With more than 2,000 acres of parks and greenspace in Columbia, it’s safe to say that residents value their time outdoors. But does the city have the right to allow public access on land dedicated to them through a conservation easement?
The City Council hasn’t come to a consensus yet, as evidenced by Monday night’s discussion of rezoning land for the development of the Silver Oak Senior Living Center.
The talk centered on whether the public would have access to about 2.7 acres of forest that would be preserved.
The original greenspace conservation easement would have meant that the developer couldn’t build over those 2.7 acres. However, it would not have allowed anyone to enter that area either.
This is where things get contentious.
Woodridge Neighborhood Association president Allen Hahn said the association hadn’t discussed whether the public should have access to the land preserved by the easement.
Mayor Darwin Hindman and Third Ward Councilman Karl Skala agreed that the forest should be open for the public to enjoy.
“It bothers me a lot to have a public area that for some reason – whether it’s a conservation easement or any other – limits access to some folks particularly over access to others,” Skala said.
But easements don’t transfer ownership of the land to the city; they only allow the city to maintain it, as Fifth Ward Councilwoman Laura Nauser pointed out.
“If we put it as an access (easement), then anybody has the right to come onto that property, which is still private property, which we have just allowed the public to access at free will,” she said
“I’m not talking about having a picnic in the middle of this piece of property,” Skala said. “I’m talking about watching some birds, that’s all. And you cannot do that with a conservation easement, apparently.”
The neighborhood association’s goal was to protect the trees, said Fourth Ward Councilman Jerry Wade said.
“The greenspace conservation easement, I think, is the correct way to do that,” he said.
“Every inch of our public property does not have to be accessible to everyone,” Nauser said. “If it were deeded to the city, I would have no problem.”
Woodridge Neighborhood Association president Allen Hahn said the association hadn’t discussed whether the public should have access to the land preserved by the easement.
In the end, the council voted to rezone the property and allow the developer and the residents to negotiate a new easement, which would be presented to the council for approval.
What do you think? Should the easement allow for public access to the preserved forest? Or should the land be kept private?
Filed under: 3rd Ward, City Council, City Government, Neighborhoods, Public Hearings, Reporter's Notebook | Tagged: Allen Hahn, Catherine McComb, Darwin Hindman, Jerry Wade, Karl Skala, Laura Nauser, Silver Oak Senior Living Center, SOCH LC, Woodridge Neighborhood Association
It’s private property, leave it be. If the neighbors want access to it, they can make an offer to the current landowner.
If public funds were used directly or indirectly (soft costs of the project), then there should be benefits from the easement to the public. However, the public and private uses should be compatible with each other and the city /county should develop a comprehensive policy that 1) establishes those compatible uses (e.g. hunting and raising livestock aren’t compatible; hiking and a development buffer are compatible uses); and 2) encourages the utilization of conservation easements. It’s a wonderful tool for maintaining our quality of life.