Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes.OSB.20240319.Regular MINUTES City of Aspen, Open Space and Trails Board Meeting Held on March 19th, 2024 5:00pm at East Maroon Pass Room, Aspen City Hall City OST Board Members Present: Julie Hardman, Ted Mahon, Howie Mallory, Adam McCurdy, Ann Mullins, Dan Perl City Staff Members Present: John Spiess, Matt Kuhn, Michael Tunte, Austin Weiss, Micah Davis Adoption of the Agenda: Adam made a motion to approve the agenda; Julie seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Public Comments, for topics not on the agenda: None. Approval of the Minutes: Adam made a motion to approve the minutes; Ted seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Staff Comments: John: Reported on two projects in Maroon Creek Corridor to start on April 15th pending snow/weather. For the Maroon Creek Trail, the license agreement is now in place with Pyramid Ranch LLC. Howie asked for any important details related to the license agreement; Matt said it is pretty standard and if any future development occurs on the private land, an easement will be pursued. Mike said that the new pickleball courts will be ready by fall. Matt added that there will be impacts to ARC access and there will be up to 100 days of single lane traffic on Maroon Creek Road during construction of Maroon Creek Trail. Matt encouraged Board members to be prepared to be a positive voice in the community. Cozy Point Ranch: two residences and Nick’s office are now connected to the new wastewater system. Stutzman is contracted to complete grading and drainage work this summer. Mike added that the majority of the large soil mound will be used by work projects this summer. John mentioned that tree code changes are being developed for wildfire mitigation; these code changes will come up in May. Matt: Updated the Board on BOCC and Pitkin County Open Space & Trails’ recent review of two projects for which Parks is a stakeholder: a wildlife crossing in the Cozy Point Ranch area, and the ABC bridge connector project. On the wildlife crossing: Parks has agreed to be a 50% partner (committing $26,000) with the County for early phase construction and a location feasibility study within the area between the airport and the landfill. This will result in a precise, feasible location for a crossing or underpass as well as any additional fencing, etc. Howie commented on Highway 9 which has two prominent wildlife overpasses. ABC to Brush Creek bridge: the goal of the meeting with BOCC was to get consensus to proceed into the next phase of design using County funds. BOCC was unable to make a recommendation to the OST staff; the next step is a site visit and Gary Tennenbaum may request a public hearing to continue the conversation. There is not strong, unanimous support for both bridges; majority support seems to be for an ABC-located bridge (0.9 mi. to the north of the ABC). If BOCC supports proceeding, staff will move into vetting ideas for this and possibly for the Brush Creek side as well. Howie commented that he and Graham did a site visit with Gary to view potential locations for the bridges. Howie mentioned a possible spring site visit with the entities involved; Matt said that they are working on this. Matt mentioned that Laura Xais, the new Wildlife Coordinator, has been hired. Many applications for the Natural Resources Manager were received and interviews are underway. Ann asked about the quit claim deed that the City approved near the ARC. Matt explained that there was an apparent overlap of City property onto private land (across the road from the ARC), likely a past surveying error. This property was quit claimed to the private owner. Howie asked if Laura Xais will be working on the Deer Hill wildlife study. John explained that this study is ongoing, conducted by Colorado Wildlife Studies, and that Laura will review these studies, but will not perform the research. She, or other staff, will present the resulting information to the Board. Dan asked about dovetailing a wildlife crossing with pedestrian/bike access to Cozy Point Ranch. Matt said that this is on staff radar, but it is too early to know feasibility. New Business: Capital Budget Matt reviewed the capital budget process: draft budget is created in spring, the City’s operation budgets are created in June, and then they are combined in August; final refinements are made in August and September, and the budget is taken to City Council in October. There are many moving parts to the budget even at this point; it is currently a fairly finalized working draft. Matt highlighted the May 14th City Leadership Review meeting: this draft is still subject to the agency director team. Matt emphasized the complexity of the budget, showing expenditures and revenue. Matt explained that the ending targeted reserves is a major focus; this is a dynamic target that helps Parks keep enough money available. Matt explained Parks’ reserves that are available for things like acquisitions and unanticipated projects; bonds are another avenue for funding such projects. Matt explained budget and project portfolio planning going forward to continue to balance the historic capital year of 2024. Going into 2025, Parks must continue to balance this load in order to handle other tasks such as management plans, etc. Matt highlighted upcoming projects including Koch Park renovations, trail surface improvements, improvements at Glory Hole Park, and the Wagner Park play structure project. Ann asked about the berms at Koch Park. Austin suggested that they might serve as spectator seating or a barrier for errant balls. Matt explained that Parks is one year into shifting funding of Recreation facility maintenance into the Parks fund and shared a 10-year overview. Highlights include 2027 as a big year for capital maintenance with placeholders for Maroon Creek bridges ($4 million), the start of Parks’ contribution for the Willoughby Park Lift One Corridor Projects ($2 million in 2027, 1.5 million in 2028), and Truscott Trail ($2.5 million). John added that Parks is currently in a period of budgeting more funds for capital maintenance and less for new projects. Matt mentioned the Old Powerhouse project for 2027. Dan asked about the 2030 ARC project; Matt explained that this would be an expansion or overhaul and that there is also a placeholder for the Ice Garden. Adam asked if the Rec budget is wholly within Parks. Matt explained that capital maintenance of structures/buildings is funded by the Parks Fund. Programs (paying staff, programming, summer camps) are funded by a separate budget (the General Fund). Matt brought the focus to Cozy Point Ranch and the priority of providing adequate potable water. This project has been ongoing for the past two years and an additional two years is expected to complete this work. Any future facility-related project at the ranch is dependent upon potable water. Numbers for such upcoming projects slated for the next three years have been pushed out ten years and will be held there until the water situation is resolved (anticipated in 2026); at that time these projects will be brought up into the appropriate timing. Ann asked whether issues related to potable water were known at the time the management plan was written. Matt said no. Ann asked if staff will revise the management plan after water capacity is resolved; Matt explained that the management plan will reach the ten year point in 2028. There is still too much that’s unknown at this point; water limitations may affect programming on the property. Ann suggested that it may reach a point where spending additional money on water at Cozy Point doesn’t make sense. Matt described additional emerging projects, including Old Powerhouse landscaping (tree removal and replanting, trail realignment, parking changes, and intersection improvements); this project involves several departments. A discussion took place about the improvements. Adam commented on a possible safety issue having to do with a gap between the bridge deck and mesh, suggesting that it could be addressed as part of this project. Howie asked about the underpass below Mill Street; Matt explained that a railing was installed, graffiti has been removed, and public art has been contemplated there. Howie suggested that the bridge should be brought to code. Matt continued to describe emerging projects, including the Thomas-Marolt Skills Trail. Additional wildlife impacts studies requested by the Board will continue through spring. Council will likely want to discuss this project and how it ranks in priority with other items such as a community garden expansion. There is a tentative plan for an early summer work session with Council; this might be done as a site visit. There is more to unfold before this becomes an official project. Parks is also talking with RFMBA about what level of funding they will bring to the project and what level of accessibility can be planned for adaptive mountain bikes. Several variables will affect whether this will be included as a project in 2025 or in a later year: RFMBA’s financial contribution, accessibility for adaptive mountain bikes, wildlife impacts study results, and Council approval. Staff will follow up with the Board after obtaining more information on RFMBA’s contribution, accessibility, and wildlife impacts information. Howie asked if the proposed design is the only plan RFMBA would move forward with, or if there is a lesser design that they and the community could accept. Matt said that the design is up for negotiation; a minimum of two downhill trails is probably needed for this as a skills progression amenity, but this topic can be added to the agenda for this Board prior to the Council discussion. Ann asked about features designed for various ages; Matt explained the elements designed for bikes and striders. Connor Park, adjacent to the old Armory/former City Hall building, is another partnership project in which planned improvements to a building have brought about needs and opportunities to improve the adjacent park space. This project is slated for design in 2025 and construction potentially in 2026; Council had prioritized this on a short timeline. The park space will be used for outdoor dining and other activities during summer months. Adam asked if the Ten Commandments monument will remain in the park space; that is TBD. Matt showed a graphic displaying the five-year outlook. He highlighted Parks’ focus in 2025 on Koch Park volleyball courts and Wagner Park playground, as well as updating interpretive panels at Wagner Park restrooms in conjunction with Aspen Historical Society. In 2026 Connor Park will be improved. In 2027 the Old Powerhouse will be improved, as well as Lift One improvements (to continue into 2028). The long-range plan shows three parks whose projects are staggered in subsequent years: Galena Park in 2028, Francis Whittaker Park in 2029 and Anderson Park in 2030. Timing of these projects is subject to change, but this is the current schedule. Ann asked whether there are design concepts for these parks; Matt said that Parks is kicking off a strategic plan and that visions for these parks will come together largely during that process. Ann mentioned the potential for over-designing park spaces, commenting that keeping small park spaces simple could be more desirable. Mike commented that Galena Plaza will be a highly programmed space, while Anderson Park will be a quiet riverside park, and Whittaker Park may be a dual type of space with more activated space closer to the road and quieter space in the back. Mike said that uses planned at the Armory building will influence the design of this park space. Matt mentioned that a challenge at Whittaker Park is use (and impacts caused by) homeless and drug-using populations. Matt described the 5-year overview for Cozy Point Ranch, including improvements to the archery range (with a $150,000 grant from CPW), continuation of water improvements design and permitting in 2025, implementation of water improvements in 2026, and working on the structural master plan and revisiting the management plan at that time. Ted asked about the Farm Collaborative’s (FC) funding opportunity and their request for matching funds; Matt explained that this was approved by Council and the septic system was installed last fall. FC will proceed with the rest of their project this summer. Mike clarified that there are two septic projects underway: one for FC and one for Cozy Point LLC. Matt went on the explain that there is some availability for capital projects within the open space portfolio in 2028 and 2029; the strategic plan will provide guidance to fill this in. From a capital projects perspective, Deer Hill and the Pride of Aspen are on the horizon; the process for each of these will be about one year. There are about three dozen interpretive signs throughout the open space and trails; John has cataloged these and plans to redesign and replace all of these in 2025. For Recreation facilities: there are plans for major improvements to the ARC in 2025 and 2026, including redeveloping the cooling plant and other projects that will affect the entire facility. Matt showed a summary of the budget and opened the floor for comments. Ted expressed appreciation for the work staff put into this budget. Julie commented that 2025 plans look robust. Ann commented on positive management and activity at the Ice Garden. She also commented that the historic architectural aspects of the facility will be fun to work on. Ted asked whether there are still partner entity factors that could affect Parks’ work at the Lift One area. Building permits are in early stages and it may be 6-12 months before they receive a building permit. Parks’ current role is listening in on the permitting process. Matt added that because there are two projects, there could be a risk that work may not proceed in a fully coordinated way. Matt explained that Parks’ timeline is based on certain assumptions about construction steps, reflected in the 2027-2028 timing shown in the budget. Ann asked about approval for the tramway; Matt said that basic approval is in place but there is no stamped approval yet. Because the lower terminal in integrated into the parking structure, they will not have a stamped approved for the lift until other related plans are finalized. Dan asked about becoming a more significant partner in the ABC to Brush Creek project, given the health of Parks’ capital reserves. Matt commented that the overarching price of this bridge project is the primary challenge for moving this project forward. The goal is to get as much grant money as possible, but Parks’ apparent funds may make it difficult to obtain grants. Old Business: None. Board Comments: Julie: mentioned that applicants for use of parks and streets are encouraged to consider impacts to the community, referencing the palm tree festival held at Rio Grande Park. She added that this event is fairly contained within the park space. Ann: commented that the community will like the upcoming conservative budget years. Ted: commented asked how the community has responded to the palm tree festival. Matt explained that this event does bring in various comments, but the majority of input reflects that it brings vibrancy to the community. Matt encouraged Board members to share thoughts with Council members. He also explained that this particular event is in the hands of Council. Matt shared that the volume of the music throughout town does have an impact. Recordings of Council meetings when this event was discussed are available to review. Dan: suggested taking another look at policy for commercial use of parks, with events like the palm tree festival in mind. Dan mentioned that a goal of his as Board Chair is to provide the Board with more advance information, such as specific actions or work items staff will be asking of the Board at meetings. This will allow Board members to better prepare thoughtfully. He asked the Board if they agree with this request. Ted, Ann, and Julie expressed agreement. Matt asked for a timeline; Adam suggested one week. Ted said that a bit more detail than is provided in the agenda would be adequate, noting that it doesn’t need to be a formal or involved document. Matt expressed that this request is reasonable, but that it will be less possible to do this for certain topics than for others. He suggested that they provide additional information going forward and work together on level of detail to meet the Board’s needs. Julie commented that she doesn’t have a lot of time for additional reading and preparation. Adam suggested that a simple tracker for stage of projects to be discussed would be helpful. Mike commented that certain projects are fairly linear, while others are more of a moving target, such as the Theater Aspen project. Matt added that Council had a work session last night addressing boards and commissions, and some changes are coming. He suggested listening to this recorded session. The City will initiate an holistic review of the 15 boards and commissions, and may develop some universal bylaws; this will precipitate some changes for this Board. Boards will also need to provide more frequent updates to Council. Adam: asked if special events have a different permitting process. Matt explained that revisiting commercial use policy is a good idea, suggesting that duration limits could be important to discuss at a future time toward limiting what can take place at a park. Adam asked about public access to events at parks; Matt explained that the policy allows for ticketed events. Adam questioned closing a park for a full week for a two-day event. Matt noted that the Board requested a review of special events policy at a future meeting. Next Meeting Date(s): Regular meeting April 18, 2024. Executive Session: N/A Adjourned: Adam made a motion to adjourn; Julie seconded, and the vote was unanimous.