Page 10 - the NOISE July 2015

If they buIld It... you’ll get towed
cathedral rock traIlhead Improvements: process or protest?
edItorIal by cIndy cole
Here’s the city’s plan for improvements at the Cathedral Rock USFS trailhead: 1 — spend millions of dollars to invite tourists to come to Sedona; 2 — get land from a local resident to increase the number of parking spaces at the very popular Cathedral Rock trailhead; 3 — in exchange for the land, restrict roadside parking at this very popular trailhead, at the land owner’s request; 4 — use city resources to patrol the area and tow visitors who continue to park along the road; 5 — spend millions of dollars to continue to convince tourists that Sedona is still a great place to visit. All but that last one are part of the Cathedral Rock Trailhead Improvements Project that the Sedona City Council voted unanimously to move forward with at their June 9 meeting.
The issue of parking along Back O’ Beyond Road near the Cathedral Rock trailhead was first raised in March of 2014. The presentation made by a city engineer at that time cited safety concerns caused by vehicles parked along and sometimes slightly in the roadway.
Several residents expressed dismay at the idea that yet another popular hiking spot would have its access further limited by parking restrictions and threats of vehicle towing. Tina Reich of Sedona cited the already limited parking in Oak Creek Canyon due to the increasing number of “no parking” areas along 89A. These restrictions force canyon visitors into concessionaire- run forest fee areas. Another speaker questioned the logic of visitors having their cars towed and the impact that would have on tourism. Sedona activist Warren Woodward asked if any studies had been done regarding the alleged safety concerns expressed by the city engineer.
“Have there been any accidents there that would give cause for concern?” he asked. When none could be cited, he asked, “Then where is the problem?”
At that time, the city council decided that no action should be taken immediately and that concerns regarding the area should be further considered before implementing any new signage or parking restrictions. The Cathedral Rock Trailhead Improvements Project appears to be the result of that consideration. Unfortunately, some of the same questions still exist.
In this new plan, the city approached a landowner who has property in close proximity to the existing USFS trailhead parking area. The landowner has agreed to donate a parcel to the city in order to create additional parking spaces at the popular hiking spot. Currently, there are
18 parking spaces at the Back O’ Beyond trailhead. The donated land would be used to create no more than 22 additional spaces resulting in a total of 40 slots. In exchange, the landowner is demanding that the city make the entire length of Back O’ Beyond Road, starting from the forest service parking lot and going west, a no parking zone. The agreement states that these signs should be placed “prior to the construction of the parking lot.”
In addition, the agreement requires that “the City shall furnish a plan for the maintenance of the parking lot, location and number of toilets, location and number of waste receptacles and garbage removal, what hours the parking lot will be open, how the City will enforce the curfew after closure of the parking lot, how the City will manage noise abatement and congestion which shall be approved by the Owner and the City Council.” Should the city eventually desire to transfer the deed to the USFS for management of the new parking area, the agreement stipulates that the “City agrees that they will continue their enforcement of the No Parking Signs in perpetuity, and will continue noise abatement and curfew restrictions in perpetuity.”
The plan raises several concerns — the least of which is why a single land owner is being allowed to dictate policy to the city. And “in perpetuity” no less.
In addition to being a popular hiking spot, the Back O’ Beyond side of Cathedral Rock has long been the location of celebratory drum circles attended by both locals and tourists. These drum circles usually take place on the full moon and generally convene around six or seven times a year. Attendance can range from just a few participants to 150 people or more. While many view these gatherings as an important and necessary tradition that is representative of the heart and soul of the Sedona community, others consider them simply a nuisance. It appears to this concerned citizen that some of the references in the written plan to “curfews” and “noise abatement,” which were not discussed at the June 9 council meeting, are really an attempt to end the full moon gatherings.
Long-time Sedona resident Daniel Holland tried to warn people via Facebook posts that urged the drumming community to attend the council meeting. Some responded saying that the additional parking was a good idea and not something to resist. Mr. Holland and I were the only ones who showed up to the council chambers on June 9 to question the plan and we both filed comment cards requesting to speak about our concerns on the Back O’ Beyond agenda item.
City Engineer Andy Dickey gave a short presentation summarizing the details of the plan. He discussed the installment of the “no parking” signs, construction of rest rooms at the trailhead, and restricting tour buses from accessing the Back O’ Beyond parking area. The full implementation of the plan is supposed to be completed within a year. Both Mr. Dickey and the city attorney admitted that there were some legal and administrative issues that still needed to be worked out and fine-tuned in the proposal. Mr. Dickey asked the council to approve the plan with instructions for city staff to resolve these issues.
ththee
102 • JULNYE2015 •• NOISISEaartrsts&&nneewwss •• tthenoiise..us
graphIc by
Image by
IrvIn lee
chIp thomas
Councilman John Martinez questioned the logic of restricting tour buses from accessing the popular trailhead. “Don’t they drop people off and then leave with no cars parking there?” he asked. He then asked the staff if any studies had been done to see whether another 22 parking spaces would really eliminate the roadside parking issue. Mr. Dickey responded that, on Memorial Day weekend of this year, staff observed 30 vehicles parked along the roadway.
“So that’s about 50 cars there currently but they only want 40 parking spaces,” Mr. Martinez calculated. “So we still have people who will not be able to visit Cathedral Rock.”
Mr. Martinez further queried staff about the installation of restrooms at the trailhead. “As I recall, if there are amenities then people have to pay for a Red Rock Pass?” “If it’s given to the forest service then they would be able to do that,”responded Mr. Dickey. “So the owner is going to donate the land to the city and then we’re going to do all the improvements -- we have a $200,000 budget for this. And then we’re going to give it to the USFS so they can charge for it?” asked Mr. Martinez. “That’s an option we can look at,”said Mr. Dickey. “Shouldn’t we know what options we are going to take before we approve this?” asked Mr. Martinez.
Mr. Martinez continued, “I would love to have staff consider this -- in a couple of minutes we’re going to have the chamber do a presentation on the destination marketing to try and get visitors to come to Sedona. Like I mentioned before, here we are inviting tourists to come visit us but we’re going to restrict them on what they can see and I have a problem with that. I totally understand that we need to keep the area safe. With parking on both sides that is not safe because you can’t get fire trucks and emergency vehicles in there. But if you could restrict parking on just one side of the road then that would help visitors still be able to visit there.” Though safety concerns were raised during the meeting, no evidence was given to support these concerns. The Sedona Fire Department was not present at the meeting and has not given any statements to the city about issues near the trailhead.
When Mr. Martinez asked about ownership of the land that is between the current parking area and the proposed new parking lot, Ms. Rowe responded that it was USFS land. “Can’t the forest service pave that?” he asked. “We would have to go through a NEPA process for that,” she responded. The NEPA process requires a federal agency to weigh environmental impact factors equally with other concerns before proceeding with things like parking lot construction. “We could take a number today and get it in line,” Ms. Rowe said, “but the topography in that area is not as good as the area we are discussing. It’s not as flat,”she quickly reasoned. “But it’s a natural fit between the current parking and the proposed one,” said Mr. Martinez. “It makes common sense to put something between them. Let’s start today to do something.”
As the council questions came to an end, Mayor Sandy Moriarty acknowledged the two public comment requests that had been submitted. “I do want to say I had two requests for comment from the public,” she said. “The reason I’m not going to allow it is we’re short on time. I am going to give your cards to staff. This is obviously not a done deal yet so if you have comments to make to staff I will ask them to call you. But I’m not going to take comments at this time.” With that, a motion to pass the proposal was voted on and passed unanimously by the council. In spite of asking some thoughtful questions and expressing some serious concerns, even Mr. Martinez voted, “yay.”
Following the meeting, Mr. Holland took to Facebook again to appeal to the community at large. “What you all fail to realize is that this is not about parking,” he wrote. “It is about control. I was one of two people today that was actually at the meeting to speak about this issue. The place was packed but not a drummer in sight. If you listened closely to what the city was saying as well as the feds you got the strong feeling that they really wanted to control what is going on at Cathedral Rock and other areas in a very clever, backhand way by restricting parking and eventually requiring a Red Rock Pass to park in their new spaces. And what happens when those lots overflow and folks park in No Parking areas? This was done before at Boynton Canyon around ‘93 and they were towing cars away. Our silence as a community and a family was all they needed to see and gave them the green light to happily proceed with their plans.”
“They were very anxious to vote on this and just before the vote the mayor commented that two people wanted to speak on this issue but they won’t be allowed because of time restraints,” Mr. Holland continued. “She said that city staff would be contacting us for our thoughts?! That this is not a done deal? Then they voted to proceed with the acquisition of the land and parking restrictions 6-0. I felt I was left out to dry. They had time for some wonderful music in the beginning of the meeting but they did not have time for two comments of six minutes or less total?!”
The most disconcerting elements in this reporter’s opinion are the references to curfews, parking lot opening and closing times, and noise abatement that were never even discussed before the council. The owner of the property that will be donated to the city clearly has an agenda that includes stopping the drumming circles from taking place on Cathedral Rock.
Perhaps Mr. Holland summed it up best when he said, “In 29 years of living here I have seen most of the fun and attractiveness about being here eroded away. From camping restrictions to no outside music and now this. And it’s not right!”
| Cindy Cole makes no bones of her drumming quads. cindy@thenoise.us opine