The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000 02 14 Informational B Concurrency Management with Park Systems I COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM B Consent Informational Public Hearin Re ular x February 14,2000 Meeting Mgr~ Authorization REQUEST: The Community Development Department-Planning Division requests the City Commission review the following information regarding concurrency management related to the parks system. Staff desires to make a short presentation on this item. PURPOSE: The purpose of this agenda item is for staff to respond to comments raised at the January 24, 2000 Commission meeting regarding compliance with concurrency management related to the parks system. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: Chapter 163.3180 states in part: 163.3180 Concurrency.- (l)(a) Roads, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, parks and recreation, and mass transit, where applicable, are the only public facilities and services subject to the concurrency requirement on a state- wide basis. Florida Administration Code 9J-S.014(3)(c) 5 states: 5. Correct or improve existing deficiencies in parks and recreation facilities. The City's Comprehensive Plan in the recreation and open space element states in Policy 1 under Objective E of Goal 1. 1) The City shall require developers to provide recreational facilities be included with private developments or fees in-lieu-of. If existing public recreational facilities are not adequate to maintain the adopted Level of Service standard the developer shall provide the facility required to meet LOS standards. CONSIDERATIONS: The following questions were raised at the January 24, 2000 Commission meeting regarding the status of the Concurrency Management system as it relates to Parks and open space. 1. QUESTION: Have we adopted LDR's consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? ANSWER: The City has LDR's that are consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. However, current LDR's are incompatible in that some provisions of the Comprehensive Plan are not addressed in currently adopted LDR's. Draft copies have been under review with past city attorneys since 1997. Staff will provide copies of drafts to the new attorney with a request for an expedited review. 2. QUESTION: Is there a concurrency management system in place? ANSWER: A concurrency management LDR is part of the draft L.D.R.'s discussed above. Although a formal concurrency management LDR has not been adopted it would not be accurate to say that the City does not have a concurrency management system since level of service standards provided for in the Comprehensive Plan are required in all developments. 3. QUESTION: Is the City enforcing Comprehensive Plan policies relative to developer contributions to parks? ANSWER: Yes. The Comprehensive Plan provides that developers are required to provide Hmd or cash in lieu of land if level of service standards are not met at the time a development is reviewed. 4. There are two park levels of service standards in the Comprehensive Plan as follows: I. COMMUNITY PARK The plan requires 1.6 acres of community parks per capita. There are currently 68 acres of land in Central Winds Park. Central Winds Park meets the Community Park Standard until such time that the City population would be approximately 42,500 people. The present population is estimated to be 30,000. The projected build out of the city is 37,537. II. NEIGHBORHOOD - PASSIVE - PRIVATE PARKS The Comprehensive Plan divides the city into three areas with the following level of service standards: AREA South East Area LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD 6.93 acres per capita South Central Area 5.32 acres per capita N orth West Area 5.92 acres per capita The level of service standard is the aggregate for active, passive, and private parks in the area. As shown in Table A, the level of service standard for neighborhood parks has already been satisfied for the projected build out of the city. Community Development Planning Division Agenda Item "B" Informational Febnuuy 14,2000 Page 2 of3 Technically, approximately 700 acres of conservation lands could be included in this category of parks. However, this acreage is not required to satisfy levels of service through build out. Developers have been required to meet plan requirements. For example; a) Parkstone - Even though the south central zone does not have a parks deficit, the Parkstone developer was required by agreement to add 3 acres of private park space to the development. The development is anticipated to have a population of approximately 1000 people at buildout. Additionally, Parkstone added 3 acres of privately used conservation area to the inventory of park lands. b) Winding Hollow was required to set aside 55.5 acres of land for park development, and $25,000 for park contributions. A 0.41 acre linear park was recently added in lieu of a road section connecting Winding Hollow and Oak Forest. Additionally, 145 acres of land were set aside as wetland conservation area. c) Tuscawilla PUD set aside the following: Trotwood Park Sam Smith Park Oak Forest Park Bear Creek Nature Trail 40 acres 23.4 acres 4.3 acres 8.7 acres Additionally, 69.5 acres (Mikes donation) adjacent to the golf course was recently set aside as a nature preserve. s. QUESTION: Is the City concurrent with its level of service standards for parks? ANSWER: As stated above and as shown in Table A the City is concurrent. ATTACHMENTS: A. Table A - A listing of population estimates and park acreage for the three geographic areas in the city. B. Table B - A listing of recreation/open space element/neighborhood/private/passive parks by acreage in the city. C. Table C - A listing of recreation/open space element/neighorhood/private/passive parks by acreage in each of the three geographic areas outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. D. Parks and recreation acreage map by area COMMISSION ACTION: Community Development Planning Division Agenda Item "B" Informational Febnuuy 14.2000 Page 3 of3 ATTACHMENT A TABLE A NEIGHBORHOOD I PRIVATE I PASSIVE PARKS POPULA. TION ACRES ACRES ACRES TOTAL PARK SURPLUS ESTIMATED ACTIVE PASSIVE PRIVATE PARK ACRES 2000 ACRES REQUIRED NORTHWEST AREA 6,167 15.81 25.50 41.31 36.51 4.80 Level of service 5.92 aa-es per capita SOUTH CENTRAL AREA 12,192 33.60 41.70 12.30 87.60 64.86 22.74 Level of service 5.32 aa-es per capita SOUTHEAST AREA 11,701 100.10 69.50 4.50 174.10 81.09 93.01 Level of service 6.93 acres per capita TOTALS 30,000 149.5:1 111.20 42.30 303.01 182.46 120.55 AITACHMENT B CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS P ARKS AND RECREAITON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECREATION/OPEN SPACE ELEMENTS NEIGHBORHOOD/PRIV A TE/P ASSIVE PARKS CITY NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS Bear Creek Nature Trail Cross Seminole Trail Fruitwood Park Moss Park Ranchlands Park Sam Smith Park Sunshine Park Torcaso Park Trotwood Park Winding Hollow Park TOTAL PRIV A TE/P ASSSIVE PARKS Chelsea Park Deer Song Gerogetown Hacienda Village Highlands Howell Creek Reserve Indian Ridge Mikes Donation Mt. Greenwood Oak Forest Parkstone Seasons Seminole Pines Tuscany Place Tuscawilla County Club Tuscawilla Trace Wildwood TOTAL TOT AL NEIGHBORHOOD/PRIV A TE/P ASSIVE ACRES 8.7 28.0 .5 2.5 12.5 23.4 10.0 5.81 40.0 55.5 186.91 .5 1.0 .5 1.5 20.0 .5 .5 69.5 5.0 4.3 3.0 .5 1.0 .5 2.5 1.3 4.0 116.10 303.01 ATTACHMENT C CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS P ARKS AND RECREATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECREA TION/OPEN SPACE ELEMENT NEIGHBORHOOD/PRIV A TE/P ASSIVE PARKS NORTHWEST Sunshine Park Torcaso Park Deer Song Highlands Indian Ridge Wildwood TOTAL SOUTH CENTRAL Fruitwood Park Moss Park Ranchlands Park Winding Hollow Park Hacienda Village Mt. Greenwood Oak Forest Parks tone Seasons Seminole Pines Tuscawilla Trace TOTAL SOUTHEAST Bear Creek Nature Trail Cross Seminole Trail Sam Smith Park Trotwood Park Chelsea Park Georgetowne Howell Creek Reserve Mikes Donation Tuscany Place Tuscawilla Country Club TOTAL TOTAL ALL THREE GEOGRAPHIC AREAS ACRES 10.0 5.81 1.0 20.0 .5 4.0 41.31 .5 2.5 12.5 55.5 1.5 5.0 4.3 3.0 .5 1.0 1.3 87.6 8.7 28.0 23.4 40.0 .5 .5 .5 69.5 .5 2.5 174.1 303.01 ATTACHMENT D ,..----- ~~ .- -.-------- - - ~---~--'-_._'.......&"- ..-" '~ --..-'~'~ ~ " .:- -:--- ...-r- ~..'" ...-~~......:.--- 'Y- ...-~-_. J \. " .. , .. North CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MASTER PLANNING MAP , ;-~. ..' ,'t'~ . . '. .. PARKS. AND RECREATION SECTORS WITH PARKS AND ACREAGE (. ;1 'I ~ . - ... . :- _.;-. . . , '~.'~' ' . . ~.'''''' .,: , . !.... _ ~.~. ~.~~ -:i \ ~ ~-...~:.., . ,; . '." , . ", LAKE, JESUP'.. "'.", - ;;. ., 'r ~h, ". .;i..{ .~. - . '.1". > .... .... .',' " . .. ...:L i~r'<;.: ... . .. . - ~(:.f.-...." J. ~ " - . ,... .:" '. . ; ~ ".', ~ .:'.>t ' '~;.'~ 7:."". ."." .. ~" . "..' ,/ 1000 0 ~ 1000 II SCALE 2000 J IN FEET 3000 i 4000 l " ',. ,,' LAKE ~ JESUP ... ~:r I ~ ~ " .... ~ ;, ,0 '$ r. , . - '--. - -1" I ~ 1.- u.. -- I.JW lIll ~\ ~ \ll\ ~\ '\\ ~'i.. ~ \\ LEGEND RIGHT OF WAY CITY LIMITS ~ NORMAL WATER LEVEL AND STREAM LOCATION IGIIl ~'" \) " '. ...:. IIr!IJ ~,. ENGINEERING & LAID SYSTEMS Inc. ",,--, '__" I APPROXIMATE WATER LEVEL AND STREAM LOCATION AUGUSTA NATiC...... BLVD STREET NAME ~ SWAMP r--l BRIDGE RAILROAD ,..