CCMIN030596 - Laserfiche WebLink

regardless of how many studies say it will be a benefit. To the exm. nt we can satisfy as many as possible, it is worth spending the time. He does not want to invest $700,000 and then have the residents reject the project. He does not share the concerns about risk. This is an enormous opportunity and he strongly believed the golf course will be successful and an asset to the community from a revenue stream. The city has been talking about this for many years. We have invested city money for tennis courts, a pool, soccer fields, and we have a possibility now of getting a golf course at no cost to the city. He strongly supported a municipal golf course. Mr. Tarvet wanted to see a window of time to try to resolve the concerns of the community to resolve that 10 %. Ms. Micheloff indicated that the $700,000 comes from the General Fund. She agrees the numbers are conservative and agrees the golf course will probably be very successful and provide funds to the city. However, she is still concerned about committing money before the community meetings. She did not support hiring a facilitator because of the cost. She wanted the people of Happy Valley to have a benefit and to explore how many are really aware of all the issues. If you are only doing a golf course and very minimal development, you don't need to widen the road so that it ruins the character of the area. Mr. Pico felt this was a $15 million project and investing a little more money to involve the neighborhood in conflict resolution would be well-spent. It was moved by Mr. Pieo, seconded by Ms. Denn[% to adopt staff recommendations A through G, with the addition of provldlng a community-based conflict resolution faeiHtator to work with the parties to resolve the issues and concerns during the next six months. Ms. Acosta agreed with the concept, but still felt them would be an impact on the staff for information gathering for the facilitator and parties. Mr. Pico did not feel there would be a tremendous drain on staff. Mr. Tarvet felt that if we are in relative agreement and there is a process for moving forward, that the dialogue between the property owners, the golfers, and the people who live there to become more comfortable is a positive step. He wants that before proceeding with staff recommendations. He did not want to be driven by the "timeline". Ms. Michelotti wanted to know what would happen on this property if the golf course does not go through. She agreed there was value in the people getting together to discuss the issues, but was not in favor of delaying the project for too long. She agreed the next three months are critical for the San Francisco property and the General Plan update. By June, we can then focus staff time on this project. 03/05/96 -13-