Browse
Search
JMRPWG agenda 032499
OrangeCountyNC
>
BOCC Archives
>
Advisory Boards and Work Groups - Inactive
>
Joint Master Recreation and Parks Work Group
>
JMRPWG agenda 032499
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/5/2020 4:56:16 PM
Creation date
2/5/2020 4:53:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
78
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Draft <br /> 3/24/99 <br /> (from Carrboro ) <br /> ♦ Dedication and Payment Provisions <br /> Population growth over the past thirty years has forced a reassessment of <br /> the traditional means of acquiring public park and recreation areas . <br /> Increasing pressures on funds generated from traditional property tax <br /> levy and bond referendums have challenged fundamental ideas on paying <br /> for parks and recreation , encouraging public officials to consider <br /> alternatives to the negotiated purchase of park land and solely relying on <br /> the property tax base and bond funds . The Work Group has recognized <br /> that all local government jurisdictions in Orange County have recreation <br /> requirements in their Subdivision or Land Use Ordinances which mandate <br /> that land be dedicated , private recreation facilities provided or <br /> combination thereof under their statutory regulatory/ police authority to <br /> . protect the health , safety and welfare of their communities . These <br /> recreation requirements are legally acceptable under this authority the <br /> same as roads , utilities and other public improvements required as <br /> conditions for subdivision approval . The North Carolina Supreme Court <br /> affirmed this authority in Messer v . Town of Chapel Hill , 297 S . E . 2d 632 <br /> ( 1982 ) , in sustaining that the Town ordinance , within the statutory powers <br /> given to a city , could exact recreation land or facilities and even require <br /> the particular site within the subdivision . <br /> A more recent tool has been the inclusion of a payment in lieu of process <br /> under this same general statutory power. The payment in lieu of process <br /> has been confused with impact fees . The payment in lieu of process is just <br /> that , payment in lieu of providing private recreation facilities or required <br /> dedication of land as discussed above . If the developer is provided the <br /> option to meet the particular jurisdictionAs requirements or make some <br /> commiserate payment in lieu of doing so , the jurisdiction is empowered to <br /> accept the payment under its existing statutory powers . All jurisdictions <br /> lieu on a similar, if not exact, basis . An impact fee is a <br /> accept payment in l <br /> cash payment based on the impact created by a development to a <br /> particular service and requires special enabling legislation . There must <br /> be exhibited a strong correlation showing the ( 1 ) actual need created by <br /> the impact of the development and ( 2 ) benefits provided to the particular <br /> subdivision . Orange County presently has a School Impact Fee , but no <br /> other impact fee exists in the county for any other services . <br /> An option remaining is to request special enabling legislation for <br /> %oRecreation Facilities FeeA . Given authority to collect such a fee would <br /> result in a general tax to provide funding for park land and facilities , much <br /> in the manner of a general tax levy . This would be collected for a specific <br /> 23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.