Both city staff and residents agree, it’s important to plan for the future of Westbrook’s open spaces. Some landowners, however, say mapping out that plan – showing parks and trails on their private property – is going too far.
After a six-month study by the planning department and Richardson & Associates, an architectural firm based in Saco, the city in April first saw the concept plan to increase open space and protect Westbrook’s natural resources. The plan included connected walking trails, more parks and land easements.
Tuesday, residents, many of whom said they should have been brought into the process earlier, let the Planning Board know how they felt about the plan. Though some were supportive of the work done and urged the board to keep moving forward, others said the process was moving too fast.
According to City Planner Molly Just, the 30-year plan was designed to provide a guide for open space and recreational opportunities in the event of a total build out of the city. If land is not redeveloped, she said, many of the parks and trails indicated on the map wouldn’t be necessary.
Still, property owners said, they didn’t want to see dots and circles indicating parks and trails the city would like to see on their land.
“Plans tend to take on their own lives,” said Westbrook resident Mike White, who was uncomfortable seeing a future Little League field marked on his land on the map.
“Words get dropped off plans, staff changes, these meetings get forgotten,” he said. “I don’t think it’s appropriate for us to crash ahead with this.”
Beth Paulson-Olmstead, who said she liked the idea of a walkable city, said she thought having a plan of the city’s future was unnecessary.
“I don’t know one, single person who says, ‘I want to have a circle around my property,'” she said, referring to the circles indicating future parks on the concept map. “It has gone well beyond where it should be.”
Tammy Brown said she thought having the map available to the public was deceptive and confusing for residents and visitors, who might think it was a map of the city’s current parks and trails and end up walking through people’s back yards.
“The map should depict what is now available,” she said. “Remove the map, slow the process, inform residents affected.”
Some residents spoke up in favor of the plan.
Mike Shutts, who serves on the city’s Recreation and Conservation Commission, said it’s important to have a plan in place, rather than “take a haphazard approach” to moving forward with providing recreational and open spaces in the city.
“I think we’ve got a pretty decent plan,” he said. “My recommendation is take it.”
Paul Niehoff said having the plan drawn out could help the city get state a federal money for future open space projects, which, he said, is a good reason to have an overall plan that indicates, both to city staff and to others, “where you’re headed down the road.”
Send questions/comments to the editors.
