Item B: Parks, Recreation and Open Space Comprehensive Plan

Home Browse Search

Changing those land uses is indeed burdensome, costly, and usually frustrating. We understand staffs desire to avoid making land use decisions in order to simplify their future procedures. We understand, but we do not agree. The public sector must comply with our land use process as much as the private sector. Staffis proposing that 1,623.46 acres be acquired for public use and much of the land will come from land with residential plan designations or zoning or will come from lands outside the UGB for which no master park plan has been developed. That is inconsistent with the Metro Plan and state statutes. IV. The Refmement Plan is inconsistent with the Metro Plan because it does not take recreational facilities and open space owned by other public entities or by private parties into account. In response to questions from the commissioners at the Monday work session, staff said that they had made a conscious decision to only include city owned land in the parks and open space inventory. Their explanation was that there is no guarantee that private recreation and open space would be held in that usage in perpetuity. Such a guarantee is not a reasonable requirement. Each new park refinement plan (presumably every 20 years) will include a new inventory. If park land is converted to another use during a planning period, that would simply be reflected in the new inventory. The Metro Plan requires that private recreation facilities and open space be considered in the park planning process. Under the Parks and Recreation Facilities Element ofthe Metro Plan~ numerous references are made to the inclusion of private facilities. Under the description of the different types of parks, for example, Special Recreational Facilities are defined as follows: Special recreational facilities include, for example, public and private golf courses, tennis courts, and swimming poots (emphasis added). It goes on to say: In addition, the park and recreation agencies and the metropolitan school districts have combined their resource and coordinated efforts to provide open space and parks and recreation facilities in conjunction with the schools. Also, in recent years, private recreational facilities, such as swimming pools and tennis and racquetball courts, have been developed. Several private golf courses have been in operation in the community for a number of years. The findings also speak to the issue: 4. While the NRP A standards provide a useful comparison, they should not be used as the determinant of the adequacy of the park and recreation facilities provided by each jurisdiction. A determination of the adequacy must be based, not only on total acres or facilities, but also on the values of the residents, the location of park and recreation facilities in relation to the residents each in intended to serve, the specific function each is . 10