Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2023 05 10

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes April 12, 2023 Page 3 of 9 Jessamine asked whether trails would be included as a part of the 2024 Open Space Master Plan and whether the current two official trail types had been established by charter. Ember reported that the trail types are not specified legally. She wasn't sure whether trails planning would be part of the Open Space Master Plan, but felt this was a topic the board could weigh in on. Jessamine thought the Open Space Master Plan might be a good time to formalize the current trail types and possibly add a new one. Helen pushed back against Charles' assertion that there is no appetite to address the issue of social trails, arguing that there is evidence to suggest they could have an impact on habitat by fragmenting the land. Charles agreed with Helen, saying that the lack of appetite was more accurately described as a lack of time and staffing for the issue. David commented that trails are not necessarily on open space as some of them are on other types of public land. He wondered if the Open Space Master Plan should be an Open Space and Trails Master Plan. He added that Lafayette has tackled social trails along the Coal Creek trail, focusing on trails that trample riparian areas. Helen agreed, but said that most of the social trail impact is on open space. Charles reminded the board of a citizen who came to the board last summer about a well -used social trail at Hecla Lake that had been disrupted by pipeline work. The contractors were willing to rebuild the trail, but as it hadn't been an official City trail, it wasn't clear what the best plan would be. He asserted that the board should brainstorm ideas for a process for dealing with future similar events. He argued the process should be equitable and responsive, and listed some of the questions that go along with each. A. Equitable- balancing conservation and sustainability concerns with current use patterns and staff resources. 1) How are utility and use patterns measured? 2) How are sustainability and conservation concerns identified? 3) How is public input gathered? B. Responsive- the timeline for individual decisions may be extremely short (weeks). There may not be time to convene an OSAB meeting. 1) What kind of time scale is reasonable for an informed decision? 2) What is the process by which issues are identified and decisions made? Michiko commented that the process should consider biodiversity and habitat impacts. Laura asked if the goal was to rank each trail according to the 4 categories ahead of time, so that when specific questions about a trail came up, staff would be ready with a management plan. She felt like that would be hard to get consensus for each trail and that this would represent a tremendous amount of work. Charles asked how a quick public process could be held to collect input about a particular trail. Helen said that these sorts of decisions should be grounded in science and the passive recreation concerns. Charles thought this was a good place for a senior research naturalist to weigh in. Ember added that the new Master Plan could include vegetation analyses of open space parcels, so areas of particular value can be identified and protected from social trails. Helen added that she felt restoration potential, along with current conditions, should be included as land is evaluated for the master plan. 5