Approval of Minutes
Commissioner Thomas motioned to approve the Minutes of the January 22, 2024 Open Spaces Commission Meeting, Commissioner Wallen seconded, all voted in favor.
Commissioner Thomas motioned to approve the Minutes of the February 26, 2024 Joint Parks and Recreation Commission and Open Spaces Commission meeting, Commissioner White seconded, all voted in favor.

Business Items 

A.  Chair/Vice Chair Seat Selection:  Commissioner Chair Wilson’s second term ends in April, and it is not renewable. Commissioner White nominated Vice Chair Bruce Applin for Chair, and Commissioner Applin indicated he was willing to serve. Commissioner Norton seconded this nomination, and all voted in favor.  Vice Chair: Commissioner Thomas nominated herself, Commissioner Wilson seconded, and all voted in favor.

B.  Hidden Hollow Easement Adjustment recommendation to Flagstaff City Council

Commissioner Wilson first requested public comment:

• Joan Martini spoke, saying that she felt for the landowners, but buyer beware—both the private parcel owners and the City of Flagstaff purchasing the property with the easement in place. She expressed that, looking at the map, these parcels are an island around Open Space: Is it possible for the city to purchase the parcels to add to Observatory Mesa Natural Area?  Parcel Owner Cody Routson indicated that the private parcels would be open to the idea of selling the property to the city in exchange for a fair offer.

Open Space Supervisor Robert Wallace read a summary of the easement request and the background (see the Open Spaces Commission Minutes from January 22, 2024, for a more detailed summary). In response to a question, it was reported that the Community Development staff met with a Coconino County staff person, who indicated the county had no concerns about a new alignment or construction of the driveway. There was a question about whether there had been an analysis of potential litigation time and expense on either decision that is made; there has not.

The questions before the Commission are whether to recommend that the existing ROW should remain in its current placement, or if it is acceptable to amend the location of the ROW, or to support the ROW realignment with certain conditions. 

Concerns were raised about the AZ State Parks Conservation Easement, where if the current dirt road was upgraded to meet city standards (keeping within the 20’ width), whether that changes the “baseline conditions” in the Conservation Easement, or whether the reconstruction of the road would count toward the city’s 20-acre limit on improvements. There was concern about Goshawk fledglings, which needed to be undisturbed from March-October, and how construction of the road and homes would affect that.

Commissioner Thomas’ inclination was to recommend approval of the ROW adjustment with conditions. Commissioner Norton’s concern was whether City Council, or AZ State Parks, or AZ Attorney General would keep those conditions intact; if the conditions deteriorated, she would be a “no.”  Commissioner Applin leaned toward recognizing the ROW, and honoring that Flagstaff purchased the land with this ROW attached, and to attach conditions to protect Open Space as best we can. Commissioner White’s inclination was to move ahead with an approval of the ROW with conditions, while/after consulting with AZ State Parks & AZ Attorney General regarding how it affects the Conservation Easement’s limit on developing 20 acres. Commissioner Wilson leaned toward approving the request, but expressed concerns he would like to see addressed, not necessarily in order of importance:

• Construction/traffic noise in a wildlife-sensitive area
• Effect on wildlife movement—a piece of Open Space is sectioned off by the right-of-way.
• ROW plan is based on an aerial survey done 18 years ago, is it still accurate.
• How it will impact Hidden Hollow neighbors
• Net zero impact to the natural area—need to naturalize the disturbed land (referring to Conservation Easement conditions 3 & 4)
• Impact to dark skies
• Accuracy of estimated cost—ability to fund and complete the roadway.
• Subsequent damage to OM and how that will be mitigated.
• Prospect of providing future utilities to those properties and how that will be implemented.
• Number of housing units/density on those 7 properties
• Intensity of future ingress/egress to the properties
• How will the final build deviate from the plan?

Proposed conditions were:

• Create a Homeowners Association (HOA) as a legal entity the city can work with.
• Performance bond with a specified warranty of the work being done.
• Any future utilities would be placed underground within the ROW.
• Someone to monitor impacts to the natural area from the construction, with a report to the city.
• Allow pedestrian access, but also gated entry to prevent unauthorized vehicle entry.
• A certified “as built” survey is provided to the city.
• Private parcel owners/HOA is responsible for maintenance of the road.
• Dark sky compliance.
• Prohibit subdividing (though the Commission is unsure what restriction would be legal in this regard).
• Restrict road and parcel construction/development during Goshawk nesting season.
• Revegetation of all decommissioned roads, cuts, and builds to Open Space specifications.

For the next meeting, Mr. Wallace will contact AZ State Parks to see if we could get an answer on the concern about reconstruction of the road affecting the baseline condition and the 20-acre limit. He will also try to hear from AZ Game & Fish Department about Goshawk habitat/fledgling requirements in that area.

C.  Observatory Mesa Trail Planning. 

Robert Wallace summarized that Commission wanted to look at guiding documents of Observatory Mesa Natural Area (OMNA) to ensure the plan was aligned with those documents. Goal for this discussion was to determine whether the trail plan aligns with guided documents, if there are sections/topics that do not align and why, so that we can make further revisions to the plan. 

Commissioner Wilson requested public comment. Duffy Westheimer spoke, saying there are 418 acres in Section 6, for the purpose of wildlife and habitat conservation. She said she has been asking Open Space to contact all the neighborhoods (about 20 altogether) about this plan, because OMNA is heavily used by those neighborhoods. There has been increased use with the building of the FUTS, as well as events. Ms. Westheimer expressed that fire is a huge risk of unsheltered people living there, that there is a lack of plans for trail maintenance and enforcement; signage alone will not work. She was concerned that developing more trails will increase use, which will increase the problems.
 
Joan Martini agreed with Ms. Westheimer about the lack of maintenance and enforcement, and about people living on OMNA or US Forest Service sections. She expressed that enforcement is the key: If we cannot enforce what we have now, how would e-bikes limiting to 20mph be enforced? If ebikes are prohibited, that seems easier to enforce. Ms. Martini was concerned about the proposed directional trail at “hot pockets” with jumps and turns, in an area with beautiful canyons and plants that do not grow in other places. She sees hundreds of elk and pronghorn antelope and was concerned about where the wildlife will go if we put in more trails. She was against directional trails, and against ebikes, wanting to keep OMNA it as is.
 
Rick Moore expressed that single-use trails should not be included, that hikers and bikers should be able to share a trail, enjoying the natural environment. Directional trails are designed for high-speed riding and jumping, which is antithetical to a natural area--it should be managed as such, not for recreation. Mr. Moore expressed that the AZ State Parks Conservation Easement specifically says passive recreation, which does not include motors, including ebikes. There are cycling/recreation areas in Flagstaff, and hundreds of miles of road allowed for motorized vehicles, keep OMNA natural.
 
William Kluwin agreed with the trail maintenance concerns raised, where when there is a downed tree, people start riding/hiking around them. He also agreed about enforcement, saying we can’t afford to enforce our regulations or maintain the trails we currently have.
 
Mark Loseth from Southwest Decision Resources asked each commissioner to express their concerns to take them into account for future planning. Commissioners expressed that “less is more,” approved of decommissioning social trails and making appropriate new trails using existing fire roads. They believed the founding documents of OMNA repeatedly cited conservation of plants, canyons, and wildlife, rarely referring to recreation, and then only passive recreation, such as hiking, biking, and horseback riding. They were concerned that “if we build it, they will come” via social media, tourist advisory websites, and City of Flagstaff tourism marketing. They were concerned about a lack of clearly stated monitoring, enforcement, and maintenance plans; it was acknowledged that a trail plan is needed for best management practices. All were against allowing ebikes on OMNA.
 
Mr. Loseth indicated he would take these comments into account and come back to the Commission for a more open discussion about exactly how we can change the plan, staying focused on the guiding documents.

Informational Items To and From Commissioners and Staff
Mr. Wallace thanked Commissioner Wilson and Commissioner White for attending the regional plan meeting. Commissioner White thanked the staff for providing the link to the founding documents in one place, which he found very helpful in grounding the Commissioners. Commissioner Wallen and all of the Commissioners thanked Commissioner Wilson for being their Chair for the past two-plus years.