Flagstaff BAC approves sending consolidated comments on regional plan; urges clearer VRU definition and trail maps

At a recent meeting, the Flagstaff Bicycle Advisory Committee voted to circulate a letter of consolidated comments on the draft regional plan, endorsing specific edits aimed at clarifying safety priorities and preserving trail access.

Committee members said the group wants a single, transportation-focused definition of “vulnerable road users” (VRUs) in the regional plan, argued for adding three Active Transportation Master Plan (ATMP) maps (forest access, single-track access, and neighborhood connectors), and asked for language that better protects alignments for the Flagstaff Urban Trail System (FUTS) and the Arizona Trail/Loop Trail.

The committee said a narrowly drawn VRU definition would make it clearer that certain policies — notably policy TS 1 — are intended to prioritize pedestrians, bicyclists and users of other small personal conveyances for safety in street planning. “VRU should be defined in transportation planning terms so policy TS 1 prioritizes pedestrians, bicyclists, wheelchairs, scooters and micro‑mobility devices,” said Sam, a committee member who led the draft language citing Federal Highway Administration phrasing.

City staff and committee members discussed a broader equity‑oriented use of VRU that appears elsewhere in the draft (cited on page 6‑11 of the plan). Committee members said equity and disparate safety outcomes are important and should be addressed, but that those concerns would be better handled in a separate, explicit equity policy so they do not dilute the operational meaning of VRU in safety policies.

The committee also recommended including the ATMP maps in the regional plan so that informal and formal trail access points receive stronger recognition during development review. “With our geography, these access points are getting chipped away,” a committee member said, urging formal protection where possible. Members said including the maps would strengthen the plan’s ability to require connectivity in new development, particularly where FUTS segments or regional trails could otherwise be lost or relocated without formal review.

On FUTS and the Loop Trail, members asked that the regional plan explicitly acknowledge the city’s trail network and the planned gaps in the Loop Trail so those routes are recognized during development and project review. Committee members said making the trail map and related language part of the regional plan would provide affirmative support when negotiating trail alignments with developers.

Committee members also discussed recommended wording for how new urban trails should be aligned and designed. Proposed suggestions included following linear landscape features (washes, ridgelines), integrating trails visibly into neighborhoods, and avoiding alignments that are indirect, enclosed by barriers, or placed adjacent to busy roadways where possible. The committee identified a potential follow‑up step of creating code‑level or programmatic standards to give staff firmer tools when negotiating trail alignments with developers.

A motion was introduced to incorporate the draft comments and related language into a letter to be circulated among committee members, finalized by staff, and transmitted through the regional plan comment process. The motion was seconded and passed by unanimous voice vote; the transcript records vocal “ayes” and the chair’s announcement that “ayes have it.” The transcript does not provide a numerical roll‑call tally.

The committee directed staff to circulate the draft letter to members for final review and to submit it before the planning and zoning commission’s next meeting so the BAC comments can be considered during the commission’s recommendation process.

The committee’s letter will include: a transportation‑specific VRU definition (based on FHWA guidance), a recommendation that equity concerns be addressed under a separate policy, a request to incorporate the three ATMP maps in the regional plan, and suggested language to promote functional, appealing trail alignments in new development.

Members said they intend the letter to be constructive and to acknowledge improvements already made to the draft while preserving specific, enforceable protections for active‑transportation facilities.

The committee’s balloted items and the submitted letter will become part of the formal public record for the regional plan review.