Laserfiche WebLink
I believe there is a fundamental right for a community to decide (within reasonable limits)how it <br /> wants to develop. Cities within our region and across the State vary widely in their emphasis on <br /> economic development, community aesthetics, environmental protection, and many other <br /> objectives. These choices affect the image and character of the community and they are <br /> normally reflected in the community's comprehensive plan and ordinances. <br /> Just as I argue that the community gets to decide what kind of park system it provides, it also <br /> gets to decide how much commercial and industrial land it will zone and provide services to. <br /> Obviously,these types of land use are intensive and consumptive of open space, and they involve <br /> large paved parking lots, buildings and they bring employees and users into the community. In <br /> short,they consume land and create intensive activity centers. By designating land for <br /> commercial and/or industrial use, the community inevitably causes this land to be valued higher <br /> than property planned and zoned for less intensive use. Clearly, the value of land is based on <br /> how it can be used. <br /> I do not see any reason why a community could not find that it is in the public interest to retain <br /> and maintain some open space as it develops. Furthermore, I do not see why that community <br /> could not conclude that all of the land owners, representing all of the types of uses proposed for <br /> the community,must share in the burden of providing some percentage of their land as <br /> permanent open space. Certainly,this is what setback and lot coverage standards do, and I think <br /> the justification could be rationally extended to include park dedication. Therefore, I would <br /> argue that some base level of land dedication could be established for all types of development <br /> and that approach could be justified. <br /> Where the matter becomes more complicated is when the analysis shifts to identifying which <br /> types of land use create a demand for park services. If you challenge a park director in a <br /> suburban community about the requirement for park dedication in an industrial project,they will <br /> usually respond that their community has a tremendous demand for facilities caused by league <br /> play(softball,tennis, broomball, etc.), and that it is the employees from companies in town that <br /> participate in these leagues. <br /> If a community chooses to justify park dedication in industrial districts because every land use <br /> must contribute some base line amount of land for open space, I believe that is reasonable and <br /> defensible. If, on the other hand,this dedication is justified based on the demand for park <br /> facilities caused by employees, the matter becomes much more complicated. At the very least, <br /> the community should complete some analysis to determine the percentage of use (however <br /> defined)that is attributable to employees of local companies and what percentage is generated by <br /> residential development. However, what I believe you will find is great disparities between the <br /> level of demand created by a large diverse grouping of businesses that happen to fall within the <br /> same zoning category. You will find some businesses that generate tremendous demand for <br /> services and some that generate none. Among the latter category, there will undoubtedly be <br /> 5 <br />