1 / 29

Parks and Recreation Division

PARK IMPACT FEE DISCUSSION. Parks and Recreation Division. October 28, 2008. PRESENTATION OUTLINE. Background Park Impact Fee Park Growth Analysis Impact Fee Fund Status Board Action. PRESENTATION OUTLINE. Background Park Impact Fee Park Growth Analysis Impact Fee Fund Status

nita
Download Presentation

Parks and Recreation Division

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PARK IMPACT FEE DISCUSSION Parks and Recreation Division October 28, 2008

  2. PRESENTATION OUTLINE • Background • Park Impact Fee • Park Growth Analysis • Impact Fee Fund Status • Board Action

  3. PRESENTATION OUTLINE • Background • Park Impact Fee • Park Growth Analysis • Impact Fee Fund Status • Board Action

  4. Background The Parks and Recreation Division has grown from 46 to 93 parks

  5. Background PRESENTATION OUTLINE Number of Parks by Classification • Pocket Parks – 13 • Neighborhood Parks – 28 • Community Parks – 10 • District Parks – 5 • Specialty Parks – 37 • 13,373 Passive Acres • 2,249 Active Acres • 37.9 Miles of Trails

  6. Background Operating/Program Budget Reductions FY 09 • Staffing Reductions (12) ($436,000) • Operating/Program Reductions ($577,000)

  7. Background ADOPTED BUDGET FY 99-00 $19.8 Million PROPOSED BUDGET FY 08-09 $44.5 Million O & M 7.5 Million O & M 31.8 Million

  8. Background • Chronology of Events • Park Impact Fee Study Jan, 2005 • Contracted Tindale-Oliver and Assoc., Inc. • BCC Adopted Ordinance Feb, 2006 • Impact Fee Effective Date Mar, 2006 • Park Growth Analysis Nov, 2006

  9. PRESENTATION OUTLINE • Background • Park Impact Fee • Park Growth Analysis • Impact Fee Fund Status • Board Action

  10. Park Impact Fee • Consultant Study • Tindale-Oliver and Assoc., Inc. • Purpose • Develop a Park Impact Fee Program • Implement fee to maintain current service delivery as the County grows

  11. Park Impact Fee Park Impact Fee Study • Service Delivery Standards • Active Recreation • 2.0 acres per 1,000 pop. (existing) • 1.5 acres per 1,000 pop. (Comp Plan level of service) • Passive Recreation • 6.5 acres per 1,000 pop. (existing) • 6.0 acres per 1,000 pop. (Comp Plan level of service)

  12. Park Impact Fee Park Impact Fee Rates * 7.4% annual index

  13. Park Impact Fee Impact Fee Ordinance Requirements • Use restricted to expenditures for capital improvements at community parks, district parks, and specialty parks to benefit new residential development. • Capital Improvements shall not be restricted to zones or districts. • Return of Funds • If funds are not spent or encumbered in 6 years from the date of payment, the money must be returned with interest at the rate of 6%. • March 2012

  14. PRESENTATION OUTLINE • Background • Park Impact Fee • Park Growth Analysis • Impact Fee Fund Status • Board Action

  15. Park Growth Analysis • Consultant Study • Tindale-Oliver and Assoc., Inc. • Purpose • To assist County staff in determining where Impact Fee eligible park land will be needed through 2030

  16. Park Growth Analysis Methodology • Projected population growth through 2030 • Inventoried Community and District parks in County and Cities • Identified service gaps in geographic areas based on future population

  17. Park Growth Analysis Methodology • Project population growth through 2030 • Created using data from METROPLAN ORLANDO • Traffic Analysis Zone

  18. Park Growth Analysis Methodology • Inventoried Community Parks in County and Cities • Community park standards • Active Recreation • 20 to 149 acres • Typical size 50 acres • Service area-3 mile radius

  19. Park Growth Analysis Methodology • Inventoried District Parks in County and Cities • District park standards • 150 to 500 acres • Countywide service area • Access most often by car • Active and Passive

  20. Park Growth Analysis

  21. Park Growth Analysis • Deficiencies in 25 years • Nine District Parks • Nine Community Parks • Estimated Construction Costs • Community Park • $4 to $6 million • District Park • $9 to $11 million

  22. PRESENTATION OUTLINE • Background • Park Impact Fee • Park Growth Analysis • Impact Fee Fund Status • Board Action

  23. Impact Fees Fund Status Park Impact Fees Collected • $2.8 million – FY 06 • $4.7 million – FY 07 • $2.6 million – FY 08 • $2.0 million – FY 09 (Budget) • $12.1 Million – Total Revenues

  24. Impact Fees Fund Status FY 09 Park Impact Fee Allocations • $12.1 million – Available Funds • $4.4 million – Gym/Rec Centers • $0.2 million – FRDAP Grant match • $1.0 million – Impact Fee Reserves • $6.5 million – Balance Available

  25. Impact Fee Fund Status Benefits of Purchasing Property for Land Banking • Insufficient funds for new park construction • Operating funds not available for new parks or facilities • Results in minimal maintenance costs • Maintains current acreage level of service • Meets Impact Fee Ordinance requirements • Meets needs identified in County • Preferable economic environment

  26. Impact Fee Fund Status Staff Recommendation • Purchase Property for Land Banking consistent with the Park Growth Analysis

  27. PRESENTATION OUTLINE • Background • Park Impact Fee • Park Growth Analysis • Impact Fee Fund Status • Board Action

  28. Board Action Approve Purchasing Property for Land Banking as recommended by Staff.

  29. PARK IMPACT FEE DISCUSSION Parks and Recreation Division October 28, 2008

More Related