Open Space Advisory Board Agenda and Packet 2021 09 08

Home Browse Search

Open Space Advisory Board Minutes August 11, 2021 Page 3 of 4 David asked if there is any current zoning on the land. Nathan said the land was city -owned, but not formally zoned. David asked about the departure of the proposed open space land away from the creek in the SE portion of the Dutch Creek parcel map (page 18 of the packet). Nathan thought it followed the parcel line. Peter commented that the city could always zone the parcel David pointed out later if it turns out that city owns it too. David asked whether the board wanted narrow little access trails to be zoned as Open Space. Peter thought it made sense, since they are trails. Nathan thought the logic was to keep them contiguous with the larger open space -zoned properties. Laura asked if zoning those corridors would impinge on the city's ability to be flexible about maintenance on those slivers of land, suggesting maintenance might be a higher priority than conservation for some of them. Peter moved that the board approved the staff's recommendation for the boundaries of the Dutch Creek, Walnut, Warembourg/Daughenbaugh parcels as submitted. Thomas seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The board then discussed the Golf Course, and Olson properties in the packet that staff are currently NOT recommending for open space zoning in this phase. Helen asked about the Olson parcel map (page 22 of the packet). Nathan said that the road right -away shown on the map has never been platted, and without that formality it is hard to anticipate the zoning before it is done. Also, the triangular parcel in the south has been suggested for a park. Nathan's opinion was that it might not be too useful for a park, but with new construction in the south, staff thought it was premature to zone the land. Peter said he thought it might a decent location for a dog park, so he agreed zoning it as open space was premature. David agreed with staff's current non -committal approach. Peter moved to defer zoning decisions for Olson, and the golf course section at Coal Creek. Helen seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. 9. Discussion Item: Select Properties for the Candidate Open Space Tour. Presented by Nathan Mosley, Director of Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (See page 23-42 of the August 11, 2021 OSAB Meeting packet) Nathan asked for the board to identify properties on the map (page 27 of the packet) that the board does not want to visit. Peter thought it didn't make sense to visit the Redtail Ridge properties (A, A.1, A.2), given the current conversations about the development there. Peter asked about the C.1, C.2 & C.3 properties, since they are under development currently. Nathan pointed out that the city has been granted trail easements with those developments. Peter and David suggested that the category called "Considered But Not Selected for Open Space Acquisition" on the map should not be included on the next visit. However, the board did want to visit the "Lower Priority" properties. Laura agreed, but commented that more recently -added board members should always feel free to challenge that designation, if they want to make an argument for any of those parcels. Peter agreed. Nathan asked if the board wanted to review the Mayhoffer parcels (D.1-D.5) given that Council didn't opt to purchase that land when they came up for sale recently. The reason was that the County didn't have the money or interest. Laura said that there is power in keeping those parcels under consideration, as elected officials and circumstances can change. Helen and Peter agreed. David asked about parcel ZZ.1 and asked why it didn't reach priority status. Nathan said he thought it was an energy easement. He suggested that if anyone