09/27/1990 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

It was unanimously agreed upon by the committee that the buffer zone should be left to grow up to 1 - 2 feet from the pond side of the path. This 1 - 2 foot mowed area alongside of the trail would alleviate encroachment of weeds on the path. The buffer areas would be left alone except for areas indicated on the map which calls for large tree or bush pruning to offer pond vistas. Vista areas will be mowed. The overall guideline is that the weed growth buffer area between the pond and the pathway should be at least 8 - 12 feet. Furthermore, the south side of the sliding hill will be recommended to let grow to curb erosion and to provide a wildlife nesting area. Question #3. Who is to determine when it would be beneficial to the pond to perform weed harvesting? Answer. It was unanimously agreed by the committee that professional water biologists such as Environmental Specialists would be requested to periodically test the water and suggest appropriate action to maintain water quality. Question #4. The recommendation from this group regarding Silver View Park improvements are dependent upon funding just as the 1981 Master Plan was dependent upon funding. What will be the answer to community residents asking why scheduled improvements are not occurring; the reason being that monies are not appropriated as recommended. Answer. After discussion regarding the public's perception of a master plan, it was unanimously agreed upon by the group that a narrative must be presented as part of the plan to explain that the goals and priorities and funding sources are simply a plan and guide for future improvements. Furthermore, this plan can be changed, but the basic park concept plan should remain consistent. That concept plan offers three areas of the park. The first is the pond. The second is the nature area around the pond and the third is the active area. As long as future requested improvements follow the theme of these three areas of the park concept plan, the improvements should be considered. Question #5. How can this improvement plan remain flexible for special opportunities or needs which today are unforeseen such as grant opportunities, special donations, or requests for facilities that are not included in the master plan? Answer. It was unanimously agreed upon by the group that the master plan must have a clause allowing flexibility for future improvements that may be req.iested or opportunities for funding facilities as long as the improvements are compatible with the park concept plan. Question #6. The issue of pathway construction materials must be decided; asphalt, woodchip or combination. Is the group interested in the northern asphalt pathway addition, and if so, what is the priority? ;-v