OCR Text |
Show WASATCH MOUNTAIN tion of open space, and has been locked up in perpetuity.” Park City is obligated to provide a good answer for why it is not now protected, Fisher said. s a solution, she suggests a limited duration conservation easement, say 10-25 years, as a reasonable compromise. That way, she says “there is no problem if the city truly doesn’t want to develop the property, and there is no permanent restriction on the decision-making ability of future city councils.” A full 95 percent of Park City-area residents polled are in favor of open space, Fisher asserted. “People are realizing more and more, open space is a usable asset,” she said. Park City owes an obligation to the people to formally bind the farm as open space, Fisher contended. “Is this a government run by the few or by all the people?” But City Manager Ross dismisses Ms. Fisher’s concerns over Open space protection as a “red herring.” He forwards three reasons to support his contention that no formal legal protection need be afforded the farm, all of which boil down to money. Ross said that lowering the farm’s value as a broadly developable asset would in turn diminish the City’s assets,. and doing so would not be good for taxpayers. In addition, Mr. Ross said the city council cannot legally bind the hands of, nor exercise control over future city councils, which would be the result of such restrictions on the property. The best protection for the farm, he contended, is the will of the people, which will “never be” trampled by city employees or the city council, regardless of their personal views. “Because it will require notice and public hearings to be changed, the [upcoming] Master Plan is the best protection,” Ross said. City Councilwoman and attorney Shauna Kerr did not criticize the city manager, saying: “Toby Ross just doesn’t want to eliminate any options.” But, Kerr added, she “has no problem” legally or ethically with a limited duration conservation easement protecting the property for years into the future. Ross’ claim that illegally bind future Councils is an “overbroad characteriza- _ tion,” Kerr said. The city manager’s inaction on the Osguthorpe Farm is really due to the fact that Park City has not yet paid off its debt on the purchase price. The city councilwoman did contend, however, that Park City has stalled too long in determining how the farm can be used by the public. Additionally, Kerr said she is dismayed that the city council was not included in the early process of the drafting of the farm’s Master Plan, which is supposed to come before the council for review and adoption within the next few months. The Master Plan is intended to be very general, and does nothing to legally bind use of the property. It will simply work as a guideline for use and development. The primary goal of the plan is to protect the visual quality of Park City’s entry corridor, as well as the historic quality of the barn, and the farm as an agricultural setting for it. The plan will also seek to protect open space, wildlife and water quality, as well as create passive recreation and outdoor education opportunities. § Earlier studies identified public sup- port for trails, and gg. - the Master Plan ae ™ apparently also suggests the installation of & trails through the farm. Still, the municipality refuses to allow trails advocates to install, at no expense to the city, a narrow, lowimpact hiking and bicycling trail along the edge of the property. «i City officials hint that any shovel which hits the dirt without extensive pre-planning will destroy the farm. Specifically, they say no improvements, not even a trail, will be allowed until the barn is stabilized, secured with locks, and fire-protected. In addition, city planners insist the Master Plan, which is the culmination of several studies, must first be adopted, in order to assure no recreational use could be harmful to the natural setting and visual quality. But dragging out the planning procedure for four, five or six years seems to be unnecessary, according to Kerr and others. There have been many options proposed for how to use the farm and barn, the councilwoman said. But now it’s time to “get on with a master plan” and decide just how we will actually use It. But the question of why the city didn’t start this process four years ago remains unanswered. There seems to be no apparent reason why the studies couldn't have commenced in 1990 and been completed within a year or two following the purchase. Despite the city’s plan, securing and protecting the barn doesn’t seem to stand in the way of beginning the studies. But the city manager claims that studies or no studies, the farm had to be actively farmed for five years from the date of purchase, through the fall of 1995, in order to avoid tax penalties. Any non-agricultural use of the property, even a walking trail, could violate this requirement, he argued. PAGE But insiders say lack of trails has little to do with agriculture. It appears more important to the municipality that no outside entity propose uses or improvements on the property over which city officials have than full control Coupled with that, is that Park City doesn’t seem to have the money to maintain or improve the farm with any real dispatch. One of the reasons for the delay may be that the city has had little luck seeking outside sources of funding for the proposed trail and stream improvements For example, a trail has been approved from the south edge of the property to the barn But currently there is n« funding to install it The one exception to the city’s “hands off” attitude is cross-country skiing White Pine Touring has -been allowed to extend its ski tracks from _ the Park City Golf Course to the farm, But even so, the city will not allow anything beyond year-to-year leases, making capital improvements impossible. Charlie Sturgis, the cross-country ski operator, is at a loss to explain why the city allow his will not profitable, well-run concession to improve or The farm as an excellent, but unused location for trailhead and race team facilities, parking, and a warming hut, he said. “Cross-country skiing is one of the least impactive uses that could possibly take place on the farm. Yet in over three years, nothing has been done to allow that use to be improved.” And when it proposed the installation of a trail. system, the Olympic Biathalon Committee was greeted with a resounding “back off’ by Park City Mayor Brad Olch, as well as the city manager. Instead of fighting with Park City, the Biathalon Committee switched its focus to the property north of the Winter Sports Park, and is no longer interested in the farm. The city-is still obligated, however, to provide an easement to the biathletes for trails, if they can obtain easements to connect from the farm to the Winter Sports Park by 1995. But since there are still substantial hurdles with other property owners along the way, including Wolf Mountain, the connection is unlikely to occur. Beyond the city’s control, however, is the problem of adequate parking. The Utah Department of Transportation and D.A. Osguthorpe are still battling over the value of the five acres on the east side of the highway, across from the barn, where the Osguthorpes still reside. According to City Engineer DeHaan, once the dispute is resolved, the municipality will take control of the property, remove the house, sheds and silos, and develop the area for parkir Osguthorpe operated dairy farm on the site from the 1940s unt Nas sold to Park City in 1990. When the UDOT plan to widen Highw 224 to four lanes came abou ( < the opportunity to sell out. W e between Osguthorpe and Park deal might not have taken p but large for the intervention of landowner who Jsguthorpe wanted City, another help lost the xcept broker local, the deal maintain becoming its pastoral another the setting, housing property rather to than project Aside from attempts by outside entities to make use of the farm, there have been several studies to determine the desires of the community at large The outcome of community input to potential uses for the farm can be found in the 1992 Landmarks Study, and in the Entry Corridor Master Plan. The plan also incorporates the findings of three other studies: an architectural study for the barn and surrounding buildings; an agricultural study to determine the feasibility of continued farming; and a wetlands study to determine the best course of action to take with regard to the stream and lowlands. , he result of these studies can be reduced to two concepts: 1) the property was purchased primarily to preserve the open space corridor, and 2) light “development” could occur on the property as long as that development would not be irreversible and would not hinder the objective of #1. Several proposals for various uses were put forth, but most agreed it would be unwise to reduce this large public tract. to a single-use park. The general view was for “low intensity recreation use” and moderate improvements to the buildings. Specifically, non-motorized multiple use trails, interpretive trails, picnic areas, a fishing pond, cross-country skiing, and possibly animal grazing, were identified. For the immediate future, it was determined that the costs necessary to make the barn acceptable for human occupation were too high to seriously consider. The draft Master Plan is expected to include the results of this community input in its recommendations. Much of the document will be devoted to trails, potential trail alignments, and related uses. Even with the promise of this plan, the question of exactly how and when the public will be able to use the farm remains unanswered. And it remains unknown what, if anything, will be done to ensure preservation of the open nature of the farm Troy Duffin is the Executive Director of the Mountain Trails Foundation, a nonprofit trails advocacy group. An outdoor enthusiast and Utah native, he spent five years living at Lake Tahoe before returning to Park City, where be now resides. 11 BS tect future. City Council, perhaps more focused on development, cannot destroy the present open nature of the farm?,” she asks. “The public believes the farm was bought specifically for the protec- TIMES |