PC 07/07/99 - Laserfiche WebLink

Combine the two Western Area parks or make them owner-association maintained. Expand the community park by five acres. Reserve land for City optional purchase of five acres to add to the community park. Require park improvements with initial residential development in each Area. Discussion: See the Parks & Recreation Commission staff report generally. The cap costs in the project documents are now several years old and reflected construction costs only, not design, engineering, and construction. Current costs for design, engineering, and construction are reflected in the "alternatives" above. Cap increases were recommended by the Parks & Recreation Commission. Staff prefers the two park concept for the Western Area for the reasons described in the Parks & Recreation staff report as this concept best meets multiple objectives. The community park, in its present location, can feasibly only be widened (by moving Pleasanton Avenue westerly). It is possible to add 5_+ acres to the park (a long, fairly narrow strip, ranging from 70 to 250 feet wide) without impacting severely the golf course/housing layout in the Central Area. These acres come at the expense of residential acreage, reducing the project's economic return, and, without a corresponding density reduction, increasing density on remaining parcels. At almost 30 acres, the community park exceeds by 50% the City's minimum standard, but it is about five acres less than what was assumed in the General Plan, acres which would have to be made up in other community parks for the City to achieve its designated park acreage/population. Park phasing is a cost issue. Eastern Area residents will be well served by the schools' fields until the local park is built. Staff anticipates City improvement of at least part of the community park early, providing parks for early Central Area residents. The Western Area timing requires parks in place once about 20% of the units are occupied; this is an aggressive timing which should be suitable. Staff anticipates that once development begins on the Western Area, more than 120 units will be in the "first phase," meaning that the park will be built within the first year or two of project development. Principles of Agreement: Incorporate all elements of the park components at issue. Staff Recommendation: The concept of a cap on fees was negotiated, but the initial amount was never truly debated. The idea was always to improve the parks to a basic level. Updating the initial cost for the initial approval, and retaining the inflationary cost cap, is consistent with the original understanding. Expanding the community park through purchase would be more expensive than replacing these acres elsewhere, so staff does not support this. Staff is also satisfied with the park phasing requirements. Substantive Issues/Alternatives Page 13 June 9, 1999