Under the current guidelines, developers are required, as a condition of approval, to pay fees for renovating existing parks or to convert possible open space for future park use.

If two new ordinances are approved by the city, one would increase park fees paid by developers, and the other could allow greater flexibility in how parklands are defined.

The parks and recreation commission applauded the deferral, saying the revisions would "shortchange" residents by giving developers too much latitude. The revised definition would recognize the installation of swimming pools, spas and recreation rooms in downtown as park projects.

Before the meeting Helen Chapman, commission chair, said it would be difficult to educate residents to think of those areas as bonafide park spaces.

"It's not a traditional way of looking at parks," she said. "We want to preserve open space."

But after the meeting, Joseph Perkins, CEO and president of the Home Builders Association of Northern California, said those alternatives to parks are legitimate.

"If you were to live in a high-rise downtown and if they build a gym, the people would get utility out of that," he said.

An indoor gym and weight room would be used just as much as a golf course, he added. Yet he supported the move to delay the vote.

"It's logical," he said. "Before the city talks about raising park fees, let's see what it has done with fees collected. We need to deal with the issue comprehensively, not piecemeal."

Chapman said developers' fees should be set at 100 percent of the current land value, not 70 percent of 2001 values that home builders now pay. Perkins argued that If that happens, the increased fees would be passed on to homeowners, making affordable housing more difficult to construct.

Chapman said higher fees are necessary to build amenities for the neighborhoods that, in turn, can help housing development sales.

"Residents expect a certain quality of life," she said.

The changes to the ordinance would mean that community gardens, rooftop recreational facilities and plaza areas could qualify under the definition as parks. In addition, the city would be able to use park fees to develop trails or improve school grounds.

"By doing the changes, we're giving the city greater latitude on how they spend those funds," Dave Mitchell, San Jose parks planning manager, said. "We encourage developers to create spaces that residents have a desire for."

Existing guidelines have yielded 135 acres of park space in San Jose.

The parks and recreation report should be completed by December. At that time council members are also expected to vote on parkland fee increases.