|
The Commission reviewed the Public Feedback Synthesis for the Observatory Mesa Trail Plan and the draft Trail Plan for the Greater Observatory Mesa area.
The Commission provided some feedback on the organization of the Public Feedback Synthesis. There was also thought, and concern expressed that the community feedback does not provide sufficient data for making important decisions related to the draft Trail Plan. Staff provided clarification that the Public Feedback Synthesis is meant to be a summary of public feedback that identifies the themes that are important to the public so that we can consider what was heard from the community and help base plan decisions to make sure the Trail Plan is representative of the community.
The Commission shared some comments on ensuring that the Trail Plan upholds the original intent for the Bond Fund that voters approved. PROSE Director, Rebecca Sayers, shared that the 2004 funds for Observatory Mesa were for acquisition. The bond also has some language about the intended use being “permanent natural open spaces for public use,” and for “wildlife habitat protection and conservation of observatory viewing quality.” The Open Space Section believes that the Trail Plan is in line with those goals as it emphasizes protecting wildlife, reducing the number of trails and restoring many of them to a natural state, and providing signage and access to the public. Staff will send the publicity pamphlet for the 2004 bond fund to commissioners for their review.
Commissioners discussed several features of the Trail Plan, focusing on elements that they find concerning. Topics included:
- Concern that the plan is more weighted towards bike use rather than walkers/hikers or other users.
- The need to ensure that the plan preserves space for wildlife and enhanced experience.
- Ensuring parking for better access to allow access for users, especially walkers/hikers.
- Single use vs multi use, specifically thoughts that single use caters towards bikes and may not benefit other users.
- Directional Trails and how they would reduce the non-bike user’s ability to make short out and back trips.
- The lack of easily accessible shorter loops that are important for walkers/hikers.
- E-bike appropriateness.
|
|