for the

stability and more. Alternative three was modified to be narrower and steeper to mitigate some of the environmental concerns from the previous version.

Both the county and the appellants stuck to their previous position on the third alternative. While staff maintained it met the project objectives best, the appellants maintained that the third alternative posed negative environmental impact and safety hazards.

Alternative four, which presents the longest trail, still presented a significant impact to the environment, which is why the “soaring community withdrew its support for this alternative,” Bobroff said. Several alternatives – including six, seven, eight and nine – w ere deemed unfeasible or impractical.

During an extensive public comment period, community members expressed concerns regarding alternative three and the overall project, particularly over the impact to soaring activities, environmental impact, the cost of the project, the width of the trail, its capacity to hold the population occupying it and more.

County staff took notes of community members’ questions and a few misconceptions and clarified them after public comment ended.

See RINCON TRAIL continued on page 10