Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2015 03 11

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes February 11th 2015 Page 2 of 7 The board had a discussion about whether trailside mile- markers were desirable and feasible. Ember's discussion with the Rec. Center staff indicated that runners may not need or want mile- markers. Tom's discussion with local runners indicated strong interest in mile- markers. Most of the board seemed to indicate some level of interest in including some mile- markers in the final plan. There was general confusion over their best implementation. For example, there was some ambiguity as to what the "point zero" for the mile- markers on different trails should be, and what unit of distance was practical (1 mile, 1/2 mile, 1/4 mile). Kristen estimated that each mile- marker pole (as currently envisioned) would cost $1500 -2300. Laura argued that the mileage information would be available to people online and on the system map, so perhaps mile- markers should be a later phased project. Missy suggested that maybe the mileage markers could be prioritized to certain popular trails. Laura thought that mileage- markers target a specific user subpopulation and asked if there was a low -cost implementation. She suggested that mileage could be indicated on the concrete trails with paint, and some sort of stakes could be used on crusher fines trails. Patsy asked for clarification from the board: if mileage is on the maps, on the linear maps, and indicated for destinations, are mileage- markers even necessary? The board agreed that the consultants should continue to research mile- marker options. C) Phasing Plan & Phase 1 Sign Locations Patsy showed the current plan for phasing the implementation of the new signs. She showed a google earth presentation showing placement of signs for Phase 1. The goal is to make it understandable to the public immediately. Phase 1 places signs on areas of the greatest confusion and the most popular areas, and it de- prioritizes peripheral areas of trails (away from intersections, neighborhood connectors, etc.). On- street route signage is also a priority, particularly because City Planning is hoping to design their street wayfinding program soon, and the consultants want the two systems to mesh. Striping at concrete intersections would also be included in Phase 1. Patsy showed which trails would be part of Phase 1 and what their Phase 1 improvements should be (see packet). Trail improvements were ranked as well, including intersections, realignments, and missing links. Patsy argued that the physical improvements should be linked to the sign phasing. Ember mentioned that the staff needs to work out how to bundle these projects into CIP requests, noting that some improvements would be bundled into Park (rather than Open Space) CIP requests, such as the Cottonwood Park improvement proposals. Phase 1 would cost $150k, with $125k /year planned for the next 5 total years. Patsy broke down these estimates into sign costs and physical trail costs. VI. Staff Updates A) The OSAB secretary (Laura) asked for direction as to how to refer to the Conservation Trust -Land Acquisition /Open Space and Parks Fund in future OSAB meeting minutes. City staff recommends calling it the "Open Space and Parks Fund" because that is how it is referenced in the current budget documentation. The future meeting minutes will reflect this request. B) The seasonal Open Space & Parks Ranger /Ambassador position is being posted on the City job board. 3