Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2021 04 14

Home Browse Search

City(f Louisville COLORADO • SINCE 1878 E. Jim Gilbert, the open space administrative assistant has retired. Sharon Schramm has been hired as the new administrative assistant. VI. Board Updates A. Charles' scout troop is looking for volunteer opportunities. Ember said she could work with them. Jessamine said that Ember and her staff were wonderful with her son's scout troop on a cleanup project. B. Helen, Laura, and Ember had a wayfinding tiger team meeting to update the city pocket map. They worked on the text, map elements, and also worked to bring the map in line with the Transportation Master Plan. The next step in wayfinding is to send out an RFP for the signs project. The plan is to have it submitted within the next two weeks. C. Anneliese asked for volunteers to work with her on the dog off -leash tiger team. VII. Public Comments on Items Not on the Agenda Jessamine reviewed the rules for public comment. A. Sherry Summer, 910 S. Paladin Court. Ms. Summer wanted to thank Nathan for working on the sledding issues. She also wanted to discuss the former Philips 66 land. She noted that OSAB had listed these properties as high value for acquisition or conservation. She also understood that the board's power is limited in its scope as an advisory board. But she emphasized how important she thought the land was and said that citizens are working to find partners to raise funds to buy the land for open space. B. Beth McQuie, 972 St. Andrews Lane. Ms. McQuie wants the purchase the Philips 66 land for open space. She asked OSAB to advocate for the purchase of the land. She thought Louisville could purchase 80-100 acres of the land for open space, especially on the north end. She said the Conservation Fund and a citizen's initiative might help with the cost. C. Tamar Krantz, 691 West Street. Ms. Krantz wanted to express gratitude to OSAB for noting the public's comments accurately at the previous meeting. She also appreciated Peter Gowen's addendum to the minutes, as it helped her understand OSAB's process and decision -making. She said that preserving at least some of the open space on the property would be ideal. She would like to have another chance for the public to help with the wording before OSAB makes a final recommendation to the Planning Commission. She pointed out that OSAB can make recommendations to Planning Commission to require additional open space land to BrueBakol's development plans. She said the developers need to integrate a sustainability plan into their development: she wants to see community buffers, wildlife corridors, and maximal development clustering. Nathan responded to these public comments. He said that OSAB is only a recommending board. He added that the property had been on the market for a long time and City Council has never attempted its purchase, due to the cost. He pointed out that OSAB cannot initiate a purchase because OSAB has no control over city funding. Nathan suggested that the Planning Commission is probably the best place for public feedback at this stage in this process. He pointed out that BrueBakol's current proposal actually exceeds the land dedication that is legally required and that the developer worked with OSAB to select the best portion of the land to set aside. He added that if the developers start asking for waivers in their proposal, there may be chance to ask for further land dedication. 4