Agenda - 04-01-1996 - IX-C - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Collins stated that,based on the findings in the paryment-in-lieu report, there were several options available to the Planning Board and the Board of Commissioners at the February public hearing. O p n One option was to recommend a payment-in-lieu based on the service area approach. The payment-in-lieu would be$422 per lot for a subdivision located in the service area of a community park and$455 per lot for a subdivision located in the service area of a district park. Another option was the county-wide approach which would be$271 per lot for each subdivision. Another option would be to leave the payment-in-lieu as it is and update the Master Parks and Recreation Plan. Following the update,a payment-in-lieu could be calculated based on the new plan. There is also a recommendation that the dedication provision be reduced from 1/35th of an acre to 1/57th of an acre for each lot in a subdivision. Collins referred to a memorandum from the Recreation&Parks Advisory Council which indicates that a majority of the Council supports a service area approach (a copy an attachment to these minutes on page ). One member opposed the proposal because he felt the Master Parks and Recreation Plan should be updated before any action is taken on the proposed amendments. However,the members did agree that the Plan should be revisited and priorities set on future plans. Collins continued that Commissioner Crowther requested,(at the public hearing,) that updating the Master Parks&Recreation Plan be considered as a part of the Commissioners'goals and objectives for fiscal year 96-97. Collins noted that a draft goal and plan of action has been prepared for presentation to the Board of Commissioners at its meeting on March 26. The plan of action indicates the update should begin January, 1997 with a Board of Commissioners' decision in April, 1998. (A copy of the draft goal and plan of action an attachment to these minutes on pages ) Reid asked for clarification that this would be a one-time fee such as the School Impact Fee. Collins responded that replacement of a dwelling,whether because of fire,replacement of a mobile home with a house,or replacement of a mobile home with another mobile home would not require that the payment-in-lieu be paid again. The fee would be paid by the developer during the subdivision process before the building process begins. The School Impact Fee is paid before a Certificate of Occupancy(CO)is issued. Barrows asked how the dedication of land for recreation would interface with open space development. Collins responded that,assuming that flexible development is approved,if someone wants to dedicate land for a public park site that only 50%of that land can count towards the 33%open space requirement. Brown asked if land value was based on before or after development cost. Collins responded that the recommendation is based on the cost of developing a park rather than the value of the property before development. It not only addresses the value of land but also the value of the improvements that go on the park site. Collins indicated this was a much different approach. Brown responded that she did not see the difference. Brown asked if there is any way to make a distinction between a development and someone who wants to create one or two lots for relatives. The response was no. Brown continued that this seems to be of the same regressive nature as the school impact fees. Collins agreed it was the same problem. Brown asked if there was