My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2015 07 08
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
OPEN SPACE ADVISORY BOARD
>
2000-2019 Open Space Advisory Board Agendas and Packets
>
2015 Open Space Advisory Board Agendas and Packets
>
Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2015 07 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 8:21:24 AM
Creation date
7/10/2015 10:52:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
OSABPKT 2015 07 08
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Open Space Advisory Board <br />Minutes <br />June 10th 2015 <br />Page 4 of 6 <br />First Helen asked if there were any general comments about the brainstorming <br />session at the previous meeting. Laura commented that it was hard to determine the <br />proper scale; whether big "priority- level" ideas or smaller - scale, specific ideas were the <br />goal. She also mentioned that she liked to hear some of the board's more ambitious ideas <br />that never get vocalized in normal meeting. Helen was enthusiastic about the process. <br />Ember said the time limits of the exercise were challenging. She suggested a <br />retreat/brainstorming night (open to the public) at a location other than the meeting ("off - <br />site") and that this idea was supported by the director. Mike commented that it was <br />difficult to shift to normal business at the end of the brainstorming session, making him <br />think that Ember's suggestion of an off -site, non - meeting time for the exercise might be <br />helpful. He also said that he struggled being both the discussion's facilitator and a <br />participant. The board seemed to all think it had been an interesting exercise. <br />Ember had prepared post -it notes on a whiteboard to talk about the operational <br />priorities from the previous exercise (Education & Programs, Development Plan, Trails, <br />Natural Habitats), and the projects for each priority from the homework. Acquisition was <br />not part of the discussion because it's a CIP issue, not an operational issue. Helen asked <br />the board to vote for their top two of the four priorities. There were 6 board members <br />present. The results were ranked as follows: <br />1) Natural Habitat -6 votes <br />2) Development Plan renamed "Strategic Planning" -3 votes <br />3) Trails -2 votes <br />4) Educational Programs -1 vote <br />Then Helen asked the board to vote for top three projects in each of the #1 and #2 <br />priorities. <br />Under "Natural Habitat," the votes were as follows: <br />— setting goals for restoring OS habitats -6 <br />— baseline vegetation and species surveys -6 <br />— "healthy ecosystems" -2 <br />— agricultural land preservation -2 <br />— native species enhancement -1 <br />—a full time "land manager" staff member -1 <br />Under "Strategy Planning." the votes were as follows: <br />—set a strategic plan & work with city staff on the plan -9 <br />— enhance native species -5 <br />—vault toilets at Open Space properties -2 <br />— "infrastructure" -1 <br />— enhance the urban environment -1 <br />Helen suggested that a clear recommendation from the board would be that Open Space <br />invests in doing the necessary science to do baseline habitat surveys and restoring natural <br />habitats. The second recommendation would be to create a strategic plan going forward. <br />Mike was concerned that Trails (as a priority) dropped out, when we have momentum <br />about wayfinding and connectivity. The board agreed, so Helen decided that we'd do the <br />same ranking exercise on the Trails section as well. <br />Under "Trails," the votes were as follows: <br />— trail connectivity /missing links & Old Town/McCaslin Access -8 <br />— wayfinding & bike plan -6 <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.