September 2009

On Sept. 21, 2009, Jefferson County Open Space (JCOS) published a revision to its proposed, recommended management plan for improving visitor experiences at Apex Park. The Colorado Mountain Bike Association (COMBA) believes the revised plan—which demonstrates a willingness to compromise—needs further attention; as such, we offer this counter proposal in the spirit of cooperation in order to seek fair and equitable status on behalf of the mountain bike community as a legitimate sub-group of all park visitors. To that end, we appreciate the Open Space staff being open to further stakeholder input before any updated plan is ratified.

COMBA supports much of the proposed management plan for Apex Park, including:

• Create a new multi-use trail from the Heritage Square trailhead to connect to Pick n’  
   Sledge Trail
• Design segments of trail utilizing calming techniques on Apex Trail to reduce speed  
   differentials for all users
• Establish sections of new trail alignment for safety and sustainability
• Incorporate features along Apex Trail of interest and challenge for biking
• Construct pullouts, install signs and trim vegetation as necessary to improve visitor  
   safety throughout the Park

While the leadership of COMBA acknowledges the gesture of “Compromised Actions”, we continue to oppose any directional travel restrictions that are only presented against a single user group (in this case, mountain bikers). This includes travel restrictions which may only be in effect every other day, as is the case with the new “alternate day” revision. This stance highlights the underlying issue at hand: the apparent bias against mountain bikers as seen through inequitable management and regulation. Bikers have demonstrated—by our majority status usage of this park; by our overwhelming participation in the public comment; and by our considerable volunteer time on the trail—that we deserve to be treated fairly as a user group with equal privileges to our pedestrian or equestrian counterparts. This new plan would set the stage for mode-biased travel restrictions within a multi-use park– on top of existing policy elsewhere which currently prohibits cyclists from either specific trails or entire parks within the JCOS system.

In addition to this unbalanced management tactic, we respectfully raise the following issues with the proposed plan:

1) In an attempt to control a very small group of “downhillers”, or “shuttlers”, JCOS is in effect penalizing all cyclists– including the majority of bikers who recreate responsibly. Casual, non-enthusiast riders most certainly will not ride “up” Enchanted Forest nor Sluicebox because of the effort and/or time required. By appending the alternate day revision, this plan essentially reduces the opportunity for participation for these recreational riders by half.

2) The travel restriction as it pertains to Enchanted Forest is an admitted concession to local “upper” residents (who primarily use this trail as a segment for a neighborhood loop), who’ve provided anecdotal accounts of haphazard cyclists. While we agree that all park users have an expectation to have their voices heard, this plan would effectively restrict many more local residents living adjacent to Apex who are on record opposing restrictions of any kind, in addition to tens of thousands of user visits over the course of a year– for the benefit of a mere handful of folks.

3) Rather than disperse users (a presumably worthy objective in order to improve visitor experiences), the proposed plan will only increase congestion on Pick N Sledge as all cyclists would be required to descend accordingly– on top of pedestrian traffic. It should come as no surprise that congestion will very likely lead to additional conflict between users as they are concentrated spatially. This in turn will have the opposite effect of the stated objectives, by creating opportunities for negative experiences at Apex Park.

We contest that the first two points raised above highlight a poor strategy– that is, both managing against, and catering to, very small groups of users as compared to overall patronage of the park. Such broad stroke regulation negatively impacts “the greater good”, as now the proverbial “bad apple” and “squeaky wheel” have usurped common sense at the expense of the many– your “average” (and majority) user.

Finally, an effective Park Management Plan should be a dynamic document which seeks to manage a parcel for current, desired usage. The argument that mountain bikers are not historical users should not carry any weight, as you are managing for today’s clientele– not the usage patterns of 30 years ago when mountain bikes were just a burgeoning novelty in CO. Our being “last to the table” does not negate our proper seat among our non-cycling peers.

COMBA Counter Proposal

Rather than just reiterate the support of our initial plan, COMBA would like to offer a revised plan of its own– which we believe, under the circumstances, offers the best (and least restrictive) outcome for all park users as well as JCOS management.

Succinctly, we propose a 3 year review period be instated (starting Spring 2010), with the following guiding principles:

1. The implementation of the proposed JCOS plan without the travel restrictions
2. A concerted effort by both COMBA and JCOS of a high visibility Public Outreach campaign in order to educate all mountain bikers, including “shuttlers”, of proper trail etiquette and expectations as responsible Open Space park visitors

The latter point would be accomplished via a multi-pronged approach:

a) Ambassador Program – This is a proven strategy which seeks to alter user behavior by not only modeling good trail conduct by trained “ambassadors”, but also by positive, purposeful outreach to all users– providing valuable education (i.e. yielding) via teachable moments while on the trail. This is a formal program based largely on the Trail Ambassador program administered by the International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA). COMBA has been approached by a volunteer who is eager to manage this program within JCOS, having seen it work first-hand on the East Coast. COMBA is thusly prepared to assist with the implementation and ongoing support of such a program if JCOS would allow it. Working separately but in tandem with the JCOS volunteer patrol, this program would be structured as an independent entity, such that it would not be directly associated with JCOS nor COMBA– subsequently remaining neutral and free from any (potential) political windfall in years to come.

b) Enhanced Bike Right events – COMBA believes in the current “bike right” program within JCOS whereby county personnel staff a converted trailer in order to reach out to users while at the trailhead about proper etiquette. We think our formal presence at these events—targeted specifically at Apex—would lend additional credibility and allow for a broader reach to enthusiast mountain bikers who may be put off by uniformed county personnel. The goal would be to convey a partnership between the county and the leading advocacy group for mountain bikers in Jeffco.

c) Upper ingress gate and signage – Whereas the county believes that “shuttlers”—who are dropped off at the top of the park (via Lookout Mountain road)—represent a significant problem, let’s try to target those folks specifically. By installing a single gate at the top of Apex where cyclists enter the park, we can utilize this “check point” by supplementing with a sign which would highlight the expectations of all who pass through. This sign would be paid for, provided by, and branded as COMBA– which would lend to its credibility among our user group. The sign should be prominent so as not to be overlooked, and by requiring cyclists to physically stop before entering (in order to pull gate open), any would-be scofflaw would have no excuse to plead ignorance to responsible user expectations.

d) Public Service Announcements – As it has been observed that at least some of the “downhillers” who fail to yield appear to be young, we recognize that our preaching to the choir (our membership) only goes so far. In order to broaden the reach of this campaign, we would look to place PSA messages on popular local radio stations, highlighting the need for cooperation and trail etiquette on Front Range Open Space trails. (This novel approach could potentially be shared by like-minded MTB advocacy organizations both north and south of Jeffco as the audience is so broad.)

e) Outreach in the Schools – This idea could take shape in many forms, for example: 2010 will likely see the introduction in Colorado of a very successful High School Mountain Bike League (well established in California). This could provide inroads to again reach out to younger riders who in many cases are not even aware of trail etiquette or yielding expectations. Alternately, COMBA could seek to partner with Bicycle Colorado and their Safe Routes to Schools campaign, whereby they go into elementary schools and talk about bike safety; while this program is primarily aimed at commuting, it would be a natural segue to include in this outreach how to be a good Open Space citizen while riding bicycles in public parks.

The above strategy we feel is important for any potential change to a park management policy. Indeed, the data reported by JCOS staff summarizing the public comment period of this revision process [“Summary of Outreach Responses”] clearly shows the most supported option as Public Outreach / Education… yet this tactic is conspicuously absent from the “Actions” of either the initial draft or the revised management plan proposed by JCOS. The second most popular management option is Trail Signage.

It is worth noting that the least supported option is Alternate and Directional– which is the primary approach of the revised “compromise” proposal forwarded by JCOS.

Finally, if an argument or rationale is going to be made (as has been suggested) that “hikers and equestrians deserve a speed-differential-free experience”, then we must point out that mountain bikers are deserving of the same experience– and therefore the statement needs to be rephrased as “park visitors deserve a speed-differential-free experience”. In that case it is only fair and reasonable that any suggested travel restrictions be equally shared among user groups, such that cyclists could enjoy the same deserved and desired experience as any other user. That is, if the directional aspect of the current proposal is to remain so as to provide pedestrian traffic a speed-differential-free experience, then directional management should also be implemented on behalf of and in favor to mountain bikers. Note: COMBA does not believe this to be the ideal solution for Apex Park; we’ll reiterate that our proposed compromise is based on a management plan without travel restrictions for any user*. To be clear, if restrictions are to be implemented, then do not discriminate solely against cyclists.

This brings us back to the apparent anti-MTB bias of the proposed plan. We wish to call out this observation in hopes that it is unintentional. As stated at the outset, mountain bikers represent a legitimate user group which should be treated equitably with regards to other user groups, so that any one group does not feel disenfranchised by exclusionary policy. We are therefore seeking a second revision to the current draft of the Apex Park Management Plan that aligns with this call for equitable management of a shared resource cherished by users of all modes of non-motorized travel. If implemented as outlined here, we believe at the close of the proposed review period the user experience at Apex would be improved for all.

We look forward to our scheduled discussion with you and representatives from the Trails Use Task Force, with the aim of working out a true “compromise” solution which is both fair and equitable to all park visitors.

Epilogue

The assertions made herein are based on a good faith presupposition that JCOS would like to continue managing parks predominantly in the spirit of “multi-use” (cited as the first stated objective in this review). If this assumption proves false, and a “shared (but not equal) use” approach is the new standard, then we recognize that JCOS may in fact reject the argument for fair and equitable. If that is indeed the case, it would necessarily trigger a shift in strategy for our approach to advocating on behalf of our constituency. Simply stated, if the rules of the game are changing, COMBA will move to proactively push for bike-only trails and parks going forward, free from multi-use constraints. *Under those circumstances in the matter before us now, we’d submit that our original solution [“Position Statement on Improving Visitor User Experiences at Apex Park”] in fact offers the best solution for providing speed-differential-free opportunities by providing descending cyclists an avenue away from crowded multi-use trails, thereby reducing speed differential among all users in a shared-use setting.

Respectfully,

The Colorado Mountain Bike Association Board of Directors, on behalf of its members.