City Council Agenda Report
TO: Mayor Clauzel and Members of the City Council
FROM: Ken Irwin, City Manager
BY: Bryan Stice, Community Development Director
MEETING DATE: December 5, 2023
ITEM NO: 7.3
SUBJECT: Approve the CEQA Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) and adopt the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
RECOMMENDATION
Motion to Approve the CEQA Addendum to the 2010 General Plan EIR for the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and adopt the Parks and Recreation Master Plan.
BACKGROUND
The City’s consultant on the PRMP, Gates and Associates, have completed work on the draft of the Master Plan. The Master Plan is now complete and ready for adoption by City Council.
On September 8, 2022, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the master plan to the City Council with a 4-0 vote.
ANALYSIS
At the last City Council meeting, staff recorded two primary sources of concern for city council members and the public regarding the Parks and Recreation Master Plan: dual use of storm drain basins, unfulfilled developer responsibilities, use of natural areas, and reactions to climate change.
Dual-Use Basins
Concerns related to the use of dual-use basins comprised two areas: The loss of at-grade park space and loss of park space due to rain events.
The latest three large residential developments that have been approved, were developed using principles close to those laid out in the Master Plans. Namely, that dual-use basins are given limited park credit depending on how much of the space is actually available for recreational activities. City staff typically pursues higher standards, but the Master Plan outlines a minimum baseline of one acre of uninterrupted turf area and an extremely gentle slope to receive credit as park space. The City has effectively used dual-use basins as a way to gain more park space as outlined in the table below.
Required park acreage Provided park acreage
Villages of Patterson 38.75 65
Zacharias 94 104*
Baldwin Ranch North 5.6 12.3
* Additional trail and recreation space may be available, depending on the design of the of the recharge basin.
For each of these projects, city staff has required that basins be restricted to large basin areas (with some temporary exceptions). This allows the basins to be designed with tiers so that water pools only in the lowest areas, leaving most of the space still available for recreational use.
Upper portions of the basin would only be filled during the heaviest rain events.
On average, basins are designed to empty of water within 24 hours. In an average year, dual-use basins are available for recreational use over 99% of the year. Should these uses be separated in the future, it will be difficult to utilize basins as recreation space in the future due to State law restrictions on the use of turf. Further, basins only used for storm drain detention/retention would typically be fenced off and unusable to the community - wasting space required for stormwater detention only a few days each year - that could otherwise by utilized as combination recreational space for the vast remainder of each year.
While there are examples of dual-use basins within city limits that are just grassed-over depressions. All parks developed over the last two years include additional amenities. The Master Plan furthers those goals by recommending that all neighborhood parks should have elements that serve each of the following functions: active sports, passive recreation, play areas, picnic areas, gathering areas, and accessibility.
Developer Responsibility
The City of Patterson has held developers accountable for park space. In all instances, developers have provided the required park space and park fees. Where there may be a perceived failure is in larger neighborhood facilities controlled by the City. Developers do not build these facilities, instead, they pay an in lieu fee for their fair share costs related to these facilities. One of the challenges for the city is the timing of fees versus the costs of projects. By law, impact fees charged by the city are required to have a “nexus” with the cost. This means that the city may only require developers to pay for the costs associated with their development.
The city may not build in additional fees and may not make up for existing deficiencies. As a result, the city collects fees, but must wait until there is a sufficient amount held to pay for the improvement. During this interim period construction costs escalate and, usually, by the time the city has enough funds for the project, the cost of the project is significantly more than the initial estimated amount. The city can combat this to a degree through regular fee updates to adjust for inflation, however, this is an ongoing issue where the city is hampered by State law to gather sufficient funding.
Natural Areas
Most of the areas discussed during the city council meeting addressed locations outside of the City’s General Plan area. For instance, only a small portion of Del Puerto Canyon is located within the General Plan area. The Master Plan is limited to locations within the General Plan area, so any discussion of other areas are not within this document’s oversight. Even if the locations are in the General Plan area, the city does not have jurisdiction unless the location is within the city limits. In total, the Master Plan is not the appropriate tool to respond to these concerns. However, language has been provided related to pursuit of recreational opportunities in the hillside area.
Climate Change
The Master Plan calls for park systems that include drought tolerant vegetation, recyclable materials. Additionally, the plan calls for parks that are within walking distance within neighborhoods with easy sidewalk and bike path access so that driving to the park is not the only option or the most appealing option.
ATTACHMENTS
November 7, 2023 City Council Staff Report
Parks and Recreation Master Plan
CEQA Addendum to 2010 General Plan EIR for Parks and Recreation Master Plan