HomeMy WebLinkAboutNatural Resources Advisory Board - Minutes - 03/16/2005MINUTES
CITY OF FORT COLLINS
NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY BOARD
Special Meeting
281 N. COLLEGE
March 16, 2005
For Reference: Nate Donovan, NRAB Chair -
472-1599
Eric Hamrick, Council Liaison -
225-2343
John Stokes, Staff Liaison -
221-6263
Board Members Present
Joann Thomas, Clint Skutchan, Linda Knowlton, Gerry Hart,
Nate Donovan, Randy Fischer, Ryan Staychock, Rob Petterson
Board Members Absent
Glen Colton
Staff Present
Natural Resources Dent: Mark Sears, Terry Klahn, John Stokes, Rick Bachand, Matt
Parker, Rachel Steeves
Real Estate: Kathy Valdez
Transportation Planning: Mark Jackson
Guests
Renee Galeano-Popp, CDOT
Doug Pearson, CDOT
Glen Frieler, CDOT
Alan Brown, PBS&J
Anne Hutchinson, Chamber of Commerce
Public Comments
None
Carpenter Road Update, Mark Jackson
Jackson provided background information about the project, and said that CDOT was
already doing an environmental study east of Windsor and found the additional funds to
do an analysis to Highway 287. The jurisdictional swap is at a standstill. There is a
stumbling block with folks in Estes Park regarding Highway 66.
• Donovan: If CDOT were to construct improvements, such as a widening, would that
almost certainly involve federal funds?
• Brown: I can't imagine not having federal funds. A developer may opt to participate
financially, but likely federal dollars would be involved.
• Donovan: Is there a percentage that would trigger NEPA?
• Brown: Any federal money would trigger it.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 2 of 11
• Frieler: Private developers might do some improvements themselves. This
document can provide a vision of an ultimate solution. As development occurs they
can make those improvements.
• Knowlton: How can CDOT not have money for Highway 392, but can do an
environmental assessment?
• Galeano-Popp: These aren't construction dollars.
• Knowlton: Who is paying for the study?
• Frieler: This is a planning study paid for with federal funds.
• Jackson: CDOT is looking to take a lot of direction in terms of the results of the I-25
EIS. They're looking at both north/south and east/west connections, particularly the
interchanges.
• Hart: Are you going to use the I-25 study as a resource document?
• Brown: I-25 will focus on the interchange. We will look at Hwy 392 as it goes
through the interchange.
• Donovan: I'm concerned about the resource that is Duck Lake. I'm concerned that
an alternative that might be looked at would be to straight line the corridor across
Duck Lake. It would cost a lot of money, and the wildlife values of Duck Lake
would be obliterated.
• Brown: Duck Lake will be the primary challenge. I'm not sure how many lanes will
need to be out there to meet the transportation needs. One of the reasons we've
identified a wider study area is to consider all possibilities of alignments. Yes, we'll
look at going over the lake. If it doesn't make sense we'll chuck it. We will look at
all alternatives. We know there are constraints we'll have to work through.
• Donovan: It would make sense to analyze to what extent CDOT would have the
ability to condemn land in a special district if the alignment were to stay the same
and right-of-way extended.
• Brown: Our first goal would not be imminent domain. We would try to purchase the
land we need.
• Jackson: hnminent domain will have to be a consideration.
• Galeano-Popp: I'm fairly new to CDOT. Natural Resources are my field of
expertise. This is one of my big projects. What I want to know regarding the
current road in there is how compatible, consistent, or conducive are the current
conditions to what you're trying to achieve. I'd like to get a feel for that. On one
end of the program, if you're trying to manage for wilderness, you'd want to take
the road out. On the spectrum, where are we today with the vision of the area? You
have a big chunk of conglomerated open space. CDOT wants to support the land
use you've determined down there.
• Knowlton: I would say there's already too much traffic on the road.
• Galeano-Popp: And that does what to "the vision"?
• Knowlton: A high level of traffic is incompatible for this stretch going through our
natural areas. The impetus for development of the road is to cant' even more traffic.
• Knowlton: I don't see any other alternative coming out of this. You want to take
traffic off Harmony and move it here.
• Galeano-Popp: Is your vision the road as it is now without further development?
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 3 of 11
• Knowlton: I'd hope that's an alternative you'd look at.
• Galeano-Popp: So your vision for the Carpenter Road stretch would be no action?
What's not working now?
• Skutchan: I drive it every day because I work in Greeley. It's definitely being used
more and more. I used to drive Harmony, but I don't any longer. The traffic flow is
good, but it's starting to get to the point where the stop signs are not functional. As
far as the impact on the open space currently, I don't know. I'm trying to think back
even three or four years. I don't notice a marked difference in the types and numbers
of animals I see around there. It is becoming a more heavily traveled road.
• Galeano-Popp: So the vision is not for it to be pristine, but not a superhighway
either?
• Brown: To enjoy the area, you have to have access.
• Galeano-Popp: Do you have sufficient access right now? Is there no desire to
increase access for users of the open space?
• Knowlton: The road is adequate for access to the open space. It's being used as a
travel corridor. Ninety-nine percent of the people using the road are not going to the
open spaces.
• Galeano-Popp: So, one scenario would be the road stays as it is? The ideal would be
to move traffic off, or not invite or encourage increased volume. And if there are
widenings?
• Skutchan: It's Harmony that has pushed me to use it more than I did. You don't
need to be encouraged.
• Hart: The no action alternative would be this road traffic increasing until people
seek an easier movement. I'd like to see an alternative that looks at how you
accommodate the expected traffic in a manner that has the minimum effect.
• Hart: Duck Lake doesn't seem to be an area that we're encouraging people to use.
It's primarily for the benefit of the wildlife. There needs to be a potential alignment
of the road that would minimize the effect on Duck Lake, and maybe connect the
area up with the Fossil Creek Open Space.
• Staychock: Fossil Creek is newly opened up. I'm wondering what the demand will
be in the future with people outside of the City of Fort Collins. People may want to
come up and visit Fossil Creek. I think we'll see a big increase, we don't want it to
be unsafe.
• Galeano-Popp: But, we don't want it to be a superhighway either.
• Hart: I don't notice that Duck Lake affects the speed. The speed limit 45 mph, and
most people are able to continue their 50 to 55 mph speeds.
• Donovan: An issue is if it will be four lanes. There were conflicting views on that
when the swap was being considered.
• Skutchan: I don't know the effects of moving traffic more quickly. If it's not
moving and flowing it could be as much of a detriment to the wildlife as a higher
traffic volume. I don't know, I'm no expert on that.
• Brown: One consideration is air quality when it comes to congestion. As cars slow
down and stop they are less efficient, and they create more pollution. The more you
can do to get traffic moving the better the air quality.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 4 of 11
• Staychock: How many stop signs are there? Have you thought about roundabouts?
They use them in the east.
• Jackson: A lot of design elements are on the table for this.
• Galeano-Popp: Is the open space resource still growing, or have they stopped
growing?
• Sears: I'd say we've purchased everything we intend to acquire except for a little
piece of land, and a conservation easement.
• Brown: Is there a management plan for conservation easements we could get?
• Sears: Those would be recorded at the courthouse. Larimer County holds the
easement.
• Fischer: The South Fort Collins Sanitation district owns land they use for sludge and
bio-solid disposal. That's another piece that's potentially available for protection.
South Fort Collins could own it in perpetuity.
• Fischer: Here's my opinion on the entire project. I'm vehemently opposed to the
transfer, and spoke about it at City Council. The transfer was a failure of
government by City Council. It was a betrayal of millions of dollars invested in
open space. The trip generation on the road will be non-existent because of the open
space. The land conservation will ensure that Fort Collins will never be a trip
generator. The participating entities are outside the City of Fort Collins. The people
in Severance, Eaton, Greeley and Windsor will tell us how they want the road to be
built. This is a regional decision making process. You've taken the decision out of
the citizens of Fort Collins' hands. The City of Fort Collins can't be accountable.
This is one of the biggest mistakes ever made by this City government. I've heard
outlandish statements by our city staff that if Co Rd 32 goes away, we'll have
gridlock on Harmony Road. In my opinion there is nothing that will mitigate the
impact of this project other than rerouting this highway to some other location.
• Galeano-Popp: You don't mean ripping it out of the ground?
• Fischer: If you're going to build this highway you need to be thinking abut a
different, alternate alignment. We didn't invest money to make it easier for people
who live in Severance and commute to Fort Collins, or even Windsor for that matter.
It's an abomination in my book.
• Donovan: When you say trip generation will be non-existent, do you mean the
citizens of Fort Collins traveling the road?
• Fischer: This corridor is virtually all developed. No additional traffic will be
generated by the property. Look at this map and tell me where development could
occur.
• Brown: Traffic volumes are generated from sources outside the corridor. People re-
distribute their trips based on the roadway network and congestion on other roads.
The one thing the regional travel demand model will look at.
• Fischer: That's my point. The City of Fort Collins invested money in there so there
wouldn't be vmt generated. Maybe one of the solutions is to make traffic slower,
make it less attractive as a way of getting back and forth. The business community
made a huge mistake in doing this. Six lanes is on the books, but where is the
business community going to locate any highway business? Nowhere. And they'll
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 5of11
deflect traffic from Harmony Road to a road where there's no business activity.
You would think they would want traffic to flow where there are businesses. I
frankly don't understand it. How does this benefit anyone in Fort Collins?
• Galeano-Popp: We sort of, loosely, think of the corridor in three segments. There's
Carpenter Road, and two segments on the east; downtown Windsor and the part
from I-25 to Windsor. Even though this is not a NEPA study we will look at the no
action alternative. In the conventional sense that would mean no action on the entire
corridor. In addition to that, there will be other alternatives that will have the no
action alternative on the Carpenter Road segment. We have the opportunity, and
good reason, to segment this. It doesn't have to end up as a through corridor. I'm
assuming there are other solutions possible in the regional picture. If the current
speed limit is inviting too much traffic we can look at alternatives for the Carpenter
Road section. We can make superhighways on the east side.
• Knowlton: As Clint pointed out, people will travel on the road where they can make
the best time; so lets not make this section that road.
• Galeano-Popp: That's what we're trying to solicit. Should we keep the speed limit
the same, or change the speed limit? We'll be working on this for a while. Tonight
is not your only opportunity.
• Staychock: Is it a possibility that 392 can come from the east and hit I-25 and
redirect south, then 392 could head west again?
• Galeano-Popp: They wouldn't rename it, but yes, that's how they would funnel the
traffic. That's exactly the type of solution I'm trying to paint.
• Brown: We do need to look at this as a regional study and look at regional
transportation needs.
• Petterson: Purely from a transportation perspective, it's my experience on Hwy 392
that the bridge is the blocker. A lot of traffic gets backed up waiting. Maybe that's
good for discouraging more use. But, backed up traffic has the negative effects also.
That should be considered in the context of this work.
• Pearson: The interchange will be considered in the I-25 EIS.
• Petterson: To the extent this is the consideration you can do what you want on either
side, and not change anything.
• Galeano-Popp: I-25, nor us are in a vacuum. We're doing coordination for the
purpose of making sure the pieces fit together and we solve the congestion.
• Hart: If it's the intention we don't want to improve the traffic flow in the Carpenter
Road segment, we'll have to look at the other entrances to Fort Collins, and see how
we make those a less unpleasant experience getting into town.
• Petterson: If the problem is Harmony Road, is it the getting on and off I-25, or is it
the traffic lights?
Jackson: The problem is the links at peak hours, it gets really congested. It's a new
interchange and it functions well.
• Knowlton: Harmony is really not that bad, it's just not a bad road.
• Petterson: I would echo that.
• Hart: When you come from Glenwood Springs it's a terrible road.
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 6 of 11
• Petterson: To the extent that Harmony is considered an alternative, we need to look
at the real concerns about Harmony, perhaps traffic lights.
• Knowlton: Someone mentioned traffic circles. I like that idea for traffic calming
and to keep it moving, which would make the air quality better. I would hope you
look at traffic circles for the intersections along the Carpenter Road stretch too.
• Donovan: If Harmony is the alternative to the north, is there a realistic alternative to
the south?
• Galeano-Popp: Highway 34.
• Hart: Then, no.
• Jackson: Crossroads is the next interchange to the south of Carpenter. A stumbling
block is the airport.
• Brown: An alternate of possibly going south of Duck Lake was suggested. Maybe
going through the conservation easements and connecting Duck Lake and Fossil
Creek?
• Galeano-Popp: How does that sit with you? Would it still have the same concerns?
• Brown: If the goal is to minimize traffic on Hwy 392, and not encourage more
traffic, what is the underlying concern? Is it that the road will get wider, more
traffic degrades the experience, or detracts from the wildlife wanting to use it?
• Fischer: All of the above. The Audubon Society has done surveys. For bird
information its an excellent resource. The vision for Duck Lake was to have a blind
that was accessible from Co. Rd. 32 so you could look over the lake. Sitting in a
blind with the traffic noise of a six -lane highway is not that desirable.
• Brown: There can be mitigation.
• Hart: Can you mitigate the effects of a six -lane highway? I don't think so. If the
goal of the board is to not encourage traffic; we want to encourage the use of other
roads.
• Galeano-Popp: This other scenario might be the next best.
• Brown: We're just throwing out ideas.
• Knowlton: Noise barriers would be awful. A way to mitigate noise should not be to
put up concrete barriers.
• Brown: There are different types of barriers.
• Fischer: The other thing about taking the highway south is it would go through a
huge wetland.
• Galeano-Popp: It would have to be a broad sweep, we'd have to do something big.
• Fischer: I was wondering about the cost estimate. The last parcel we bought in the
Fossil Creek we paid $50,000 per acre for. Those are the values we're talking about.
• Galeano-Popp: Hwy 34 came up a little while ago. CDOT is in a NEPA analysis
right now from 287 to Larimer County Road 3. It probably will call for widening on
that. For me, Hwy 34 looks like the big corridor. It takes into account Centerra and
the Johnstown annexations.
• Brown: The next step will be a regional travel demand study. Highway 392 and
Carpenter Road has been identified as a regionally significant corridor.
• Petterson: Is that the phase where you will try to determine how many of the folks
are going to I-25 and how many are going across?
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 7of11
• Hart: We need to consider this board's responsibility. We're not interested in that
happening in the Carpenter Road portion of this corridor. We don't have to consider
the study. We want you to change your focus.
• Galeano-Popp: We will do everything to accommodate that vision. If I do nothing
else in this job it will be to give attention to this.
• Donovan: Realizing it's one view point among many.
• Galeano-Popp: It's a pivotal one.
• Knowlton: In a way the cat is out of the bag. It's in the Master Street Plan. As soon
as you do that, draw lines on a map, people get expectations. Now it's a game of
having to back up and say maybe not.
• Galeano-Popp: From the chair I'm in at CDOT, I'm not seeing predetermined
notions about anything.
• Fischer: This was four lanes on the master street plan till about a year ago. Then the
proposal to upgrade it to six lanes. This board opposed that, in part because of the
natural areas we've invested in. Council disregarded the recommendation of this
board. Then it went a step further and turned it over to the State.
• Skutchan: I'd like to acknowledge a few things. I think I have a different opinion on
this subject. I understand that it is a regionally significant corridor. Just because a
citizen doesn't use it, doesn't mean it's not appropriate. Arrangements like that are
what keep people from being cooperative. When we purchase open space in areas,
its not our goal to slow traffic down. There's a large degree of arrogance when you
make those statements. It oversteps the bound of what open space is about. When
you purchase land you have responsibility and culpability to many people. I'm
bothered that the views of this board don't reflect all of the community. It's
Council's decision. They're elected and we're not. We should see as much
cooperation as possible. What is the best way to mitigate the two? I'd be happy with
that.
Coventry HOA — Hidden Cattails
John Stokes said we've talked about this previously in a study session. It's the
conveyance of a 2.1 acre tract of land to a Home Owners Association. The memo is self-
explanatory. We need a recommendation from the NRAB to City Council.
• Staychock: Why is it difficult for the natural areas program to maintain a small,
isolated area?
• Sears: Exactly because of that. It's out of our way to go maintain.
• Staychock: Is the "maintenance" trash?
• Sears: Yes, trash, and weed control. The HOA has really desired a higher level of
maintenance than we're willing to give it. They approached us and said they're
willing to take it over. We're more than willing to allow it. Typically this type of
property would not come to us. I'm not sure why it was dedicated to the City instead
of being left in the HOA for maintenance.
• Staychock: Is the HOA currently involved in the Adopt A Natural Area program?
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 8 of 11
• Sears: I don't know if they are officially in that program, but they've been actively
involved in the maintenance for several years.
• Staychock: When an entity wants to volunteer to adopt a natural area, does that give
them more tools to manage with?
• Sears: No, not really. It's pretty much litter clean up. They can get involved in other
aspects. But its not weed control or vegetation management. It's pretty much picking
up litter.
• Fischer: What happens if for some reason the HOA lets it go, or doesn't maintain it,
or starts doing things that are not compatible with the terms and conditions of the
conservation easement?
• Sears: The enforcement is identical to any other conservation easement. We retain
the right to take them court. We would go to a lot of other measures prior to going to
court.
• Skutchan: Is there anything different with it being a HOA? Has there been a
precedent of working with HOA's?
• Stokes: You never know, they might do damage and we might seek restitution.
• Skutchan: What are their holdings?
• Stokes: Probably fairly modest.
• Donovan: They may have decent resources, but realistically there's not much to be
done.
• Sears: A court could file a lien against each and every property in the HOA, or they
can file it against the property taxes. There are several legal ways, but it would be an
extreme case.
• Petterson: I understand the property may have some natural values, but in terms of
prioritization, I'm inclined to go ahead with this.
Rob Petterson made the following motion:
Move that the NRAB recommend that City Council pass an Ordinance authorizing the
conveyance of the 2.197 acres of the Hidden Catttails Natural Area to the Coventry
HOA subject to the reserved Conservation Easement.
The motion was seconded by Linda Knowlton.
Staychock: I strongly oppose this. It sets a terrible precedent. I understand it can be
difficult to manage 2.197 acres. But, I foresee rotten things, and how this can go out
of control. We just purchased 12,000 acres near the Wyoming boarder. It could be
misconstrued as to the reason that we're doing this. It's setting a bad precedent for
the other areas.
Stokes: We own and manage 34,000 acres now. This discreet two acre tract is
completely separate from anything else we manage. It's very inefficient to manage
this small, isolated piece of land that a HOA is completely willing to take care of. It's
financially inefficient and distracts us from more important work we could be doing.
I cant agree with your analysis. It makes a lot of sense for our program to dispose of
it. That was acquired very early on in the program. We managed a few little pieces
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 9 of 11
of land. We are far beyond that. We're managing tens of thousands of acres. We're
not setting any bad precedents.
• Staychock: A developer donated this land. Who knows what his vision was.
• Stokes: We own the conservation easement. Soapstone doesn't have a conservation
easement, so in some ways its in more jeopardy.
• Staychock: I understand it may cost too much money, but it's a natural area. I don't
trust the HOA's to be good at conserving natural areas. It was given to the City for a
good reason. I don't like this idea at all.
• Fischer: You have to look at the history of the program. We have disposed of
properties in the past, and hopefully we will dispose of properties in the future when
its beneficial for the citizens of Fort Collins to do so. We can use the tools of
purchasing land and putting conservation easements on them, and then disposing of
them. In the Timnath separator that would be an excellent way to jump start the whole
program. Instead of waiting, go out and do it. We've disposed of part of Arapaho
Bend, it's now the Park & Ride. It's a tool. I don't think we can go forward with this
program without the tool of being able to dispose of properties when its
advantageous. It makes perfect sense to me. Of course, there are always risks.
• Stokes: We will be using that tool a lot more, buying properties and putting
easements on them and re -conveying them. Sometimes we have to, folks wont sell
the conservation easement. It's a tool we'll be using quite a bit of.
• Sears: Since this was acquired our policy is to not accept more properties like that.
We expect them to conserve the natural resources to the lands adjacent to their
HOA's. On a number of occasions we have developers pleading with us to take
properties, and HOA's pleading with us to take over their properties like that.
• Donovan: I agree with Randy.
• Skutchan: I agree, it does make sense. I would be cautious. We've got these huge
properties. We have to balance that. Some people feel these natural areas keep the
value and small town feel to Fort Collins. Be careful of your language.
• Skuchan: With this being more of a tool in the future, is there a screening process.
What's the line of questions going into this? With more easements, there's more
opportunities for things to go wrong. Are there classes, or information that fully
explains the whole process?
• Stokes: We haven't done any yet. I've done a lot in past lives. The land owners are
very sophisticated, and very interested in conservation. They're familiar with the
documents and processes, and we usually have a very good relationship.
• Sears: Ryan's points are well taken. Is the HOA going to be back in five to ten years
begging us to take it back? Or we could spend more time enforcing the conservation
easement than we did managing it in the first place. But, it seems good now.
• Skutchan: What documentation goes along with the successes, and the areas that
didn't work so well?
• Sears: It's a heavier handed tool that we would have had. The City does a fairly
limited job enforcing green belts. It's hard to enforce.
The motion passed with seven votes in favor, and one vote opposed (Ryan Staychock).
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 10 of 11
• Fischer: You mentioned that we don't have a conservation easement on Soapstone. I
made a suggestion a while back that we should be putting conservation easements on
all of the land we own. The future is uncertain. If we have conservation easements
on them they will be protected even if 50 years from now a Council decides to get rid
of them.
• Stokes: We've talked about this. It's one of those things that's on the back burner.
• Sears: The down side is there is a huge cost associated with it. Legacy Land Trust, or
Latimer County would have to hold the easement. There's a pretty healthy fee up
front.
Review of Vegetation Guidelines & Update of Vegetation Management Activity,
Rick Bachand, Matt Parker, Rachel Steeves
Bachand and Parker reviewed the guidelines with the board. Parker presented a
PowerPoint presentation detailing the recent activities of the vegetation crew.
New Business
Linda Knowlton asked for clarification of the attendance policy. Donovan said the City
Attorney said the resolution applied to regularly scheduled meetings, that both meetings
(the first and third Wednesdays) are regularly scheduled meetings, and that it's best if we
take attendance at both of the meetings. Donovan said his interpretation is that if written
notice is received it's not counted as an absence for the purpose of the attendance policy.
Donovan said that other meetings called throughout the year would not count.
Election of Officers
Chair: Linda Knowlton nominated Nate Donovan for chair. Jerry Hart seconded the
motion and Nate Donovan was elected unanimously.
Vice Chair: Randy Fischer nominated Linda Knowlton for vice -chair. Nate Donovan
seconded the motion and Linda Knowlton was elected unanimously.
Committee Assignments
Natural Areas: Glen Colton, Jerry Hart, Linda Knowlton, Randy Fischer
Solid Waste: Jerry Hart, Ryan Staychock, Rob Petterson, Randy Fischer (chair), Nate
Donovan
Trails: Glen Colton, Ryan Staychock, Rob Petterson, Linda Knowlton, Joann Thomas,
Clint Staychock
Budget: Rob Petterson, Randy Fischer, Nate Donovan
Ryan Staychock made a motion to drop all committees that no one has signed up for.
The motion was seconded by Jerry Hart and passed with 7 votes in favor and one vote
opposed (Nate Donovan). The committees that were dropped are Education, Growth
Management and Futures.
Other Business
Natural Resources Advisory Board
March 16, 2005
Page 11 of 11
• Fischer: I'd request that when a naming goes forward on a natural area from here on
out that we be aware of it, instead of reading it in the newspaper. I'm hoping we can
get a chance to weigh in on the names.
• Stokes: Do you want to do that with Soapstone. We did the same process for some
little sites down south. We got a lot of neat names. The name Bobcat Ridge was
developed by the public. We'll whittle the list down to three, and bring it back to the
next meeting.
• Fischer: Will we be able to get a look at the kayaking proposal?
• Stokes: Yes.
• Stokes: Kudos to Joann for the nice soapbox. We appreciated that.
• Stokes: We have decided on a candidate for the land manager position. We offered
the job to Daylan Figgs from Nebraska. He works for Nebraska Parks and Game.
• Stokes: We have at least one citizen in town who is irate with the dog off leash law,
and our enforcement of it. He's determined to change that law and come after our
ranger program. He's very serious about making this a cause. Staff is supportive of
the law. We want to be prepared as a department to potentially have a dialogue going
forward in the public.
• Skutchan: With all of the watch dogs here I'm surprised that the proposal to put a
theatre on the Oxbow didn't get brought up.
• Stokes: Doug Moore reviews proposed projects.
• Fischer: If it's a private development we can't comment as a board. That's why it
hasn't been brought up. We have no mechanism to comment. There will be a major
impact on the river corridor, but we cant comment.
• Donovan: I'm fairly pleased to the how the work is progressing at Spring Canyon
Community Park. They were sensitive to minimizing the disturbance of the corridor.
• Rayn Staychock will not attend the April 6 meeting.
Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Submitted by Terry Klahn
Admin Support Supervisor