Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2022 04 13

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes March 9, 2022 Page 3 of 5 opportunity to study the proposed locations. David and Peter submitted written recommendations via email. The board looked at each property map in the packet and discussed the proposed locations. Hecla: Susan asked if the benches would impact (or are impacting) nesting avocets. Ember said the bench locations were placed with nesting birds in mind. Helen asked if ground - nesting birds could be aided with fencing. Ember cautioned that fencing might actually serve to fence nesting birds in and hinder them as much as help them. Aquarius: Peter suggested that #56 be moved further east to avoid noise from the highway and improve the view, though he thought it was an appropriate general location for a bench. David thought there wasn't a nice flat area there for a bench. Ember, Peter, and David were all concerned about blind corners on the trail at that location. Dutch Creek: David thought bench #57 wasn't needed. Peter agreed it didn't seem like a high priority location, but would be okay if someone wanted it. Ember clarified that removing proposed benches is acceptable to staff. Susan and Helen agreed it was a low -value placement, but Susan added she often sees walkers stop there. She lives very close to the location. Laura said that if it a location where people naturally stop, then it might be useful to citizens and should be on the list. She reminded the board that the point of the program is to prioritize actual bench needs over memorial requests. The board decided to keep the bench on the plan but that it was a low priority for the board. Daughenbaugh: Peter thought #59 was not a prime site. He thought #60 and #61 were good sites that would not impede traffic flow. Susan asked if the bench at #61 could be used to block the social trail there, but Charles was worried doing that could cause an accident. David said that the locations are provisional and general, and the exact final location would be determined by staff at the time of installation. The board thought shifting the location bench #61 to the east side of the trail could be desirable. Centennial Trail: A board member cautioned that bench # 63 should not block the social trial. Bullhead Gulch: David reminded the board that a local citizen had expressed concern about the #65 location, but he actually liked the location. However, he thought the #66 was redundant to a stone bench that already exists nearby. Peter liked the #66 location and felt like it was useful. David pointed out that the property line is right next to that bench. It was recommended to consider removing bench number 66. Charles suggested an additional bench in the southern part of the property. North: Helen asked if #67 had been shifted to a safer spot after the initial proposal. Ember said the exact placement would need to be determined. Several board members agreed that the bench would be better placed about a third of the way along the trail to the southeast. Coyote Run: Several board members were concerned about the location of bench #71, since it was right at the end of the sled hill and could be a collision hazard if it was partly covered in snow. Peter thought it could be a bike hazard too. Consider removing bench number 71. Peter thought location #70 might not be necessary, given its proximity to #40, but other 5