Plans unveiled in Camp Bay access talks
A photo shows the disputed Camp Bay area with some saying the public has historical access to the lake while other contend the area is private property.
Staff Writer | July 26, 2022 1:00 AM
▶️ Listen to this article now.
SAGLE — Differing visions of how to resolve a dispute over public lake access and private property rights have been introduced.
In their proposal, Fred and Jennifer Arn said they would support vacation of the last 526 feet of Camp Bay Road on the condition that M3 put in a boat launch “accessible to the public.” Also needed would be an easement for public access from the end of the public portion of Camp Bay Road.
“The Arns will work with M3 and the county, including the County Trail Mix Committee, to develop and establish an appropriate trail plan, signage, etc.,” Plan A stated.
Other stipulations were that the county “vacate only the final 526 feet of Camp Bay Road (the “road segment”)[instead of the last half mile originally requested by M3] as measured from the artificial high water mark.” Additionally, the Arns asked that M3 “allow public access to parking and waterfront in Tract A of the first phase of the development, referred to as the community recreation area.”
Under the Arns’ plan, M3 also would be required to provide 50 feet of public beachfront. M3 would also agree to “allow non-motorized pedestrian and bicycle access on or alongside Camp Bay Road” for the public to “access U.S. Forest Service lands located on Tract B of the future phases of M3’s development.
M3 would also be expected to dismiss its pending petition for judicial review. Under the proposal, both sides would cover their own legal costs and would publicly support in front of the appropriate governmental authorities.
Plan A also stated that “M3 need not allow public access to the community docks and other structures associated with the community recreation area.”
“Public access will be appropriately documented in an easement, plat note, or other dedication to be agreed upon in a final settlement agreement,” the proposal continued.
In their proposal, Plan B, M3 officials offered a 10-foot-wide easement that follows alongside Camp Bay Road on the east side to where Camp Bay Road intersects with South Camp Bay Road. There it will cross over the road and travel on the lakeside of South Camp Bay Road to the southeast corner of Camp Bay to 50 feet of public beachfront. The easement would come with the condition that “dedication [of the easement] will occur upon approval of the vacation of the road.”
M3 would also construct a dirt path open to the public from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m. and county deputies would be allowed to enforce easement terms.
Other than the opening and closing hours of the path and access, the Arizona company would also seek to enforce trespassing laws as well as rules such as “no littering, no fires, that sort of thing,” M3 officials said in their proposal.
While the two sides have submitted a proposal to the other, and negotiations are underway, the judicial process could move forward if an agreement isn’t reached.
If the parties fail to reach an agreement, a hearing will be held Aug. 10 to decide if the court is qualified to determine public access to Camp Bay’s beachfront.