HomeMy Public PortalAboutOpen Space Committee (21) Town of Truckee
Open Space Committee Agenda
December 1, 2003 5:30pm
1. Call to order and introductions
2. Discussion — review of current General Plan dialogue related to open
space definitions and how that relates to our process.
3. Distribute/discuss models from other communities
4. Next steps —further OS definition discussion, review of revenue
options, polling efforts, or?
5. Adjourn — Next meeting January 5, 2004
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 OSpurposes—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.