TITLE: PARKS CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY - Mackay Council · mackay city council: planning scheme policies...

MACKAY CITY COUNCIL: PLANNING SCHEME POLICIES

TITLE: PARKS CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY - PUBLIC PARKS AND COMMUNITY LAND (PPCL) - DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

POLICY NO. 16.02ADOPTED: 15 March 2006

AMENDED:

PLANNING SCHEME POLICY NO. 16.02 PUBLIC PARKS AND COMMUNITY LAND (PPCL) - DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS PAGE NO. 1/38


TABLE OF CONTENTS

2 PRELIMINARY ..........................................................................3 1.1 PURPOSE..................................................................................... 3 1.2 PHILOSOPHY ................................................................................ 3

1.2.2. Adoption of PPCL Network Developer Contributions Policy.................. 3 1.3 LAYOUT OF POLICY ........................................................................ 4 1.4 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE AGREEMENTS........................... 4

2.0 PPCL NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE ...............................................4 2.1 DEMAND ON PPCL NETWORK ............................................................. 4 2.2 DESIRED STANDARD OF SERVICE ......................................................... 6 2.3 INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDED BY DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS ........................ 7 2.4 COSTING ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................... 7

3.0 DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS.......................................................8 3.1 APPORTIONMENT OF DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS ................................... 8 3.2 CALCULATION OF DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS ....................................... 9

3.2.1. Developer Contributions By Service Catchment ............................... 9 3.2.2. Demand Generation Rates by Development Type ............................. 9

4.0 APPLICATION OF DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS CHARGE ................... 12 4.1 LEVYING THE DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS ...........................................12 4.2 PAYMENT OF THE CHARGE...............................................................12

4.2.1. General .............................................................................. 12 4.2.2. Developer Contribution Charge By Service Catchment ..................... 12 4.2.3. Worked Examples .................................................................. 14 4.2.4. Staged Developments ............................................................. 15 4.2.5. Security.............................................................................. 15 4.2.6. Contribution Credits............................................................... 16

4.3 EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS COLLECTED ..................................................17 5.0 REFERENCES......................................................................... 17 6.0 APPENDICES ......................................................................... 18

6.1 APPENDIX A: INFRASTRUCTURE MAPS..................................................18 6.2 APPENDIX B: DETAILS OF ESTABLISHMENT COSTS FOR PPCL NETWORK .........26

6.2.1. On-Going Administration Costs (Cost Of Preparing This Policy- Establishment And Administration) ....................................................................... 26 6.2.2. Land Purchasing Costs............................................................. 26 6.2.3. Loan Financing Costs .............................................................. 27 6.2.4. Land Acquisition Costs (Purchase Price) ....................................... 27 6.2.5. Embellishment Costs Of Public Parks ........................................... 27

APPENDIX C: Estimated Cost and Timing of Proposed PPCL Infrastructure and Upgrades (2005-2020) .......................................................................................29 APPENDIX D: CALCULATION OF EMBELLISHMENT COSTS FOR SPECIFIC PARKS..........36 APPENDIX E: ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING REDUCED RATES OF DEMAND GENERATED BY CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT TYPES ................................................................37



2 PRELIMINARY

1.1 PURPOSE

This is Policy No. , Policy for Infrastructure (Public Parks and Community Land for Sport and Recreation Network - Developer Contributions), which has been prepared in accordance with the Integrated Planning Act (IPA) 1997. This Policy covers the entire City of Mackay. Its purpose is to present the developer contributions for Public Parks and Community Land for Sport and Recreation (PPCL) network servicing the Mackay City Council (MCC). The Policy is supported by the following documents: (RSOS): “Mackay Recreation, Sport and Open Space Plan”- SKM and EDAW 1998. (PRLDP): “Park and Recreation Land Development Plan”- SKM 2001 (PPCL): “Planning for Public Parks and Community Land for Sport and Recreation”-

Lambert Recreation Planning 2004

1.2 PHILOSOPHY An applicant shall pay contributions towards the capital cost of the acquisition and embellishment of land (PPCL) to meet the demand placed on the network by the development. Contributions are based on the methodology outlined in the subsequent sections of this Policy. Such contributions are held by Council and used for the administration, planning, acquisition of land and construction of works or the payment of loans to provide a reliable PPCL network as outlined in the Policy.

1.2.2. Adoption of PPCL Network Developer Contributions Policy This Developer Contributions Policy for Public Parks and Community Land (PPCL) for Sport and Recreation has been adopted by resolution of MCC on ../../2004, pursuant to provisions of Integrated Planning Act (IPA 1997) and has effect on and from the date of adoption by MCC. The provisions of this Policy are subject to review by MCC from time to time and adoption of any revised Policy will be in accordance with Schedule 3 of IPA 1997.



1.3 LAYOUT OF POLICY This Policy is arranged as follows: 1 Preliminary 2 PPCL Network Infrastructure 3 Developer Contributions 4 Application of PPCL Network Developer Contributions 5 References 6 Appendices

1.4 EXISTING DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE AGREEMENTS

Mackay City Council is bound by preceding development infrastructure agreements. However where the identified standard of service has increased, Council may impose developer contributions for the difference of the agreed standards of service and the desired standard of service in this Policy.

2.0 PPCL NETWORK INFRASTRUCTURE

2.1 DEMAND ON PPCL NETWORK

Demand has been calculated on the basis of 7 service catchments, 6 of which cover the main areas of urban residential growth and one covering the land outside of the main urban area. These service catchments are shown on Infrastructure Map 1, Appendix A and are described briefly in Table 2-1.



Table 2-1: Description of Service Catchments

Service Catchment1

Main suburbs and (planning precincts from RSOS)

Est growth 2005-2020

Comments

1 Shoal Point – Bucasia (1) 3,064 Northern most precinct dominated by beach communities

2 Nindaroo, Eimeo, Blacks Beach, Dolphin Heads Rural View (2)

7,935 Northern beaches.

3

Mt Pleasant, Glenella Beaconsfield, Andergrove, North Mackay, Cremorne, Slade Pt and Mackay Harbour (3,4,5)

1,382 Mostly developed catchment with some in-fill capacity and additional growth areas in dispersed locations. Central to other catchments.

4 City, West Mackay, East Mackay and South Mackay (6)

2,166 Predominantly developed. Commercial focus for city. Residential growth from infill development and redevelopment at higher densities. Some growth to occur at beach side suburbs.

5 Ooralea and Paget (7) 661 Predominantly industrial and commercial uses with small area of residential growth.

6 Walkerston (9) 808 Village and residential area with modest growth of residential uses.

7 Remainder of the scheme area 1,686Mix of rural and agricultural uses with small village residential nodes.

The growth forecasts for the PPCL infrastructure network which form the demand assumptions for the network within each of these service catchments, are presented in Table 2-2. The forecasted demand is measured in terms of equivalent persons (EP) and was obtained from the Population Information and Forecasting Unit of the Department of Local Government, Planning and Sport and Recreation. Forecasts have been based on analysis of individual collector districts, past growth trends, available land and current development trends.

Table 2-2 PPCL Network Demand (EP) by Service Catchment

Service Catchment

2005 2010 2015 2020 Growth 2005-2020

1 6,152 6,959 8,024 9,216 3,064 2 7,166 9,801 12,465 15,101 7,935 3 29,958 30,323 30,774 31,340 1,382 4 20,703 21,588 22,232 22,869 2,166 5 2,115 2,277 2,490 2,776 661 6 2,191 2,415 2,684 2,999 808 7 12,837 13,523 14,068 14,523 1,686

Total 81,122 86,886 92,737 98,824 17,702

1 Precinct 8 (from the original RSOS and 2001 plan) has been excluded from the growth area and included in SC 7.


MACKAY CITY COUNCIL: PLANNING SCHEME POLICIES 2.2 DESIRED STANDARD OF SERVICE

The desired level of service for Public Parks and Community Land is discussed in detail in the RSOS, which forms the basis of the Council’s Public Recreation Strategy. A summary of the key performance criteria for these desired levels of service is provided as Table 2-3.

Table 2-3: Summary of Performance Criteria for Desired Level of Service

Criterion Performance target Comments

Broad level of provision for urban areas

2 Ha of sporting land per 1000 persons 3 Ha of general parkland/ land for recreation facilities per 1000 persons

Non Urban areas are 0.5 Ha general parkland and 2 Ha sporting land.

Local neighbourhood access to parkland for informal recreation

All residents to have access within 500 m of their dwelling.

Access must not be impeded by barriers such as major transport corridors

General access to Public Parks and Community Land

Land and facilities to be located centrally. Preferred locations are adjacent to schools and local commercial centres. Road frontage of at least 50% is also required. All facilities are to incorporate provisions for people with disabilities. Development of local facilities should occur before development of district facilities. All parks and facilities are to be accessible by foot, bicycle and car.

The RSOS contains more detail in regard to access.

Land quality/ suitability Areas to be managed primarily for protection of environmental, historic or cultural values are not considered suitable for Public Recreation Land. Land providing a regional open space component should not be included in Infrastructure Plan calculations. Public Parks and Community Land is able to support a number of potential uses including formal and informal activities.

Public Parks and Community Land may complement such areas and integrate with them in forming the open space network. However such areas may be developed with paths and other facilities to provide additional recreation opportunities. Regional open space elements are those identified in regional planning documents (eg. WHAM) This means that land constrained by slope, flooding, environmental hazard or other features is not normally considered suitable. These constraints will limit the flexibility of the land resource and subsequent responses to changing public recreation needs.

Access to district level parks and facilities

Preferred access within 2km of dwellings. Maximum access radius of 5 km

District level access is influenced by other features such as transport infrastructure and natural barriers


MACKAY CITY COUNCIL: PLANNING SCHEME POLICIES Criterion Performance target Comments

(eg. Rivers). The preferred minimum is to be obtained where possible. District level facilities would normally serve a catchment of 2-5 km.

Access to sub regional parks and facilities

Preferred access radius of 15 km The access radius is also considered to be the catchment served.

Minimum size/ land area required

Local park/ playground area (0.5 Ha) District parkland (3.0 Ha) District Sport (5-10 Ha) Multi Use Park (3 Ha) Linear Park (1 Ha) Sport and Rec facility land (2 Ha) Metropolitan Park (10Ha)

In small communities district and local components may be co-located in a single area. Some of the district and higher level components may be combined in a single location.

2.3 INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDED BY DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

This Policy covers the provision and embellishment of suitable quality land for Public Parks and Community Land for Sport and Recreation opportunities. This includes formal activities such as sport and organised recreation at constructed public facilities and informal activities such as use of parks and picnic areas. Hence, the development of public parks, sporting fields and other open space based recreation opportunities (such as providing walking and picnic areas in conservation and areas and on bathing reserves/ foreshores) are covered by this Policy. However the construction of built facilities such as indoor sports centres and swimming pools is not included. It should be noted that this Policy only includes PPCL acquisitions or embellishments attributable to meeting the needs of future populations to be accommodated in any particular service catchment. Any acquisitions or embellishments associated with rectifying current under-supply or responding to the needs of existing populations are to be funded from other sources. Where both existing and future populations use an infrastructure item, only the proportion attributable to future populations is covered by this Policy. Existing PPCL infrastructure along with the proposed infrastructure are shown on Infrastructure Maps 2 to 8, Appendix A. Detailed listings of all proposed new PPCL infrastructure and upgrades are provided as Appendix C whilst embellishment costs are calculated in Appendix D.

2.4 COSTING ASSUMPTIONS

This Developer Contributions Policy identifies the establishment cost of providing suitable quality PPCL infrastructure for the Mackay City Council. Establishment costs include: On-going Administration Costs of preparing, maintaining and administering infrastructure contributions: • % of the (Recreation Sport and Open Space Plan SKM 1998) attributable to future population • Cost of preparing the (PRLDP): (SKM 2001)



• Cost of the preparation of the Infrastructure Plan (PPCL): (Lambert Recreation Planning 2004) which has informed this policy

Land Purchasing Costs: • The capital cost associated with establishing and servicing an initial loan fund to enable timely

acquisition of required sites. • The cost of an agent or consultant valuer to undertake the acquisition program on Council’s

behalf which is included as part of the capital cost. • Statutory fees and taxes associated with acquisitions and title transfers. Acquisition Costs of land needed for the parks, sports fields and built facilities: • This is the anticipated purchase price of individual sites. This is calculated per catchment using

average value per hectare2 for that catchment and calculated in the current value of 2004 dollars.

Embellishment Costs of public parks: • This is the cost of developing public parks to the minimum standards specified in this plan. • Includes park upgrade costs, where upgrading the capacity of existing parkland is more cost

effective than acquisition of additional land. Basic Development Cost of land for sport and recreation facilities: • This means an estimate of the average expense involved in making the land suitable for

facility development: • Fencing or defining boundary with bollards etc. • Providing power and water to boundary • Basic vegetation management such as clearing, weed removal or establishing screening and

landscape vegetation. Details of the above mentioned establishment costs are presented as Appendix B. It is important to note that additional costs involved of making suitable poor quality land proposed as park(eg, does not meet performance criteria such as poorly drained or heavily cleared and scraped) are not included. These costs would normally be transferable to the development proponent or may be offset against much lower acquisition cost. It should also be noted that the maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement cost of existing aged or obsolete components of the network are not included in the developer contributions.

3.0 DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

3.1 APPORTIONMENT OF DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

New development shall pay for its proportion of the cost of proposed new parks and upgrades of existing parks in Mackay City Council. These proposals are shown on the Infrastructure Maps in Appendix A.

2 The average value per hectare is calculated using a number of sites deemed suitable for parkland, many of which were identified in the RSOS.



Each service catchment therefore contributes towards the proposed new parks and park upgrades within their catchment as well as any proposed new parks outside their catchment required due to increased demand on the network generated by future development. For Example, demand for particular facilities such as district sports fields or metropolitan level parks may arise from more than one service catchment. The relative proportion of demand generated has been apportioned in cost calculations. A detailed schedule of proposed parks and upgrades, the associated costs and the relative apportionment across service catchments is contained in Appendix C.

3.2 CALCULATION OF DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

The calculation method for determination of the PPCL network developer contributions for a development or redevelopment is a two-step process. First the demand (EP) generated by the development is calculated and then second, the contribution per EP for the relevant service catchment is applied.

3.2.1. Developer Contributions By Service Catchment Council’s Schedule of General Charges specifies the developer contributions for the PPCL network that apply in each service catchment in dollars per equivalent person, ($/EP). The service catchment areas to which the developer contributions apply are shown in Infrastructure Map 1, Appendix A. The developer contributions for the PPCL network will automatically be adjusted annually according to movements in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and land valuations of benchmark sites. The contribution will be adjusted at the time of payment. The CPI indexes for the 2001/02, 2002/03, and 2003/04 are presented as Table 3-1 - Consumer Price Indexes.

Table 3-1 Consumer Price Indexes

Month, Year Index June, 2002 138.1 June, 2003 141.8 June, 2004 146.3

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics 2004

3.2.2. Demand Generation Rates by Development Type Table 3-2 sets out the various deemed densities and demand generation rates for different development types in equivalent persons (EP). If the development type is not listed in Table 3-2, the EP attributable to the development will be assessed on a case-by-case basis. However for developments of an unusual or exceptional nature then it is recommended specific calculations be undertaken having regard to the likely population impact of the subject development and the principles expressed in this section.



It should be noted that reduced rates have been applied for non-residential (commercial and industrial) development; room only residential development and nursing home/special needs type accommodation. The assumptions used to derive these reduced rates are detailed in Appendix E. The Net Demand Generation Rate (See Column 4 of Table 3-2) for the appropriate development type should be taken as the demand generation rate for the development when calculating developer contributions.



Table 3-2 - Deemed Densities and Demand Generation Rates by Land Use Zoning and Development Type

Development Type Deemed Density Reduction Rate (%)

Net Demand Generation Rate

LAND USE ZONING

Urban Expansion, Urban Residential & Village

28 EP / Ha 100 28 EP/Ha

High Density Residential, City Residential, Mixed Use & Waterfront

106 EP / Ha 100 106 EP/Ha

All Commercial zones 42 EP / Ha 60 25.2 EP/Ha

All Industry zones 34 EP / Ha 60 20.4 EP/Ha

Rural Residential 14 EP / Ha 100 14 EP/Ha

All Special Activities zones 106 EP / Ha 100 106 EP/Ha

DEVELOPMENT TYPE

Dwelling House/ Detached House

2.8 EP / dwelling 100 2.8 EP/dwelling

Accommodation units/ multiple dwellings

3 Bedroom* 2.8 EP /dwelling 100 2.8 EP/dwelling

2 Bedroom* 2.1 EP / dwelling 100 2.1 EP/dwelling

1 Bedroom* 1.4 /dwelling 100 1.4 EP/dwelling

Caravan Park 0.8 EP /site 100 0.8 EP/dwelling

Nursing Home / aged persons hostel

0.8 EP / dwelling 100 0.8 EP/dwelling

Other accommodation types inc: Retirement Village, Boarding House, Hostels, Guest Houses, Motels

1.9 EP / dwelling 70 or 100

1.3 EP/dwelling (for room only) 1.9 EP/dwelling (for self contained dwelling units)

* “Bedroom” is as defined in Schedule I, Part 12 of the Scheme



4.0 APPLICATION OF DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS CHARGE 4.1 LEVYING THE DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

The developer contributions for the PPCL network apply to all developments that generate additional demand on the Mackay City Council PPCL network. It should be noted that the developer contributions do not apply to lots that are in existence (registered) on the date of adoption of this Policy. (Other exemptions from paying the developer contribution charge identified by the Integrated Planning Act 1997 and subsequent amendments are Development by State Government Departments under a designation [section 2.6.6].3, and Works or land uses authorised under the Mineral Resources Act 1989 [section 5.1.5(3)]). Contributions are calculated separately for each financial catchment and are levied on a “per additional equivalent person (EP)” basis to provide for more accurate, user-based costs. Thus, an estimate of the demand generated by the development is needed to calculate the contribution. Residential, commercial and industrial developments are all considered to generate demand, and should therefore pay contributions. The demand generated by different types of development has been provided as Table 3-2.

4.2 PAYMENT OF THE CHARGE

4.2.1. General Hence, the developer contribution is payable: ο If the contribution applies to reconfiguring a lot that is assessable development - before

endorsement of the plan of subdivision; or

ο If the contribution applies to material change of use - before the new use commences; or

ο If none of the above apply - on the day stated in the Decision Notice or Negotiated Decision Notice.

The payment of the charge will be at the rate applicable at the time of payment.

4.2.2. Developer Contribution Charge By Service Catchment The following table summarises the charge per EP for each service catchment and the proposed provision to meet the demand. The detailed calculation tables for each catchment are contained in Appendix B. 3 State policy has identified that the state will pay half the costs of supplying certain infrastructure to state supplied developments.


MACKAY CITY COUNCIL: PLANNING SCHEME POLICIES Table 4-1 Charge per EP by Service Catchment

Service Catchment addl pop- 2020

proposed acquisition new parks (ha)

Upgrades proposed (no of parks)

value of acquisitions upgrades and share of establishment and administration

charge per EP

1 Shoal Pt - Bucasia 3,064 10 4 $3,854,959 $1,258

2 Rural View, Eimeo, Blacks Beach, Dolphin Heads,

7,935 39 3 $10,956,803 $1,381

3 Mt Pleasant, Glenella Beaconsfield, Andergrove, North Mackay, Cremorne, Slade Pt and Mackay Harbour

1,382 12 5 $1,791,282 $1,296

4 City, West Mackay, East Mackay and South Mackay

2,166 0 4 $2,324,450 $1,073

5 Ooralea and Paget 661 2.5 1 $842,250 $1,274

6 Walkerston 808 4 2 $821,023 $1016

7 Remainder of scheme area- (not planned as part of PPCL infrastructure plan) see note

1686 $1,216

Note: the charge amount for Catchment 7 is an average of the other catchments. In most cases, development outside of catchments 1-6 would be required to provide land to service the development’s park needs.



4.2.3. Worked Examples The following are worked examples of how to calculate the developer contribution for the PPCL network: Example 1: A developer proposes to develop a parcel of land in Service Catchment 1, to contain 10 detached houses. Step 1 – Calculate the demand in terms of Equivalent Persons (EPs) Refer to Table 3.2 Deemed Densities and Demand Generation Rates by Land Use Zoning and Development Type Detached Houses/Dwelling House = 2.8 EPs 10 houses x 2.8 EPs = 28 EPs Step 2 – Calculate the developer contribution . Using Table 4-1 Charge per EP by Service Catchment identify the charge per EP for the relevant Service Catchment. Service Catchment 1 = $1,258 per EP (excluding CPI adjustment) Demand generated by the proposed development = 28 EPs Developer Contribution = 28 x $1,258 Total contribution owing = $35,224 (excluding CPI adjustment) Example 2: A developer proposes to develop 10 Ha of land for residential use and 2Ha for retail/commercial purposes – in service catchment 4 Step 1 – Calculate the demand in terms of Equivalent Persons (EPs) Refer to Table 3.2 Deemed Densities and Demand Generation Rates by Land Use Zoning and Development Type Urban Residential = 28 EP/ Ha Commercial = 25.2 EPs/Ha 10 Ha x 28 EPs =280 EPs 2Ha x 25.2 Eps = 50.4 Eps Total Demand Generated = 330.4 Step 2 – Calculate the developer contribution . Using Table 4-1 Charge per EP by Service Catchment identify the charge per EP for the relevant Service Catchment. Service Catchment 4 = $1,073 per EP (excluding CPI adjustment) Developer Contribution = 330.4 x $1,073 Total contribution owing = $354,519 (excluding CPI adjustment) Example 3: A developer proposes to develop 10 Ha of land for residential use and a proposed future park has been identified on the subject site- in service catchment 2 Step 1 –Determine the value of the land contribution required Refer to the PPCL infrastructure Plan for Service Catchment 2 (Appendix A) and Table 6-1 Appendix B Valuation Estimates by Service Catchment. Identify the development site and the type and amount of park proposed on the site (in this example a Local Park of 0.5 Ha).



Determine the value of the land required : 0.5 Ha x the average land value/Ha shown in the infrastructure table for Service Catchment 2 ($186,667) Value of land contribution : 0.5 x $186667 = $93,333.5 Step 2 – Calculate the demand in terms of Equivalent Persons (EPs) Refer to Table 3.2 Deemed Densities and Demand Generation Rates by Land Use Zoning and Development Type Urban Residential = 28 EP/ Ha Demand = 28 x 10 Ha Total Demand = 280 Eps Step 3 – Calculate the developer contribution . Using Table 4-1 Charge per EP by Service Catchment identify the charge per EP for the relevant Service Catchment. Service Catchment 2 = $1,381 per EP (excluding CPI adjustment) Developer Contribution = 280 x $1,381 contribution owing = $386,680 (excluding CPI adjustment) Step 4 discount the amount owing by the value of the land contribution $386,680 - $93,333.5 Total Contribution owing = $293,346.5 (excluding CPI adjustment) If in the above example the developer also proposes to develop the local park a further discount would apply: Refer to Table 6-2 Embellishment Cost By Park Type - Based On Minimum Standards Of Development. Average $/ha for development of a Local Park = $96,500 Area of proposed park = 0.5 Ha Amount of discount allowable for development = $48,250 This would reduce the contribution owing to $245,096 (excluding CPI adjustment)

4.2.4. Staged Developments Staged developments and complexes for which developer contributions are payable, will be approved subject to a condition requiring that contributions be paid regarding the total demand (EPs) generated by the development as per this Policy. As each stage is developed, the demand generated by the stage will be assessed and the developer contributions will be payable in accordance with Section 4.2.1, at the rate applicable at that time. The Applicant for a staged building development will be required to either provide security or enter into an infrastructure agreement as determined by Council.

4.2.5. Security Council may require a security bond in the following circumstances: ο As a condition of development with respect to staged building developments/ complexes.



ο To allow Council to program and construct works with an assurance that the developer contributions will be available;

ο Deferred payment schemes as approved by Council from time to time where the development is released prior to the payment of contributions, as determined by the Council.

The amount of the security bond required to be lodged shall be determined by the Council based on the best available information regarding the development. The security bond shall be lodged at the time stated in the Infrastructure Agreement, or in the absence of an Infrastructure Agreement, in sufficient time for Council’s consideration prior to release of the development. Security bonds lodged in respect of this Policy shall either be in cash or in the form of an irrevocable Bank Guarantee from an approved Trading Bank, and shall state the purpose of the guarantee and the Real Property description of the development to which it applies. The Bank Guarantee shall be open-ended with no lapse time, unconditional and activated solely on demand by the Council.

4.2.6. Contribution Credits Where Council approves the contribution of land or the construction of works by the developer pertaining to this Policy and determines that an allowance will be made for the developer to offset the costs of the works against developer contributions, these offsets shall be defined as Contribution Credits and determined by converting the value of land contributed (using the average acquisition cost per Hectare ($/Ha) identified in the relevant catchment) or construction costs into demand units (EP) based on the relevant type of development and service catchment developer contribution charge rate. It should be noted that the option to contribute land or works to be offset against developer contributions is solely at the discretion of Council and cannot be exercised by a development proponent without prior consent of Council. Such consent shall include a landscape plan detailing the proposed works prepared to the satisfaction of Council. Any construction work performed by the developer must meet Council’s minimum development standards for parks and must be equal in value to a maximum of 50% of the developer contribution payable. Further to this, any land contributions would only be considered where they conform to the provision planning identified for the catchment (see Appendix A) and where Council considers the land to be of suitable quality for the proposed park use (see TPSP 1.09). Where the total contribution of land is greater than the assessed developer contribution for the PPCL network - Council may at its discretion: ο Meet the additional costs, if the infrastructure item was planned in the near future;

ο Require the developer to construct the infrastructure at the developer’s cost, if the infrastructure item was not planned in the near future. In this case, Council will endeavour to ensure that the developer is reimbursed for the additional cost from the PPCL developer



contributions received from other developers that contribute to the network for up to five (5) years from approval of Council (As the timing and level of contributions payable by other developments are unknown at the time of approval, Council cannot assume a binding legal obligation to reimburse any specific amount at any specific time. Interest will not be considered and the developer contributions will be reimbursed at the agreed number of EP credits at the rate applicable at the time of reimbursement).

4.3 EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS COLLECTED

Monetary payments of the charge will be administered according to the provisions of the Integrated Planning Act (IPA) 1997. The monies collected will be expended on the PPCL infrastructure items identified in the PPCL Infrastructure provision tables contained in Appendix C (and as updated in annual and 4 yearly reviews) according to the estimated timeframes indicated within the Policy. Timing cannot be determined exactly and therefore Council reserves the right to modify the timing of expenditure to reflect faster or slower than anticipated growth. Council may also choose to modify the expenditure in terms of the infrastructure items to be provided only if the modification will result in the same or an increased standard of service for the community from which contributions for the particular item have been collected.

5.0 REFERENCES (RSOS): “Mackay Recreation, Sport and Open Space Plan”- SKM and EDAW 1998. (PRLDP): “Park and Recreation Land Development Plan”- SKM 2001. (PPCL): “Planning for Public Parks and Community Land for Sport and Recreation”-Lambert

Recreation Planning 2004. ABS, 2004: 6401.0 Consumer Price Index, www.abs.gov.au, 18 August 2004-08-19.



6.0 APPENDICES

6.1 APPENDIX A: INFRASTRUCTURE MAPS

Infrastructure Map 1 – Location of Service Catchments for Public Parks and Community Land for

Sport and Recreation Infrastructure. Infrastructure Map 2 – Existing and Proposed Infrastructure for Service Catchment 1 Infrastructure Map 3 – Existing and Proposed Infrastructure for Service Catchment 2 Infrastructure Map 4 – Existing and Proposed Infrastructure for Service Catchment 3 Infrastructure Map 5 – Existing and Proposed Infrastructure for Service Catchment 4 Infrastructure Map 6 – Existing and Proposed Infrastructure for Service Catchment 5 Infrastructure Map 7 – Existing and Proposed Infrastructure for Service Catchment 6



Infrastructure Map 1 – Location of Service Catchments for Public Parks and Community Land for Sport and Recreation Infrastructure.

PP

LANNING SCHEME POLICY NO. 16.02 UBLIC PARKS AND COMMUNITY LAND (PPCL) - DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

PAGE NO. 19/38


Infrastructure Map 2 – Existing and Proposed Infrastructure for Service Catchment 1

PLPU

ANNING SCHEME POLICY NO. 16.02 BLIC PARKS AND COMMUNITY LAND (PPCL) - DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

PAGE NO. 20/38



PLPU


PAGE NO. 21/38



PP

LANNING SCHEME POLICY NO. 16.02 UBLIC PARKS AND COMMUNITY LAND (PPCL) - DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS

PAGE NO. 22/38



PLPU


PAGE NO. 25/38


6.2 APPENDIX B: DETAILS OF ESTABLISHMENT COSTS FOR PPCL NETWORK

6.2.1. On-Going Administration Costs (Cost Of Preparing This Policy- Establishment And Administration)

Total Cost of RSOS Preparation $37,000

% Share for future pop (to 2020) 19% Amount included in Policy $7,025 Total Cost of PRLDP Study $26,000

% Share of cost (charged to future pop) 100% Amount included in Policy $26,000 Total Cost of PPCL Preparation $10,500

% Share of cost (charged to future pop) 100% Amount included in Policy $10,500

The above amounts are then charged proportionally to the future population in each service catchment.

Notes:

(RSOS): “Mackay Recreation, Sport and Open Space Plan”- SKM and EDAW 1998. (PRLDP): “Park and Recreation Land Development Plan”- SKM 2001 (PPCL): “Planning for Public Parks and Community Land for Sport and Recreation”

Lambert Recreation Planning 2004

6.2.2. Land Purchasing Costs These costs are calculated for service catchments 1-6 only as they are the anticipated growth areas and the subject of detailed planning. Cost per property for acquisition $2,500 Annual retainer for consultant valuer/ acquisitions agent $5,000 Total number of properties to be acquired 51 Total land purchasing cost (15yrs) $202,500 Cost per person $12.64



6.2.3. Loan Financing Costs These are calculated for Service Catchments 1-6 (where anticipated acquisition activity will occur) based on the following assumptions:

Year commenced 2005 Loan Amount $1,000,000 Term 10 years Cost of Capital Rate4 6.5%

Therefore,

Total interest paid on loans $362,576 Cost per person (future population) $22.64

6.2.4. Land Acquisition Costs (Purchase Price) Acquisition costs have been calculated on a per hectare basis for each Service Catchment and are presented as Table 6-1. The estimates are derived from valuation of a series of “benchmark” sites, which represent a fair range of land proposed for acquisition (as at 2004). These “benchmark” sites will be used for annual adjustments of the per hectare acquisition rates used to calculate the charge.

Table 6-1 Valuation Estimates by Service Catchment

Service Catchment (SC) Average Valuation

($/ha) 1 Shoal Pt – Bucasia $200,000 2 Rural View, Eimeo, Blacks Beach, Dolphin Heads,

$186,667

3 Mt Pleasant, Glenella Beaconsfield, Andergrove, North Mackay, Cremorne, Slade Pt and Mackay Harbour

$150,625

4 City, West Mackay, East Mackay and South Mackay

No acquisitions proposed

5 Ooralea and Paget $250,000 6 Walkerston $115,000 7 Remainder of MCC Acquisitions

not yet planned

6.2.5. Embellishment Costs Of Public Parks Embellishment (or development) costs have been calculated based on the minimum standard of development for parks specified in the PRLDP and PPCL. They are calculated on an average $/Ha basis for different types of parks and are summarised as Table 6-2.

4 advice from Mackay City Council( 2001) Finance indicates likely rate between 6 and 7 %



Table 6-2 Embellishment Cost By Park Type - Based On Minimum Standards Of Development.

Embellishment Cost per Hectare ($/Ha)

Park Type Average Park Size (Ha)

Embellishment Cost by Park Type ($/park)

$96,500 LP- Local Parks 0.5 $48,250 $124,450 DP-District Parks 3 $373,350 $120,000 DSP - District Sport Parks 5 $600,000 $88,000 LNP- Linear Parks 1 $88,000 $133,500 MUP- Multi Use Parks 3 $400,500 $29,000 SRF- Land for Sport and

Recreation Facilities 2 $58,000

$175,500 Met-Metropolitan Level Parks 10 $1,755,000 In addition to the embellishment costs of new parks, this Policy also covers the upgrading of existing parks to accommodate increased demand generated by development. Where the upgrade will also address an existing undersupply within the service catchment, costs are shared with the existing population (i.e. that proportion is not included in the charge). The upgrade cost of existing parks has been calculated on a case-by-case basis. The above table also shows the estimate for the basic development cost of land for sport and recreation facilities.



APPENDIX C: Estimated Cost and Timing of Proposed PPCL Infrastructure and Upgrades (2005-2020)

Table 6-3 Main Schedule of Apportionment of Costs By Catchment



Table 6-4 Proposed PPCL Infrastructure - Service Catchment 1



APPENDIX D: CALCULATION OF EMBELLISHMENT COSTS FOR SPECIFIC PARKS

ug-to Water/tap Lights fencing Playg Seating picnic BBQ field/Kick

Inf/active/ spec facils L'scape power

land prep/ conting'y

public toilets

path/bikeways carparking Total $

1.1 lp $2,000 $3,000 $15,000 $10,000 $3,000 $10,000 $12,000 $0 $15,000 $10,000 $1,500 $5,000 $0 $12,000 $5,000 $103,5001.3 lp/foreshore $4,000 $6,000 $30,000 $20,000 $12,000 $40,000 $48,000 $0 $30,000 $20,000 $3,000 $10,000 $120,000 $48,000 $20,000 $411,0001.8 lp/foreshore $4,000 $6,000 $30,000 $20,000 $6,000 $20,000 $24,000 $0 $30,000 $20,000 $3,000 $10,000 $0 $48,000 $10,000 $231,0001.9 lp/foreshore $4,000 $6,000 $30,000 $20,000 $6,000 $20,000 $24,000 $0 $30,000 $20,000 $3,000 $10,000 $0 $24,000 $10,000 $207,0002.2 conpk $2,000 $0 $40,000 $0 $3,000 $40,000 $0 $0 $7,500 $10,000 $0 $20,000 $0 $96,000 $20,000 $238,5002.3 lp/foreshore $4,000 $6,000 $30,000 $20,000 $6,000 $20,000 $24,000 $0 $0 $20,000 $3,000 $10,000 $0 $24,000 $10,000 $177,0002.8 conpk $2,000 $0 $40,000 $0 $3,000 $40,000 $0 $0 $7,500 $10,000 $0 $20,000 $0 $96,000 $20,000 $238,5004.3 lp $2,000 $3,000 $15,000 $10,000 $6,000 $10,000 $6,000 $0 $15,000 $10,000 $1,500 $5,000 $0 $24,000 $5,000 $112,500

4.11 dp $1,000 $3,000 $10,000 $5,000 $3,000 $10,000 $12,000 $0 $4,950 $10,000 $1,500 $0 $0 $24,000 $5,000 $89,4505.1 dp/ foreshore $4,000 $18,000 $40,000 $10,000 $12,000 $40,000 $48,000 $0 $9,900 $80,000 $3,000 $20,000 $120,000 $96,000 $40,000 $540,9005.2 mup $2,000 $3,000 $10,000 $5,000 $3,000 $10,000 $12,000 $25,000 $0 $10,000 $1,500 $5,000 $0 $12,000 $5,000 $103,5005.3 dp/foreshore-lp $4,000 $18,000 $40,000 $10,000 $12,000 $40,000 $48,000 $0 $9,900 $40,000 $3,000 $10,000 $120,000 $96,000 $40,000 $490,9006.1 met-lnp specified by councils master planning- Ocean Blue $1,500,0006.2 lp-lnp $8,000 $6,000 $10,000 $10,000 $12,000 $40,000 $12,000 $0 $15,000 $40,000 $1,500 $5,000 $0 $96,000 $0 $255,5006.3 lp/foreshore $4,000 $6,000 $15,000 $10,000 $12,000 $20,000 $12,000 $0 $15,000 $20,000 $3,000 $5,000 $120,000 $48,000 $10,000 $300,0006.4 met specified by councils master planning- Queens Pk $350,0007.1 lp $2,000 $3,000 $7,500 $0 $3,000 $10,000 $6,000 $0 $0 $10,000 $1,500 $5,000 $0 $0 $4,000 $52,0007.2 dp-mup $2,000 $3,000 $10,000 $5,000 $3,000 $10,000 $12,000 $25,000 $0 $10,000 $1,500 $0 $0 $12,000 $5,000 $98,5009.1 dsp $2,000 $3,000 $0 $0 $1,500 $5,000 $0 $50,000 $0 $10,000 $1,500 $5,000 $15,000 $12,000 $5,000 $110,0009.5 lp $2,000 $0 $7,500 $0 $3,000 $10,000 $12,000 $0 $0 $10,000 $0 $5,000 $0 $0 $4,000 $53,500

Lagoon Met specified by council planning. Estimated $6M of which council pays 50% $3,000,000



APPENDIX E: ASSUMPTIONS REGARDING REDUCED RATES OF DEMAND GENERATED BY CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT TYPES

Non-Residential Development While all developments resulting in an increase in the local population are liable to pay the infrastructure charge, the nature of non-residential development is such that the type of demand varies from residential development. In these cases (non-residential development) demand is anticipated to focus on informal park and recreation facility demand as well as opportunities for informal sport. Locally provided opportunities are also considered of more importance for non-residential development. However as district level parks and sporting fields are ideally located as part of a central node including retail and service opportunities it is likely that larger commercial and industrial developments will be serviced by district parks as well as local parks. As the desired ratio of general park and facilities land to sporting land is 3:25 it is proposed to charge non-residential development at a rate of 3/5 (or 60%) of the total per person charge identified in the charge tables for each Catchment. In other words the equivalent demand generated for non-residential development is 0.6 x the additional persons to be accommodated. Some land uses such as agriculture will not generate significant demand, as there is usually low numbers of additional persons to be accommodated. Therefore, charges will not apply to agricultural uses (rural residential development is not included in any rural land use or zone and will therefore be included in the charges). Room Only Residential Development In addition, developments dominated by holiday (or casual) accommodation do not result in a year round demand. Where the dwelling unit is not considered to be self-contained (ie. The unit does not include cooking or laundry facilities) then a reduced demand is appropriate. Current estimates are that average occupancy of holiday/motel/rooming house accommodation is approximately 70%6. Therefore it is appropriate to discount demand by this amount. For ease of referral this type of residential development will be described as “room only” which will be taken to include all types of holiday, motel, boarding or rooming accommodation that is not self contained. It should be remembered that holiday type accommodation does still produce significant pressure on PPCL infrastructure due to the increased leisure time available to those on holidays. This is particularly the case for foreshore parks and bathing reserves, district and metropolitan parks, long recreational trail networks and parks with special features. Nursing Home- Special Needs Type Accommodation

5 Based on the desired service level of 3 Ha for parks and recreation facilities and 2 Ha for sporting land (see 2.2

). DESIRED STANDARD OF SERVICE

6 Figure supplied by Mackay City Council




Nursing Home, Aged Care, Respite centres and other special needs residential developments are considered to generate less demand than other residential uses. In most cases these developments provide on-site open space and their residents are unlikely to use the full range of PPCL infrastructure. Demand is anticipated to be similar to “room only” residential in that it will focus on informal park and recreation facilities and should be discounted to 70%. Where self contained “retirement villages” are proposed they should be treated as residential and demand is not discounted. The following table summarises the reduction rates (%) applied to various land use types.

Demand Reduction Rates (%) for Different Land Uses

LAND USE TYPE Demand Generated (EP)

Reduction Rate (%)

All Residential uses Additional number of Persons to be accommodated

100%

Room only residential

Maximum number of occupants 70%

Nursing Home, Aged Care, Respite centres, special needs residential

Maximum number of occupants 70%

Commercial and industrial uses

Number of workers to be accommodated

60%

Rural uses No charge Other uses and particular or special developments

Determined on the merits of each proposal, but having regard to the basic principles identified above.

As determined by MCC

TITLE: PARKS CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY - Mackay Council · mackay city council: planning scheme policies...

Documents

Transcript of TITLE: PARKS CONTRIBUTIONS POLICY - Mackay Council · mackay city council: planning scheme policies...