CCMIN091796 - Laserfiche WebLink

Rick Johnson, 3913 Alma Court, opposed the West Las Positas interchange because of his concerns regarding noise, increased traffic, concerns for the safety of children walking to school, possible increased crime, and possible reduction of property values. He felt the Stoneridge Drive interchange was sufficient to handle the traffic. 6. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS Item 6a Review of the Credit for Private Open Space Under the Park Dedication Ordinance. (SR96:255) Dolores Bengtson presented the staff report. Mr. Pico stated the proposed ordinance allows a 38.4% credit and asked if that were the maximum allowed. Is it possible to grant a lower percentage if Council desired? Ms. Bengtson said yes. The 38.4% is the current ceiling on the credit but that percentage would float based on the proportion of neighborhood to community parkland. The percentage over time could go lower or higher, but at no time could it go over 50% because of State law. Mr. Tarver asked on what grounds a legal challenge would be based if no credit were given? Mr. Roush responded that there could be a potential violation of equal protection and perhaps substantive due process. That is, if a credit is given to developers who provide these amenities to the public generally, but not given to a developer who provides the amenity to residents of a private development, there might be an inequality. Mayor Tarvet asked if anyone wished to comment on this item. There were no speakers. Ms. Mohr referred to neighborhood parks developed for public use and asked how the amount of credit is determined. Ms. Bengtson indicated there is a relationship between the cost of the land, the cost of developing a park and the park dedication fee as calculated under the ordinance. For example, the Amaral Park was required by the Stoneridge Drive Specific Plan and is paid for by all the developers of the project. Each developer has donated a certain acreage and contributed revenues from their homes. 09/17/96 -4-