Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
or inconvenience to the citizens. She said that there are many unanswered concerns <br /> about the trail, and she listed them: <br /> - What exists for private landowners who have trail users enter on private <br /> property? <br /> - Are the entities allowed a rebate on property taxes by the County for the land <br /> granted for easement, or does the County still wish to secure revenue for the <br /> grantor? <br /> - What proposals are in place to assure security on the trail? <br /> She said that it seems that the County Commissioners seem to promote what <br /> they like over the rule of the people in general. She said that there are more concerns, <br /> but the County Commissioners need to figure out a way to collaboratively share the <br /> information with the population. <br /> Bill Charles read a prepared statement: <br /> "My name is Bill Charles and I wish to speak on the behalf of a group that has not <br /> yet been here, all the Orange County property owners and citizens that may be directly <br /> affected by the proposed Mountain to Sea Trail (MST). <br /> The MST organization has proposed the trail to be somewhere in a mile wide <br /> swath or corridor passing from the Haw River, North along Cane Creek, through the <br /> OWASA lands, then North-East to the Eno River. (Primarily in Bingham Township). The <br /> possibly affected parties are not just the property owners inside the corridor, but also <br /> citizens with property boundaries contiguous to its East and West borders. The final <br /> route may not be centered in the corridor, but may pass close to its fringes and affect <br /> these outside properties. The total affected parties may well number in the hundreds. <br /> We have heard many questions and seen much opposition to the MST from the <br /> citizens opposed to the OWASA trail routing. What part of this opposition was caused <br /> by lack of communication by OWASA, and the citizens who only became aware of the <br /> trail plans by flags being placed along their properties? This lack of involvement has <br /> fueled some rancor. <br /> I ask that the same lack of communication not be applied to the much greater <br /> sections of the trail proposed North and South of the reservoir. All of these Orange <br /> County property owners deserve to be informed about the MST planning in their areas. <br /> We believe that the board can take a leadership role and inform and involve citizens as <br /> partners in the decisions that will possibly affect them. <br /> So, in the interest of transparency and public interest, we, once again, ask that <br /> the Mountains to Sea Trail be placed on an upcoming regular agenda for public <br /> discussion. Given the problems with prior meetings, we ask that the topic be placed first <br /> on the agenda. We hope to cover the following topics: <br /> - First— how to create a process to directly and formally notify all property <br /> holders who could potentially host the trail. These are property holders in the <br /> one mile swath and the contiguous properties. These property holders must <br /> be informed on issues such as: parking, trail development and maintenance, <br /> liability risks to property owners, safety, security and fire response. Also, <br /> what are the standard terms of permanent easements that might be placed <br /> on their property. <br /> - Second, where might the access points be located and how will they be <br /> secured and managed? Every known park or trail access point in Orange <br /> County is a secured public location that is actively managed. Bingham has <br /> no managed access points. Even the few homes in the Thunder Mountain <br />