7B - Park Dedication - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Number of Units Y Number of People Y 0.015 acre Park Land in Subdivision X Per Household X (per capita share) Dedication Area There are two methods for determining the cash in lieu of land (park dedication fee), both resulting in the same value: Park Land Y Undeveloped Park Dedication Area X Land Value Dedication Fee Number of Units Y X Number of People Y Park in Subdivision X Per Household Per Resident Fee Dedication Fee Public vs. Private Recreational Facilities: Developers may argue that they have satisfied the park dedication requirements by providing facilities for use by their residents, but maintaining them in a private manner and restricting access to the residents of that development. While the short-term goal of providing facilities for new residents has been satisfied in the very basic sense, there are a number of issues that arise when recreational facilities are made private rather than maintained by the public. With private recreational facilities, access is restricted to a subset of the City's residents. The facilities are not available to the general public,which in some cases can result in trespass issues or create community tension if those private facilities are surrounded by developed, populated areas. Facilities provided within a development may not provide a range of recreational opportunities for all of its residents. For example, a particular development may provide housing for young families, young couples, and retired couples, all of whom have different recreational demands, but the development may only provide trails and a picnic area.This development may be serving the recreational needs of some of its residents,but because of the range of households within the development,the other residents may find themselves traveling to other parts of the city to use a playground with their kids or to play organized sports with other young adults. In short,while a developer may have a target market for the sale of their units, we cannot predict the long-term composition of the residents in a particular development, nor can we predict their recreational needs and expect those needs to be satisfied entirely within that development. This is not to say that there is not a need for private facilities. There are certainly cases where private facilities may make more sense, as in the case of a golf course, where the capital investment is quite large compared to the local residential use of the facility. At the previous Planning Commission, there was discussion regarding the incorporation of open space that is set aside as part of a Rural Conservation Subdivision or shoreland planned unit development. Because this land is typically held in private ownership,it does not accomplish the end goal of providing public open space. These lands are required to be preserved as an element of this development style and also typically contain areas otherwise unsuitable for development. These lands do, however, provide permanent open space that does have other public benefits, such as retaining scenic vistas and protecting wetlands, notwithstanding the lack of public City of Pequot Lakes Staff Report 6-4 May r7,200'7