Discussion and possible directions to staff on any and all matters regarding conceptual design options for Community Park on County 24th Street under the February 26, 2020, Development Agreement, Order No. 2020-3.  (Lizandro Galaviz, Director of Parks & Recreation)

Background
On February 26, 2020, by Order No. 2020-3, City Council approved a development agreement with the Comite de Bien Estar, Inc. (Comite). Comite wishes to exercise its option on 40 acres in the East Mesa, on the south side of County 24th Street between Avenue E and Avenue F.  The 40 acres currently belong to Border Ranches, L.L.C. under Joshua J. Meyer’s management.  The City Council agreed to purchase 20 of those 40 acres at Comite’s actual, discounted option price of $34,000 per acre for a community park.
 
Comite’s Proposed Change to the Development Agreement
Comite has requested a change to allow for more housing, which would help with the building of San Antonio Street across the north side of the proposed park, which would reduce the city’s obligation under the Development Agreement to 16.4 acres.  To maximize the number of lots in the subdivision, Comite needs a road on the south side of the land proposed for a park.  Comite proposes to name this road, San Antonio Street.  The development agreement provides that Comite is to bear the full cost of this road.  Comite has approached the city, saying that it cannot afford to build a full road unless it has houses on both sides of San Antonio.  Comite proposes that the city receive about 16 acres, and they will construct a block wall to separate the homes from the park.  Comite is willing to provide a south side entrance to the park from San Antonio.  Because City Council approved the park development agreement, Comite’s proposed change is a decision for City Council.
 
Options
There are several options.  Finance Director Monica Castro has reviewed Comite’s proposal. As long as the city can decide when it is to build half of San Antonio Street (if the Council chooses an option that incudes building ½ of San Antonio Street), then all options are financially feasible.  The options are:
 

• Keep the understanding contained in the current park development agreement as approved by Order No. 2020-3, no changes.  
• Accommodate the request of Comite de Bienestar, Inc. (“Comite”) and reduce the amount of land for the park to allow Comite to build on both sides of the street known as San Antonio Street as proposed for a subdivision to be known as Bienestar 11.  The proposed city park is to be located on land north of Bienestar 11.  Comite has offered to create a design that allows a south entrance to the park.  Separating the houses from the park would be a block wall.  But Parks & Rec Director Louie Galaviz has some concerns about the separation of homes from activities in the park and believes some buffering is needed.  Without houses on the north side of San Antonio, the street and retention/grass area on the south side of the park provide some of this buffer.  With houses, other buffering would be needed inside the park reducing the area available for activities.  Accommodating Comite reduces park size to about 16 acres. When one considers two acres for a police/fire substation, this reduces the park to about 14 acres, making this no longer a community park but a neighborhood park.
• Keep park size at 19 acres and pay for half of San Antonio.  Cost about $130,000 according to Eulogio Vera.  (Again police/fire substation would reduce park to 17 acres.)
• Keep park size at 19 acres and agree that the City will be responsible to develop north half of San Antonio, but delay when the City will do this so that the City does not have to do it during fiscal year 2020-2021.
• Keep park size at 19 acres and agree that the City will be responsible to develop north half of San Antonio, but delay when the City will do this so that it does not have to pay $130,000 during fiscal year 2020-2021, however pay for or pave 6 feet of the road.  This would allow parking in front of houses on the south side of San Antonio, and would cost only about $35,000.  

Conceptual Design Options
 
Staff has various design options for 20-acres and the reduced acreage to present.  Staff is open to any recommendation about the design options.
 
Staff respectfully requests the input of Council on how it wishes to proceed.