Agenda - 12-17-1996 - 9c - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

NORTHEN BLUE, L.L.P. 5 A LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 100 EUROPA DRIVE SUITE 550 JOHN A.NORTHEN CHAPEL HILL,NORTH CAROLINA 27514 MAILING ADDRESS: J.WILLIAM BLUE,JR. P.0.BOX 2208 DAVID M. ROOKS,111 CHAPEL HILL,NC 27515-2208 CHARLES H.THIBAUT CAROL J. HOLCOMB JAMES C.STANFORD TELEPHONE(919) 968-4441 CHERYL Y.CAPRON December 5, 1996 TELEFAX(919) 942-6603 ARLENE O.HANKS E-MAIL: nblaW @netpath.n@t Mr. Geoffrey E. Gledhill Attorney at Law P.O. Drawer 1529 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Re: University Manor Subdivision conservation easement Dear Geoff: Enclosed please find a revised draft of the conservation easement incorporating points made during the December 2 Commissioners meeting. The changes are as follows: Section 2.7 where I deleted the language"as shown in Exhibit B or" which appeared to be unnecessary. Section 3.2 where I added"Property"after"Protected" so the sentence would make sense. Section 16 where I extended the County's time to exercise its option from December 1, 1998 to December 1,2001. I did not change Section 13 dealing with the County's ability to assign the lease. Mr. Bailey does hope to realize a tax benefit from granting the easement,and in order for the easement to qualify for favorable tax treatment,the holder the enforcement rights created in the easement must be an organization qualified to hold conservation easements under IRC § 170(h). Hence, the limitation on assignments must remain in place. I fear the Commissioners did not fully appreciate the nature of the interest the easement document conveys. As we discussed,the document would be more accurately described as a negative servitude than as an easement in that the document grants the County power to enforce the prohibited use provisions of Section 2 rather than granting the County the right to use the property. Consistent with this fact, Section 5 places the burdens of ownership, including all costs and liabilities, on the homeowners association with the exception liability arising out of activities of County employees for whom the County would be responsible. I think it would be fair to say that the easement creates no new potential liability exposure for the County. It might be helpful if you were to explain this to the Commissioners since I believe it would allay most of their concerns.