Parks level of service definitions

1:40:05Okay.

1:40:08All right then. So I'll just go back to the recommend staff recommendation because that's where we that's where we ended before we decided to move past this item. So Uh at least my recommendation does not change based on the direction of the board. So but um I respect all the input and discussion for sure. This is not a difficult thing to do. We understand that.

1:40:31Yeah, this is just on the level of service change. Or definitions.

1:40:36Definitions are changed as well as the level of service and the um reference to the study is also in the comp plan for the And I believe the planning horizon too, the years are in there too.

1:40:56And you're creating the new definitions of the different types of parks.

1:41:04Yeah, the only issue I had with the definition of the district park was naming the specific parks in there. And I'm I'm just wondering what happens if You end up with a park that you want to call a district park that ends up less than eighty acres. Do you have to then amend that definition to add the name of that park to that definition at that point?

1:41:23Ideally you'd want to have that in your comp plan, but a comp plan amendment's not difficult to do. It's a text amendment just Go along with some other amendments at the same time. But it's preference.

1:41:36Yeah, I I just don't know if you want to address anything, you know, 'cause there are district parks less than eighty acres. Um that are named here specifically. So I don't know if if that definition maybe should be

1:41:51amended in some way that you allow um future additions of district parks under eighty acres in special circumstances. I don't know. the legal way of wording that but

1:42:06Do you have to specify the number of acres?

1:42:09Um So I d I think that again is probably a question for for Ms. Blair, but I I will tell you that through co-location and other configurations, typically we can make a district park be less than eighty acres. So if that's just some kind of tweak to the definition that we need to make, we can definitely do that. Yeah,

1:42:27the d the the definition specifically says a district park is the largest facility-based park that contains at least eighty upland acres. The following parks shall be considered district parks which are less than eighty acres and then it names those parks.

1:42:39So assuming it's less than eighty it automatically goes to the other definition.

1:42:45Yeah.

1:42:46Okay.

1:42:47I would highly recommend that that language be left in due to the due to the way the the definitions are and the level of service considerations and the legal ramifications of of impact fees, how district parks are interpreted and how the addition of district parks are interpreted. We're adding two district parks to the list of district parks that exist. And that's the that's the right sized number of parks to be adding relative to that new population. So there were some reasons why we we did that. to

1:43:18ensure that the the Not irrespecti uh irrespective of of acreage, but Um But focusing on the purpose of the parks, that they were they were designated purposefully and that they be listed as such to supplement what's in the impact fee study in terms of defining them that way.

1:43:36Because they function as district parks?

1:43:38Because they function as district parks and they have facilities on them that are district park facilities. um even though the land maybe is constrained below what a district park would normally we would want it to be. Right,

1:43:49which is fine. I'm j I'm just saying if what if you end up with that situation in the future. So if you acquire a piece of property that you don't know about now that is less than eighty acres, but you want to build those facilities on it, or the county wants to build those facilities on it, that would qualify it as a district park and you'd want it considered as a district park, but it's not specifically named in here and it's less than eighty acres.

1:44:11Well you could always amend the language, you know, I was gonna

1:44:14say you'd have to go back and do go through another complex.

1:44:18Right. It wouldn't be prevented.

1:44:22That just gets to how mu what's the density of the only thing that those definitions really affect is the density of parks per capita. Okay, so you got one less district park and you got more community park.

1:44:38Right. That is true. And and and and Mr. Moody, that that is the crux of it, is that those calculations are set up in a way where it all makes sense legally to have them structured this way. And the number of parks matters in terms of the legal construct of the impact fee study and demonstrating that we aren't building more district parks than currently exist per capita. today. Um so it's helpful to maintain the status of the parts as designated. And it

1:45:09also helps for the track the department to track as it implements things to know that That was a district part today and it was a district part ten years ago and that sort of thing. So that you you don't have a a history that you have to Re reinvent your research to figure out what's going on.

1:45:24But the idea is going forward, district parks will contain at least eighty acres.

1:45:30I believe there's one piece of land that's been purchased that's under eight acres that's designated as a district part that hasn't been fully built out, but that's the one example I can think of that Is a circumstance in the future that could could dictate that there's a park that's less than eighty acres that is designated a district. And that's not named here. In this definition, right? I do not believe so.

1:45:51Does it have a name yet?

1:45:53I don't know if you're referring to we would we would have to go we would have to go dig. Yeah.

1:45:59Yeah, the only one's named is Veterans Memorial J B J Ben Harrell, Magnolia Valley. Conerton and John S. Burks Memorial.

1:46:08Presumably it is name that could be added.

1:46:16I'm pretty sure it's on the list.

1:46:18Okay. So it's one of those I just named.

1:46:20Yeah, yeah. I I think it's Connerton Park.

1:46:22Okay.

1:46:23Um and co-locate so that was uh that's kind of ironic. That was the example I used through colocation. So Um through concurrency you ask for eighty. Through co c colocation and sharing of facilities, maybe seventy two acres works because you're sharing facilities. So

1:46:41Okay.

1:46:43Yeah, that was the only further comment? Comment I have on the definitions. Any public comment

1:46:50So despite all the opposition that's here.

1:46:54Motion to approve.

1:46:57We have a motion and we have a second.

1:46:59Finally consistent, yeah, find it consistent

1:47:01with the compliment. And we have a second. Any further discussion of the motion? If not, all in favor, signify by saying aye. I

1:47:13No. No. I'm

1:47:14gonna vote no. I I really have a problem with

1:47:19Putting the burden

1:47:20on one industry. So uh I'll go well this is just for the definition. This is just the definition. This is

1:47:26just the call

1:47:26plan. The density. This is not the Redoing the density. Okay, thank you for clarification. I can vote yes.

1:47:37Let's have a roll call vote.

1:47:42Uh for all in favor, my roll call.

1:47:45Mr. Jamie Jordan.

1:47:46Aye.

1:47:46Mr. Derek Montlett.

1:47:47Aye.

1:47:48Mr. Peter Hansel? Aye. Mr. John Oudy? Aye. Mr. Christopher Poole? Aye. Mr. Richard Tanella?

1:47:55I'm not voting.

1:47:57And Chairman Gerald Gray.

1:47:59We just wanted to make sure you were paying attention, Ray. I'm awake. Hi.

1:48:04The motion carries uh five to one.