October 26, 2006

Council passes park initiatives

By Carol Rosen
Staff Writer

The unanimous passage of the changes to the Parkland Dedication and Park Impact Ordinances elicited a jubilant reaction from the audience at Tuesday night’s meeting.

Those attending, many of whom spoke during the public comment period, had fought hard to ensure the changes would be accepted.

The council approved proposals to adjust PDO/PIO fees to 100 percent of 2005 land values; prior fees were set at 70 percent of 2001 land values. It also accepted 13 base recommendations to the ordinances, but per a memo from Vice Mayor Cindy Chavez and Councilmembers Ken Yeager and Nancy Pyle, modified the limitation of land dedications to at least one-half acre from one acre and required staff to return in one year to report how the water retention/recreation program was working.

Retention/recreation
The discussion lasted nearly three hours, but the issue is complicated with complex points embedded within it. The proposed change to control storm runoff can be quite confusing. Recently (2005) the Regional Water Quality Control Board required that turf, instead of asphalt or other man made substances, be set aside to retain runoff from public and private development projects. This requirement attempts to minimize pollutants from paved surfaces and reduce the impacts of increased storm water runoff on local creeks to prevent erosion.

Up to now, developers did not receive any credit for providing this service. The PDO/PIO amendments revise this to provide 50 percent credit to developers for retention areas that also can be used for recreational purposes. The Chavez/Yeager/Pyle modification, which passed, includes that update a year from now on how the pilot program is working.

There was some concern among the council members that usage during a heavy rainy season could damage its functionality during the dry season making the land unfit for recreation. They questioned how the land would be maintained and who would be in charge of maintenance. Staff indicated that in the largest percentage of cases maintenance of this water retention/recreation land would be in the hands of homeowner associations or those owning the property.

Council members also discussed two other areas—a grace period of six months for those developers whose buildings were in the pipeline or ready to go by March and finding and coordinating funding sources for parks without pinning everything on a single source.

“It took 14 different funding sources to build Olinder Park,” Chavez said. This is a “solution that doesn’t exist now to a problem that’s only going to get bigger,” she added referring to the need to develop opportunities for funding sources that are available when needed.

City Manger Les White later noted that by researching coordination of the grants, “it is our intention to get into positions to manage and understand grants. We have to be proactive in seeking grants,” he said.

Until 2005, the Redevelopment Agency provided the parkland fees necessary that developers didn’t pay with affordable housing. The council is now considering reinstating those vouchers, or something to that affect while also looking at new and varied funding sources to pay for affordable housing projects.

Chavez also recommended that PRNS schedule an appearance with the council in April to discuss budget opportunities. This would allow the city council to provide additional budget monies to PRNS if necessary for maintenance, eliminating the maintenance problems that have plagued the parks for the past few years.

Public comment
More than 20 different speakers appeared before the council to show their support for the measure.

Two different speakers from the Almaden Valley Youth Soccer league emphasized the problems they have in finding fields for their children to play weekly games. Both speakers noted that the league has provided more than $230,000 to maintain the fields they play on, which largely belong to San Jose Unified School District. However, this year a number of the school fields are under construction and the games are limited to 15 schools.

The soccer league has had to turn potential players away because of the lack of fields, one parent said. The league presented petitions with 1,500 signatures requesting more parkland in the area.

Other residents said they would love to see “pocket parks” in their neighborhoods, and that some of the schools turn children away from fields and play areas.

“The city is in crisis. We are deficient in parks. If you take away the schools, there are no parks in our area, there’s only a .6 tot lot,” said one speaker.

Another speaker called her area a “nature deficit disorder.”

Supporters also suggested the addition of parks will increase the city’s livability. “In the long run, it will make San Jose a more livable city,” said a speaker, while another cautioned, “The quality of parks is just as important as the quantity.”

Both Cal SJ and the Parks Commission presented a number of speakers. Six parks commissioners joined Parks Commission Chair Helen Chapman at the speaker’s platform to urge council members to pass the recommended amendments. Her speech noted it is time to move forward.

“Our work isn’t finished. We have a lot more to do, and with your support we can now move forward on our goals,” Chapman told council members.

She later told the Times that the passage, especially the modifications by Chavez, Yeager and Pyle, were more than the Parks Commission had expected. “The [Chavez/Yeager/Pyle] memo included a portion prohibiting construction of high rises beyond Highway 87. Up to now, they’ve been creeping toward that area. The council showed strength. Everything we’ve been trying to say they added including vouchers. That’s what our citizens need.”

She also noted that various commissions and groups worked together to push these ordinances where before such cooperation might not have been possible.

“The unprecedented support of the three commissions—parks, housing and planning—and neighborhood groups from all over the city—including downtown, Willow Glen, District 1 and Almaden—as well as the business community downtown have come together to accomplish something that will benefit the entire city for many years to come. It makes me proud to be a parks commission,” Chapman said.