Open Space Advisory Board Minutes 2008 05 14

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

they are free to do this. Trash should be picked up by person who has adopted area). 4tn s tyler to Daughenbauc~h this requires a bridge because the ditch is very steep. There is access furthE;r south that would be a better spot. Stn Completed in 2008 Rec. center has a very steep road. They need to look at concrete and move end p~oini: closer to building's entrance. 6tn Jefferson completed in 2008 could be in-house with regular new trail funding and is a shorter project. Shows on our map as already a trail. Suggested for National Trail Day in June. c;ood volunteer project because regional trail and nearby project can be exhiibited. 7tn completed in 2009, to~- four priority, social trail to lake to stock pond and beyond. Public liked it as a social trail, but eventually it will get larger and will not be sustainable. Four ft wide crusher fine recommended. Tom questioned can top two be afforded since they are together over $55. Ember believes that she vvas estimating greater pricing than actual and that both could probably be covered alter meeting with engineer. Spencer asked about concrete costs. Kathy Kron said numbers are based on actual bids from Fisher Farms project and public works. Truman is very pleased with top two, but how do the others get financed? Ember plans to request CIP project to be approved by council and city manarigeir. She feels it should have a good chance. Tom questioned about traffic counts for trails use. He volunteered to do the one behind his house. Ember hasn't done any because of limited staff. Traffic surveys need to be done .at tlhe same time and same day to make consistent. Aaron volunteered for the Rec Center area. Tom stated that the first location that isn't just for the neighborhiood and it's used to get to Sunset/rise park. He approves the top four and wants to talk to Ember about coming up with a rubric for measuring traffic. MCate is highly in favor of the Rec Center path creation since it is such a visible part of the city. Spencer is concerned about cost and wanted other materials besides concrete. Ember stated that crusher fine at the Rec Center would require switchbacks and those generate cutoffs. Kathy Krohn says it is more than 8% grade and not recommended for crusher fine. Stairs have been considered, but are not favored because of various public uses. Truman about mair~tainance for crusher fine versus concrete. Ember said it depends on slope. For example, Aquarius is crusher fine that is gone after a rainstorm, drainage is also key. This is when concrete would be more cost effective. Weeds encroach on crusher fine and when it gets blown off there is no vegetation to hold it into place. Spencer asked about width of trails. Ember stated that the standard is 8ft for multi use, but not when it ties into sidewalk, Kathy Kron said many of these proposed projects are connectors and not true multi use trails. Ember wants to use alternatives for diversity. Citing examples of Oft in the Boulder mountains and 5ft on sidewalks. Tom thinks an improved trail at fishing pond could increase traffic. Ember acknowledges this is a reasonable concern. Linda asked what other materials are available? Ember stated there are plenty, but they are very costly. There are some binding materials for crusher fine that superior will) be testing. If goes well then Louisville will look into using it as well. Art PheIK>s said it looks like cala limestone on other side of South