Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs deeper analysis of Community Recreation Center options, including housing and revenue scenarios
Summary
Consultants presented a hybrid CRC concept that would preserve the gym/field and add residential units above a parking deck to generate revenue; the council asked staff for a focused study session on CRC and Lane Park options with high-level pro formas and entitlement scenarios.
Consultants proposed a hybrid option for the Community Recreation Center (CRC) intended to preserve the gym and field while adding residential development to generate revenue for broader facilities investments.
Presentation and rationale
Charlie Williams described a design that would retain an at-grade field over a parking deck (approximately 70 stalls in conceptual layout) and provide a residential development that could yield roughly 35,000 square feet of housing in the concept presented. “We've designed it right now in a way that it could perhaps leverage the existing footprints that's there and build onto that,” Williams said.
Supporters and concerns
Council members and public commenters said the CRC presents opportunities and risks. Supporters noted revenue potential, additional property tax and the chance to fund Lane Park and other capital needs. Neighbors and CRC users expressed concerns about traffic, view impacts and preserving recreation access. Mike Sadler, representing an advocacy group connected to the CRC, asked that designs “minimiz[e] the traffic” and urged continued community involvement in concept refinement.
Entitlement, valuation and next steps
Council asked staff to prepare a focused follow-up that includes: high-level market/value estimates for the CRC site, a comparison of options ranging from sale/ground lease to a city-held, revenue-generating model, and Lane Park trade-offs (including the $12–$13 million light Lang Park relocation test fit and subterranean parking alternatives). To refine financial assumptions council requested staff engage a real‑estate/valuation expert to provide residual land/value scenarios under different entitlement assumptions and return with pro forma-level estimates.
Staff recommended a dedicated study session on CRC and Lane Park that would bring back conceptual costs, entitlement considerations (including hillside protection zone constraints), and parking solutions. The council agreed to that approach and asked staff to include community-development and housing-policy input so projections reflect realistic entitlement outcomes.
