SHERIDAN — Sheridan City Council members continued debating open space requirements and the impact on affordable housing in the community Monday, even proposing at one point to eliminate all open space requirements in new developments.
The discussion came as part of an ongoing effort to update city code to better define the term “open space,” particularly as it applies to future developments. Currently, open space is generally defined as unimproved land or water set aside, dedicated or designated for public or private use of owners, adjoining landowners or the public. But city code references “open space” and parks, using a variety of terms without clearly defining their meaning.
Sheridan Community Development Director Wade Sanner proposed defining open space in city code as, “land that is preserved or undeveloped, in order to protect and conserve resources and provide passive or active recreation. Open space can be owned or managed by both private and public entities, which may or may not have public access. Open space could include detention ponds, sensitive slopes, healthy forested lands, habitat conservation areas and open grasslands.”
Sanner noted the city has had open space regulations and dedications in its code since 1969, so the concept is not new. The proposed changes to the ordinance simply add definitions, but don’t change existing requirements.
Outgoing Councilor Clint Beaver, though, saw the conversation as an opportunity to help address the affordable housing issues facing the community.
An amendment to the ordinance offered by Beaver would have deleted most of the open space requirements spelled out in city code and instead emphasized that by eliminating such requirements the city was being consistent with its stated goals of addressing housing needs.
Beaver argued that the “pocket parks” and small areas created by the requirements are not the draw people refer to when complimenting the city for its parks and pathways.
“They’re thinking about the whole pathway system and our large community parks,” Beaver said. So there’s a disconnect sometimes I think in the language here. People could definitely be for open space, and yet appreciate the zoning regulations that we have here…actually work against our desire to have affordable housing.”
While most of the city councilors agreed that the city should reconsider the requirements in code as they pertain to the percentage of to-be developed lands set aside as open space, they did not go as far as wanting to repeal the requirements completely.
Councilor Kristen Jennings voted in favor of Beaver’s amendment, stating the open space requirements bucked against private property rights as well.
Overall, though, while Beaver and some developers have stated eliminating the open space requirements could lower development costs by creating bigger returns for investors, several councilors doubted the change would lower housing costs significantly but could damage what makes Sheridan special to residents.
Councilor Aaron Linden said he plans to bring forward an amendment for the third and final reading of the ordinance, seeking to adjust the percentages outlined in the city’s open space requirements, but did not support eliminating the wording completely.
