1 | Observatory Mesa Trail Planning |
||||||||||||||||||||
The commissioners spoke on their top thoughts and concerns related to the Greater Observatory Mesa Trail Plan. They have strong concerns over granting e-bike access. There are some opposing viewpoints on the topic of directional and single-use designated trails. Other topics of discussion included multi-use trails preferred for mountain biking, including a formal statement about a monitoring and maintenance plan in the proposal, and implementing a fixed date for revisiting the plan to evaluate what is working and to allow for reconsideration of plan direction. Ultimately, the commission concurred that they need to review the guiding documents to ensure that the trail plan abides by the directing management policies. Documents requested for review include AZ Sate Parks Deed of Conservation Easement, the 2004 bond initiative, and the Legally Designated Open Space Management Plan. The following members of the public made comments against the proposed plan, wanting to keep Observatory Mesa Natural Area natural for peaceful enjoyment, not a recreational area. Several speakers noted a reduction in the amount of wildlife with the current use. The Open Space Management Plan does not mention recreation. The proposed plan/trails are too complicated with too many new trails, and we should stick to conserving plants, wildlife, scenery and historical resources, and that e-bikes should not be allowed. There was also a concern that single-use plan excludes people, and all Flagstaff residents voted to purchase this land for conservation. Observatory Mesa is getting plenty of use as it is, and more trails and access will create more problems, especially on private roads. Concerned about Hot Pockets downhill trail causing serious erosion, and the need for enforcement:
The following members of the public made comments supporting the proposed plan. The main points stated were: having a plan means we can maintain it, and this is a good compromise. Some were concerned about a broad interpretation of “preservation;” doesn’t it mean keeping the land from being developed, supporting directional bike trails particularly where they’re close to the urban area, that well-built trails are sustainable and maintainable. Even among supporters, there were different opinions about e-bikes: If we prohibit e-bikes, people will do it anyway; if we specify type 1 and 2, we’ll get community buy-in for that. On the other hand, they go too fast, and the Forest Service doesn’t allow them; we don’t want to make Observatory Mesa another Dry Lake Hills, and the AZ State Parks Conservation Easement does not allow motorized vehicles. If we take out Section 17, the plan is not that complex.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||