However, by rearranging their lots, the developers could have included a 1/2 acre park similar to this:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| (return to Previous page) | |||||||||||||||
| NEIGHBORHOOD PARK IMPACT | |||||||||||||||
| The City failed to require these developers to provide a neighborhood park within the subdivision or provide adequate fees so a nearby 1/2 acre park could be created as local laws require. In this neighborhood, buildable 1/6 acre lots sell for about $115,000, so three would be needed for a 1/2 acre park, but the City only charged the developers less than $48,000 total. Now taxpayers will be stuck subsidizing these Redding developers by having to pay about $300,000 more than what the developers were charged for such a park if one is ever constructed. More likely, a park will never be built nearby to serve the residents of this new subdivision. However, by rearranging their lots, the developers could have included a 1/2 acre park similar to this: |
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
| The developers appear to have left a "remainder parcel" in the subdivision where such a park could be built, but even when questioned by City officials, they refused to commit to dedicating that buildable, residential parcel for a park. They also made no commitment with the Parks and Recreation District or any third party to build and maintain a park there. Without any public disclosure, they could instead build a home, duplex or triplex apartment on that parcel as this subdivision was ultimately approved. | |||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
| Next page: (Sewer System Overloaded) | |||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||