CCMinutes - 06/14/04 Mtg - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

that whatever profit was gained and who gained it had nothing to do with the council's decision. Councilor Meisner earnestly supported development of a park in Santa Clara. He felt the current incarna- tion of the deal had become much more complicated as the City was adding to the UGB substantially in return for 77 acres of park land and the opportunity to purchase Moon Mountain property. He asked if there were other parcels in the Santa Clara area that might have willing sellers. Andrea Riner, Planning Manager for the Parks and Open Spaces Division, stated that the parcel in question was the ideal site for a park of this proposed size. Councilor Meisner liked the concept, but wanted to look at all of the options. He asked how the acreage fit into the work of the Region 2050 effort. He asked how the council could look at such things in a compre- hensive way, adding that he did not expect the response at the present meeting. Councilor Pap~ agreed that the park was needed, but recalled that the transaction was to trade some property and change the UGB. He asked how it had become more complex. Ms. Riner responded that one complexity was the council's requirement that more protections be added to the Laurel Hill Valley site. She said the division moved forward on negotiations to acquire the property. She clarified that 100 acres were being acquired and 30 more acres were being donated as a conservation easement. Councilor Pap~ noted that the main motion did not include much initial outlay of public money. He asked where funding would come from to pay for the amended motion. Ms. Riner responded that it would come from the 1998 bond measure for park land acquisition. In response to another question from Councilor Pap~, Ms. Riner stated that, should the City pursue the eminent domain purchase of the 77-acre property, it would cost in excess of $3.5 million and approximately $2 million for the 100-acre purchase. Councilor Pap~ said he would not support the amendment. Councilor Nathanson commented that the motion on the table represented a ~major change in direction." She opposed making such a change until staff could provide detailed information on the pros and cons of taking this new direction. She expressed concern regarding what would happen to the land in the south hills. She was not willing to support the motion until it was studied further. Councilor Taylor felt this was not an appropriate item for the Consent Calendar. She also did not think it was appropriate for staff to have spent so much time on the item. She commented that she needed more information on the pros and cons of the deal to base a decision upon and reiterated her concern regarding removal of agricultural lands. Mayor Torrey stated that the council did instruct staff to bring back a proposal and staff had done so. He felt Mr. Dafoe had made a valid point and he supported the inclusion of language that would address his concerns. He said, through the council's content discussion, legislative intent would be determined. He surmised that, should the amendment pass, the City would have acquired 77 acres outside of the UGB and would not be able to develop the infrastructure for the park. Mr. Klein affirmed this. He said a Metro Plan amendment would still have to be passed in order to develop the land. Mayor Torrey remarked that there was benefit in having a community discussion on this. He called it a