Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
allow flexibility to initiate new concepts and implement ~~~w <br />programs as needs change. She continued challenging the <br />Board to prepare individual park master plans with <br />considerations given to all the. findings and recommendations <br />in the larger comprehensive plan and the same challenge would <br />be presented for a Greenway/Open Space Master Plan. She <br />concluded asking that the plan be updated and be used to <br />determine the level of leisure services Orange County will be <br />providing. <br />Lindsey Efland, speaking as a property owner whose property <br />will be affected by the Plan, indicated he appreciated the <br />County's efforts to provide .parks for its citizens living <br />outside municipalities but expressed objections to the <br />proposed greenways system. He stated he felt this proposal <br />diverts attention from the acquisition of land for community <br />and district parks. He continued that Orange County is not <br />ready for a mandated network of greenways involving private <br />land and that most citizens would view this as a taking of <br />property rights. <br />Mr. Efland continued expressing concerns that resources are <br />not available to adequately control and administer such a <br />plan. He cited the Efland Sewer Project as an example <br />indicating it is a necessary and worthwhile project but has, <br />in his opinion, been poorly administered. He indicated that <br />he had some slides that showed the destruction of a creek in <br />Efland with the implementation of the sewer project. He <br />noted that had a private developer been responsible for such <br />environmental destruction, he felt the County would have <br />secured a court injunction stopping construction until good <br />practices were restored. He expressed concern that Orange <br />County is not acting as a good steward of the land in this. <br />case. He continued that he felt the language of the Master. <br />Plan is too vague for his support of the greenway plan. <br />Mr. Efland stated that while the County needs to be aware of <br />the continuing development pressures, the government mandated <br />public access across private land is not the answer. He <br />asked that the committee concentrate on the location and <br />development of specific park projects so that the. public can <br />focus positively on that process rather than react negatively <br />to the entire package primarily because of objections to <br />greenways. <br />Mr. Efland, as an Orange County School Board member, stated <br />that he felt a representative of Parks and Recreation should <br />make a presentation to the school board explaining how these <br />proposals will affect property owned by the school system. He <br />indicated that some staff had participated in discussions of <br />the plan but his concern was that there had been no direct <br />address to the school board. <br />At this. point, he presented the slides demonstrating that <br />there is a thirty to fifty foot cleared space at the location <br />where the property owners had signed to the County a twenty <br />foot right-of-way. He stated that the creek is completely <br />dammed up with debris and proper erosion control actions have <br />not been taken. He indicated he felt this damage would not <br />or could not be rectified. This erosion and destruction is <br />