5-25 Parks and Recreation Master Plan Development Feedback Memo Final.pdf
Extracted text (via pymupdf)
12357 characters
_________________________________________________________________________________________ 110 E. Irwin Ave. • Buckeye, Arizona 85326 Phone 623-349-6300 • www.buckeyeaz.gov DATE: May 27, 2025 TO: Honorable Mayor Eric Orsborn & Buckeye City Councilmembers FROM: Miranda Gomez, Community Services Director CC: Brian Craig, Development Services Director RE: Parks and Recreation Master Plan Developer Feedback & Action Summary As part of the City's long-range planning efforts, the Community Services Department is pleased to present to Council the Parks and Recreation Master Plan under consideration for approval. The plan provides the guidance and framework for how the City will grow parks and recreation facilities and programs over the next ten years and beyond. Many of the elements from the master plan are a continuation of the previous Parks and Recreation Master Plan that was adopted by City Council in 2016 and set the level of service standards for developed park space at a total of 8-acres per 1,000, which is in line not only with other communities in the valley, but also across the state and nationally. The master planning process had robust community engagement to ensure the plan reflected stakeholder and resident needs and included numerous public meetings, a website where residents could provide feedback into the master plan at www.planbuckeyeparks.com, a statistically-valid survey, and numerous stakeholder meetings. Coordination with the Development Community The Community Services Department, in coordination with the Development Services Department, has provided several opportunities for the development community to provide input into the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Staff made two presentations to the development partners stakeholder group in June and October 2024 with the presentation in June providing an overview of the plan and sharing feedback we received from the online survey results. We also asked for volunteers to serve on a focus group to discuss parks, trails and open space-related opportunities with a follow-up email sent by Development Services with no responses received. In August, we met with the Teravalis development team and, based on that conversation, we made updates to the park’s development standards, which was presented to the development partners stakeholder group in October. Since March 2025, staff has been coordinating with the Teravalis development group on their review comments on the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. More recently, on Wednesday, May 21st, staff met with representatives of the development community along the Sun Valley Parkway corridor. The purpose of the meeting was to present changes that were made to the Parks and Recreation Master Plan based on feedback from the development community and to receive additional input. We’ve summarized the feedback from that meeting, which is provided below. While many modifications to the plan have been made based on this input, there are a few areas where there is not full alignment between staff’s recommendations and the development community’s perspectives. _________________________________________________________________________________________ 110 E. Irwin Ave. • Buckeye, Arizona 85326 Phone 623-349-6300 • www.buckeyeaz.gov Staff worked hard to ensure the plan reflects a balanced consideration from what we’ve heard from residents, other stakeholder groups, and developers. At the conclusion of the May 21st meeting, the development representatives expressed their appreciation for staff’s efforts to engage the development community in the planning process. Summary of Comments from the Development Community Below is a summary of the comments (provided by Tiffany & Bosco) from the development and homebuilding sectors, and the modifications that have been made to the plan based on their feedback. We’ve also incorporated the main discussion points from the meeting on May 21st. 1. Development Costs a. There is concern related to the percentage of landscaping to be required which is a component of the Development Code. The 2016 Parks and Recreation Master Plan used this information to denote a certain percentage of the landscaped area that should be amenitized as usable park space. If the city were to reduce this requirement, it would need to be done in the development code, not the Master Plan. b. The 2016 Parks and Recreation Master Plan established the minimum size of the largest park to be provided in a development based on the number of housing units and the corresponding increase in residents that it would bring. Essentially, the number of housing units and residents that are planned for a community dictate the smallest size of the largest park to be provided. The development community believes the minimum size of the largest park does not align with what’s reasonable from a construction and maintenance standpoint, and proposed removing this standard. Staff are concerned that the removal of this standard would leave developers without clear direction of park size expectation. Without it, park land could be fragmented into small, 1-acre parcels that fail to offer meaningful recreational opportunities for future residents. c. Stakeholders expressed concern about the scope of developing large parks and the desire to potentially phase park development as the community grows. As a result, clarifying language has been added to the plan which states that parks over 8-acres in size can be phased. d. The developers requested information on passive vs. active space within parks, which is provided in the plan under Park Classifications. 2. Request to Define Park Requirements Through Development Code During the conversation on May 21st, the group discussed that there are some elements of the plan where the development community would like the city to be more prescriptive, such as dictating which amenities will be required when building a park. The developer group mentioned Phoenix and Gilbert, which has language in their development code. Staff believes that the current list of possible amenities is clear within the plan, while also providing flexibility for the developer when creating the spaces in _________________________________________________________________________________________ 110 E. Irwin Ave. • Buckeye, Arizona 85326 Phone 623-349-6300 • www.buckeyeaz.gov their communities. Staff agreed to consider this request when updating the development code in 2026. 3. Request to Allow More Flexibility For some elements in the plan, the developer stakeholders requested less definition and more flexibility, such as the minimum size of the largest park. Staff believes that these discussions can be facilitated at the Development Agreement or Master Planning phases of a Community Master Plan creation or amendment. 4. Park Conveyance Process for Parks Over 15-Acres Unclear The plan states that the City will consider parks over 15-acres for future conveyance to the City for some agreeable form of ownership, maintenance, and programming. This statement is intentionally not prescriptive to avoid committing the city to an unknown future liability. The developer request is that the city produce clear steps that a development could follow that would trigger the conveyance of a park. In response to this request, staff believe that there are too many variables to create such a process. However, additional language has been added to the plan to make the intent clear that this would be negotiated between the City and the developer when it’s in the best interest of both parties. a. We’ve added clarifying language that parks over 15-acres in size may be negotiated and conveyed via an agreement with the City. Any park that is conveyed to the City would be eligible to receive a credit on their community park impact fee. b. We’ve added language that allows parks over 50-acres in size to be split with two smaller parks constructed. A 50-acre park would be needed when the development is over 7,000 units, bringing in 22,400 residents. These two smaller parks should be linked through trails located along natural or man-made corridors, such as washes, canals, drainage channels, rivers, powerline corridors, etc. 5. Amenity Requirements a. Language has been added to the 2025 Plan indicating that the 2 amenities per 250 housing units is inclusive of amenities associated with pocket, neighborhood, and community parks. b. There was concern about drinking fountain requirements. We’ve added clarifying language that drinking fountains are needed in community parks, not neighborhood or pocket parks and that they should be included near active amenities, such as sports courts and dog parks. We’ve also added that drinking fountains can be provided at adjacent public facilities, and not necessarily in the community park itself. 6. Pathway and Trail Standards a. Some in the development community believe the pathway and trail widths are too wide, especially Primary Paths which are identified as part of the Rivers to Ridges corridors to connect Buckeye’s open space resources. We have provided _________________________________________________________________________________________ 110 E. Irwin Ave. • Buckeye, Arizona 85326 Phone 623-349-6300 • www.buckeyeaz.gov information on much wider path profiles in the adjacent communities of Goodyear and Surprise. b. Discussion at the May 21st meeting also centered around the possibility of trail adjacent landscaping being included in the calculation for open and park space requirements. Staff informed the developer group that we are interested in creative ways to deliver the intent of the plan and would discuss deviations on a per community basis. 7. Lighting Requirements for Paths / Trails The previous master plan included language that paths/ trails should be lit, providing an unclear requirement. The 2025 Master Plan provides additional clarity on lighting. a. We’ve added language on best practices for lighting paths / trails in dark sky communities and that DSD is working on an Environmentally Sensitive Lands Overlay (ESLO) and that once the ESLO is approved and where there are conflicting statements, the ESLO will take precedence. We’ve also added language related to encouraging energy efficiency and motion-activated lighting. 8. Trailhead Development a. The developer group expressed issues if they were required to build a trailhead. For communities where a trailhead is identified (where two or more trails intersect), trailheads can be addressed at the Development Agreement or Master Planning phases of a Community Master Plan creation or amendment. 9. Impact on Affordable Housing Developers cautioned that the cumulative effect of the standards could contribute to increased housing prices by raising the cost of land development, thereby affecting housing affordability. Staff discussed opportunities to address these provisions in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan in the upcoming the Housing Action Plan as it relates to affordable housing developments. In the future, there could be provisions in code that adjust standards as part of an affordable housing project. Next Steps: During the meeting on May 21, 2025, staff discussed the next steps in the process, including the Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on June 10th, when the Commissioners will consider making a recommendation to Council to approve the plan. This will be followed by Council’s consideration to approve the master plan on June 17th. Developers requested a letter be included in the Council packet indicating their concerns of which this memo is intended to serve. This letter has been reviewed and vetted by those in attendance at the May 21st developer stakeholder meeting. At the meeting, we discussed the next steps after Council approval, including the incorporation of some of the standards and guidelines into the City’s Development Code, which is a Council Strategic Plan objective for 2026. Staff also discussed the desire to continue conversations surrounding advocating for relaxed standards in the Housing Action Plan.