{"id":173,"date":"2013-01-25T08:01:00","date_gmt":"2013-01-25T13:01:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2013\/01\/vote-for-a-hearing-to-abandoning-a-road-leading-to-the-alapaha-river-lcc-2013-01-22.html"},"modified":"2013-01-25T08:01:00","modified_gmt":"2013-01-25T13:01:00","slug":"vote-for-a-hearing-to-abandoning-a-road-leading-to-the-alapaha-river-lcc-2013-01-22","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.l-a-k-e.org\/blog\/2013\/01\/vote-for-a-hearing-to-abandoning-a-road-leading-to-the-alapaha-river-lcc-2013-01-22.html","title":{"rendered":"Vote for a hearing to abandoning a road leading to the Alapaha River @ LCC 2013-01-22"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n\n<\/a>\nUpdate 2013-01-25 9:48 AM:<\/strong> fixed an error and added some further detail. -jsq\n
\nCiting unspecified sources of information about water rights,\nthe Lowndes County Commission voted to move to a hearing to\nabandon a road to a river they didn’t name, but which\nhappens to be<\/strike>: the Alapaha River (it was named this time).\nThis was at the\n\nRegular Session of 22 January 2013.<\/a>\nSee also the\n\nWork Session the morning of the same day<\/a>.\n<\/p>\n

\n<\/a>\n\n7.b. Abandonment of a portion of Old State Road (CR 16) <\/a>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nCounty Engineer Mike Fletcher describe the case like this:\n<\/p>\n

\nGeorgia Statute says that for an initial determination\nthat the section of county road has for any reason\nceased to be used by the public<\/strong> to the extent that\nno substantial public purpose is served by it,<\/strong>\nor that its removal from the county road system\nis in\nthe public’s best interest.<\/strong>\nAnd just to remind you, as we spoke yesterday,\nthe bridge that goes across the Alapaha River has been washed out;\nit has not been replaced,\nso there is no access across the river to Lanier County.\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nCommissioner Demarcus Marshall remarked that this same\nitem had been voted down 26 October 2010(?).\nChairman Bill Slaughter asserted that the applicant had previously gotten\npermission to close the road and was merely asking to extend the length;\nhe was corrected by staff (I think by County Manager Joe Pritchard) saying\nno, it wasn’t approved.\nWhy doesn’t staff brief the Commission and the public on the history of a case\nlike this when it comes up again?\n<\/p>\n

\nCommissioner Joyce Evans said\n<\/p>\n

\n\n<\/a>\nIt was not approved because of different circumstances.\nI think during that time, Mr. Fletcher,\nyou researched it all and you got the information\nthat we needed.\nAnd that was the reason it was not approved;\nwe didn’t have the information that we needed\nabout the water rights.\nSince then we have received that.\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nCounty Engineer Mike Fletcher added:\n<\/p>\n

\nThis is not considered a navigable waterway,\nso therefore Mr. Connell owns the bottom of the riverbed,\nso his property actually goes into the river, and not to the\nhigh water mark.\n<\/blockquote>\n

\nMarshall said he’d heard from a constituent\n\n\nabout the previous vote.\nSlaughter said the additional information indicated\nCommissioner Crawford Powell asked if there was a need to deed\nproperty back to Mr. Connell.\nCounty Engineer said the County didn’t actually have a dead.\nCounty Attorney said giving up the easement on the road would\ngive all rights back to the landowner.\nThey voted unanimously to “move forward with the public hearing portion.”\n<\/p>\n

\nThey gave no indication that they had read this purported new information.\nThey didn’t say when the public hearing would be.\n(At the Work Session that same morning the Engineer remarked\n\n“I guess it will be in three weeks at the next regular meeting”<\/a>.)\n<\/p>\n

\nHere’s\n\nthe video:<\/a>\n<\/p>\n

\n