02-14-2022 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION Tuesday, January 18, 2022 6:00 o’clock p.m. _____________________________________________________________________________________ Page 1 of 2 3.LA21-000074 TEXT AMENDMENT, PARK DEDICATION. Staff presented a summary packet of information. Barnhart stated when they reviewed the subdivision code in 2018 it was noted that the park dedication requirements were antiquated and needed to be updated based on current goals of the community. Staff tweaked some of the ordinance and reviewed the methodology of how they came up with the park dedication. Park dedication is allowed by State statute within several parameters. One of the key parameters is that there should be a nexus between what the City requires as a park dedication and what impact a proposed development has on the park system. Staff analyzed the number of households and acreage of the park system, then approached it with the idea that new development should pay for itself, meaning there is an adequate amount of park system for the community. If one adds more households to the community they should also add more park to the community to keep things linear. He noted parks and trails would be part of the park dedication calculation. He showed a draft on screen noting that each new household should provide 0.1 acres of park (land or cash) at the discretion of the City Council. Staff has drafted an ordinance that takes the current amount of households, parks, trails, and anticipated growth based on the 2040 Comprehensive Plan from 2018 and applied it to the subdivision code. He noted they also propose a cap as a parcel with a lot of density (10-20 units/acre) the cash donation requirement could be more than the cost or value of the property. Staff proposes a cap based on density. Erickson asked if Barnhart received his email with comments and proposed adjustments. Barnhart did incorporate Erickson’s comments into the draft that is currently on screen. Vice Chair Ressler opened the public hearing at 7:24 p.m. Sonja Lockman, 115 Luce Line Ridge, has a real concern that the money can be used for park improvement, that the value can be determined simply between the City and the developer when they have already seen the potential for these bogus public-private partnerships that do not benefit the City or the residents. She is very concerned that the money can be used to take over a park, such as Lowry Woods, to buy into an easement to give property to another private entity – which is a mountain biking group – that would destroy the woods and that is expressly not in line with the nature conservancy of that woods. She stated “we have been told that the Lowry Woods access is the number one goal for the Park Commission even though we were told prior that they would not try to get any access for bikes into Lowry Woods. We have been told that our neighbors have been approached in the past about selling an easement for people to have access.” Ms. Lockman has a very big concern that this is an end-run around things that do not benefit. She thinks this is a lack of available notice to the public to weigh in on this and that is not okay. She stated a public hearing requires that they give notice and there was no notice. Vice Chair Ressler closed the public hearing at 7:28 p.m. Vice Chair Ressler asked Mr. Barnhart to clarify how the public is notified of a text amendment such as this one. Barnhart replied a text amendment is posted on the website and also in the paper. He would recommend anyone interested to subscribe on the website, noting they can subscribe to any legal notices and have agendas pushed to their email inbox. Council Exhibit D PC Minutes - Draft