Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br />approved by the City and presumably approved by BCDC pursuant to their permit dated <br />two years earlier, defines the public access granted in the third paragraph. It is stated: <br /> <br /> “And said over (sic: owner) hereby dedicates to the public forever, an easement <br />for public ingress and egress to access the public trails, wetland buffer areas, and public <br />interpretive center over, upon, and across those certain strips of land designated as <br />“P.A.E.” (Public Access Easement) as delineated on this map.” <br /> <br /> That is the language of the easement approved by the City and BCDC. No <br />amount of hearsay on what discussions preceded this approval and no discussions of what <br />might have been are relevant or legally enforceable. BCDC and the City are entitled to <br />enforce the easements as written. No more and no less. Clearly the entities approving <br />this easement 20 years ago did not intend to grant parking on Bayfront or to even allow <br />vehicular traffic on Bayfront, a public street, except perhaps to drop off people at the <br />trails. If they had intended to expand the easement to include unrestricted traffic or <br />parking, they would have done so. Easements are charges against particular plots of land. <br />As they are restrictions on another’s land, they are not subject to wistful interpretation or <br />the hypothetical. They are what they say. As pointed out by Mr. Tepper in his <br />memorandum, the easement on Bayfront to the trails called for in the plans is specified as <br />an 8’ wide paved path and an additional 4’ shoulder. Obviously these dimensions do not <br />allow for vehicular access and it is irresponsible to suggest that one was anticipated when <br />there is no allowance for vehicles in the map or the permit. As to further meaning of the <br />intent of the parties in approving the development and the map, one need only read the <br />sixth paragraph of the approved map. It states: <br /> <br /> “Private storm drain easements, private vehicle access ways, and private <br />pedestrian access easements as shown on this map are for the benefit of the streets and <br />lots tributary to the easement. The maintenance of these private facilities is the <br />responsibility of the homeowner’s association. These easements re not offered for public <br />use, and the use by the public shall be permissive only.” <br /> <br /> Again, there is no question but that Bayfront is a public street, no public cars <br />allowed, except with the permission of the HOA and no agency has ever contended <br />otherwise. Heron Bay only asks, in conjunction with the guidelines to be established by <br />BCDC, to briefly stop non-residents during the hours the bay trails are open to determine <br />their intention. If their intention is to visit the bay trails, then the stop will be a helpful <br />experience, directing the visitors to the park and perhaps to available parking, all <br />provided at the largesse of the HOA. There was a suggestion at the Planning <br />Commission that the kiosk constituted a “virtual gate.” This is a legally unsupportable <br />position. Both in the former and the current City Master Plan there is no talk of virtual <br />gates. The reference is not to be found in any public law. The brief stop at the kiosk, is <br />designed to provide an additional layer of safety for the residents of Heron Bay and also <br />to serve as a welcoming station to all members of the public who wish to use the bay <br />trails and facilities. Heron Bay urges the City Council to approve the placement of the <br />kiosk and to allow a brief, unobtrusive stop of non-resident vehicles for safety and <br />welcoming purposes to users of the bay trails.