The city indicated that the conservation easement was not put in place as part of any planning commission meeting requirement. My notes show that the city indicates that they have copies of correspondence from 1995 between the owner/developer of the residential lots (my house in Lakeview Estates) and the city regarding concerns that the residential property developer had about the commercial buildings being so close to the residential lots.
The New Morning Windows building was originally going to be on the property now owned by Malt-O-Meal but it was moved to where it is now and as part of the "land sale agreement" for the New Morning Windows purchase of 14.4 acres, the conservation easement was put in place.
The argument now being put forward by the city is that the conservation easement is no longer needed since the commercial property is now owned by a new owner (since New Morning Windows sold the 4.5 acres to Malt-O-Meal) and that the development is a parking lot and office building rather than any expansion of the window manufacturing or expansion by the original owner. The city's other justification is that there are no conservation easements on either of the neighboring office park properties - only on these 700 feet that are adjacent to the Lakeview Estates residential lots.
This is all interesting given the city's own web site new resident guide "Conservation easements are a partnership between the landowner and the City to forever protect the environmental features of the property" and "In conservation easement areas, the landowner agrees to restrict certain uses of the land and obligates future landowners to the same restrictions"...
The problem I have with this is that I relied on that conservation easement when I bought and built my home - I did my research in 1998 and never would have built here had the conservation easement not been in place. I am now hoping that any information that would indicate that the easement was put in place to protect the homeowners (my home for example) would be enough to give me "standing".
No comments:
Post a Comment