Browse
Search
Minutes - 19871123
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
Minutes - Approved
>
1980's
>
1987
>
Minutes - 19871123
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/3/2013 9:12:38 AM
Creation date
8/13/2008 12:53:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
11/23/1987
Document Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
309 <br />Chair Marshall stated that the Board felt that condemnation <br />of land was a very serious issue and there is no intent to <br />condemn land for the Master Recreation and Parks Plan. With <br />an adopted plan, there is a way to acquire those lands under <br />the Subdivision Regulations or the Planned Development <br />procedures. Also, payment-in-lieu of recreational space, <br />enables the building of a fund to buy land that may be vital <br />to the Plan a <br />Mr. Warren responded that he felt such options should be <br />"spelled out" in the plan. Ms. Marshall concurred. <br />Linda Heitzer expressed concern and opposition to the <br />greenway plan. A copy of her comments in a letter to the <br />Durham Morning Herald is in the permanent agenda file in the <br />clerk's office. <br />Laura Lloyd stated that her family are property owners in the <br />Joint Planning Area and Bingham Township. She expressed <br />opposition to the proposed .greenway system which would allow <br />the unsupervised public to walk up and down most of the <br />creeks in Orange County. She asked that the portion of the <br />Plan be omitted which called for the taking of private lands <br />for a public greenway system. She expressed concern that she <br />had already had to donate easements on her property with a <br />five-acre lot subdivision in order to have the subdivision <br />approved with a private road. She felt that the County did <br />not have the right to take private land for public use and <br />she did not desire to have people walking along her property <br />which is in a protected watershed. She continued asking if <br />the County would be securing the stream buffer easements from <br />private property owners in the same manner it had with her <br />subdivision. <br />Max Kennedy, member of the Orange County Board of Education, <br />expressed concern with priorities. The two that he was most <br />concerned about were education and water. He was concerned <br />with the figure of $43,000,ooo.p0 to be spent on recreation <br />over a period of twenty years when he felt that education and <br />water are not adequately addressed both in the current and <br />capital point of view. He questioned whether or not parks <br />could be maintained for the figures presented even if park <br />lands were donated. <br />He expressed concern that the schools had been mentioned as <br />one of the agencies involved in the development of the plan. <br />He noted that the orange County School Board had not been <br />involved in the project even though some personnel have <br />contributed information for those involved in the plan <br />development. He emphasized that his Board had neither <br />endorsed nor condemned the Plan at this point nor were they <br />part and parcel of the Plan. <br />Mr. Kennedy continued in reference to the comment that <br />greenways would develop as adjacent property is developed, <br />that it would be required of the individual developers to <br />donate to the County as a provision of the Subdivision <br />Regulations. He expressed concern that the rights of property <br />owners are subordinate to those desiring to walk on their <br />property. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.