A sign at the 54th Avenue entrance to the Mennonite Village calls attention to the Nov. 17 public hearing before the Albany City Council.
When Albany officials and consultants drew up the South Albany Area Plan in 2012, nobody objected to the notion of running a 10-foot-wide paved bike path through the Mennonite Village, the retirement community off Columbus Street.
Now that the Village is planning to expand by adding up to 98 duplexes, building this potential route for cyclists and 20-mph electric scooter riders sounds like a dangerous city requirement to residents whose average age hovers around 81.
And yet, for some reason the Village included construction of the loop trail in its initial land use application for the expansion. It then tried to amend its application to eliminate the trail and related features from the plans, but on Oct. 13 the Albany Planning Commission approved the plans with the trail included as one of the conditions of development.
The Mennonite Village appealed, and now the city council gets to settle the dispute. A public hearing before the council is scheduled on Monday, Nov. 17, when the council will meet at 6 p.m.
On Sunday I took a bike ride to the Village entrance at Columbus and 54th Avenue. Because of the trail controversy, I wanted to see an existing pathway that Google maps show on the south side of the developed portion of the community, along Oak Creek.
I found the path, but a sign told me I had better not ride the bike there. The path is only about 5 feet across, not wide enough for bikes meeting people on foot. And anyway, the whole Village compound is marked as private property, “no trespassing,” which I presume applies to the merely curious, like me.
The planned expansion, in three phases, is to take place on about 40 acres of the more than 70 acres the Mennonite Village bought years ago on both sides of Oak Creek, reaching east to Interstate 5 and south to the largest of the Freeway Lakes.
In 2018, Mennonite Village got the city to annex the acreage, and as one condition of the annexation, the Village agreed to build the trails and trailheads envisioned in the South Albany plan when development takes place.
Now that has changed. Dozens of residents wrote to the Albany Planning Division objecting to the trail requirement. Mostly they are worried about the risks that fast bikeway traffic would pose to elderly people taking leisurely walks.
Village CEO Diane Hood also mentioned safety, among other concerns, and added another: “The cost to build and maintain this public pathway will be borne by our residents — current and future.”
The Village’s lawyer, Steven P. Hultberg, has asserted that the requirement to build the public Oak Creek Loop Trail is unconstitutional and illegal.
On Nov. 6 he wrote the city with an offer: In return for the city dropping the trail requirement as part of the land use permit, the Village would dedicate a 15-foot-wide easement for a trail along its southern property line, south of Oak Creek. A trail could go there, he suggested, easily connecting to points east and west.
To sum up: Does it make sense to build a public bikeway through a community of the aged, some of whom are not too steady on their feet? And to make them pay for it too? (hh)
The Village’s narrow walking path along Oak Creek starts here. As you see, it’s reserved for pedestrians.
The 2013 South Albany Area Plan envisioned all sorts of trails including, in red, the Oak Creek Loop Trail.
Don’t screw with old people. No matter thier politics, they have time to show up to meetings. Try 9pm or after meetings if you want to win the battle.
What is the problem with moving the proposed trail to the edge of the property? And why not lower the speed limit to 5 mph through or next to the village?
Whoa, whoa, whoa… that’s way too reasonable of a suggestion and comment for this blog. Where’s the regulars when you need them?
“Does it make sense to build a public bikeway through a community of the aged, some of whom are not too steady on their feet? And to make them pay for it too? (hh)”
How’s this any different than the waterfront, and making people pay for putting the power underground, etc..?
Speaking of the power line bury……
Any news Hering?
Are we Albanians stuck with the bill from our corrupt city council?
Checking often. Still no definitive amount or date when billing is to start.
Appreciate you!
I believe that times have changed since the agreement was setup. You have homeless, tagers, litters, and disrepecting kids. This is not a great combo for seniors who pay for safety and peace of mind at this place. I belive the whole plan is a bad idea. The city does not need the path it will just increase the cost for city tax payers to take care of.
“In 2018, Mennonite Village got the city to annex the acreage, and as one condition of the annexation, the Village agreed to build the trails and trailheads envisioned in the South Albany plan when development takes place.”
What part of this do they not understand? They agreed in order to get the City to do something, now they want to wiggle out of responsibility. Keep your word Village!
Please understand that when the Annexation Agreement with the City of Albany was signed in 2018, they could not foresee the impact of e-bikes, scooters, skateboards, one-wheels and other motorized devices would have on this multi-use path. Currently, the path is utilized by the elderly with mobility impairments, and they do so with the help of walkers, canes and care-givers. It is this mix of the fast and slow that creates an incredible safety hazard for our senior citizens, which is why vehicles that can only travel at a certain speed are not allowed on the freeways.
Certainly we must have building codes and rules, but sometimes those codes need to be modified or changed because they not only do not meet the needs of the public, but are actually detrimental to the public. That is the case in this situation.
I get that things have changed, but in 2018 they had skateboards, scooters, bikes that do 25 mph, runners, people in wheelchairs and walkers. They got land outside the city brought into the city, so now it can be developed, that is MILLIONS of dollars of value to them, their word is either good or it isn’t, come up with a different plan, make changes to the path with speed bumps or curves to slow down traffic, or simply write a check to the City to change what they gave their word on….
Rich, e-bikes can go up to 35 mph. Many bicyclist and e-scooter riders can’t even follow the rules on our city streets. Do you really think they will on a path with seniors? We can’t even protect our own parks and pathways from crime and vandalism, but we can and should protect our seniors.
Sharon, do you think that the Village should get millions in benefits and not pay the agreed upon price? If they do not want to put the trail in, they should make up for it by offering something of value that is beneficial to the City… Do those bikes and scooters run over us old folks in other places in the city?? Red Herring
Rich, the Mennonite Village has been a major employer and asset in our community before I was even born. I rode my bicycle by the village many times as a kid in the 60’s. They bought that extra land years ago for expansion. They have built a very livable community and provide a needed service. Plus landlocked land up against the freeway and railroad. There are many new developments that have been built in Albany over the years and from out of town developers who profit, yet they are not required to build a public path, just their sidewalk frontage. Mennonite Village’s profits are put back into their village. Can you same the same for Hayden and Lennar Homes?
They are great folks, but did the others get it for free, or did they have to keep their word for their commitments? It is the same as the CARA deals, some have to keep their commitments and others get let out of theirs.
They should keep their word, or make an alternative deal to make up for it.
The Village is not a closed campus. We have lived here for over five years. We have bike riders on the street that are not residents. Feel free to ride your bike on the streets just not in the walking trails. The pathway would not connect anything except Columbus to I5 and would take up part of the gardens. The narrow trail that is there now floods every year along with the creek. Just an FYI. Thanks for your input.
It would seem to me a public trail and maintenance would be the responsibility of the public, not the Village. And, they agreed to the requirements in 2018 in order to seek approval of their proposed expansion. 80 year olds lived there at that time, so screaming “safety issue” now seems odd. Yes, there are ornery youth, taggers, the possibility of trash left behind, but those aren’t sufficient reasons to not build a trail, so build your expansion or don’t, but they shouldn’t be allowed to skirt the requirements they agreed to previously.
Please see my response above.
Is the City WILLING & ABLE to POLICE this path? Since at least one of those answers is NO, let them use the path that skirts the property.
If I’m on my bike, I don’t want to have to wade my way through a bunch of old, deaf, physically impaired etc. people (even though I’m in that category). They don’t even know how to get out of the way properly. I don’t like having to wade through young people who don’t have enough sense to make room, like alongside of Lowes.
Why do people just automatically assume the city’s requirement was reasonable to begin with? Twisting peoples arms into providing unwise requirements seems to be a city requirement. Why do people have to suffer before the city allows anything? Jumping through these types of ridiculous hoops is the only way to get approved. It would be awesome if they would stop this trend and work with the community for the better rather than covering up their clueless decisions. Just move the trail as Mr. Hultberg suggested. Shame on the city for wasting people’s time and money on this.
Shame on the city? This was a known requirement for the annexation, and was agreed to… Case closed
I dont see why the move to South side of Oak Creek would be an issue. It’d be a welcome for all the new homes out there and gives those developers a potential opportunity to connect the trail through the new subdivisions, and offer more for the price of 600k.
There are many things to consider about the bike path other than it was approved in 2012 so it should be included.
This plan was approved 14 years ago. If it is to be built because no changes can be made to the original agreement, then to shouldnt all the other parts of the approved plans also be upheld based on the year approved? Those such as building codes, permit fees, lot size:etc. Progress has dictated that many plans of that age have had to be altered as times and circumstances have changed. Imagine living in the existing part of the village. Some houses that border the new walkway would be within 20 ft. Would anyone like to live that close to a public path? You would have the public in your backyard. It would destroy the peace that is now experienced other than the residents who meet each other on ther daily walks.
There are less than 10% of both residents and the administration that remain since this plan was approved. In that amount of time life has changed considerably.
Imagine moving in to the village with the knowledge that it is not open to the public and the entire purpose for moving there was to have peace and a sense of security for just that reason. The majority of people there use walkers, canes and other devices to get around. Many of these people have early stages of dementia and quite frankly, minds do not react as quickly and accidents walking are already to much without adding bikes and other transportations that would confuse the residents on how to react while walking. We are talking about your parents, grandparents any other family members in the last stages of their lives. In instances where the path would be a few feet from the residence, think of the added noise and invasion of the quiet they moved in there to enjoy in their late years. Many of the residence are widows. Security and fear are already a part of their daily concerns. There have been thefts of catalytic converters, gas and even lawn decorations as it is now. There has been theft of golfcarts just for the joyride of a few youth. The village is not patrolled by law enforcment.
Take into consideration that in at least the last 6 years, no one moving ito the village had any idea of such plans. Residents have monetarily put all they have in to buying and living in the village. They have no alternative to move because there is no money to do so. This is an earth shatterring problem they are dealing with emotionally.
Can we not honor the elderly by understanding this issue and come up with an alternative? It’s more than a bike path, it’s an invasion of the lives of those who just want to live out their years.
Agree 100% Randy
Grandfather(verb) senior walkways. This 5′ wide meandering concrete sidewalk has been used by the elderly for many, many years. How about just respecting tradition?
A paved bicycle trail on the south side of Oak Creek makes far more sense, as it would better serve residents of all the new homes that are being erected in the vicinity.