Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parks Rezoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and parks officials press Planning Board to restore $100,000 for park rezoning and master-plan work
Summary
Multiple park advocates and the Parks & Recreation Commission urged the Planning Board to reinstate $100,000 to map and rezone parcels used as parkland, arguing unzoned park parcels are vulnerable to development and that $100,000 is small compared with long-term risks.
Park advocates, the Parks & Recreation Commission and nonprofit park stewards urged the Stamford Planning Board on Jan. 7 to restore $100,000 proposed for mapping and rezoning parcels that are used as parkland but are not formally zoned as parks.
Melanie Hollis, chair of the Parks & Recreation Commission, said that rezoning provides "a layer of protection" for parkland and urged the board to fully fund three requests: a $100,000 rezoning allocation, a field needs assessment the commission originally requested at $250,000 (reduced in the draft) and additional funding for tennis courts at Scalzi and Cove. Hollis noted the city scored poorly on the Trust for Public Land park metrics and said the three capital requests align with the city's park strategic plan.
Several members of the public backed the request. Shelly Michaelson cited national parks benchmarks and warned that parcels currently used as parkland but zoned residential or commercial are at risk of future conversion; Mill River Park Collaborative's Nettie Compton argued that $100,000 to map and protect park parcels is a prudent investment compared with the cost of reclaiming lost acreage.
Tracy Kaye, representing Bartlett Arboretum, clarified that the Arboretum has $550,000 in city funding and $570,000 in private contributions and is seeking an additional $300,000 for a greenhouse and related project; she said unresolved parcel consolidation issues have delayed construction.
Planning Board members asked whether rezoning work could be folded into the comprehensive-plan update but were told rezoning still requires separate legal notices and costs that the land use bureau would need to cover. The board did not adopt a final funding decision during the hearing and will include public input in its recommendation to the mayor.
