Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApproved Minutes - 2025-03-19 PARKS, RECREATION & NATURAL RESOURCES ADVISORY • BOARD tij MINUTES March 19, 2025 ORFOO Recorded Minutes: https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=2955737&repo=CityOfLakeOswego CALL TO ORDER Patrick Gutierrez called the meeting to order at 4:00 p.m. and Introductions are made. ROLL CALL Present: Jason Dorn, Co-Chairs • Patrick Gutierrez, Co-Chairs • Greg Wolley •Rebecca Greene • Matt McGinnis • Kara Gapon (Online) • David Walters • Ed Becker • Sarah Ellison • Diya Deepu, Youth Member • Katie Gragg, Youth Member Trudy Corrigan, Council Liaison CAC Members: Whitney Taylor • Lilisa Hall (LAB liaison, attending in place of Pat) • Kara Orvieto (SAB liaison) • Betty Holladay (50+ liaison) • Jymn Meier • Emily Frey • Julie Haddad Alternates: Tyson Hart, Absent: Staff: Ivan Anderholm, Director of Parks & Recreation • Jan Wirtz, Recreation Deputy Director • Robin Krakauer, Communications and Sponsorship Coordinator • Kyra Haggart, Parks Planner • Dina Balogh, Administrative Supervisor Guests: MIG: Matt Hastie and online, Lauren Scott and Jessa Miller APPROVAL OF MINUTES • The Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Advisory Board (PARKS Board) reviewed and unanimously approved the minutes from February 19, 2025 . CITY COUNCIL UPDATE: Trudy Corrigan, Council Liaison • Proclaimed Women's History month. • Proclaimed Disability Awareness month. • Adopted findings to tree appeal. • Study session on the South Shore Fire Station task force recommendation. • Had a study session on the Pioneer Cemetery ownership and transition plan. Parks, Recreation and Natural Resources Advisory Board March 19, 2025 • Update on the Americans with Disabilities Act with Kelly Bird. • Public hearing on additional license to establish an additional recycling collection services. • Proclaim Arbor Month. • Approved 2025 City Council work plans, goals and initiatives. • There will be special session on March 31 regarding Lake access. This will be a chance to hear public comment and to have a public conversation around the decision. Appeal process: Lake Corporation has sent notice of appeal; current judgment stands unless injunction is presented. YOUTH MEMBER UPDATE: Katie Gragg and Diya Deepu: • Connected with Gail at Luscher Farm for our LOHS Green team to work on a general project. LOHS students that have signed up to work for their stewardship. Also, had a member of the Oswego Watershed Council come to LOHS to talk about ways to mitigate climate change. This month we have had a watershed wide event on March 15 pulling ivy. • Spring break is next week. Posters will be put up at the High School regarding job opportunities with LOPR. PUBLIC COMMENT: NA • Emily Evans: I'm the resident with my family at bigger for the last nine years. We're added users and I really like to thank you all for everything you do to create all this wonderful natural space and programming Between every park. I think in the city we live right next to we have farm plant and leisure so we really appreciate everything. I'm also here today to ask that you will make a recommendation with the city council to end any further litigation with regard to late access and frankly prohibiting them is like my own from accessing the link. As I said we've been here nine years, we've ever been on the lake, we love our home, but it doesn't give us access, and I don't think that's there. don't think it's there that ours are being used to continue this litigation when I feel that it's really been decided at this point and I worry about other things we aren't doing because we're spending money on this one. Thank you for your five year service. Thank you. • Natalie Bennon: Thank you, I just want to say ditto to what Emily said. I've been a resident since 2016 and I used to also be on the Parks Board. I appreciate all the service that all of you do. I moved to Lake Oswego so I could take my kids on a daily walks, instead of trying to find a place where we had to spend all day getting there and all day getting back and that sort of thing just on the weekends. I also would encourage you to please recommend City Council to support providing public access to the lake because I also agree that it's disappointing to continue spending dollars on this. My kids would like to be able to access the lake in some places around the lake and not just the city swim park. We went one time when they were little and you know the fence was kind of demoralizing and we never went back because it just felt like we weren't welcome there and we weren't part of that part of the community for us. Thank you. 2IPage REGULAR BUSINESS: PARKS PLAN 2040: REVISED DRAFT PLAN Kyra Haggart, Parks Planner Matt Hastie, MIG Parks Plan 2040 Presentation: https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/WebLi nk/DocView.aspx?id=2955793&repo=CityOfLakeOswego • Document is comprehensive and reflects previous discussions,with minor suggestions for improvement. • Questions raised about specific projects and natural area improvements in the document. • Discussion centered around the inclusion of public access to the lake and other waterways in the plan. • The issue at hand is about exclusion and the need for the city council to take a stand. • A full analysis of public access is not feasible, but language exploring opportunities for public access should be included in the plan. • The plan provides guidance, but it is not regulatory and can be flexible based on future decisions. • The chair of HRAB is concerned about identifying and preserving historic resources in parks. • The CAC has been working on the entire plan for the last 18 months and wants their hard work recognized. • There are discussions about lake access, universal design for playgrounds, and mountain biking opportunities. • The importance of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the plan should be emphasized. • Access to lake facilities can benefit local businesses and the bottom line. • Provide a document to the board for future implementation and goal setting. • The Parks board is encouraged to collaborate with other groups in the community to achieve the goals of the projects. • The board is unsure of the city council's stance on the lake access issue. • The board wants to make recommendations but needs to know where the city council stands first. • A motion is made to recommend the adoption of the plan with specific changes. • A motion was made to support public access to the lake and recommend against spending additional funds on a legal challenge. • There was discussion about accompanying the motion with a letter to the city council explaining the rationale. Q&A: • Sarah page 95—Programming for neuro divergent aquatics—very important and question on the chapter 10 natural area improvements. Have those projects already modified in scope or are they the same as prior to chapter 10?—Stevens Meadow project—has this been changed? • Kyra—No we are hoping to do this project and work through the barriers—River Run and Canal Acres—need to check with legal on this. 3IPage • Sarah—Lake access—now that it is clear that the lake is public we should have information to reflect this. Add Oswego Lake to this. Goal 2.13 —Oswego Lake should be added. • Trudy—Situation is the same—it is not a time to make a change. • Rebecca—Attract diversity but the lake says no? • Ivan—Ask question put lake language— "pending litigation process"in PP2040—put to the plan—prioritization —City Council priorities. Take away the Tualatin and Willamette — "All public waterways." • Matt—If you avoid the specifics. Then plan can be inclusive without knowing what the outcome is. Would like to not have something in the plan. Would be good to explore how to have it in there. • Sarah—Include accuracy with including all the water language. Explore public access opportunities. • Sarah—I would like to see the plan reflect what people were thinking. At least a place holder • Greg—Ivan's language covers it. • David—Agree with Ivan. Likes the terminology. • Tyson— Why is it so important to include the terminology? • Sarah—People wanted public access and comments. • Ed— This is a big issue—access is a key term in the plan. This is a public plan. These are waters of the state. We need to make this an opportunity. Will not vote in favor to this plan without the plan having the lake component. Need a full analysis. • Sarah—Cannot have a full analysis without more time. • Whitney—Recommend—add text to plan "in light of the recent ruling", add that study as a project. • Patrick—Do not do the full analysis now—but we would want language in there • Jason—nothing to add. • Tyson -Adding verbiage with something that is really up in the air—how hard and fast is this plan. Is there money to explore lake access. Can we make changes and explore new opportunities? • Kyra—Complex or things that don't have—this plan is not to take a study of one thing— it identifies where we can study in future years. • Matt PB—The plan provides guidance to staff. • David—If we approve—we are making a recommendation and they cannot approve. • Ivan—Council has the ability to say they can approve with changes • Matt—Is the plan flexible enough to make changes over the years. Kyra—not regulatory. • Ivan— The plan is a 10,000-foot level. We use as a guide. Then we bring to elected officials. • Meg—Chair of HRAB—identifying the parks historical resources—the furnace—making sure we are including it. • Kyra—Don't know about identify historical language—Matt MIG thinks it is in their system wide recommendations. • Kara—Sustainability—find some type of compromise about the lake. • Rebecca— The lake has been mentioned throughout. • Ed— These are public lands. Defer the vote until after the 31st. • Katie—After a motion goes through can you still do changes? 4IPage • Diya—Can it go to council and come back to the board • Matt MIG—Parks board makes a recommendation then goes to Council—will not come back to parks board again. • Greg—Agrees with a lot of what has been said—approve the plan at some point. Maybe some language on lake access. Pickleball?? • Matt MIG—Identify an outdoor space and then identify indoor. • Kyra—No site identified. It is identified as a priority. • Sarah—Not our job at what the council wants us to hear. If we think something should be in there then we should put it in. • James—Accessibility—Is it the intention to have universal design for accessibility. Taught outside programs and kids would be left behind on trails who were in wheel chairs. Thankful to plan and appreciate for those who often do not have a voice. Thank you to Kyra for the visual accessibility. • Kyra answer—Playground equipment that gets replaces new equipment should incorporate those standards and designs. • Betty—10,000 mile view—If there are additions and to be made then put things in the plan that you want. Designation about lands that have been taken. How to manage that. Appreciate the detail. • Tyson—Page 78 and 79—Mountain bike info. No need for safety issues. Sunnyslope— need for accessibility and improvement. There is a lack of mountain biking opportunities. Need to add statement what the actual needs are. • Julie CAC online—Plan is great. Consider that we are keeping our minds about the future. We can amend the draft • Betty—Ed struck a chord about DEI. Motives from people and culture clash. Have an initial statement about caring about these issues. We want to be welcoming. • Greg—People who recreate and spend money in town —business case to have people come and spend money. Business community should welcome access. • Patrick—Great CAC meeting, public outreach —interactive. Great job. Plan is amazing. • Athletic Field Study- Matt • Draft report is under staff review(MIG) • Report identifies a number of recommendations. • Ed- Funding Strategy? • Ed—Ivan will struggle with funding so we should look into a foundation —foundation takes a lot of time and effort. What entity will you partner with in City?Schools. Bring together parks and schools together. Add this to the language—Consider partnering with the school district. • Ivan—Great idea—and we can explore that. • Ivan can come back to talk about funding strategies at another meeting. • Jason—Agreement with schools? • Ivan— We have a higher level of service—school would benefit on having that partnership and renewing the talks • Kyra— We can bring the study in its finality to the parks board. SIPage Motion to Approve: • David Walters made a motion to approve the plan with proposed changes. Specifically add Oswego Lake or keep in general language. After discussion the Parks board unanimously approved the motion: Move to recommend that City Council adopt Parks Plan 2040, with proposed changes: • Add a note about trend in aquatics for sensory friendly swim to Systemwide 3.7 • Adding a mention in to community engagement summaries to specifically mention access to Oswego Lake as a community priority • Add Oswego Lake to Systemwide 2.13 • Add a new systemwide recommendation about interest in exploring future access opportunities to the lake • Add a note in systemwide recommendations about coordination with tribes • Add emphasis on important of mountain biking • Add a statement at the outset of the plan about desire to be a welcoming and inclusive community • Add language to the Foundation funding tool about partnering with the School District Action Items: • Prepare an executive summary and a letter from the director as appendices for the document • Review and address the recommendations in the athletic field requirements report before putting it out for public review • Explore opportunities to provide adaptive sports and expand the variety of all abilities programming, specifically mentioning sensory-friendly swim times. • Clarify if the natural area improvement projects have been modified in scope in response to chapter ten. • Consider adding mention of lake access in the section on access to important natural areas and features. • Explore opportunities to expand recreation opportunities or programs that provide access to the Lake and Willamette River. • Add text to the plan regarding the recent ruling and interest in exploring access to the lake • Consider adding a project to study access to the lake and develop a plan • Ensure that there is room and funding within the 15-year window for projects related to lake access • Clarify the flexibility of the plan and its ability to adapt to changes in priorities • Clarify the process for identifying historical resources in parks • Determine if there is a system-wide recommendation for identifying and preserving historical resources 6IPage 2025 PARKS BOARD WORK PLANS: • Draft copies of work plan for two themes were discussed and will be reviewed for revisions. • Draft copies of the work plans will be brought to the board at the April meeting for approval. STAFF AND BOARD MONTHLY UPDATES: • Ed made a motion not to support the city council spend any more money in an appeal to Lake Oswego Lake. Rebecca seconded the motion. Motion was approved. • Jan: Summer Camp and Activity guide is on line • Ivan: Communication will go out about the LORAC launch party and opening. Jason Dorn adjourned the meeting at approximately 6:50 pm. The next regular scheduled meeting will be Wednesday, April 16, 2025, 4 p.m. Prepared by, Dina Balogh, Administrative Supervisor 7IPage