Draft parks impact fee study offers two fee options; councilors favor square‑foot schedule and moving to maximum allowable

Summary

City planning and consultant Tishler Bice presented a draft parks impact fee study showing a maximum‑supportable fee schedule and two methodologies (by unit type or by unit size). Consultants and councilors debated whether to include neighborhood parks in the fee; a Capital Improvements Advisory Board recommended a lower fee.

City planners and consultant Tishler Bice presented a draft parks impact fee study at the April 28 work session, showing how the city could recalculate park impact fees and outlining two ways to set those fees: a traditional single‑family/multifamily schedule or a unit‑size (square‑foot) schedule that mirrors recent public‑safety fee work.

Catherine Harrison Rogers, who introduced the study, said the draft “is the maximum allowable fee, based on the analysis that was done, by the consultant, and the information available.” The consultant, Julie Herlands of Tishler Bice, walked council through the components that feed the calculation — current park acreage and facilities, levels of service, land acquisition assumptions and prototype improvement costs — then presented two fee schedules and projected revenue under each.

Why it mat…

Draft parks impact fee study offers two fee options; councilors favor square‑foot schedule and moving to maximum allowable

Summary

Subscribe to keep reading