3 minute read
APPENDIX A
A // APPENDIX
• Fence screening private property to the south may have been too “extreme” of a measure to quell issues with landowner-fencing located by lower rock face • Importance of the clarity of the viewshed- a major driver of current park use • Creating programming opportunities for Summer Program/local groups with park development and additional amenities • Prioritization of facility amenities/phases & funding determining what gets excluded from the revitalization • Cross marketing other recreation/tourism opportunities at HKP • Navigating potential grant cycle conflicts with other local projects (Middle Fork & South Fork Greenways & Rec Center are council priority)
• INTERPRETATION/SIGNAGE: Matching tower location with windmill site?? Or interpretation for how proximate the original site was Educational signage to designate features within the viewshed Currently no interpretation for the windmill in the plan, should be added One-way direction for parking loop may need more signage to make more intuitive
• FACILITIES Consideration should be given to how facilities weather at the park (elevation/moisture/weather/etc.) Railing where needed around the park for risk management/safety Tower:
Potential negative feedback from the community/public based on the current existence of dramatic views at the park Approach/framing/selling of the tower through an historical point of view, calling it the “fire tower,” or interpreting it in relation to the former NASA Windmill Can the cell tower & viewing tower coexist as one structure? Can the cell tower be redesigned with more efficient technology? Using the roof of the lookout tower for the antennas? Phase 3 or 4 implementation
Vault Toilet: User functionality/tourists’ aversion to more rugged toilet types of restroom facilities Cost & cleaning of a vault toilet A little more due diligence for toilet types/opportunities
Stage:
Would require more parking/shuttle/increased restrooms Perhaps council ring more appropriate style for this type of programming Programming for stage would gear towards naturalist talks Must be sensitive to TOB and conflicting programming opportunities Use of a mobile stage / smaller stage instead of permanent stage suggested Removal of stage from plan suggested Entrance: More Rocky Knob-like entrance (instead of unsightly chain-link fence gate) suggested Expense of such gateway, as well as property lines must be accounted for in analysis Positive reception to revitalizing the current sign Main Viewing Platform: Balancing the marketing-effect of its visibility from downtown with potential unsightliness Big draw for visitors/activity Potential need for rendering of views from town to properly frame the idea for the public viewing Can the larger viewing area (deck) be built with materials other than wood? Platform/priority 1 items drive park use
A // APPENDIX
Natural Play Area: Playground/play area would drive programming & use, increasing community value for the park Slide feature is “cool”/positively received + modest play area facilities should be pursued Positive reception of slide idea-issues cited with playground equipment at Rocky Knob and sustainability/weathering of materials used Walking Trail: Important feature Thought should be given to how internal park trails might connect to other outer trails Bouldering: Boone Climbers Coalition reference in plan to have access to develop trail & bouldering activity
• Signage issues guiding people to the park from town • Explore addition of 1 or 2 parking spaces • Long Hope Valley development (?) tower as existing example of what tower could look like • Greene Property land acquisition: $1 million for 55 acres near Boone UMC trail/bouldering/surrounding land (Greene’s land w/o the house) • Provide Budget #’s for TDA mtg./presentation
• PROJECT PRIORITIZATION:
Priority 1: Dressing Up Existing Facilities (Picnic Tables/Signage/Picnic Shelter) + Bathrooms Priority 2: Viewing Platform Priority 3: Walking Trail System + Play Area Priority 4: Tower + ?
