Broadway trailhead?

EC_hiker · Post by **EC_hiker** » Sep 28 2003 2:14 pm

I had planned on hiking Jacob's Crosscut from the Broadway trailhead yesterday, maybe check out Monument Canyon, etc. I couldn't find it. It's gone.

I was driving east on Broadway, and suddenly I'm in yuppie subdevelopment hell.

Where's the trailhead?

:

Nighthiker · Post by **Nighthiker** » Sep 28 2003 7:23 pm

Just as you enter the subdivision you should observe a barb-wire fence adjacent to the entry. That is the trailhead. Sometimes it is blocked and posted but it is the Tonto Nat. Forest. After you have entered the subdivision you will note a small cul-de-sac for about three vehicles, unless it is posted you can park here (which they do from time to time). As a condition for the development thru Pinal County Planning and Zoning the development was to provide parking for the trailhead until phase two of the subdivision. Do not park on Broadway as this is a tow away zone. Tonto National Forest is not interested in a railhead parking lot on the Tonto at this time.

Trishness · Post by **Trishness** » Sep 28 2003 8:33 pm

In response to napalm's reply:

Napalm,

I did the Crosscut in August and the TH is just on the left as you enter the subdivision. There's room for a couple of cars near the barbed wire fence. They have this teeny tiny sign at the TH. I was amazed when I went out there and saw all those homes....really sucks.

mttgilbert · Post by **mttgilbert** » Sep 29 2003 12:11 pm

The more people that move into those housing developments the more of a push theres going to be to remove access to the wilderness in those areas. Probably because a lot of those people consider hikers and trespassers to be one and the same. Someday there may even be the same problem with places like peralta trailhead. Just wait one day the residents of Peralta Homes will clamor for a gated community to keep all the through traffic out of their neighborhood.

EC_hiker · Post by **EC_hiker** » Sep 29 2003 2:48 pm

Thanks for the update, folks.

Nighthiker - Railhead parking?

Trishness - Yeah, it kind of does suck that they're building homes right up next to the Nat'l Forest/Wilderness boundary, but think of it from the other point of view: what a place to live!

Matt - (in best Foxworthyesque redneck voice) I tell you whut. They block off access to the trailhead, and Hayduke reailly WILL live. :twisted:

Trishness · Post by **Trishness** » Sep 29 2003 10:09 pm

In response to napalm's reply:

<SIGH> I'm just so dismayed about all the urban sprawl and I agree with Matt G about how much longer it's going to be before they deny access to the trailheads with gates, fences and fines. Broadway TH today/Peralta or Carney Springs tomorrow. There're all new homes going up in the Hieroglyphic Canyon TH area now. Case in point.......Boynton Canyon in Sedona, which is out in the "Red Rock Wilderness" in the middle of nowhere and there is a HUGE resort out there with all these signs and barbed wire fences. I just shake my head.

Sorry......I'll step off my little 'ole soapbox now.

mttgilbert · Post by **mttgilbert** » Sep 30 2003 8:01 am

Don't get off your soapbox, keep yelling about it. To everyone you can. Thats the only way to keep these places open. Public interest is the key. Write your congressman, write your representatives, write the governor, write anyone you can think of and tell them what you think. It really is up to people like us to protect these areas, or at least do whatever good we can. The wilderness areas are protected for our use. If our access is denied they might as well tear down the fences and open the wilderness up to the bulldozers.

sherileeaz · Post by **sherileeaz** » Sep 30 2003 9:26 am

matt gilbert wrote:Don't get off your soapbox, keep yelling about it. To everyone you can. Thats the only way to keep these places open. Public interest is the key. Write your congressman, write your representatives, write the governor, write anyone you can think of and tell them what you think. It really is up to people like us to protect these areas, or at least do whatever good we can. The wilderness areas are protected for our use. If our access is denied they might as well tear down the fences and open the wilderness up to the bulldozers.

I noticed this when I moved here that they are allowing building right by the tailheads and trails. In Indiana, the Federal gov't and state of Indiana are buying up more land to avoid this. I lived by the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. The existing homes can not be sold or inherited. The gov't is buying them back so these homeowners are allowed to continue to live there til they die or move. Each month they get a check from the gov't to pay them partially for the price of their home. When it's paid off, the gov't owns it. It's protecting alot of land. One example is that I'm still amazed that the City of Phoenix residence (concerned citizens) had to buy the property around Luke AFB to preserve that area from more housing, if more housing developes, the AFB has to close!!! Seems really backwards to me. Protect it right off! What I don't know is why aren't they--the gov't doing something to preserve all these important issues? No funds, not priority or is it the usual, that they don't think beyond yesterday, let alone today??? I'm sure it has to do with greed and money. *sigh* Politics as usual. (not wanting to be offensive, but it's just my view)

EC_hiker · Post by **EC_hiker** » Sep 30 2003 10:16 am

Haven't there already been some issues with property owners either in Gold Canyon resort or King's Ranch trying to deny access to the trailhead?

jmangum · Post by **jmangum** » Sep 30 2003 10:43 am

In response to napalm's reply:
Probably the biggest one in recent years is up in Cave Creek. Black mountain is a county owned mountaintop conservation area, but the access areas have been competely surrounded by custom homes. These homeowners have completely restricted the access to the trails on Black Mountain.

According to an article in the AZ Republic (Aug 13, 2002 "Homeowners limiting access to public parklands") homeowners have closed or attempted to close access to trails in the Superstitons, in Phoenix mountain parks, at Troon Mountain and at Pinnacle Peak Park. If you remember The city of Scottsdale agreed to close down the park to allow construction of luxury homes, but as soon as the homes were built the homeowners tried to prevent the reopen the park. In 1995 homeowners on Camelback closed the Cholla Trail and it took 3 years to get it back open.

Yea, it sure would be nice to live so close to public land, but homowners who build need to take in to consideration everything that comes with public land - the public.

Nighthiker · Post by **Nighthiker** » Sep 30 2003 12:28 pm

Access was aquired by Pinal County in the Kings Ranch Area for a parking lot and trailhead for Lost Goldmine trail and to Hieroglyphic Springs. Plans are to link someday with the Broadway trailhead.

Trishness · Post by **Trishness** » Sep 30 2003 7:32 pm

In response to matt gilbert's reply:

OK....I'm taking my little soapbox wherever I go! I took a drive tonight after work to see where the Meridian TH is because I'm really close to the Usery's and I'm tired of paying $5 every weekend at the main parking area. They're putting in a flippin' subdivision at the end of Meridian bordering the National Forest and calling it "Tonto Vista" or some catchy marketing name like that.

I remembering reading somewhere about all the building out in the King's Ranch Road area of Gold Canyon and how the homeowners wanted to restrict access to the trailheads.

Bummer.

Nighthiker · Post by **Nighthiker** » Sep 30 2003 7:48 pm

Napalm, what listed on your avatar ? And I was reading Ghost Railroads of Central Arizona when I took a break to visit this topic. All these people living along the borders of our public lands, they are probaly golfers.

Trishness · Post by **Trishness** » Sep 30 2003 7:55 pm

In response to Nighthiker's reply:

NO MORE GOLF COURSES!!!!!!!
(doing my best "Mommie Dearest" imitation

joebartels · Post by **joebartels** » Sep 30 2003 8:33 pm

Save the desert, club a golfer!
not implying, just repeating what I read at White Canyon trailhead

matt gilbert wrote:...The wilderness areas are protected for our use. If our access is denied they might as well tear down the fences and open the wilderness up to the bulldozers.

umm, let's not forget the animals and perhaps the ecosystem in general
but I hear what you're saying

I realize this isn't the popular reply but access to the Broadway Trailhead is pretty low on my list of concerns. I understand the "big picture" senerio, but Peralta & FW trailheads aren't going away. There doesn't need to be so many access points in my opinion. Now start talking about people that actually WAIT for the first parking lot at Piestewa then you better start holding me back

Trishness · Post by **Trishness** » Sep 30 2003 9:00 pm

"Save the desert, club a golfer!"

OMG, too funny

Seriously though, the little picture today could become the big picture tomorrow as far as the development of lands bordering National Forest & Wilderness areas. If they can build a resort at the edge of Boynton Canyon, what's to stop them from building one at the FW trailhead one day?

joebartels · Post by **joebartels** » Sep 30 2003 9:21 pm

I'm thinking FW is surrounded by national forest instead of State Trust Land, but I'm not looking at map

probably of more concern would be Peralta

not a pleasant scenario to think about
but if a child gets hit by a speeding 4x4 near the school, 77 will be in serious jeopardy

Trishness · Post by **Trishness** » Sep 30 2003 9:34 pm

In response to joe bartels' reply:

Peralta is a main concern but then you have to keep in mind that where we build subdivisions, we build schools and need to have an Osco or Walgreens on every corner. If you have an Osco, invariably you have an Albertsons.......God forbid we have to drive more than a mile to get a gallon of milk.

I live in AJ and have seen this area just boom with development in the last few years. Queen Creek is a prime example of this and it won't be long before Ironwood Dr is full of strip malls complete with a Super Walmart, Target, Bed Bath & Beyond and Starbucks.

mttgilbert · Post by **mttgilbert** » Sep 30 2003 10:48 pm

In response to joe bartels' reply:

Joe, what I meant by that was that if there weren't hikers (and ecologists) clamoring to save these ecosystems (even if it is for our personal enjoyment) that eventually those contractors would, without hesitation, bulldoze any area they could get their greedy hands on to build new homes.

I agree that the broadway TH isn't one of my biggest concers per se, but as Trish pointed out, every step they take to close even a small TH brings them one step closer to closing the larger THs. Yes, if a child gets hit by a speeding 4x4 there will be problems, but I imagine the odds are better that that child gets hit by one of the residents than by someone trying to get to peralta TH. That aside, you're right, the peralta and FW THs are not going anywhere, but access is restricted to those areas by the fee system. I know you might say the fees are nominal, but the more successful those fee programs are the higher they'll raise the fees, and by restricting access to free THs they're forcing people to patronize the fee sites and thereby encouraging the system. (I really didn't want to bring the fee system into this, but I feel at least in a limited capacity that its a pertinent issue. I'm sure you can all imagine how I feel about the Fee Demo program.)

I can also see why you would have a problem with the 'urban' mountains like squaw peak, but honestly thats the price you have to pay to access a mountain so close to the city. At least you can be certain that they won't close it down. If there were lines to park at peralta there probably wouldn't be an issue.

Trishness · Post by **Trishness** » Oct 01 2003 12:12 am

In response to matt gilbert's reply:

^5 Matt

Thanks for putting it in writing so eloquently. I couldn't agree with you more.

Trish

Broadway trailhead?

Broadway trailhead?

Re: Broadway trailhead?