|
|
|
| Thu, Nov. 12 - - Mobile - RSS | |
|
|
Crow's Nest to be condemned
Stafford to condemn Crow's NestDate published: 6/21/2006 By MEGHANN COTTER Late last night Stafford supervisors came out of closed session and voted 6-0 to condemn the environmentally sensitive Crow's Nest peninsula. The process requires taking the owner, K&M Properties of McLean, to court. The company planned to put 688 homes on 3,230 acres. County officials offered to pay $30.5 million for the land in May. The developers response to that proposal and specific details about the condemnation process were not clear at press time. The developer's attorney, Clark Leming, could not be reached for comment. Supervisor Paul Milde, whose district includes Crow's Nest, said he has mixed feelings about condemning the peninsula. "It's not the route the board would have preferred," he said. He considered condemnation a last resort, he said. But the board's action last night is proof of how serious the county is about preserving the peninsula. Crow's Nest activists have been urging the county to save the peninsula since other options at the state level fell through. Cecilia Kirkman, founder of the Save Crow's Nest preservation group, said last night she was delighted. "It's unfortunate that the owners of the property have apparently been unable to negotiate in good faith, and it is good to see the Board of Supervisors taking this positive step," she said. To reach MEGHANN COTTER:
Read more stories about Stafford Date published: 6/21/2006
Well done, BOS
(posted by
JohnKnight
, Sep. 25, 2007 2:41 pm)
This is excellent news. The Crow's Nest is a lovely, environmentally sensitive area which should be preserved for posterity. The BOS has taken the brave step to look beyond short term commercial gain and should be supported by all those who are concerned by the ever increasing urbanisation of the County.
Don't agree with the BOS
(posted by
jghughes
, Sep. 25, 2007 2:41 pm)
Disagree with the Board for several reasons. One it will cost us millions of dollars that we could spend better. The cost will only escalate with time and legal costs. Two, I don't think they will win sincethey are not doing it for the public good, but for the benefit of a very small number of residents. Three, this is just another attempt to slow growth in the county, which is why the previous board was thrown out.
Not sure if I agree with BOS
(posted by
WeimCity
, Sep. 25, 2007 2:41 pm)
With this action to seek taking private property which apparently can not be purchased with the ever inflating property values in Stafford County, I am not sure if this endeavor can make it throug the pending legal actions. This property was acquired with the intent to develop, the owner went through legal procedures and then at the last minute, problems which should have been disclosed during the initial reveiw were used in the third review to defeat the proposed development. What am I missing?
|
 |
|||
|
|||
