CCMIN022195 - Laserfiche WebLink

She requested more time to review the subject. She also pointed out that while business should pay its fair share, it is possible to "fair share" businesses out of town. Pat O'Brien, 27 Castledown Road, representing the Economic Development Advisory Committee, requested that the Committee be consulted regarding the analysis of this proposal's impacts on the retention and attraction of businesses to Pleasanton. Ms. Dennis asked why retail/service commercial and general industrial areas were eliminated as contributors to the park assessment. She further inquired if the parks will be designed to specifically serve business activity uses during the week, with other public uses on the weekend. Mr. Swift responded that elimination of retail/service commercial and general industrial is merely one of the options for Council to consider. It is not staff's recommendation. The study analyzed the needs of business parks, not commercial areas, etc. It was anticipated that commercial areas would use the park less than the business park, however, the survey disclosed that commercial areas did generate employee park use at approximately the same rate as office workers. The option to eliminate commercial areas was provided primarily because they were not included in the original conditions of approval. Because the level of density is usually less in the commercial areas than in major offices, staff is recommending that the fee obligation be done per employee rather than per acre or square foot of building. Ms. Michelotti referred to the chart on page 26 of the Park and Recreation Facility Needs Study that describes the areas served. She referred to the options and indicated they do not assess any more per employee, it just means that if more employees are included, more funds will be available. Mr. Swift indicated that was generally true. However, in some of the options instead of using the maximum range of $172 per employee, $150 per employee was used. This lower number was used where the areas were large enough to allow acquisition of a minimum twenty acres, to take advantage of Prudential's offer, as well as the offer of Signature to actually develop the park at a lower cost. The City Council can establish an obligation at any number lower than $172 per employee. The total fund will be affected by the area to which the fee is applied. Council could lower the fee but maximize the area included in the district. Mr. Tarver indicated staff has outlined the total obligation based on the report and the land owners in the area. He feels there is a fairness issue and in the method of collection. He took issue with the survey. He wanted to know what the impact is. Is it what staff assumed, based on the study? Before a decision is made on the fee amount per employee, it must be clearer who will actually impact the park. The list of parks needed appears to be based on the number of people who will use them. He questioned the two methods used and whether one is based on the other. He inquired about the process to form an assessment district and whether that can be used if there is no support from the business parks. 02/21/95 -5-