Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks And Rec Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning commission holds 'rackspace' recreation-fee changes pending borough park-and-rec plan
Summary
Commissioners discussed the borough's recreation-fee (fee-in-lieu) language, the definition of 'rackspace' as public vs. private open space, and whether to require a standardized fee calculation. They agreed to delay action until the comprehensive parks and recreation plan is complete and to circulate a proposed short technical fix.
At the June 24 meeting the Planning Commission discussed revisions to the borough’s parks and recreation "fee in lieu" language and the classification of "rackspace" (private recreational areas) as public or private open space for fee credit.
Staff and commissioners said the borough should wait for the forthcoming comprehensive parks and recreation plan before making substantive changes because that plan is expected to provide the rational basis and methodology for calculating any fee in lieu. Commissioners referenced guidance from planners and historical precedent on impact fees in Pennsylvania (noting developments of impact-fee practice in the state since 1988) as context for how a borough might justify fee amounts.
Commissioners also discussed rooftop courtyards, trails, and whether private, resident-only open spaces can be credited toward public recreation requirements when accompanied by legally binding agreements. Several members recommended a narrowly tailored short-term edit—changing two words in the current code—to remove an obvious inconsistency and asked staff to circulate that short technical fix to the commission for comment. They also asked staff to re-share earlier consultant material (a prior analysis by Tom Comitta and others) so commissioners could review options for a broader rewrite of the ordinance if warranted.
The commission agreed to hold substantive changes until the completed park-and-recreation comprehensive plan is available, circulate the proposed short fix to members, and revisit the topic at a work session. No fee schedule or new ordinance language was adopted at the June 24 meeting.
