Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2021 08 11

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes July 14, 2021 Page 3 of 5 thought formalizing trails would probably indicate to the citizens a commitment to their maintenance. David noted that any designated dirt trail should be multi -use. The tiger team's next step is to formally define who the staff's point of contact would be (Nathan or Ember). After that, the tiger team would get together to evaluate what the standards for selecting any social trails to formalize should be. Peter and Jessamine appreciated the team's momentum. 8. Informational Item: Mayhoffer Farm Management Plan. Presented by Ethan Abner, Cara Potter, Jena Van Gerwen, Graduate Students from the Master of the Environment (MENV) Program at the University of Colorado at Boulder. (See page 12-26 of the July 14, 2021, OSAB Meeting packet) Nathan introduced the students. Jena began by introducing the purpose of the plan, its stakeholders, and the location of the properties in question. The land is currently agricultural and includes privately -owned parcels with conservation easements. The team will provide a land management plan, a GIS story map (which will be the most significant public -facing deliverable), and presentations to the Open Space Advisory Boards and councils of Louisville, Lafayette, and Boulder County. Cara presented next. She said that the team had already met with the County and Lafayette Open Space Advisory Boards. The teams have been reviewing documents and learning the history of the land and about the adjacent Harney Lastoka Open Space property. They have identified goals with stakeholders that include trail connectivity, a balance between habitat, recreation, and agriculture, and access equity, including serving historically underserved communities. They have been conducting interviews and surveys with key stakeholders, including staff, land users, and leaders of local LatinX groups. She reviewed the project's timeline and workflow, which should conclude in December. Ethan concluded the presentation by talking about how the project has already been modified. For example, they are being careful about suggesting amenities that cannot be realistically offered. He listed the stated goals for each municipality. He concluded by asking for questions. Laura asked whether the land along the creek could allow for creek access for nature play or picnic tables. She added that things like creek play and picnics are good, inexpensive entertainment and could help with the team's goal of equity for access to underserved communities. Ethan said he wasn't sure. Cara added that creek access wouldn't be encouraged due to its potential impact on wildlife, such as nesting raptors. She also added that there could be some hazard associated with allowing creek access, as she had observed things like barbed wire in the creek. Annaliese asked for clarification about the "community assessments" the team reported. Ethan said that they did demographic research to try to fold it into their long-term goals. For example, this plan may need to serve an aging local population. Annaliese asked if they could share the results of their demographic research with the board. Ethan added that one of the questions of their survey was preferred trail width.