Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 4 guests

Lafferty land fight intensifies

Discussions related to articles

Lafferty land fight intensifies

Postby whippis » Tue Mar 18, 2014 9:48 am

Why is this even an issue? I'm not necessarily a fan of how it has been used in other places (New London, CT) but this is exactly why the concept of eminent domain exists. Certainly the city could have spent less buying the access to its land than the legal fights have cost. Take the access point, grant an easement back to the other property owners who need it and move on. None of the articles explain why this was never done or even contemplated. Does anyone know? Same goes for the other owner who won’t allow a connection between this land and the park. My wife’s aunt had land bought under eminent domain in MA for exactly this purpose- linking of two public trails. People agruing in court over 150 year old maps? It would be funny if it were in the Onion.
whippis
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 8:13 am

Re: Lafferty land fight intensifies

Postby SadPipal » Tue Mar 18, 2014 10:49 am

Absolutely right. I believe both cases but particularly Lafferty, meet the criteria for ED. Actually buy a little more to allow for easier access and parking, possibly a park center, bathrooms etc. About time all this nonsense stopped. The landowners, who realistically won't even be impacted, will be forced to stop their belligerent nonsense. I have no idea why the city insist on taking the most expensive path possible while neglecting our infrastructure and demanding more taxes.

Use the tools allowed by law and just get it done.
SadPipal
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:55 am

Re: Lafferty land fight intensifies

Postby whippis » Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:22 am

I underatsnd the adjecent landowners' concerns- more traffic, decreased property values etc. However I think in this instance those concerns are outweighted by the public interest in using the land. I do not agree with a larger taking for facilities. If facitlites are to be built they should be on the land already owned by the city. The public should take the minimum it needs to gain access to the land and link it to other public lands.
whippis
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 8:13 am

Re: Lafferty land fight intensifies

Postby SadPipal » Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:22 pm

The reason I suggest more, and as little as possible is to allow some parking, and bathrooms for, the obvious reasons to ensure it stays pleasant, along with some form of interpretive center. Both could be integrated in one building. Simply enough to allow full access to OUR land for all. A few thousand square feet is nothing compared to the acres owned and can be done in such away as to respect property rights and privacy. Just creating a gate limits who can use it. Agreed no more than absolutely necessary for the common good with minimal intrusion. Sure this could be in the park but better at the entrance if possible. May well be only a couple of hundred are needed. Whatever works best for all including the homeowners.
SadPipal
 
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2014 5:55 am

Re: Lafferty land fight intensifies

Postby da shaman » Wed Mar 19, 2014 11:47 am

the city can't take care of the parks we have now. What makes you think the addition of Lafferty will be any different? People are slobs and will throw their trash any damn place they feel like. Cars will be parked any and everywhere. Who will be charged with the policing of the park? The PPD is too short-handed as it is. I can see the problems now with emergency vehicles unable to get to the park because of poorly parked vehicles and poor access to the park. Better to leave the land alone. We are not the stewards we think we are.
da shaman
 
Posts: 272
Joined: Wed May 25, 2011 9:47 am

Re: Lafferty land fight intensifies

Postby BayNative » Fri Mar 28, 2014 8:42 am

I'd just let it rest until the City's budget is balanced, the economy is thriving, and existing parks first are well maintained.

It's not going anywhere. There is nothing particularly special about the area.. just more California grassy hills with Oak trees. We already have dozens of areas in the near area to hike and bike.

I'm joining a voluntary crew of parents to maintain the baseball diamond at our local park because the City can't. We are lucky to get the field mowed, forget about basepath/infield maintenance. Volunteers are rototilling/grading/raking to get the weeds out, but the lumpiness of the whole field means this will be another season of "bad hops". Not a big deal on the scheme of things, but where are the millions of dollars for establishing an additional park????

Human nature is enamoured with "Shiny and New".
BayNative
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 9:20 am

Re: Lafferty land fight intensifies

Postby whippis » Fri Mar 28, 2014 10:45 am

City doesn't need to establish a park on the land now or ever. The issue is with adjecent landowners not allowing access to the land the city owns.
whippis
 
Posts: 236
Joined: Fri May 03, 2013 8:13 am


Return to In the news

cron