My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
(1)080508 Park Development Impact Fees
Colton
>
CITY CLERK
>
City Council Agendas
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2009
>
2008
>
08/05/2008 06:00 PM
>
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
>
Park Development Impact Fees
>
TIME AND PLACE FIXED TO CONSIDER THE CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING OF JULY 15, 2008:
>
(1)080508 Park Development Impact Fees
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2014 3:49:55 AM
Creation date
2/19/2014 11:44:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Agenda Item
Item Number
1
Submitted On
7/31/2008
Submitted By
Sabdi Espinoza
Item Title
080508 Park Development Impact Fees
ATRequest
2349
Status (2)
2
Department
City Clerk
Meeting Date
8/5/2008
Meeting Time
6:00:00 PM
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
94
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
consultant, and representation from City Council, met again with BIA representatives on July <br />28, 2008. Fee methodology questions were addressed by the consultant, and the BIA further <br />expressed their concerns with the proposed fee increases. <br />For clarification, the primary concerns expressed by the BIA include the following. <br />1. LEVEL OF SERVICE - 2 ADDITIONAL ACRES OF PARK -LAND (OPEN SPACE) <br />The studies cite that the city currently has a level of service roughly equating to 2.8 <br />acres of parkland per 1,000 residents. The Quimby statute allows for the escalation <br />of this level of service to 3 acres per 1,000 residents, which is being recommended by <br />the study and by city staff. The Park Impact Fee Study recommends an additional 2 <br />acres of open space be required to bring city requirements in-line with City Council <br />vision, General Plan recommendation, and the Park & Facilities Master Plan vision, <br />of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. This method of utilizing park development impact <br />fees to augment parkland levels has proven successful in other communities. Initial <br />analysis, using this method to deliver a level of service equating to fully -developed <br />parkland at 5 acres per 1,000 residents, produced a recommended park development <br />impact fee in excess of $10,000 per unit. After further analysis, staff is <br />recommending that this additional 2 -acre requirement be for open space only, with <br />minimal development, which significantly reduces the proposed fee to the current <br />level, which is included in the study, at $5,317 for a single family home. <br />It is important to note that this 2 -acre requirement would be imposed on new <br />development only, and unlike Quimby requirements, this funding may be spent <br />o—X on parkland to serve the new developments in Colton. In this way, there is <br />assurance that this added 2 -acre requirement will serve exactly those developments <br />from which fees are exacted, ensuring that future Colton residents are not being <br />charged additional funds for deficiencies in current amenities which do not directly <br />serve them. <br />2. LAND COSTS - MARKET VALUE OF LAND <br />The studies list the "market value" of land at $253,000 per acre, for the purposes of <br />calculation. This figure is based on comparable sales research conducted during the <br />compilation of the studies. The BIA has noted that no Colton sales were included in <br />this analysis, which is correct. In fact, the consultant made an effort to analyze <br />Colton "comps" during research, however suitable data could not be located, which <br />seems reasonable to staff, given minimal development in Colton during the research <br />period. The consultant instead used comparable data from surrounding <br />jurisdictions, which staff feels is suitable data for these purposes. <br />Clearly, land value will fluctuate from time to time, making this projected number <br />somewhat "relative" to current market conditions. This highlights the need to <br />update this value on a regular basis, which has not occurred in recent years, and is <br />the reason for incorporation of an administrative component to the development <br />impact fee. Regular update of this land value will minimize large impacts in the <br />future, and it is staff's intention to ensure regular updates henceforth. <br />3. FEE COMPARISION TO SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES <br />It is correctly noted that the proposed fee increases would make Colton's fee higher <br />than comparable fees in surrounding communities. A comparison table has been <br />included for review as Exhibit C. It should be noted, regarding this point, that fees <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.