Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2017 03 08

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes February 8th 2016 Page 4 of 6 she would be willing to budge on them. Jim was concerned about on-going maintenance cost for the different pedestal options. Graeme liked the Cantilevered pedestal, saying they were simple and classy. Missy asked if the board was "negotiating against itself." Helen cautioned that council allocated funds towards Open Space wayfinding in this year's budget and left it to staff to determine how to prioritize that spending, and it needed to be done carefully. Laura summarized that the board wants to be consistent with Planning and prefers with the cut-out design concept, but was willing to compromise on this issue. Helen said we could take this to the Wayfinding tiger team for more discussion. The board asked Catherine for information about lifecycle considerations, ADA considerations, and for Planning's specific design concept (to look at coherence). X. Discussion Item: OSAB Acquisition Reporting a. Confirm Acquisition Rubric Results- Helen wanted a formal approval of the ranking spreadsheet generated by last year's OSAB site visits. Helen moved to approve the ranking, Graeme seconded, and the motion passed unanimously. Jim commented that he was impressed by the work that went into this ranking. Fiona asked Jeff for clarification about how City Council wanted to use the ranking. Jeff and Graeme gave some background. The board, Jeff, and Ember then discussed the Philips property (variously known as the Storage Tek land, and the Conoco land). The board felt like all options for this parcel should continue to be evaluated, including middle compromises. Jeff cautioned that the City is counting on this land eventually contributing to the tax base. Jeff added that Broomfield seems uninterested in city buffers, given how they have built right up to the Louisville border recently. The board expressed the hope that their advocacy for this land could help guide its future use. Jim asked whether the City leasing public access on it is a possibility. Missy suggested the property owners could be asked. b. Discuss and Vote on Top Open Space Priorities- Helen and Ember met and created the explanatory/contextual document for the top-ranked properties included in the packet. Graeme and Laura expressed their admiration for the document they had prepared. c. Review and Finalize "Draft 2017 Open Space Advisory Board Highest Priority Property Acquisition Recommendations"- Missy commented that the first six properties were all recommended for fee simple acquisition. She suggested moving that statement to the end of each section. Helen asked whether the board would be willing to share this draft with City Council at the March Study session. The board was in favor this idea. Jeff suggested that each property also have the City's current zoning included. The board agreed with this idea. XI. Discussion Item: Finalize Louisville's Annual Open Space and Trails Request to Boulder County Parks & Open Space Ember provided some background for new members. This is an annual process. Boulder County canvasses its cities for joint funding requests for both land and trails. OSAB recommended the same three properties for acquisition with the County: Mayhoffer (Parcel D), Bennett/Newbold (Parcel N.2, N3), and Schreiter (Parcel MM). Missy moved that we submit the Candidate Open Space Properties as written. Laura seconded. The motion passed unanimously. Ember then put up the trails proposals and discussed their history. Helen asked what would trigger Public Works to do the crossings on the 104th St. trail requested by the County as a prerequisite to funding this trail (#3 on the map). Ember said that Public 5