Translate

Monday, October 6, 2014

White Ave. Pier Park Controversy Returns

Fairhope, Alabama

WHITE AVENUE SUBDIVISION

north end
A legal dispute involving a city waterfront park that was thought to have been settled last year is back in litigation after objections arose about a new sidewalk being constructed there.

The park stretches roughly from White Ave. south to Nichols; the city maintains a short public pier and parking area there.

The issue began in 2007 when Mobile St. resident Gene Warhurst sought to build a private pier and the city sued to prevent it: He and adjacent  residents claimed they, not the city, had always maintained the property -- even though it had been deeded to the city by the Single Tax Corp. in 1931.

The city contended it had always been maintaining the property.

White Ave. pier
In 2013,  the court approved a settlement between the parties where the land would revert back to STC ownership (and then be leased back to the residents); but a 20' easement along the bay would remain "parklands".  (see the plan below)

As a part of the settlement, the STC was to finance a new 8' sidewalk within the easement; and the city maintain it.




SIDEWALK PLAN DISPUTED

south end
According to sources familiar with the case, some of the residents' understanding of the settlement differs from what was actually recorded, concerning the location of the sidewalk: It should have been closer to the water they contend; its length on the north end and responsibility for longterm shoreline bulkhead maintenance also may be in question.

The State Supreme Court could become involved, since some judicial errors may have occurred, according to another source.

The sidewalk has been completed, except for a small portion at the south end: How to route the sidewalk to avoid damaging oak trees is holding it up there.



Plat recorded by Judge of Probate:


5 comments:

Anonymous said...

The sidewalk starting and ending nowhere

Anonymous said...

Once again, there is no STC; it's the FSTC.

Anonymous said...

Those people want to exclude the public, but want the city to maintain their waterfront bulkheads. ;(

Anonymous said...

there are many others, like in Pt Clear and Battles Wharf ... that guy is a lwayer , so he can sue and sue and sue at no cost.

Anonymous said...

I personally think that Fairhope has messed up in so many ways. They want to be a vacation spot but in reality the Only thing that they have going for them is that it sits on the bay. A very short small window of the bay, they should have never let houses build on the bay side and let the drive along the bay be enjoyed by everyone