Laserfiche WebLink
Under discussion, Commissioner Scurlock noted that this <br />particular piece of property was secured for recreation purposes <br />under the original pla-t, and asked if we have the legal ability, <br />if we sell it, to remove that encumbrance and allow it'to be used <br />for some non -recreational purpose. <br />Attorney Collins advised that we do, and recalled that we <br />had a case about two years ago up in Orchid Island Estates where <br />we were trying to swap a tract of park land in Hobart Park, and <br />the court ruled that any person who purchases a lot by reference <br />to a plat map that shows a park tract has an implied easement to <br />use that as a park tract. in this case the applicant for plat <br />vacation owns all the lots, and they are the only on.es who could <br />raise an objection to us selling it to a third party. What they <br />want to do is take a single family subdivision of sub -standard <br />sized lots and replat it for muNiti-family development, but when <br />the Planning Dept, wanted to reserve access to this park tract, <br />they said that if they had to have roa-ds---th-r-ough---t-he i -r <br />multi -family development, it is going to frustrate the whole <br />project. The applicant could still could object ,to a sale, but <br />we have to go through the bidding process because the statute <br />says that if we sell anything worth more than $5,000, we have to <br />bid it. <br />Attorney Collins felt it is probably an abundance in <br />caution, but we just want to cover all our bases. The applicant <br />will end up buying the tract, replatting it, and bringing in a <br />new multi -family development. <br />THE CHAIRMAN CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion was <br />voted on and carried unanimously. <br />'F 61 sir �1 <br />BOOK © fIlu 9 <br />