Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Trails Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council reviews master plan for Flying Creek Nature Preserve south parcel, including 3.5 miles of mountain‑bike trails
Summary
Christopher Grant of Thompson Engineering and Aaron Steele of Taylor Trails presented a conceptual master plan to the Fairhope City Council work session for the south parcel of the Flying Creek Nature Preserve.
Get email alerts on the Parks Trails Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Christopher Grant of Thompson Engineering and Aaron Steele of Taylor Trails presented a conceptual master plan to the Fairhope City Council work session for the south parcel of the Flying Creek Nature Preserve.
Grant said the design team mapped existing user-built trails and proposed a phased plan that preserves canopy, uses low‑impact development measures and adds a mix of trail types and amenities. “We’re actually saving the majority of those trails and enhancing those,” Grant said. He described program elements including multi‑use shared trails, intermediate and advanced unidirectional ‘flow’ mountain‑bike trails, a bike skills playground, a pump track and a trail hub with a pavilion, tool shed and restrooms.
Steele, who described his firm’s experience in trail design, explained that a bike playground teaches riders techniques on scaled features and that a pump track is an oval or triangular series of rollers and berms intended for momentum‑based riding and for use by bikes, scooters and skates. “It’s a great way to exercise, and it’s great for kids,” Steele said.
The plan aims for about 3.5 miles of trail on the south 32 acres while preserving vegetative buffers and connecting to the north parcel’s existing trails and the nature‑center amenities. The team said approximately 1.5 miles of existing informal trails were mapped and would be incorporated into the design; the additional mileage would be built to achieve the 3.5‑mile goal.
Council members asked whether that mileage is feasible on the site and whether the design would preserve the preserve’s natural character. One council member said the proposal felt “practically a biking park” and voiced concern that it would serve a small constituency; others noted that inclusion of multi‑use trails, a playground and pump track could broaden utility to families and non‑mountain‑bike users. The group also discussed liability protections for recreational facilities; presenters said state statutory protections exist for public recreational use but that some risk remains.
Next steps the presenters listed: council approval of the master plan, design development, bidding and construction documents, then construction. Presenters said park construction on parts of the preserve and some park amenities are expected to be completed in the coming weeks and months; the nature center and some north‑parcel features are still scheduled for later dates. No formal vote was taken at the work session.

