My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2021 03 10
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
OPEN SPACE ADVISORY BOARD
>
2021 Open Space Advisory Board Agendas and Packets
>
Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2021 03 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/30/2021 4:17:23 PM
Creation date
3/9/2021 2:11:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Meeting Date
3/10/2021
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
77
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
expressed through the public comments are best presented later in the process, particularly those <br />outside OSAB's jurisdiction. <br />c. Quality of Public Comments. Public comments were thoughtful, well -articulated, and appreciated <br />by both OSAB and the applicant. The public is encouraged to continue their participation in the <br />process, particularly where those comments speak to issues beyond OSAB's jurisdiction. This <br />will improve the project's final result. <br />d. Purchase of Property. Members of the public obviously desire more public open space from the <br />application lands than that offered in the applicant's proposal. Paying market rate prices for prime <br />commercial property at this location is beyond the city's financial capability. If a benevolent third <br />party would purchase a portion of the property and dedicate it to the city, such an acquisition <br />would be welcomed. However, caution would still be required as significant portions of the <br />property were previously developed, but not sufficiently reclaimed to a condition suitable for city <br />open space. Costs of reclaiming such land could be an unbearable burden. <br />G. Clustering. OSAB supports clustering buildings and parking to the extent possible, to minimize the <br />project's developed area footprint and maximize open space and other open areas. Recognizing that at the <br />GDP stage, building height restrictions cannot be waived, OSAB supports increasing building heights in <br />exchange for clustering as the project proceeds. Further, if or when clustering is proposed, OSAB would <br />like to review and comment on any such proposal. <br />H. Pond in Northeast Portion of Property. At its December 11, 2019 approval, OSAB expressed its interest <br />in preserving the area surrounding the pond in the Northeast as a publicly accessible area. OSAB remains <br />strongly interested in this concept. Action taken at this meeting is not intended to amend OSAB's prior <br />decision on the matter, only to supplement it. <br />The above rationale is offered to make a more complete record of the board's decision. I believe that is <br />particularly important given the public interest in this matter. While incorporating the above rationale into the <br />meeting Minutes goes way beyond our usual practice, I believe it is justified in this case for purposes of better <br />informing our staff, other city staff and boards, City Council, the applicant, and most importantly, the public. <br />I am comfortable with our action on this matter. I believe that incorporating the above rationale into the Minutes <br />will help maintain the board's credibility with the public in taking a position contrary to that advocated by most <br />citizens concerned with this matter. <br />XII. Action Item: Herbicide Campaign. Presented by: Nathan Mosley, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Open <br />Space and Ginger Cross, City Marketing Specialist <br />Staff is looking for board feedback on the 2021 herbicide campaign (starts on 146 in the packet). City Council <br />has banned the use of two major herbicides (glyphosate and 2,4-D) on city -owned Parks and Open Space. Use of <br />these herbicides on Open Space was always very minimal, but on park fields the impact might be more <br />noticeable. Peter thought the literature looked good. Ginger took over the presentation. She talked about how <br />citizens often don't know the difference between Parks and Open Space land, and noted that citizens may still see <br />spraying but other, non -City, entities (another point of confusion). They're hoping to minimize questions and <br />trying to show a popular "good" thing the City is doing. Jessamine opened the meeting up to any public <br />comment. No comments were made. Nathan complemented Ginger on the visuals and has said the comments <br />have been positive. David thought they looked good, but wondered whether people know that glyphosate and <br />RoundUp are the same thing. Ginger said she added the word "herbicide" to teach what they are. Anneliese <br />asked if it was okay to use the commercial name RoundUp. Nathan commented on the struggle of being precise <br />about language, given that some sorts of herbicides will still being used. Anneliese thought it might be good to <br />8 of 77 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.