Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7: PH-Resolution on PROS Project and Priority Plan ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Public Hearing: Resolution 4863 Approving the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan Meeting Date: March 13, 2006 Agenda Item Number: 7 Department: Public Works Staff Contact: Carolyn Weiss www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-4909 ISSUE STATEMENT The purpose of this public hearing is to provide an opportunity for public input regarding the proposed Parks, Recreation and Open Space Project and Priority Plan. The council is scheduled to take action on this item on April 10, 2006. BACKGROUND The Project and Priority Plan contains specific project information, including a timeframe for project implementation and cost estimates. To aid in reviewing the plan, the project information is structured in several different formats including tables organized by planning area and tables organized by project type. The Project and Priority Plan also includes maps showing existing and proposed resources for each planning area and for the entire city. The Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Comprehensive Plan, adopted by City Council on February 13, 2006, provides concepts, principles, goals and strategies to guide preservation and enhancement of Eugene’s parks, recreation and open space system. The projects identified in the Project and Priority Plan are some of the means by which the strategies identified in the PROS Comprehensive Plan can be implemented. As was the case with the PROS Comprehensive Plan, the Project and Priority Plan is the direct result of outreach to thousands of Eugene residents. The Project and Priority Plan is intended to be a living document and, as such, individual projects may be delayed if funding cannot be identified within the shown timeline. Likewise, individual projects may be moved forward if funding is identified earlier than shown in the timeline. A City Council Work Session was held on the proposed Project and Priority Plan on February 13, 2006. Attachment A to this agenda item summary (AIS) is a memorandum responding to questions from the council regarding growth allocation percentages. The memorandum describes how the growth allocation percentages were calculated, and describes the relationship of these percentages to the System Development Charge methodology currently under review by a Rates Advisory Committee. Attachment B is a spreadsheet responding to questions from the council regarding projected service levels for each planning area based on the priority assignments in the Project and Priority Plan. This analysis includes projected service levels resulting from the implementation of Priority 1 projects. L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060313\S0603137.doc An additional memorandum is forthcoming which responds to questions raised by Council at the Work Session regarding funding assumptions. The memorandum and accompanying chart will identify the assumptions that are being made to forecast future funding levels for the implementation of projects contained within the plan. RELATED CITY POLICIES This item relates to the following: PROS Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the council on February 13, 2006 ? Eugene City Council Priority Issue - Strengthen and promote community “Arts and Outdoors” assets ? COUNCIL OPTIONS 1. Direct staff to respond to public hearing testimony at a work session scheduled for April 10, 2006. 2. Direct staff to make modifications to the PROS Project and Priority Plan and return to the council. 3. Take no action. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends that staff be directed to respond to the public hearing testimony at a work session scheduled for April 10, 2006. SUGGESTED MOTION None; this is a public hearing only. ATTACHMENTS A. Memorandum providing clarification of preliminary growth allocation figures in the PROS Project and Priority Plan. B. Projected Service Level Analysis by Planning Area C. Proposed Resolution FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Carolyn Weiss, Parks and Open Space Planning Manager Telephone: 682-4909 Staff E-Mail: carolyn.j.weiss@ci.eugene.or.us L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060313\S0603137.doc ATTACHMENT A Public Works Engineering City of Eugene MEMORANDUM 858 Pearl Street Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 682-5291 (541) 682-5032 FAX Date: March 6, 2006 To: Mayor Piercy and City Council From: Fred McVey, 682-5216 Engineering Data Services Manager Subject: Clarification of Preliminary Growth Allocation Figures in the PROS Project and Priority Plan In a February 27, 2006 council work session on the PROS Project and Priorities Plan (Project Plan) members of Council requested clarification of the relationship of the Project Plan to the development of an updated parks SDC. Specifically, clarification was sought on the significance of the “preliminary growth allocation” percentages included in the Project Plan and the method of determining these allocation figures. Relationship of Project Plan to Parks SDC Adoption of a project plan is a prerequisite for updating and modifying the parks SDC insofar as a new or modified SDC methodology must demonstrate consideration of the project costs listed in an adopted plan. To be considered for use in developing the parks SDC the adopted plan must meet certain criteria specified in ORS 223.309, specifically that the plan include a list of the capital improvements and the estimated cost, timing and percentage of costs eligible to be funded with revenues from improvement fee SDCs. The preliminary growth allocation figures included in the Project Plan are intended to satisfy the requirement to provide an estimated “percentage of costs eligible to be funded with revenues from the improvement fee”. The need for an estimate of the percentage of SDC funding of projects in the Project Plan has required analysis of parks capacity needs of growth during development of the Project Plan. The capacity analysis used to derive the preliminary growth allocation percentages is consistent with methods, described in more detail below, used in preliminary development of an updated parks SDC methodology. The Project Plan is a reference document to be considered in development of the SDC, but does not prescribe the form of the SDC methodology nor the amount of the SDC. The SDC methodology may consider the Project Plan using a variety of means, factors and assumptions. Various policy and methodological alternatives will be considered through adoption of a modified parks SDC, subsequent to the separate adoption of the Project Plan. For these reasons, the affect of preliminary growth allocation percentages contained in the Project Plan on the future modified parks SDC is variable and has yet to be determined. Project Plan Growth Allocations Calculation of Preliminary Growth Allocation Oregon SDC statutes [ORS 223.229] define the portion of system costs that may be allocated to growth through the SDC. For an improvement fee SDC, the growth allocation is determined by the projected costs of capital improvements that are needed to increase capacity in the systemto meet the demands of new development. Demands for capacity in the system – both for existing and future park users (growth) – are generally based on the projected level of service (LOS) which quantifies total future park acreage or facilities per demand unit (generally population). Future parks acreage is determined by the existing system inventory plus those system elements added by projects in the Project Plan. The capacity requirements for existing development and growth are estimated by multiplying the future LOS for each park type by the population of each group. Project Plan costs are then allocated in proportion to each group’s relative need for the new acreage, as determined by the capacity analysis. Table 1 at the end of this document presents a capacity analysis based on the proposed Project Plan. In Table 1, columns ‘a’ and ‘b’ provide existing and planned future LOS calculations by park type for developed and undeveloped land. The future LOS reflects total planned acreage, adjusted for park projects included in the Plan that are not owned or funded by the City. The future LOS is based on 1 forecast population for 2025, and for all parks projects projected for completion by 2025. Total capacity needs for the existing 2004 population and the increment of growth between 2004 and 2025 are presented in columns (f) and (h) of Table 1, respectively. Capacity needs are the product of the future LOS and the population attributable to each population group. As an example, for neighborhood park development (in the bottom half of the table), the additional need for neighborhood park development for the existing population (36.5 acres, shown in column ‘g’), is equal to the total need (132.3 acres shown in column ‘f’) less the existing inventory (95.8 acres shown in column ‘c’), as existing park users’ needs are assumed to be met first by existing parks and facilities. For growth, the additional need of 34.7 acres (column ‘j’) from projects equals the total need (column ‘g’). The capacity analysis for land acquisition and development of other park types follows this same methodology. Table 2, also included at the end of this document, shows the allocation of project list acreage to existing development and growth, based on the capacity analysis provided in Table 1. Project list acreage in Table 2 comes from column ‘d’ in Table 1. Existing deficiency and growth acreages also come from Table 1, columns ‘g’ and ‘j’, respectively. Using the example stated above for neighborhood park development, the growth need is calculated to be 34.7 acres, which represents 49 percent of the total acreage (71.2 acres) added by the project list. This percentage is then used in Project Plan as the preliminary growth allocation for all neighborhood park development projects. A separate capacity analysis was conducted for certain facility types for which separate project costs are itemized in the project list. Similar to the park acreage analysis, the capacity analysis for facilities is based on the future LOS for the existing and 2025 populations, but the capacity is expressed as number of facilities per population rather than by acres. 1 2025 is used as the capacity planning period for all part types, except natural area parks, where acquisitions and development within the planning window are assumed to meet capacity needs through 2050. Project Plan Growth Allocations Key Assumptions . The following key assumptions are used in the park capacity analysis and preliminary growth allocation ?Capacity is considered by park type on a system-wide basis as opposed to individual park-by-park basis. ?Capacity and costs are analyzed for land acquisition and development costs separately. ?Existing park users’ needs are assumed to be met first by existing parks and facilities. ?All park types are considered in the cost allocation: Neighborhood Parks, Community Parks, Natural Area Parks, Urban Plazas, Metropolitan Parks, and Linear Parks. ?Allocations for facilities are determined based on capacity analysis by facility type. ?Improvements to Special Facility parks and facilities are allocated in proportion to future 2025 population, as all park users – existing and new – are assumed to benefit from these facilities. ?Cost allocations are based on planned level of service (LOS) resulting from the PROS Project Plan, as opposed to exiting LOS. ?The improvement fee cost basis exclude projects, or portions of projects identified as “renovation” in the Project Plan. ?The improvement fee cost basis exclude projects, or portions of projects that have been estimated to be funded through other funds, e.g. grants. If you have any questions regarding this information, please contact me at 682-5216 or by email at fred.mcvey@ci.eugene.or.us. Project Plan Growth Allocations Table 1 Land Acquisition and Development Capacity Analysis (f) = (b X (h)=(b X (i)=surplus (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) = (c+d) pop) (g) = (f-c) pop) (g) ( j) = (h- i) Existing Population (167,081) Growth Population (43,819) Existing Planned Added by From Existing Existing From LOS LOS Project Existing Inventory Total Future Total Need (Surplus) / Total Need Project List (acres/1,000 (acres/1,000 Plan Inventory (acres) (acres) (acres) Deficit (acres) (acres) (acres) Park Type population) population) (acres) (acres) Land Acquisition NEIGHBORHOOD 55.0 265.6 210.4 (0.2) 55.2 0.2 55.0 PARKS 1.2606 1.2595 210.6 URBAN PARKS 1.6 2.7 2.1 1.0 0.6 0.0 0.6 0.0066 0.0126 1.1 COMMUNITY PARKS 161.5 380.7 301.6 82.4 79.1 0.0 79.1 1.3118 1.8050 219.2 METROPOLITAN 1.3 655.8 519.5 (134.9) 136.3 134.9 1.3 PARKS 3.9170 3.1094 654.5 NATURAL AREA PARKS 1,490.5 2,977.2 1,968.6 481.8 516.3 0.0 516.3 8.8985 11.7822 1,486.8 LINEAR PARKS 13.0 214.1 169.6 (31.5) 44.5 31.5 13.0 1.2038 1.0153 201.1 SPECIAL FACILITIES 0.3 131.0 103.8 (26.9) 27.2 na 0.3 0.7823 0.6212 130.7 Total Acquisition 2,904.0 1,723.1 4,627.1 3,275.6 371.7 859.1 166.6 665.5 17.3806 19.6052 Development NEIGHBORHOOD 71.2 167.0 132.3 36.5 34.7 0.0 34.7 PARKS 0.5735 0.7919 95.8 URBAN PARKS 0.0 1.1 0.9 (0.2) 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.0066 0.0052 1.1 COMMUNITY PARKS 56.4 200.2 158.6 14.8 41.6 0.0 41.6 0.8604 0.9492 143.8 METROPOLITAN 25.5 216.9 171.9 (19.5) 45.1 19.5 25.5 PARKS 1.1456 1.0285 191.4 NATURAL AREA PARKS 0.0 16.8 13.3 (3.5) 3.5 3.5 0.0 0.1006 0.0797 16.8 LINEAR PARKS 8.0 15.4 12.2 4.8 3.2 0.0 3.2 0.0443 0.0728 7.4 SPECIAL FACILITIES 2.0 82.5 65.4 (15.1) 17.1 na 2.0 0.4820 0.3913 80.5 Total Development 536.8 163.1 699.9 554.5 17.7 145.4 23.3 107.0 3.2128 3.3187 Project Plan Growth Allocations Table 2 Allocation of Project List Acreage/Cost Existing Deficiency Growth (thru 2025) Growth (beyond 2025) Project List Park Type Acreage Acreage % Acreage % Acreage % Land Acquisition NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS 55.0 - 0% 55.0 100% - 0% URBAN PARKS 1.6 1.0 65% 0.6 35% - 0% COMMUNITY PARKS 161.5 82.4 51% 79.1 49% - 0% METROPOLITAN PARKS 1.3 - 0% 1.3 100% - 0% NATURAL AREA PARKS 1,490.5 481.8 32% 516.3 35% 492.4 33% LINEAR PARKS 13.0 - 0% 13.0 100% - 0% SPECIAL FACILITIES 0.3 - 0% 0.3 100% - 0% Total Acres 1,723.1 565.2 33% 665.5 39% 492.4 29% Development NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS 71.2 36.5 51% 34.7 49% - 0% URBAN PARKS 0.0 - 0% 0.0 0% - 0% COMMUNITY PARKS 56.4 14.8 26% 41.6 74% - 0% METROPOLITAN PARKS 25.5 - 0% 25.5 100% - 0% NATURAL AREA PARKS 0.0 - 0% 0.0 0% - 0% LINEAR PARKS 8.0 4.8 60% 3.2 40% - 0% SPECIAL FACILITIES 2.0 - 0% 2.0 100% - 0% Total Acres 163.1 56.1 34% 107.0 66% - 0% Project Plan Growth Allocations 2012 Natural Acres 2006 Natural Acres 2012 Developed Acres 2006 Developed Acres 2012 Total Acres 2006 Total Acres 2012 Park Count 2006 Park Count NOTES Spending 2007-2011 Project 2007-2011 Project Count % of Population ATTACHMENT C RESOLUTION NO. _______ A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE PROJECT AND PRIORITY PLAN. The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A. The City of Eugene’s Parks, Recreation and Open Space (PROS) Project and Priority Plan was created after planning and public input in association with the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan. The PROS Project and Priority Plan identifies, prioritizes, and estimates costs of proposed actions for parks, open space and recreation facilities, programs, and services. B. The PROS Project and Priority Plan is adopted in accordance with the state statutory system development charge (SDC) requirements set forth at ORS 223.304 and ORS 223.309. C. Public involvement was a major component of the planning process, culminating with a public hearing on March 13, 2006. D. The City Council has reviewed and considered the attached PROS Project and Priority Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows: Section 1. Based on the above findings which are adopted, and the public hearing held on this matter, the PROS Project and Priority Plan attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution is approved. Section 2. This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption. The foregoing Resolution adopted the _____ day of ____________________, 2006. _______________________________________ City Recorder Resolution - 1 Page L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060313\S0603136-attC.doc