Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Management Open Space topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs LMO changes to require usable open space and pathways in major subdivisions
Summary
The committee recommended amendments to the land‑management ordinance to tighten definitions and design standards for common open space, remove credits for adjacent buffers, and require pedestrian pathway connectivity in major subdivisions.
The Community Service and Public Safety Committee recommended forwarding a Land Management Ordinance amendment that tightens rules for common open space and requires pedestrian and pathway connectivity in major subdivisions.
Planning Director Missy Lewick said staff revised the definition of common open space to exclude detention/retention ponds and natural water bodies while adding docks and boardwalks as qualifying amenities. The revisions remove credits formerly allowed for adjacent street and use buffers, prohibit counting remnant open parcels that provide no value and add design criteria to ensure open space is functional, connected and visually identifiable.
Key numeric standards in the draft require that at least 75% of common open space be arranged in dimensions of no less than 15 feet in any direction, at least 50% of required common open space be contiguous (pathways, sidewalks or streets do not break contiguity), and that at least half of the common open space be designed for active or passive recreation. The amendment also requires pathways within major subdivisions that provide direct connections to lots, community amenities and the town’s multiuse pathway system.
Staff said the changes respond to recurring development patterns the town has observed — extensive tree clearing, narrow linear strips of “counted” open space and weak connectivity — and that the full subdivision code will be reviewed in a comprehensive LMO overhaul. Planning Commission hearings were held and the commission recommended approval.
Public commenter Chester Williams and other committee members sought clarity about wording such as “reasonable rules and regulations” for access to open space and whether the code language should use “shall” versus “may” in specific approval steps; staff explained those choices and said the published packet contained a formatting error but the version presented at the meeting reflects the intended text.
Ending: The committee’s recommendation advances the open‑space and pathway standards to town council; staff said the amendment is intended to preserve specimen trees, improve pedestrian connectivity and ensure open spaces are usable rather than tokenized landscape credits.
