Sweetgrass PUD amendment

The applicant's planning agent argued the amendment fulfills the original promise of a 45-acre community park and said the private recreation component is incidental; urged approval.

Ward 1 resident supported Aldrich's concerns, noted Sweetgrass residents have waited roughly ten years for their park, and suggested checking state statute on dedications.

Argued the amendment codifies a reduction of promised public parkland from 66+ acres to 45, and objected to a subsection allowing 25% land use changes without major amendment review; urged rejection until a transparent map is provided.

The owner's planning agent explained the park acreage split and the PUD zone-change provision, saying the HOA-area residents he contacted raised no opposition.

Self-described technical auditor claimed the PUD amendment contains structural defects and asked council to vote no; the mayor noted he was premature since it was second reading.