WHEREAS the BC government has determined that Parkland Development Cost Charges DCCs cannot be used to fund sport-related park infrastructure such as synthetic turf fields, swimming pools and arenas; AND WHEREAS municipalities can use Parkland DCCs to provide fencing, landscaping, drainage and irrigation, trails, rest-rooms, changing rooms and playground and playing field equipment; AND WHEREAS there is tangible evidence that new development directly impacts the demand for sport-related park infrastructure through increased attendance at municipal recreation facilities and increased demand for playing time on municipal sports fields: Therefore be it resolved that the BC government be requested to approve an amendment to Section 9353bii of the Local Government Act to include sport-related park infrastructure as an applicable Parkland DCC capital cost.
Ministry of Community, Sport Cultural Development As the Province has mentioned in previous responses to similar UBCM resolutions, widening the scope of Parkland development Cost Charges DCCs to include major sport infrastructure like pools, all-season fields, arenas, and gyms has been reviewed by the Development Finance Review Committee DFRC. After this detailed review, all parties on the DFRC Province, local government and developers unanimously agreed not to expand the scope of the parkland acquisition DCC. The DFRC came to this conclusion based on the principle of user pay. The cost of a core service should be paid by those who benefit from it. New community parks primarily service new development. Thus, the purpose of the Parkland DCC is to acquire land for community parks and provide basic improvements like fencing, trails and playground equipment. Whereas, major athletic infrastructure like an arena benefits the entire community and therefore should be paid by the entire community through the existing tax base. Determining a reasonably accurate benefit factor i.e. cost allocation between new and existing development for such athletic infrastructure would be very difficult and highly subjective. This may result in prohibitively high DCCs, which could discourage new development. Thus, the Province supports the decision of the DFRC and is not prepared to revisit at this time.