Open Space Advisory Board 2017 06 14 Final Minutes

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes June 14th, 2017 Page4of7 leaving fee -simple as the first choice for every parcel, and wants to think creatively. Fiona said she likes the idea of including aspirational goals, though providing alternatives. Bob and Ember both commented that sometimes the goals for a parcel could be diverse. In general, OSAB liked Fiona's version of the format. Ember reported that Jim liked the new format and thought it addressed many of Council's concerns. Fiona volunteered to populate the tables, but Jeff and the board thought staff should do it. Fiona asked how the board wanted to differentiate between high/medium/low parcel priorities. Laura reminded the board that often the ranking is sort of obvious by how the numbers shake out. Laura and Ember have asked the board to come up with alternative names for this document that downplay acquisition as the only possible conservation method for land. No one was particularly inspired, so Missy asked for the board to email potential ideas to Ember. Steve Rasor suggested including the word "opportunity" in the title of the document. Helen summarized the action items from this discussion: populating the summary table, ranking the properties high/med/low priority, emailing Ember alternative names, and having a final draft of the excel packet emailed to everyone before the next meeting. IX. Discussion: Review and Comment on Tiger Team "Near Term Solutions" for Dog Off -Leash Area —Presented by: Fiona Garvin and Laura Scott Denton At the previous meeting, the board decided that in addition to the Long Term/City Wide Dog Issues Tiger Team of Mike and Keagen (from PPLAB), Laura and Fiona should form a second Dog Issues Tiger Team to brainstorm ideas to improve conditions at the Davidson Mesa Dog Off -leash Area (DOLA) in the Near Term. Fiona and Laura presented a document they generated summarizing Near Term solutions. This document is a brainstorming draft for OSAB's review and it was included in the meeting packet. Fiona identified the three main challenges for the DOLA: heavy use, non - scooping, and ambiguous status (should it be a Park or is it Open Space?). Laura explained why some ideas were included in the document, but grayed out. These were ideas that have been discussed, sometimes multiple times, but are disliked or rejected by OSAB. She hoped that the board would agree that this document could stand as an agreement on what has been discussed, hopefully preventing re -hashing the same ideas and suggestions over and over. The board agreed that there is not a lot the City can do to directly reduce usage. Missy asked about alternative parks to take the pressure off Davidson Mesa, but Mike cautioned that would be Long Term/City Wide solution, not a Near Term solution. Mike thinks the DOLA is inconsistent with its Open Space designation, and suggested that this point be a starting point for all future discussions. He added that rejecting mud closures as a site management tool is ridiculous. He also thinks increased enforcement is a "non-brainer." Jeff said he suspects that the 2015 data is flawed. He thought its projection of 100 DOLA users per day is an under -estimate. He felt the City needs better data. His major concern is that the current DOLA is unsustainable. He thinks closing it is untenable politically, but reports that City Council is concerned about its degradation. Fiona felt that it is better not to overstate the numbers, but use conservative estimation. Helen questioned why we need more data and how it would actually change things, considering everyone agrees about the degradation. Jeff wants to know whether it is residents or non-residents using the DOLA. Laura pushed back on the idea that Tom's