Much vigorous discussion this morning at The Bean concerning Chris Fulcher's proposal to exchange some public rights of way for a nearly-completed pier.
I have a lot of thoughts, mostly having to do with the historical background of how we got where we are. My thoughts relate to esoteric considerations of right of way law, dedication and acceptance procedures, what happens when a right of way is abandoned and how long is "in perpetuity." The latter period is very long, indeed.
Therefore, negotiators on behalf of the town's public assets need to be careful and take a long view.
I have posted some initial thoughts here and will elaborate as time goes by.
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Navigation Aids
This morning over coffee at The Bean the conversation turned to navigation. One discussant, currently taking a boating course, grumbled about being trained to use nautical charts. "All we need is GPS," he observed. Another discussant related a grounding due to lack of a paper chart on board. I offered the view that GPS is very accurate, but I wouldn't go out on my boat without a paper chart. Nor would I drive anywhere without a paper map.
And I wouldn't use a chart without orienting north up.
It now turns out that GPS may be dulling the ability of humans to picture landmarks, routes and directions in their mind's eye. Today's New York Times summarizes recent scientific analysis in an article, "Is GPS All in Our Head?"
It turns out I was right to worry about relying too much on high tech navigation devices, especially GPS.
Save your paper charts and keep them up to date.
Bring back light houses.
Protect endangered visual navigation markers.
And I wouldn't use a chart without orienting north up.
It now turns out that GPS may be dulling the ability of humans to picture landmarks, routes and directions in their mind's eye. Today's New York Times summarizes recent scientific analysis in an article, "Is GPS All in Our Head?"
It turns out I was right to worry about relying too much on high tech navigation devices, especially GPS.
Save your paper charts and keep them up to date.
Bring back light houses.
Protect endangered visual navigation markers.
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Bonaparte's Retreat
OK, it wasn't Bonaparte. It was really the Board's retreat, but that doesn't have quite the same ring.
Liz and I spent the past two days as members of the public attending the Oriental Town Board's retreat at River Dunes. The big news was disclosed early on the first day, when we learned the details of Mr. Chris Fulcher's proposal to exchange the end of South Avenue with a nearby site already dredged, with pilings for a pier already installed, and the site bulkheaded. It is a very interesting proposal, which merits careful study.
More importantly, it soon became clear that the town manager, Mr. Bob Maxbauer, has initiated an ambitious program of identifying, prioritizing and planning projects for improving the Town. The purpose of the retreat was principally for the manager to brief the town board and seek policy guidance before proceeding further. It appears likely that the Town will schedule more detailed workshops to flesh out specific plans.
We have a manager! Details to follow.
Liz and I spent the past two days as members of the public attending the Oriental Town Board's retreat at River Dunes. The big news was disclosed early on the first day, when we learned the details of Mr. Chris Fulcher's proposal to exchange the end of South Avenue with a nearby site already dredged, with pilings for a pier already installed, and the site bulkheaded. It is a very interesting proposal, which merits careful study.
More importantly, it soon became clear that the town manager, Mr. Bob Maxbauer, has initiated an ambitious program of identifying, prioritizing and planning projects for improving the Town. The purpose of the retreat was principally for the manager to brief the town board and seek policy guidance before proceeding further. It appears likely that the Town will schedule more detailed workshops to flesh out specific plans.
We have a manager! Details to follow.
Town Of Oriental Sale Of Property?
I've been puzzling over the mayor's special message of two weeks ago:
"The Town of Oriental is exploring the possibilities of sale or exchange of property in the vicinity of the west end terminus of South Avenue and Avenue A. No action was taken by the Town Board of Commissioners at the special meeting held on Friday, January 13, 2012. In the event the Town receives an offer, such offer will be a public record available for inspection. Such offer would be taken up at a subsequent public meeting."
As of Friday, the mystery has been removed.
What had been puzzling is that the town owns no property in the vicinity of the west end terminus of South Avenue and Avenue A. The town only owns, on behalf of the public, the public rights of way in that vicinity.
Furthermore, a town can't sell such a public right of way, because some other party owns the underlying property rights. The only option available to the town if it no longer wishes to maintain custody of a dedicated and accepted right of way is to abandon it. If the town abandons a right of way, ownership reverts to the party that owns the underlying "dirt." Determining the party who owns the underlying "dirt" can be complicated in the older part of town.
We now know that Mr. Chris Fulcher wants to trade some of his existing property leading to Oriental Harbor for the terminus of South Avenue and for Avenue A. The proposal might or might not be a good deal for the town.
There are two questions for the board to examine:
1. Will the property to be "donated" to the town equal or exceed the value to the town and to the public of the existing right of way providing public access to the harbor?;
2. Can the proposed exchange be negotiated in a way that avoids at least one and probably two or more legal obstacles?
"The Town of Oriental is exploring the possibilities of sale or exchange of property in the vicinity of the west end terminus of South Avenue and Avenue A. No action was taken by the Town Board of Commissioners at the special meeting held on Friday, January 13, 2012. In the event the Town receives an offer, such offer will be a public record available for inspection. Such offer would be taken up at a subsequent public meeting."
As of Friday, the mystery has been removed.
What had been puzzling is that the town owns no property in the vicinity of the west end terminus of South Avenue and Avenue A. The town only owns, on behalf of the public, the public rights of way in that vicinity.
Furthermore, a town can't sell such a public right of way, because some other party owns the underlying property rights. The only option available to the town if it no longer wishes to maintain custody of a dedicated and accepted right of way is to abandon it. If the town abandons a right of way, ownership reverts to the party that owns the underlying "dirt." Determining the party who owns the underlying "dirt" can be complicated in the older part of town.
We now know that Mr. Chris Fulcher wants to trade some of his existing property leading to Oriental Harbor for the terminus of South Avenue and for Avenue A. The proposal might or might not be a good deal for the town.
There are two questions for the board to examine:
1. Will the property to be "donated" to the town equal or exceed the value to the town and to the public of the existing right of way providing public access to the harbor?;
2. Can the proposed exchange be negotiated in a way that avoids at least one and probably two or more legal obstacles?
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Monday, January 23, 2012
Politics And Leadership
Divide and rule, the politician cries; unite and lead, is watchword of the wise.
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
A Grounding At Sea Can Ruin Your Whole Day
I just received a link to a video and narration of the Costa Concordia's track as she ran aground in Italy. I don't think the captain will be able to get out of this one. The track is derived from the ship's AIS transmissions, which include GPS coordinates.
Did he run aground on an uncharted rock? Not exactly.
Worth watching, but not for the faint of heart.
http://gcaptain.com/gcaptains-john-konrad-narrates-the-final-maneuvers-of-the-costa-concordia-video/?37941
Did he run aground on an uncharted rock? Not exactly.
Worth watching, but not for the faint of heart.
http://gcaptain.com/gcaptains-john-konrad-narrates-the-final-maneuvers-of-the-costa-concordia-video/?37941
The iPhone and America's Discontents
Yesterday's New York Times had a very informative article focused on why iPhones are made in China, not in America. And the answer is, it isn't just about price.
The article explains: "It isn’t just that workers are cheaper abroad. Rather, Apple’s executives believe the vast scale of overseas factories as well as the flexibility, diligence and industrial skills of foreign workers have so outpaced their American counterparts that “Made in the U.S.A.” is no longer a viable option for most Apple products."
In short, at least in Apple's case, it is about quality. And continuous improvement.
For the past two decades, Americans have been misled by a chorus of triumphalist pronouncements about the decline and fall of the Soviet Union. "See," we are told,"communism failed. It can't work. Only capitalism can work, everyone knows that."
Is that so? The last time I checked, the People's Republic of China had a communist government.
So how come they are taking over production of our goods from our industries?
I think they have been paying attention not to the thoughts of Mao, but to the thoughts of W. Edwards Deming.
Read the New York Times article.
I'll share more thoughts later.
The article explains: "It isn’t just that workers are cheaper abroad. Rather, Apple’s executives believe the vast scale of overseas factories as well as the flexibility, diligence and industrial skills of foreign workers have so outpaced their American counterparts that “Made in the U.S.A.” is no longer a viable option for most Apple products."
In short, at least in Apple's case, it is about quality. And continuous improvement.
For the past two decades, Americans have been misled by a chorus of triumphalist pronouncements about the decline and fall of the Soviet Union. "See," we are told,"communism failed. It can't work. Only capitalism can work, everyone knows that."
Is that so? The last time I checked, the People's Republic of China had a communist government.
So how come they are taking over production of our goods from our industries?
I think they have been paying attention not to the thoughts of Mao, but to the thoughts of W. Edwards Deming.
Read the New York Times article.
I'll share more thoughts later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
