Rocky View County’s Public Services Committee received phase two of a three-part Amenity Study, June 15.
This phase of the study looked at ways of funding amenities, such as recreational facilities and protective services and estimated costs of recommended amenities.
The report recommended the County apply charges to residential and non-residential developments to use towards capital funding of parks, libraries and recreational centres.
“You can’t expect the general tax-payer to front-end the additional recreational facility costs created by new growth,” said Division 3 Councillor Gordon Branson. “We need to find a fair, equitable, reasonable, defensible solution.”
The report estimated a target of $2,700 per unit of residential development and $10,000 per acre for non-residential.
The Municipal Government Act does not allow jurisdictions to charge a levy for soft services such as recreation and protective services. However, many municipalities work around this by making agreements with developers. For example, the City of Calgary earns about $20,000 per acre for non-residential development, the report states.
Currently, Rocky View funds its amenities through taxes and reserves, grants, limited fundraising and developer funding, including municipal reserves and cash-in-lieu. According to the report, 16 per cent of taxes in Rocky View are currently spent on amenities, while urban municipalities use 33 to 40 per cent of their tax dollars.
Rocky View began its voluntary recreation contribution program in 2006. To date, it has raised about $320,000, according to Dari Lange, Rocky View recreational services advisor.
“It is growing, a lot of developers seem to be supportive of the program,” said Lange.
The study was partially prompted by Rocky View’s Growth Management Study, which predicts Rocky View’s population at 150,000 people by 2060.
That growth will mean the need for more amenities.
If a program to collect money for amenities was introduced, potential issues could arise, including an increase in development charges and a potential effect on housing prices, according to the report.
“You have different problems in a large rural municipality than you do in an urban municipality,” said Rocky View County Reeve Lois Habberfield. “How do you distribute the wealth and how do you make it fair? Different areas need different services.”
Habberfield said developers often include amenities in their developments to attract buyers.
However, she doesn’t think that adding an additional charge to developers would discourage development.
“I don’t think it will be a concern,” said Habberfield. “It is an expectation in the cities. Most of the professional developers are very used to that model.”
The final version of phase two of the Amenity Study will be be brought before council in the fall.
