A “skills trail” for mountain bikers on the Marolt-Thomas Open Space? Part of the open space has been targeted for development by the Roaring Fork Mountain Biking Association. They have drawn up designs for a densely packed spaghetti network of trails working back and forth on what is currently a brush-covered space that’s inhabited by mule deer and songbirds.
This plan begs many questions:
First of all, what is the purpose of the shared open space we have here in the Roaring Fork Valley? Is it for the wildlife we share the valley with? Yes, at least in part. Is it for the psychic relaxation we feel without seeing strip malls, stoplights, traffic and even lycra-clad recreationalists on every corner? Yes.
Our open space gives all of us, residents and visitors alike, a chance to take a moment of relief from the hustle and bustle of our lives and the rat race. Is it to be kept as open space only until the next best “highest use” comes along? No; we have pledged to ourselves that these lands are not to be developed.
Second, how do we feel about a special, single-purpose user group converting publicly owned and managed open space to an exclusive use? Not really a great model for good decision making. Is this conversion of use justified just because a single, well-organized group wants it?
Third, have there been adequate studies of the need for such a conversion? No. Are we to simply shrug and say “Sure, we all like bicycles, there are tons more folks in the valley now and of course it will be good for the visiting tourists to learn how to ride mountain bikes?” Last I checked, there are lots of bicycle trails in the area, from the valleywide Rio Grande Trail to the Crown, Mushroom Rock, Prince Creek, Sky Mountain Park, Government, Rim, Owl Creek, Brush Creek, Hunter Creek, East of Aspen and Smuggler Mountain trails, to name a few.
Fourth, has the impact on adjacent land been adequately considered? Issues like parking, additional traffic, restrooms, expected number of users and so on don’t seem to have been addressed. All the neighboring parcels from the hospital to the Marolt housing complex will feel the impacts.
Fifth, what other alternative locations have been considered? We do have alternative sites with parking and facilities, places which are already areas dedicated to “industrial” style recreation. Buttermilk and Snowmass ski areas (where the Aspen Skiing Co. already has a dedication to summer bicycle uses in its operations) come immediately to mind as better alternative locations.
I think this conversion of public open space is a really bad idea. I don’t know if a mountain bike training facility is actually required in the valley (people seem to know how to mountain bike just fine as it is), but there are much better places to locate such a land use.
I know this is Aspen, where “more is never enough,” but shoehorning this use into this location really is too much. Other than RFMBA (clearly pushing its constituents’ agenda) and the nearby orthopedic doctors over at the hospital (who stand to gain clients), who really does want this new use in this location?
The community has fought hard for open space in this valley. It is under constant threat of conversion and overuse and yet it exists because we all benefit from it. Ultimately, it is not the mule deer or songbirds or small wildlife alone that will suffer, but it is us, the residents of this valley, that need this and other open space here for our own human habitat.
We have worked hard for these lands, taxed ourselves to pay for them, promised donors they would be forever protected, and managed and maintained them for years. They should not be converted into industrial recreational zones.