Laserfiche WebLink
0 0 <br />of what the impact to that project is and thereby determine how much right-of-way could be <br />taken from the individual. He further argued that his client has a constitutional right to <br />compensation for his right-of-way and had not waived such right. <br />Chairman Wheeler reminded Mr. Barkett of his promise to deliver the deed to <br />escrow as soon as they get the legal description and to work out the terms with the County <br />Attorney. He asked Mr. Barkett why that was not done. <br />Mr. Barkett had done some research, on his client's behalf, and found out it was <br />not legal. Chairman Wheeler engaged in further discussions with Mr. Barkett and could not <br />support the request without the right-of-way. <br />Michael O'Haire, Esquire, representing Double R&D Inc., also discussed eminent <br />domain issues and his client's entitlement, under the law, to have the Comprehensive Plan <br />change and rezoning granted. He hoped the Board would not deny the approval unless his client <br />contributes right-of-way. <br />Chairman Wheeler explained his position when the Board in the past voted on this. <br />Commissioner Davis was concerned with interconnectivity issues, which he explained. He could <br />not put taxpayers in a compromising position. <br />Mr. O'Haire and Commissioner Davis engaged in discussion regarding denial of <br />the rezoning. Commissioner Davis expressed strong opposition to the granting of an "up -zoning <br />so they could buy it later." <br />Joseph Paladin, Chairman, Growth Awareness Committee (a Private Sector <br />Organization) commented that the policy mentioned earlier "more reflects on raw lands" and <br />negotiated right-of-ways before we enter into development. He urged the Board to vote "no" on <br />March 6, 2007 21 <br />BR <br />1456 <br />