Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutOpen Space Committee (16) Open Space Committee Minutes December 1, 2003 Roll Call — Richard Anderson, Florence Cox, Pat Davison, John Eaton, Jeffery Hill, Beth Ingalls, Perry Norris, Stephanie Oliveri, Ted Owens, Steve Randall, Lynn Saunders, Hugh Williams, Steve Wright, Tony Lashbrook. Review of General Plan Open Space discussions —Town Lashbrook reviewed the recent outcome of a joint Planning Commission/Town Council workshop held to discuss current GP policies and develop suggested modifications for the updated General Plan. General discussion was held. The Committee then began a discussion on the possible definition(s) of Open Space that might be used in the future in discussions with a professional polling firm. Four different types of Open Space categorization were considered — specific, somewhat general, very general and open ended. The specific areas where the Committee members felt that there would be value in asking voters their preferences were: - Hiking/biking trails - OHV trails - Downtown plaza / neighborhood gathering place - Ball fields - Wildlife corridors / habitat - View sheds - Riparian areas - All recreation - Cultural resources - River corridors - Large tracts of forest land - Flood plains It was noted that in all instances, funding for maintenance would be a mandatory component of any funding source. The very general category had only two designations: - Developed - Undeveloped These would need further definition —other suggestions were recreational and pristine. The third category was suggested from an Aspen polling effort that asked voters to identify "touchstone places" in their community thus allowing the committee to review suggestions from the poll rather than restricting those polled to the lists compiled by the committee. The somewhat general concept suggested that the community be polled on a broad range of categories such as: - Natural recreational lands & trails - Habitat and lands with high natural resource values - plazas & gathering places - cultural resources - public access and recreation lands - scenic lands and view sheds Committee members felt that providing these 4 categories to the polling professional would be sufficient to allow further dialogue of the group to refine the actual poll. Committee members suggested that another poll question should ask the question of who should administer the funds gathered for OS purposes—the Town, the Recreation District, a new government entity (OS District), an advisory committee to the Council, etc. The next meeting on January 6th will focus on a review of the possible funding sources to raise OS money and a discussion on how much money should be raised on an annual basis both for acquisition and maintenance. It was then felt that it would be appropriate to bring in a pollster to aide in the creation of a poll.