Because of the constant turn-over in our city of elected officials and staff, major issues and even law suits fall through the cracks. What ever happened to the public rights of way of nearly 5 years ago where certain owners on the Intracoastal Waterway believed that they should own public property, the pocket parks adjacent to their houses. They wanted to grab city owned land and claim it as their own.
Commissions changed and politics being what it is, allowed this to "go away." These rights of way belong to the City and this issue needs to be re-visited. There are six blogs on this issue (LABELS Pocket Parks)--here are three of them.
Nancy Shepherd vs. the City of Lake Worth. This case was originally filed on November 9, 2009 and is still opened to this day. The City of Lake Worth has never filed the names of any new attorneys on the case. Elaine Humphreys and Jean Middleton are still the attorneys of record. There is no reason why a case of "grabbing public property" should be going on for 4 years.
Pocket Parks, city Rights of Way
Pocket Parks Again
15 comments:
thanks for bringing this up again. no one has the right to steal public land.
I believe the picture above is on South Lakeside- you'll notice how well maintained it is. These aren't park area, they are actually unpaved roads with utility accesses. And the issue to the people it directly effects (no, that doesn't include me) is safety, not grabbing up city land. During the day, people may walk down to the water to look or fish, which is fine. But at night, it's a whole different world that comes out, especially with South Federal and all it's know prositution and drugs 2 streets over. Also notice the white plank barrier that had to be installed only a few months after opening the area. Peolpe were constantly driving down to the water at night, partying with loud music, using it as an hourly motel, walking up on residents property from the back and enjoying their patios. The police had a difficult time monitoring these areas as there is no lighting and they will not leave their cars and walk the 150 feet back to the water because of their own safety. Sometimes all points need to be considered, I'm sure you would not appreciate being woke in the middle of the night or having strangers waking around your home while you sleep.
It's the Right-Of-Way at end of Wellesley Drive.
Sorry but a PBSO dereliction of duty is not an excuse to steal public land. Prostitutes hang out everywhere, including John Prince Park. I've seen homeless guys sleeping on the benches in front of City Hall. Shall we hand these things over to the Shepards, also? Or should we all demand that the cops start doing their jobs?
Katie Mcgiveron
The pocket parks should be open to the public and signs should be posted if the parks are closed at sundown and those rules should be enforce. I can understand why a neighbor might object to people walking back and forth on a small parcel of land (which abuts their property) in the middle of the night.
But the prior lawsuit, which as you note is still pending, wasn't about access to the park, rather the abutting owner claimed ownership over it under adverse property rules.
Your right Katie, the prostitutes, drug users and homeless are everywhere..so think about how much fun they are having in these small, unlight,obscure, out of the way places, which unfortunately are only feet away from someones bedroom window.
I had a prostitute and a john pull into our alley and into a drive way of an bank owned property. I called PBSO which showed up but did not do anything besides tell them to move along. Does that mean I can lay claim to the property? If yes, whoo-hoo.
if the owners of the property that abut the "easement" public right of way or what ever its called were to communicate with each other they could file a petition to try to get the area abandoned.
Its called a: Right-of-way Abandonment request. It is a *process* but it works. We all gained an additional 15' of depth to our back yards in Boca...the only caveat is that we have to give access to the utility companies if need be.
I believe several years ago the City of LW passed a law that NO public property can be sold, given away or even leased for more than 19+ years without being voted on by the registered residents of this city. Why is there discussion about owners stealing city property?
There's discussion because there is an outstanding lawsuit where Nancy Shepherd wants the right of way. good point though.
This is a complicated issue. Something you all may find interesting on public right of ways:
The city cannot sell, lease or give away the property with public right of ways because the city does not own the property. When the city abandons a right of way the property remains under the ownership of the adjacent deed holders, who have been paying taxes on the property to the center line all along.
The 'pocket parks' discussed on this thread are public right of ways not public property (like the beach complex).
David-
Right-of-way means property owned by the City for use by the public as a means of passage. I would be interested in any link or information that says otherwise. Thanks.
Lynn@10:00, "a means of passage" to what? Do we really want people to park in or in front of these right of ways. If so the city would have to maintain them. Right now, seems to me, landowners maintain them without any benefit. I see no purpose in this debate. The change over in electric transmission and the 2020 plan are the biggest issues in the city. Asking a small number of citizens to foot the bill for the 2020 plan makes talk about right of ways trivial. No, I donot live near one. Ilive on a street with a good road but terrible curbs and sidewalks. Under the plan my sidewalks and curbs will not be repaired, but I will be expected to pay for the rest of the city based on my property value. Tough sell.
All the issues that may seem "trivial" to some people are not to others. Stealing public land is not trivial IMO. And all the smaller or "trivial" issues add up to what becomes dozens of issues that are never acted upon thus allowing our city to go unchecked and further deteriorate.
No matter how much this commission wants to obligate the taxpayers to a general obligation bond for untold millions and untold number of years, it will not pass, IMO. I think they need to revisit this pipe dream--perhaps special assessments for each individual block that is being repaired. Dunno.
To obligate the few who pay the most taxes to pay for road infrastructure throughout our city is unfair as is obligating taxpayers to pay for infrastructure at the Park of Commerce in order to attract development that may never come.
Lynn, I agree with most of your comments to my comments. Seems like Maxwells re-election war cry always has Park of Commerce up front. The only disagreement I have with you is on right of ways. No one is stealing them. But it makes no sense to promote their use as maintenance would be another headache to the city. On another note I am for leashed and cleaned up after dogs in our beach park. Write tickets for infractions.
Post a Comment