e. ” police and fire security….streets, etc”. It must also be livable and place that is desirable, that is why parks are available thru out the city.

  45. Public Comment

    I live in area 10 and won’t be able to attend the meeting. I think having creekside walking paths would be wonderful. We have walked on the undeveloped paths along Arcade Creek between Sayonara and Sunrise. It is lovely, but could use a little more attention. What would happen to the homeless that live along the creek and under the bridges? Would all the paths be paved? I love the dirt trails for a little bit more of a back to nature feel.

  46. Public Comment

    I am writing to express support for the four study goals listed above. I live in Area 4 “Crosswoods Community”. The need for more improved connecting trails in Citrus Height is apparent by the huge demand from residents choosing to walk the 1 mile circle around Crosswoods. I witness people driving into the community on a daily basis for the sole purpose of walking, jogging and bike riding. The improved trails that now exist add to the beauty of our city. Expanding trails throughout our city will only add to the sense of community developed since the onset of Citrus Heights.

    I am unable to attend your Januay 14th meeting. Please keep me informed as the study proceeds.

Comments are closed.