Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Trails topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Prosper council tables park-fee reimbursement dispute over 10-foot trail; developer seeks credits
Summary
Town council on May 27 unanimously tabled two park improvement fee items after debate over whether the town directed a developer to build a 10-foot trail and whether the developer is entitled to roughly $93,516 in fee credits.
The Prosper Town Council on May 27, 2025, voted unanimously to table two agenda items about park improvement fee agreements after a developer and town staff disagreed about reimbursement for an upsized, 10-foot trail.
Town planner Dan Baker told the council the town calculates park fees using the subdivision ordinance’s fee schedule and that one developer had already paid $947,301.30 in park fees. Baker said the developer sought credits totaling $93,515.90 to cover the cost difference for upsizing a trail segment from the required width to 10 feet.
Developer representative Clint Richardson said the 10-foot trail was not an optional amenity but a directive from town staff during plan review. Richardson told the council he has written emails to support that claim and said the reimbursement provision is likewise documented in writing. He asked the council to postpone action so staff and the developer could investigate the underlying documentation.
Council members asked whether an existing 10-foot trail is already present nearby and whether other areas in town have 10-foot sidewalks on both sides of the street. One council member said if the developer chose to install a 10-foot trail as an amenity for residents, reimbursement may not be warranted; another asked staff to verify comparable locations.
After discussion, council members moved and seconded a motion to table agenda item 12 (Park Place Phase 1 park improvement fee agreement with PPP 100 Dev LLC) and agenda item 13 to allow time for further review. The council set both items for future consideration and passed the tables unanimously. The developer requested the June 24, 2025 meeting date so representatives could be present; the council approved that date.
Council did not adopt or deny the fee-credit request at the May 27 meeting; action is deferred to the stated June meeting so staff and the developer can present supporting documents and clarify whether reimbursement is contractually required.
