Council, developers spar over park sizes, inclusionary housing and Carroll Way alignment in East of Leisure Town plan

City planners, three property owner teams and residents debated park sizing, inclusionary housing and the planned alignment of Carroll Way in the East of Leisure Town growth area during an extended discussion at the June 24 council meeting.

Background

Community Development Senior Planner Albert Enolt and Director Erin Morris told council that approximately 648 acres within the East of Leisure Town growth area remain unincorporated or under review and that three property owners (Donaldson/Ramos, Racines/Chen, and A&P Children’s Investments) had asked to develop about 5,000 housing units across the sites. Enolt said the city’s general plan and the 2021 Parks and Recreation Master Plan set minimum park sizes: neighborhood parks a minimum of 6 acres and community parks a minimum of 10 acres. The developer teams propose smaller neighborhood parks of roughly 2–4 acres and community parks around 6 acres, citing a higher‑density “missing middle” mix that they say needs more dispersed small parks and private amenities.

Park size dispute and staff position

Staff said the established minimums are intended to ensure amenities and maintenance efficiencies; Enolt and parks staff cautioned that multiple small parks increase maintenance costs and can preclude larger programmed amenities the master plan envisions. They pointed to prior experiences (Vanden Meadows, Roberts Ranch, Magnolia Park) where negotiations about timing, construction and credits affected outcomes and emphasized that a change would require a general plan and parks master plan amendment.

Developers’ arguments

Todd Chambers (Donaldson/Ramos), Greg Brun (A&P Children’s Investments) and Rich (developer representative) urged council to permit flexibility: allow smaller neighborhood parks, permit shared or split community parks between adjacent developments, and accept HOA‑maintained amenities (clubhouses, pools, pickleball courts) as part of the neighborhoods’ recreational offerings. Chambers asked the city to avoid requiring a single property to provide all park acreage and argued that developer‑built, themed parks and private amenities would serve residents well.

Inclusionary housing and affordable units

Morris said the guiding principles the council adopted in 2024 asked developers to propose a strategy for “integrated mixed income neighborhoods.” Staff suggested using 10% of units as a starting point for on‑site deed‑restricted affordable housing, but Morris was explicit that the 10% figure was a prompt for discussion rather than a fixed requirement. Developers pushed back that mandatory inclusionary requirements could make missing‑middle projects financially infeasible; Donaldson/Ramos offered to dedicate a 6‑acre site that they estimate could produce roughly 150 deed‑restricted units but the other two landowners have not committed to on‑site affordable units.

Carroll Way alignment

Staff presented two corridor options for Carroll Way. Option A preserves a future right‑of‑way corridor to the north—allowing a future connection to Lockpatten—while Option B would stop the roadway before the Lockpatten interface and rely on internal neighborhood loops and Paseos. Several council members and developers expressed safety and neighborhood‑cohesion reasons for preferring the internal loop/Option B alignment; staff characterized the northern corridor option as a long‑term reservation that would preserve a connection if future development required it.

Council direction and next steps

Council did not take a final vote on a plan. Instead, members asked staff to incorporate the feedback, continue outreach and return with a refined draft land‑use plan and analysis. Staff indicated it will update the draft plan based on council direction, notify stakeholders and prepare an environmental review (EIR) notice of preparation; staff suggested returning to council in August with revisions and holding further hearings in 2026.