My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
4.21.21 Park Minutes
Hugo
>
Community Development
>
Parks
>
Parks Commission
>
Parks Commission Minutes
>
2021 Park Minutes
>
4.21.21 Park Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/16/2021 11:16:44 AM
Creation date
5/20/2021 3:35:00 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
3. Park Dedication Fee Research <br /> Denaway presented staff research of park dedication fees in other cities, park dedication fees received <br /> with recent developments and the evaluation of Hugo's developable acres and park needs in the <br /> Comprehensive Plan. Staff used 2020 Census information of city populations and growth rates to <br /> develop a list of cities that are comparable to Hugo in those aspects.Staff then compared park <br /> dedication fee rates and methods of calculating those rates used by the chosen cities to Hugo's current <br /> rate and calculation method. Denaway then presented information on park dedication fees collected <br /> since 2015, monetary and land, and parks that had been constructed since 2015. Lastly, Denaway <br /> discussed future park needs outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> Open floor discussion included consideration of the Greenway Corridor Plan,what portion of park <br /> dedication fees collected are monetary or land and the need to ensure a proper balance of land and <br /> monetary collection. Commissioners all felt that increasing the park dedication fee would be appropriate <br /> and discussed different ways of implementing an increase, including how much of an increase was <br /> desired and whether to increase the fee one time or incrementally.Tennyson favored an increase that <br /> would make the fee comparable with other cities, and St. Pierre added that the fee should be <br /> comparable, but remain competitive with other cities. Schmid expressed a concern that too large of an <br /> increase would encourage more land donation. Schmid suggested a system where the fee coincides with <br /> property values, increasing or decreasing the fee in concert with increasing or decreasing property <br /> values. Clarke inquired as to what information Council would need to approve an increase,and stressed <br /> the need to have a logical and defensible rationale.Tennyson suggested an increase of$1000.00, St. <br /> Pierre and McGinnity expressed agreement with that suggestion. <br /> Clarke made a motion, Schmid seconded that Council be presented with a recommendation to increase <br /> the park dedication fee by$1000.00,with a preference for a one-time increase, but open to an <br /> incremental increase if that is what Council prefers. <br /> All ayes. Motion carried. <br /> 4. Adjournment <br /> Tennyson made a motion,Schmid seconded to adjourn at 8:43 PM. <br /> All ayes. Motion carried. <br /> Page 2 of 2 <br /> Parks Commission Minutes <br /> September 15,2021 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.