Agenda - 02-26-1996 - 5a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

33 103 "Plan consistency" refers to whether the location of land proposed for dedication as a park site is consistent with the general location of a community or district park shown in the Master Recreation & Parks Plan. In many instances, the question of plan consistency may not arise, provided the land dedication is near a proposed park site or even within the service area of a park (as shown on page 6). In other cases, however, a proposed land dedication may fall between the service areas of two (or more) park sites. It is in such situations that the question of whether to accept the dedication arises. While there is nothing to prevent the acceptance of the dedication, there still remains the question of whether the dedication satisfies the intent of the dedication/payment-in-lieu provisions; e.g., can a dedication be given credit toward satisfying the provisions if its location is not consistent with the Plan? The means of dealing with this question is to accept the land dedication on a conditional basis. In other words, the County would agree to accept the dedication, provided the Master Recreation & Parks Plan is amended to include the "new" park site as part of the system of district and community parks. Likewise, the developer would agree to dedicate the land under the same terms. Such an arrangement provides assurances to both parties that, within the financial resources available to the County, there is a long-term commitment to develop the park. If the Plan is not amended, then the developer is free to incorporate the land into his/her subdivision plans and make the required payments-in-lieu. Credits Toward Payments-In-Lieu Regardless of the method through which a complete or partial land dedication occurs, one issue that will arise in such situations is whether the land dedication will preclude the necessity of the developer from making a payment-in-lieu. The answer to this question is that the land dedication may reduce the payment-in-lieu, but it will not eliminate it entirely in all cases. Consider, for example, a developer who submitted plans for a 300-lot subdivision and agreed to dedicate part of the land for a proposed park site. As shown on Table 12, the amount of land to be dedicated would be 5.27 acres (under the 1/57'h standard). If credit is based on the average price per acre ($10,000) used to calculate the payment-in-lieu, then the developer would be eligible for a $52,700 credit (5,27 acres x $10,000 per acre). If the "service area" payment-in-lieu were adopted, the developer would have to pay a $126,600 payment-in-lieu if located in a community park service area (300 lots x $422 per lot). This means that that the developer's payment-in-lieu would be reduced to $73,900 or$246 per lot. But what of the developer who agreed to dedicate more than the minimum required acreage? As an example, if a developer offered to dedicate 25 acres for a community park, he/she would receive a credit of$250,000 (25 acres x $10,000 per acre). When compared with the payment-in- lieu required of$126,600, no additional payment would be required, since the credit exceeded the required payment. However,the excess credit could not be transferred to another site or project. While such a system of credits may be viewed as a disincentive, for the developer who paid $3,500 per acre for the land, it can be an incentive to dedicate more land. As an example, if the developer of the 300-lot subdivision paid $3,500 per acre for the land and was only given credit