Redwood City keeps park fees for market-rate developers

Developers pay these impact fees used for new parks or improvements to reduce impacts of growing urbanization and new people.

The standard best practice is 3 acres of park space per 1,000 residents, as outlined in the state’s Quimby Act, which was established in 1965 to promote preservation of open space amid booming development. Redwood City currently does not meet this standard, Councilmember Kaia Eakin said.

“Will we get there ever? I don’t know, but I do know that to even try to get there, it takes money,” Eakin said. “It just does.”

Increasing open space is an accessibility issue, Councilmember Alicia Aguirre said, and noted that park space is not currently equitable across the city. Six underserved neighborhoods in terms of proximity to parks include Friendly Acres, Redwood Oaks, Palm, Woodside Plaza, Farmhill and Eagle Hill.

“As we’ve been talking about mental health and equity, and all of those issues, there’s nothing like being at a park and being at a park that’s a part of your neighborhood,” Aguirre said. 

Approaching the conversation from a housing crisis lens, Councilmember Elmer Martinez Sabllaos said he was in favor of a fee reduction to promote getting as many housing units available as quickly as possible. 

“Our housing crisis isn’t impacting just one particular income group, not just one group of residents, and we have more work to do to address the needs of the community that we currently have,” he said. 

Citing similar priorities, Councilmember Chris Sturken also pointed out that though the discussion surrounded market-rate developments, their accompanying affordable units are also at stake. 

“This is one of the few levers we have as a city to incentivize housing at a time when economic conditions, the cost of land, the cost of construction are through the roof,” he said.

Staff studied its impact fees on market-rate housing as it fares against comparable cities, and found that Redwood City is “not an outlier” in the fees it invokes on these developments. Redwood City also exempts extremely low-, very low- and low-income affordable housing units from these fees and offers a 50% discount to moderate-income affordable housing units.

Vice Mayor Lissette Espinoza-Garnica said the conversation was not a matter of housing and parks, but public interest and for-profit interest. They also said there is no guarantee that lowering the fees would result in expediting development. 

“I think it’s important that we ensure that for-profit development pays its part on its impact, especially during a deficit,” Espinoza-Garnica said. 

Residents raised concern over diverting funds away from public parks during public comment, sharing needs of more public gathering spaces, high density at the parks currently available, and loss of city entertainment spaces. 

Sturken made a motion in favor of a 25% discount to the park impact fees. This failed 3-4, with Aguirre, Howard, Eakin and Espinoza-Garnica opposed. Another motion to accept staff recommendation and not approve a temporary reduction in the parks Impact Fees passed 5-2, with Martinez Saballos and Sturken opposed.