SALISBURY – Officials in Wicomico County approved the acquisition of a conservation easement on Porter Mill Road this week.
On Tuesday, the Wicomico County Council voted to approve a Rural Legacy Area easement acquisition on Porter Mill Road.
Frank McKenzie, chief of technical services and environmental planning for Wicomico County, said the landowners will receive $405,000 in exchange for a conservation easement that limits development potential on the property.
“What we are requesting tonight is your approval for us to proceed with this acquisition to purchase the easement of 270 acres,” he said.
As part of the easement agreement, the property owners will be allowed to retain an existing dwelling unit and establish one new single-family dwelling and one accessory dwelling unit on existing parcels. However, they would forfeit rights to any further subdivision activity on the site.
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
Name the land owner.
ReplyDeleteGo to the county website and look under county council minutes.
ReplyDeleteGot it
ReplyDeleteWilliamson and Lokey —see Sdat MD real property search
Across the Biff’s sludge tank on Porter Mill Rd
This state has a swamp of its own and needs to b e drained.
ReplyDeleteRiddle me this, with the elections 2 years out how in the hell is the County Council stating they will clear ALL department heads just to prove a point? This council may not be re elected themselves so how can they say they are going to clean house? Just because of Michele Ennis you are going to let go or not confirm Dept heads? I can think of 4 that if you let go GOOD LUCK. Destroy the county operations just to make a point? I can not wait to see this.
ReplyDeleteWhere do I sign up (a joke)? I could bearly sell my home in Fruitland for that price. I would bet most homes in Salisbury area on average don't come near that price. Anyone check to see if the Council owns land there?
ReplyDeleteThe "public" wants to tell the landowners can and can't do with their own land, that is legally zoned for how it is being used, and for future development. This is what you get. What the public wanted to do was to "take" away the landowners rights, by limiting development. The "taking" requires a payment in compensation for the loss of their rights under the "Taking Clause" in the 5th amendment of the US Constitution. This payment will compensate the landowners for the limiting of use caused by the easement, and satisfies the law for the taking away some of the landowners rights. Perfectly appropriate and legal. Not only legal, but required to satisfy all the opponents demanding to stop the landowners from using their land for legal activities. Ironic that some of the opponents that wanted to shackle the landowners, now think the payment is political. If it is political, it was the opponents of the landowners that made it political. All is well and as it should be in local politics.
ReplyDelete