Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes.OSB.20240118.Regular MINUTES City of Aspen, Open Space and Trails Board Meeting Held on January 18, 2024 5:00pm at Pearl Pass Room, Aspen City Hall City OST Board Members Present: Julie Hardman (remote), Ted Mahon, Howie Mallory, Adam McCurdy, Ann Mullins, Dan Perl City Staff Members Present: John Spiess, Matt Kuhn, Michael Tunte, Austin Weiss Adoption of the Agenda: Ted made a motion to approve the agenda; Ann seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Public Comments, for topics not on the agenda: Fran Soroka asked the Board if they have any questions about Cozy Point Ranch. The Board did not have questions; Adam asked her if she had news to share. Fran mentioned that the routing and snow plowing are working well, and that there are no problems with the fencing in the parking area. They are looking forward to site work resuming in spring. Mike added that work is continuing through winter to install the OWTS system; other work will pick up in spring. Fran said that Patty is pleased with progress. Approval of the Minutes: Dan made a motion to approve the minutes; Ted seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Staff Comments: Matt: Shared that two positions were added to the Parks team in the 2024 budget. Wildlife Coordinator, a transfer from the Police Department, will focus on bear compliance and community communication; this will likely be posted internally. Natural Resources Manager will support John Speiss; duties include overseeing wildfire programs, the wildlife officer, plans review, and forestry programs. This position will be posted publicly. John will have a new title. These will be posted in the next 2-3 weeks. He added that pickleball courts were approved by City Council and will commence in spring. In the coming year, there will be $10 million in capital improvements. Capital work plan and budget review will be topics for the next Board meeting. John: Added that Gould is the contractor for the Iselin tennis courts; Gould as contractor for this project and Maroon Creek Trail is beneficial from an efficiency standpoint. Ted asked where pickleball can be played while courts are under construction; Mike said that the Rec Department is working on alternatives. New Business: Board Chair Election: Adam mentioned this position’s two-year term limit. A discussion took place about traditions around electing this position. Matt suggested that Vice Chair could step up to Chair. Current Vice Chair Dan said he would be a willing candidate. Ann made a motion to elect Dan as the next Board Chair; Adam seconded and the vote was unanimous. Howie moved to elect Julie as Vice Chair; Ann seconded and the vote was unanimous. Community Garden: John introduced this topic, mentioning that staff are looking to the Board for a recommendation on the concept of expanding the Aspen Community Garden. He mentioned that this is an action item in the Marolt Open Space management plan. Other action items include installing an enclosure for the port-a-potty, controlling invasive weeds around the garden, assisting management of the garden, researching feasibility of garden expansion, and researching alternative locations for additional garden space. John explained that the current garden waitlist has 108 names, many of whom have been waiting years for a plot. Turnover rate is 3-6 plots per year. The turnover process is first to offer a large plot to existing small plot owners; second, large plots are divided and offered to the next waitlist names. John shared questions to prompt Board discussion and consideration: Is Marolt Open Space the right location? Should the expansion be attached to the current garden or not? Is more garden space truly needed? What is the carrying capacity for this open space? If new garden space is created at a separate site, it would likely have its own separate organizational structure and leadership group. Matt added that there is an opportunity for the Board and staff to define parameters for garden leadership. If a second garden site is pursued, staff and this Board may work on a framework to support the space as public land. Adam asked if staff have other sites in mind. Ann acknowledged the community’s demonstrated need for more garden space. Dan commented that the long waitlist is strong evidence of need; he expressed support and desire to discuss locations. Ted commented that while Marolt is a great spot for an expansion, it is also getting busy there; parking fills on weekends. Alternative locations should be considered. Dan suggested that an attached expansion would be ideal for consistency and other benefits. Howie added that expansion is a legitimate need. He asked how many existing plots are actively used. Howie mentioned traffic, parking impacts and the proposed bike park, suggesting taking a holistic look at uses of the Marolt Open Space. Ted added that vehicle access and parking could be difficult if more plots are created. Howie commented that an alternative site could be important to avoid further impacting the Marolt Open Space. Julie expressed support for an expansion and asked how turnover is managed when plots are not fully used. John responded that staff generally tries not to get involved with plot transitions, but they have created a framework for transitions toward best active use. Criteria are applied (ex. fully planted by a certain date, etc.) and they strive for proper transitions (ex. not to a plot owner’s friend, but to the next waitlist name). John shared basic needs of a community garden: access (vehicle access to gate, ADA access), fencing (8-ft), and irrigation (water rights, existing at/near site). Matt added more considerations: Some gardeners grow flowers only (currently allowed) while other community gardens stipulate growing food only; or whether improvements are allowed (ex. raised beds, pavers, chairs, decorations). Ted suggested a site visit in July. Adam asked if gardeners pay for plots; the fee is $40/year – this is used for irrigation costs, tools, etc. Matt said Parks pays for compost/trash bins and the port-a-potty (about $10,000 total). John showed slides of the Thomas-Marolt parcel and shared part of the deed for the Marolt parcel that prohibits bike parks and community gardens; these are allowed on the Thomas parcel. He described the irrigation system, pump house, and infrastructure. Dennis suggested a location for an expansion that avoids the paraglider landing area. Adam asked for the argument against an attached expansion. Matt explained that potential downsides include the historic railroad berm as a barrier on the southwest side of the garden. The other side of the garden may too close to the potential future entrance to Aspen/Hwy 82. An expansion must not contradict other management actions. Ann commented that it does get busy at the garden and that the access at Hwy 82 can be dangerous. She added that an expansion would take away from the overall aesthetic of the open space, suggesting that it could be situated on the edges of the open space near the bike park and/or housing where parking and access could be better and the expanded garden would not impact the open feeling of the property. Ann asked if any other Parks in town could be suitable. John mentioned that irrigation and water rights are the most limiting factors. John added that a garden on the east side of town could be beneficial to residents living there. Matt mentioned a parcel adjacent to Hunter Creek Condominiums, Anderson Park, or converting existing park space such as at Ajax Park or Koch Park; each site has pros and cons. Howie suggested Cozy Point Ranch. Adam suggested AspenMass. Matt said water would be challenging at AspenMass; there could be potential areas at Cozy Point Ranch outside lease boundaries. Matt commented that the current garden does not require residency; requiring this could be considered and staff can come back to the Board with more information. Dan suggested using the space between the existing garden and the potential future Hwy. 82 alignment to avoid impacting other areas. Adam invited Fran Soroka to comment. Fran said that water is a challenge at Cozy Point Ranch. Matt said that the water portfolio is robust and could be analyzed. Fran suggested an area between Highway 82 and the Watson Ditch. Matt said that a non-irrigated cutting will be done in that space this spring to determine whether soil amendments and improvements are worthwhile there. Adam summarized that there seems to be Board interest in exploring other options in addition to the Thomas parcel of the Marolt Open Space. Adam asked if there is concern about parking with the skills trail and possible added garden space along Marolt Place. John said it would be necessary to study traffic generation there. Matt commented that the discussion is framed by how we look at the site philosophically and whether it is an open space or an emerging park; this can help inform carrying capacity questions. Adam asked if there is a zoning difference between open space and park space. John said there is a difference. Adam suggested the Tot Lot Park. Ted commented on urban community gardens and how efficient and successful they are; he suggested whether Burlingame and Centennial should have gardens to alleviate some demand. Matt suggested the Bar X parcel as a potential garden site. Dan mentioned that Burlingame has a community garden and asked Mike whether it is successful. Mike said that plots are very small and are not utilized well; ditches do not supply water in a timely way. HOAs may not inherently be the best managers for community gardens; Mike said that City-run gardens could be a better model. Howie asked if the goal is to make additional garden space operational this summer. Matt said that priorities set by the Board were to start with the bike skills trail and then focus on the community garden. He added that as funding for the skills trail is discussed, it is important to consider the option of garden expansion on the Marolt Open Space. These are potentially connected decisions. John asked Ted to clarify his suggestion of dispersing pocket garden areas into various parks. Ted said that he was brainstorming locations close to where people live and acknowledged that there are practical challenges. Howie asked about the Soldner Property purchased by the City and County. Matt clarified that a conservation easement was purchased, not the property. Howie said that it would be important to research this former agricultural land. He commented that the passionate volunteers that manage the current garden are key to success, as opposed to HOAs or City staff. Adam asked if management of a garden addition would fall on John’s shoulders if such volunteers do not come together. Ann suggested that the current volunteers may be interested in managing an additional garden. John said that these volunteers seem to be at capacity. Dan asked if the current volunteers support an expansion at the existing site; John said that they seem to feel that the current site is at capacity. Howie suggested obtaining more information for future discussions. John summarized that the Board seems to want an examination of other potential future garden locations. Adam suggested tabling this topic until staff has time to manage a new community garden; he expressed concern for the right volunteers to come together. Howie suggested that the new Natural Resources Manager could take it on. Dan expressed that staff management of a new garden might be appropriate based on the well-documented demand for more gardening opportunities; this may be a staff priority over other projects. Julie commented that Parks does not seem to have the resources for a garden expansion. She suggested continuing the conversation and gathering more information on other locations. Ann commented on the tremendous value of the community garden socially and environmentally. She suggested tucking an additional garden space closer to the edges of the Marolt Open Space as well as looking at other possible locations such as Anderson Park. Ann commented that she feels current volunteer managers do not wish to manage more plots. Ann expressed support for a garden expansion. Matt commented that a new garden could be structured so that it would not add tremendous burden to staff managing it. Matt said that with research, good models could be found. Adam asked the Board to analyze staff resources and governance structures that could support an additional garden. Matt clarified that staff will return to the Board later in 2024 with a rough matrix of options and possible governance structures, considering expansion at the Marolt Open Space as well as other location options. Pride of Aspen: Matt reported that the City of Aspen purchased this property. Initially conservation was to be held jointly by the City and the County, but the City is not a qualified recipient of conservation easements with the state of Colorado which is necessary for tax benefits. The seller had stated he was not interested in the tax benefits, but in November the he changed his mind and wanted the tax benefits. As a qualified recipient, the County was able to receive the conservation easement while the City took title to the property. This adds about 20 acres of open space to the City’s portfolio. Staff will determine property boundaries and other information toward managing this new property. Howie suggested consulting Pitkin County Open Space for advice on creating a management plan. He asked if linking with the flume is a potential trail goal. Matt explained that there are many continuous public lands in the vicinity that could make trail connections possible. Douglas fir beetle management could also factor into the management plan. Dan asked whether recreational amenities were allowed in the conservation easement. Matt explained that with the City being landowner, some of those considerations are now different; the process would become internal, which is beneficial. Adam asked for clarification of easement restrictions. Matt explained restrictions include timber harvesting and other commercial activities, trails are an allowed use. Old Business: Leash Ordinance: John explained that staff are asking for a recommendation on the proposed amendment to leash code. Staff took Board feedback about allowing watchful off-leash play in all City of Aspen parks, and worked this into Section C: “Watchful off-leash play shall be allowed in Aspen City parks under the following conditions: owner/possessor/keeper remains no more than 150 feet from and actively attentive to the dog; owner/possessor/keeper has suitable leash in their possession; play does not enter trails, playgrounds, wetland habitat, artificial turf, or other areas signed as leash required or dogs prohibited; play does not enter areas in active use by organized athletic programs.” Staff also made two changes in Section B to align with County code: required leash length was changed from ten feet to six feet, and a person may be in direct control of no more than three dogs. The existing Section C was removed because it was already captured within Municipal Fines. Dan asked for clarification about three areas that had been discussed to highlight for watchful off-leash play: Wagner Park, Rio Grande Park, and Marolt Open Space. Matt clarified past meeting discussions about this, explaining that the initial discussion focused on those three areas but it was decided that codifying the status quo should recognize additional areas where off-leash play has been allowed. Adam asked which areas would be signed as leash-required. John said these areas are: Maroon Creek Wetlands, John Denver Sanctuary, and possibly Herron Park for certain times of day. This allows Parks flexibility with what is signed for restricted use. Howie moved that this code language be accepted. Ted seconded and the vote was unanimous. Board Comments: Julie: None. Ted: None. Howie: asked for status of the wildlife study at Deer Hill. John mentioned that this is on-going; in late fall, the wildlife biologist suggested continuing monitoring throughout the winter. Howie asked about status of the proposed Theatre Aspen tent; Matt explained that a draft term sheet is being developed with their attorneys; this identifies provisions for the development and a future lease. This is currently sitting in Theater Aspen’s court. The term sheet is being used to green-light the application for planning. Dan asked when this will return for Board discussion; Matt said that this could occur before the City Manager considers signature. Dan expressed that the Board still needs to crystalize its position on this project and that more discussion is needed. Dan: None. Ann: None. Next Meeting Date(s): Regular meeting February 15, 2024. Executive Session: N/A Adjourned: Dan made a motion to adjourn; Ann seconded, and the vote was unanimous.