Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes.OSB.20240418.Regular MINUTES City of Aspen, Open Space and Trails Board Meeting Held on April 18, 2024 5:00pm at Pearl Pass Room, Aspen City Hall City OST Board Members Present: Julie Hardman, Ted Mahon, Ann Mullins, Dan Perl City Staff Members Present: John Spiess, Matt Kuhn, Michael Tunte, Brian Long Adoption of the Agenda: Dan moved the Marolt Open Space/Bike Skills Trail topic to be the first agenda item. Julie made a motion to approve the agenda; Ted seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Public Comments, for topics not on the agenda: None. Approval of the Minutes: Ted made a motion to approve the minutes; Julie seconded, and the vote was unanimous. Staff Comments: John: The Maroon Creek Trail project is underway. The Iselin Courts project has not yet begun; this project utilizes the same contractor and is coordinated with the Maroon Creek Trail project. At Cozy Point Ranch an outbreak of strangles (a highly contagious bacterial infection in horses) began in January; quarantine protocols have been in place for the past two months. Operations have been impacted, however progress is being made toward ending the outbreak. Mike: Herron Park bathroom project will begin May 20th. Gould is mobilizing to begin the Iselin Courts project; demolition will begin in the next week or two and will go through October. Pickleball will be offered at the Ice Garden this summer to provide courts while Iselin is closed. Brian: Winter and Summer trails crews have switched for the season. Hopkins and Hallam Bike- Pedways are in place. Asphalt overlay work is underway on Ute Avenue Trail. Old Business: Marolt-Thomas Open Space Bike Skills Trails: Public comment was opened for this topic and two representatives of Friends of Marolt spoke. Terry Paulson asked Parks reconsider this project due to many issues: insufficient space for the volume of people who would use this amenity and degradation to the property’s open space qualities, etc. He commented that the proposed location which is between two busy highways with fast vehicle speeds presents an unsafe situation for children on bikes. Spillover of bike activity in close proximity to the paragliding field would exacerbate existing safety concerns. In 1993 only one pathway existed across the space where the paragliding landing field is located; now there are seven paths. These paths constitute an increased safety issue for paragliders, cyclists, and dog walkers, and should be reduced back to one trail. Terry emphasized that these issues have not been fully addressed in the process of considering the skills trails location. He commented that creating one more additional amenity on this already heavily used open space is not a good idea; this is not the appropriate place for a bike skills trail. Terry added that a skills trail may not be a critical need for children learning to ride bikes. He expressed that the Marolt Open Space should be left alone; it currently hosts enough uses and shouldn’t be further impacted by adding a bike park. Allen Harvey expressed his concerns about the proposed bike skills trails, related to aesthetic impacts, impacts to wildlife, proximity to the riparian zone of Castle Creek and its use by wildlife passing through the space, and impacts to habitat connectivity. He also commented that maintenance and management will be ongoing costs and efforts, citing the issues at North Star Nature Preserve as examples. Allen suggested alternative sites including Burlingame or in the school campus/ARC vicinity. He asked the Open Space program to take a second look at this proposed project and encouraged them to explore alternative sites. Dan suggested planning a summer site visit for the Board. Matt added that there is currently no funding in the budget for this project, and that if this project is added to the budget, a site visit for the Board and possibly also Council would be conducted. Matt said that Council members are also hearing public sentiment expressing concerns about this project. He said that the proposed project is still in early stages and there is no commitment to construction at this time. This Terry asked about the process going forward. Matt explained that there could be a land use application, a contract for construction, or the addition of this project to the budget; there are many upcoming steps and formal check-in points. The Board’s recommendation presently directs staff to continue exploring this project. Ann added that there is currently a range of opinions among Council members. Allen thanked Brian for transparent sharing of information. Julie thanked Allen and Terry for sharing their comments and suggestions. Terry commented that North Star is an important example from which to learn and avoid difficult management issues. Brian presented on the wildlife assessment by Colorado Wildlife Science for the Marolt-Thomas Open Space site pertinent to the proposed bike skills trails. He shared key sections of the assessment, beginning with a description of the location and current layout of the site and surroundings. He shared photos of the site from the assessment, describing habitat types and vegetation cover. The report acknowledges that while the location sees heavy human uses, it does provide habitat for wildlife. The report noted that more wildlife observations and sign were recorded on the north side of the open space than on the south side, due largely by more use on the south side by people exercising their dogs. Wildlife using the location include mule deer (in non-winter months) and elk (during transitions between summer and winter). Colorado Parks and Wildlife species activity maps for elk and mule deer includes this parcel solely as mule deer range, although elk do use the site. Julie asked for clarification of the duration of the study conducted on site. Brian explained that Jonathan Lowsky of Colorado Wildlife Science conducted a survey for a single day on March 8th, recording direct observations and detections of wildlife signs. He added that this is a snapshot of wildlife use at the site, and that staff have many more observations in addition to what this report summarizes. No federally protected species or designated critical habitat for any listed species occur within or adjacent to the property. The species that occur on the property are those that are well-adapted to exist around humans. Mule deer, elk, raptors, and small mammals regularly occur on the property. The report describes the project area as fairly isolated with limited value for wildlife movement, noting that development of skills trails will result in direct loss of a small area of native plant community with minimal value for wildlife. It is unlikely to cause any indirect loss of valuable habitat. Brian also shared a portion of section five from the Marolt Open Space’s management plan that lists exploring appropriateness the proposed bike skills trails on the property. He stated that the question for the Board is whether staff should continue planning and development of the bike skills trails in partnership with RFMBA. Brian mentioned that Jonathan Lowsky will return in May to conduct another field visit. Julie commented that her take away from this information is that the skills trails would not impact wildlife in a big way. Brian explained that wherever there is bare dirt such as a trail, this represents lost grasses, oaks, chokecherry, etc. and that the project design aims to minimize this. Julie mentioned Terry’s vision of a dirt mound pump track, but the proposed scenario will try to keep as much vegetation as possible. Brian said that birds and small mammals definitely live in this space. Ted commented that nothing alarming was conveyed in the report and that the conclusions do not indicate a need to stop the project; he expressed support for continuing with the exploration process. Allen commented that a one-day experience, such as Lowsky’s survey, does not fully capture wildlife activities on the open space. Ann commented that the wildlife report does not constitute a deal-breaker in her opinion, although she said that the Board will need to go back the question of whether it supports the construction of a bike park like this. She said that the Board will need to circle back to consider the other location options, noting that she sees the proposed site as the least impactful location at Marolt Open Space, and that this report indicates the site still works. Julie expressed agreement with Ann’s comments and noted that she and the Board care about open space. Dan expressed his support for continuing the process of exploring the skills trails, adding that the proposed design is pared down compared to other versions that were presented. Allen commented that he feels it is important to minimize impact by design. Keeping bikers on paths is a challenge and that controlling this must be considered. He thanked the Board for listening to his input. John asked the Board to request any other information they need in this process. Ann asked for an example of what the trails will look like, noting that she has doubts about minimal visual impacts. Julie asked staff to remind the Board of the other top options that were eliminated. John responded that initial proposed plans from 10-15 years ago focused on a different location within the open space and a different type of bike park amenity. Ann mentioned the recent Castle Creek Bridge meeting where entrance to Aspen options were presented, including one that would cross directly through the Marolt Open Space. She commented that this open space is not truly an open space because it is so heavily used and that it is quickly being chipped away. New Business: Power-driven Mobility Devices (OPDMD): John began the discussion with a review of the current OPDMD map, initially developed by Austin in 2011. Matt added that this topic came onto Parks and County radar recently when a citizen asked about using OPDMD to gain access to trails with an e-bike. OPDMD management is broad as it includes a variety of devices. Matt explained that based on pressure for various adaptive uses and the Board’s request for greater accessibility on trails, there is a need to update OPDMD policy to prepare for upcoming changes. In this discussion, we will consider how motor-driven devices are used through an accessibility lens. John read Parks’ current policy as well as the definition of OPDMD: “An OPDMD is any device that is powered by batteries, fuel, or other engines that is used by individuals with mobility disabilities for the purpose of locomotion whether or not it was designed primarily for use by individuals with mobility disabilities.” John presented the County’s management plan pertinent to OPDMD and the City’s OPDMD map. John mentioned that the City’s OPDMD designated trails are “restricted” based on allowed dimensions, weight, and speed of devices. John read the City’s e-bike code language, which was crafted toward the general public (not toward users with disabilities). John asked the Board to focus on this particular ADA language: “…unless a particular device cannot be accommodated because of a particular safety requirement. The covered entity must provide the service it offers in alternate ways if possible.” John clarified that service pertains to the location of the trail, its destination, and the type of experience it offers. The Board’s task is to review and discuss the OPDMD map. John provided a list of trails organized by type (dirt, crusher fines, asphalt) and the OPDMD map, asking Board members to work in pairs to identify opportunities to answer the question of whether an alternative service is being provided. Ann asked for an example of an opportunity. Brian described the Water Plant Trail which could be widened to allow adaptive bikes, and as such, would be an opportunity. Julie asked how this would be signed and enforced. Matt said that this is a resource for people who experience significant disabilities and that this concept is well-known among members of that community. It would not be advertised other than being mentioned on the City’s website. Julie asked if it is ok for certain trails not to be accessible; John clarified that in some cases accessibility cannot be accommodated due to legitimate safety requirements. There was a discussion about how to determine whether a trail is appropriate for creating accessibility, and for providing similar experiences on similar trails. Ann suggested creating a complete, connected trail system that is fully accessible and useable for OPDMD. John explained that there are two types of opportunities: within the existing trails portfolio and new construction. Ted and Dan indicated the following trails could be converted from no to yes: Maroon Creek Trail, Mascotte Trail, Lone Pine Trail, Clark’s Market Trail, Lani White, Snyder Park Trail. Upper Red Mountain Trail was mentioned as a possibility. Matt asked for discussion of the Maroon Creek Gorge Trail, as one that may be more easily converted. The Iselin end of this trail is difficult due to grade but accessing from the Tiehack end of the ped/ski bridge could work for access to the Gorge Trail. Dan suggested adding another definition of class of restricted trails, to provide an e-bike only OPDMD category. Matt mentioned needing legal clarification for whether type of motor can be specified for OPDMD access on certain trails because, for example, 4- versus 2-wheeled devices have different motors. He added that there are many safety concerns on a number of current single-track trails. For example, Ajax Trail is currently basically not a mountain bike trail, and if we were to define that trail within an OPDMD category, there would be safety concerns for people with mobility impairments. Maroon Creek and Butterline Trails may be the safest for a broad range of users, including an OPDMD allowance. Dan commented that the City’s single-track portfolio is small, making this is a challenging exercise. John added that it is less about defining the types of devices and more about specifications of devices (mass, width, speed). We might not ultimately specify devices, but rather specifications that would lead to certain appropriate devices. Matt shared that much has changed in the past 10 years since the code language was written, and that making changes that characterize device specifications will best address future new devices. Cardiac issues, asthma, and muscular issues are examples of conditions people may have whose needs may be met by OPDMD use on trails. John added that it is important to consider the overall safety of OPDMD and non OPDMD trail users mixing on trails. Julie commented that Butterline could remain a “no” because Owl Creek Trail runs parallel to it and provides an alternate option for the same point to point access. John summarized the Board’s input: that Mascotte and Maroon Creek Gorge have potential to be converted to OPDMD access. Ann suggested the trails at the end of Smuggler; Matt mentioned that those trails are generally on Federal land. Dan commented that it would be interesting to see if it makes sense to classify some trails for e-bike only OPDMD. Matt said that next steps are to consider classifications (2 vs. 4 wheels, gas vs. electric motors) to see if these can be separate OPDMD classifications. We also need to determine what the current classification is for adaptive mountain bikes and ensure that this is our priority, and add adaptation change to our policy. Board Comments: Ted: None. Ann: Mentioned it would be great if we could codify the accessible trails and update a map to put it out to the public. Ann recalled one of the first accessible trails created for wheelchair use, and how amazing that was. Julie: Commented on communicating to kids’ summer camps to respect public amenities (such as avoiding painting on picnic tables). Matt explained that there will be greater oversight of such camps this year through permitting as a way for Parks to gather information and work with rangers toward how to best manage this going forward. Julie added that there is a need for better trail access to the Mill Street bridge near the Old Power Plant. Winterskol has been officially moved to December. Dan: Emphasized Ann’s comment about adaptive trails, and that the Maroon Creek Gorge Trail is particularly exciting for creating OPDMD opportunities. He also commented on students’ writing in the newspaper about the removal of the “tooth” play structure. He said that going to schools for kids’ input should be part of the public process for related projects. Next Meeting Date(s): Regular meeting May 16, 2024. Executive Session: N/A Adjourned: Julie made a motion to adjourn; Ann seconded, and the vote was unanimous.