Preston commissions debate draft open-space incentive subdivision rules, ask for more examples

The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Conservation and Agricultural Commission of Preston met jointly at Preston Town Hall on Jan. 27, 2026, to review draft regulations titled “Open Space Incentive Subdivision — Cluster Housing,” and discussed changes intended to grow the town’s Open Space Fund to support larger land purchases for conservation.

Kathy Warzecha presented the draft and told commissioners the proposal would collect an additional fee or donation on top of the existing open-space fee to build the town’s Open Space Fund. Warzecha said the aim is to have sufficient funds to acquire larger parcels, conservation easements or farmland rather than relying solely on small, piecemeal purchases.

Resident Jill S. Keith, who spoke during public comment, said she was recording the meeting "to share with community members online to make meetings more accessible."

Commissioners raised several concerns and requests for clarification. Terri Eickel warned that the state could move to remove the open-space fee again, which would limit the town’s funding options. Lynwood Crary asked how the regulations would treat donated land that is of limited use (for example, wetlands or swamp) and requested that minimum standards for acceptable open-space donations be stated explicitly in the regulations. Crary also asked about the average value tied to the 10% option mentioned in discussion; Warzecha said recent cases have been few and she would look up and provide examples showing how a 10% payment or credit has operated in practice.

Matt Snurkowski asked whether the commissions would have authority to review offers of land or donations; Warzecha said she would add language to the draft to permit commission review of offers. Fred Eddy suggested giving the commission discretion over applications, while Crary cautioned that broad discretion could increase the risk of litigation. Snurkowski also questioned whether a 5-acre minimum lot size in the draft is too small and could cause more disruption, with Terri Eickel noting that the impact of minimum sizes depends on the parcel’s location and surrounding density.

Gary Piszczek described current easement and bonding practices at the state level, and Ted Zajac observed that while many landowners wish to preserve their land, some land trusts have moved away from accepting easements, which affects preservation pathways.

Commission members expressed interest in seeing concrete examples of how the additional fee or donation has worked elsewhere. Warzecha committed to providing sample cases and revised language for the next joint meeting. No motions or formal votes were recorded during the workshop; the commissions agreed to reconvene to continue drafting the regulations.