AgdaPkt 2007-09-10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

7B Page 6 Commercial Deve�apment Both the Planning Commission and members of the developmen# cammunity expressed concern that the fee would oniy affect residentiaf developmer�t. Wf�iie this is the norm in other Peninsula cifiies, we heard that the same land could be developed for commercial or residential usss and that it wouEd be Eess expensive to develap commercial as the park fees would not apply. This would appear to be cantrary to the City's goal af creating new housing. The Finance Committee recommends that staff be directed to pursue a sfudy that would al[ow for consideration af including commercial tievelopment wi#h respect ta park fees. Appfication of Fees to Resid�ntiaf Additions Concerns were expressed on the applica#ion of the fee to bedroom additions. Community Development Staff na#ed that Planning and Bui[ding Fees were significantly increased within the recent past to better cover actual casts and that this would represent another significant increase. The Real Es#ate Association also indicated that they wouid prefer that bedroom additions be exempt from the fee. The Finance Committee recommends that the fee apply to new construction on1y. Credit for Land Donations ResidentiaE developers wauld receive up to a 100% credit #or donated land and improvemen#s that meet th� City active parkland criteria. The park in-lieu fee may also be paid at the certification of occupancy vs. at the time a building permit is issued. These recammenda#ions were supported by the Finance Committee.. Pipeline Proiects The new park fees wi{I apply to all projects, which apply for a Tentative Map or a building permit 30 days after the ordinances go into effect, which is 60 days after the second reading of the ordinances. Planning staff is aware of and st�pports this recommendatian, as daes the Finance Committee. PARKS ASSESSM�NT MIG was engaged to produce a parks assessment. A copy of the complete text of their ini#ial repor# is available for your review in the office of the City Clerk. Their recommended p�oject list includes: • Development of a multi-use sports complex to meet the changing needs of sports activities and emerging sports participation; potentiaf acquisition and developrnen# af 25 to 40 acres • Devefopment of new parks �nd recreation amenities to support underserved and parfc deficier�t pfanning areas, youth opportunities and family recreation to meet the 3 acre per 1,000 standard in the following planning areas: o Downtow� o Sauth Redwoad City o South East Redwood City o East of 101 • Provide for adequate park development in new residential deveEopments to maintain the 3 acre per 1,000 resident standard. • Con#inue to expand existing parkiands to connect and enhance neighborhoods.