Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Pico ~slr,~cl if there was any other part of town with that many people that is served <br />by only a five acre park. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift said the only other area comparable in density, and it has fewer units, is served <br />by the little park near Regalia House, which is comparable in acreage. If you use the half mile <br />radius, Fairlands Park is within the radius of most of this high density area and the Sports Park <br />is not far. There are many other neighborhood parks within the area, but they are not ar22~sible <br />for one reason or another (major streets/arroyos). <br /> <br /> Mr. Pico asked if staff believes the five acre park would totally serve the needs of these <br />residents. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated it would serve neighborhood park needs, but not the total ne~!s, <br />because the total needs are made up of community park and neighborhood parks. The <br />community parks are spread out throughout the city. <br /> <br /> Ms. Dennis wanted to clarify that if Council is looking for additional park land that it <br />should send the project back for redesign rather than just taking the three acres. <br /> <br /> Mr. Swift indicated that Mr. Sweeney does not want the three acres to come out of the <br />balance of the protxn't7 left undeveloped on the north side of the Spanos project. Therefore, if <br />you speak stric~y of dedication, it must come from the twenty acres within that project. To take <br />three acres out of that twenty acres requires the redesign of the complex. There is no three acre <br />piece than can be carved out and leave an adequate project. Many things will change and no <br />matter where you put the park, the project will have to be redesigned. Rather than rilesign it <br />at the Council meeting, staff recommends denying the project without prejudice and give staff <br />direction to work with the property owner. <br /> <br /> There was a break at 8:55 p.m. <br /> <br /> The meeting was reconvened at 9:08 p.m. <br /> <br /> Ms. Michelotti referred to the Case Avenue project and asked for clarification of fees <br />waived. <br /> <br /> Mr. Bocian indicated it was $2.2 million and none was in the form of waivers. There <br />are loans for the fees. The land value is $2.2 million, which equals the $4 million figure quoted <br />by Mr. Sweeney. The developer did not pay up front, because there was a long term lease and <br />loan agreement. All fees were converted to loans. The affordable housing fee was waived by <br />ordinance as in this project. It is not unique to the project. The school impa~t fees were also <br />waived. <br /> <br />03/19/96 -11- <br /> <br /> <br />