Laserfiche WebLink
CASE #2 <br /> <br />RECOMMEND PARK DEDICATION CASH INCREASE AND CONSIDER <br />MODIFICATION TO RECREATION DISTRICT ACCOUNTING. <br /> By: Mark Boos, Parks/Utilities Supervisor <br /> <br />Background: <br />During the Commission input portion of the August meeting, the subject of both park dedication <br />rates and the utility of maintaining the proceeds by way of Recreation Districts was discussed. <br />There seemed to be a strong consensus that rates should be increased and the Recreation Districts <br />were generally a good tool in assuring that those who, in effect paid, would realize a tangible <br />benefit in their area. Attached is a park dedication survey compiled in August by Jeff Johnson of <br />Andover. <br /> <br />Park Dedication <br />The average park dedication rate for those cities listed (for 1999) is $1,157. Ramsey's rate is <br />currently $975 for "urban" lots and $750 for "rural" lots. In addition to the above, the City <br />collects a $150 trail fee for each dwelling unit. Staff is proposing to increase the rate for Year <br />2000 to $1,200 and $200 per dwelling unit for the trail fee. Staff is also proposing elimination of <br />the rural/urban land distinction as family recreation needs are indistinguishable by the lot size <br />they happen to purchase. <br /> <br />Recreation Districts <br />As indicated, the Commission seemed to be in agreement that "Recreation Districting" <br />beneficial. Staff is, however, proposing a modification in the policy as follows: <br /> <br />was <br /> <br /> 50% of new park dedication moneys would be retained in the respective district. <br />· 50% of the new park dedication moneys would be in a fund that could be used citywide for <br /> any park and trail projects. <br />· All park trust fund interest earnings would also be added back annually to this new fund. <br /> <br />The above would maintain the integrity of ensuring that those who, in effect paid, would see <br />benefits at the neighborhood level - Yet community parks and trail projects would also receive <br />the benefit of development that is not in direct proximity to the need. <br /> <br />Commission Action: <br />Based on discussion. <br /> <br />Reviewed by: <br />Parks/Utilities Supervisor <br />City Administrator <br />City Engineer <br />Community Development Director <br />Finance Officer <br />Director of Public Works <br /> <br />Copies also Distributed to: <br />Zoning Administrator <br />Community Development Assistant <br /> <br />PR:9/9/99 <br /> <br /> <br />