Park transfer to city on track

Dan Kulin

Monday, June 6, 2005 | 9:58 a.m.

The planned transfer of Floyd Lamb State Park to Las Vegas is still on track, Las Vegas Councilman Michael Mack said, although city and state leaders will meet sometime in the near future to decide what exactly would be allowed at the park in northwest Las Vegas.

At issue is the definition of "passive use" and how that would be applied to what could be done at the park, which is largely undisturbed rural and desert land, said Allen Biaggi, director of the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources.

A proposed transfer agreement narrowly approved by the City Council on April 20 could allow for playing fields and other outdoor recreation on much of the park.

But Mack, a primary force behind the proposed transfer, said there is no desire to put fields there.

"The city's intention was to have it passive, with no ball fields, and no lighted fields," Mack said. "Trails, for equestrian or walking, would be OK though."

Mack said he agrees the term passive uses needs to be defined. He added that once a consensus is reached, the council might revisit the matter to make sure the city's resolution is consistent with what the city and state leaders agree to.

A divided City Council approved the city taking over the park with some council members expressing concern over adding the cost of maintaining the park to the city's budget.

The transfer must also be approved by the governor and then the Legislature's Interim Finance Committee, unless the full Legislature is in session when the decision reaches them.

The agreement approved by the council would leave the state in charge of the park for two years and then turn it over to the city.

The state-owned 680 acres of the park is now under a land-use restriction that allows for only passive uses there, such as trails.

The agreement approved by the council would leave the passive-use restriction on the park's 60-acre core, which includes the fishing ponds and historic buildings. But the remaining 620 acres could eventually be used for ball fields or other recreational activities that aren't defined as passive.

Biaggi said before acting on the transfer they want to make sure all sides agree on "what the term passive recreation means and whether it applies to the larger 680 acres."

The term is "relatively undefined," Biaggi said, adding that it could be interpreted to allow sports playing fields, trails, and horseshoe pits or prohibit any new uses.

Biaggi said there will be a meeting -- a date has not been set yet -- between city and state leaders, as well as interested legislators and private groups, to reach a consensus on what exactly the agreement should allow.