Oshkosh board recommends updating parkland fees, considers raising land dedication to 2,000 sq. ft. per unit

The Oshkosh Parks Advisory Board on April 14 voted to recommend proposed updates to the city's fee-in-lieu-of-parkland-dedication and parkland dedication requirements, following a presentation from consultant John Cameron of Eller's Public Finance Advisors.

The recommendation would raise the city's fee-in-lieu formula and change the land dedication requirement to a uniform 2,000 square feet per residential unit regardless of single-family or multifamily status. The board's recommendation will be forwarded to the planning commission and then to the common council for final consideration.

Why it matters: Oshkosh's last formal update to the parkland dedication and fee rules dates to February 2003, and a recent comprehensive outdoor recreation plan shows the city currently provides about 4.55 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents versus the National Recreation and Park Association's standard of 6.25 to 10.5 acres per 1,000 residents. The consultant said the changes are intended to help the city address that acreage shortfall while aligning fees with current land values.

Details from the presentation: John Cameron said the existing ordinance requires 1,400 square feet of dedication per detached single-family unit and 900 square feet per attached multifamily unit. Current fees in lieu are $400 per single-family lot and $330 per multifamily unit. Using the city's February assessment data and active parkland figures from the updated recreation plan, Eller's calculated a land cost per capita and applied factors to derive proposed fees of $798 per single-family unit and $665 per multifamily unit. Cameron said the consultant also modeled a move to a single 2,000-square-foot dedication requirement per unit and compared total required acreage under current and proposed requirements for recent developments.

Board discussion and next steps: Board members and staff discussed how the rules would apply in infill areas where dedicated parkland may not be feasible. Staff said they would consult the comprehensive outdoor recreation plan to identify areas deficient in neighborhood or community parks; where the plan indicates a park is needed, staff would work with developers to secure land dedication. Where nearby park service exists or the plan does not call for additional parkland, staff said the city would typically accept a fee in lieu.

The board also noted a separate, paused feasibility analysis for a park impact fee that would be charged at building permit issuance; staff said any future park impact fee would operate alongside the fee-in-lieu requirement, and both could apply to new development.

Motion and vote: A board member moved and another seconded to forward the fee recommendation to the planning commission for consideration. The board recorded affirmative votes for the motion (Davis; Palm; Mats; Franz; and a speaker announced as "Good luck" in the roll call). Later in the meeting, the board moved to forward the proposed change in the dedication square footage (the 2,000-square-foot proposal) and recorded affirmative votes (Davis; Long; Patz; Franz; Claire). The board recorded the outcomes as motions carried and instructed staff to bring the items to the planning commission and common council.

What was not decided: The board did not adopt an impact fee at this meeting; staff said the park impact-fee feasibility study remains on hold and will resume at a later date. The planning commission and common council will have the next opportunities to amend, accept or reject the proposed fee and dedication changes.

Quotes from the meeting: "We will work with the developer if there is parkland noted in that area of the city," staff said when explaining how dedication vs. fee-in-lieu is applied. John Cameron summarized the methodology: "Dividing the average value of land by residents per acre, we get a land cost per capita," and from that the proposed fees were calculated.

Context and background: The administration said the city is below NRPA acreage standards and last revised the relevant municipal code language in 2003. The consultant's analysis drew on city assessment values, the updated comprehensive outdoor recreation plan and a regional survey of comparable municipalities. Cameron said some peer communities have higher dedication requirements; Oshkosh's current per-unit dedication and fee levels are on the low end among jurisdictions reviewed.

What comes next: Staff will present the recommended ordinance amendments to the planning commission; if they recommend adoption, the matter will proceed to the common council for public hearing and final action. The board's vote at this meeting represented a recommendation to advance the proposals, not a final legislative adoption.