It is pretty hard to fight highest and best use, FYI.

If they can prove vast economic improvements, you might be S.O.L.


****edit****
Do you own or rent?

Personally, I rent so I figure one of the only things I can do is make as big of a stink as possible... you know, the whole "make your voice heard" type-of-thing. And Unfortunately, they are citing "vast economical improvements."

Some of the problems I have are: There is plenty of room for development on the old Timken property and other abandoned areas nearby. I have no problem with that. However, it is my opinion, and I think it is well founded, that they want to raze our neighboorhood because of its proximity to 71, and also because of the high "ethnic" population. In their outline, it is proposed that displaced individuals will be compensated or moved to the other side of 71... a community that is NO different from ours. So basically, they want to get all the black people to the other side of the highway. "Out of sight, out of mind." The "improvements" to the lives of people currently in this community would be: relocation, travelling inconveniences, and jobs at bed bath and beyond. The largest part of the proposed development is a strip mall. There is more than enough room for something of that nature on the old Timken property. I am fairly certain that our neighborhood is considered little more than an eyesore, and a potential deterrent to people who may want to shop at their new stores.

Now I have problems with this, also. Sure, it is a bad neighborhood. But has anyone done anything significant to improve it in the past few years I've lived here? Obviously the answer is no. There are multiple boarded up houses that continue to stand and rot, and house who knows what. There are dealers and prostitutes walking the streets every day. If I had a badge I could literally walk out the door and arrest someone for soliciting sex. So how will these thing change if we're moved to the other side of the highway? They won't, but at least they'll be a little further out of the way.

As a minority myself, one of the things I plan on doing is writing a letter to Mayor Coleman to tell him that he needs to "rep him self" (not in those words, of course). I don't know how much good it might do, if any, but its worth the chance and effort.

BTW, the letter and proposal I've seen is from Jereme Solove... I'm not quite sure what his affiliation is.

Well, if you don't own the building, you have your work cut out for you. Developers compensate, and many times they compensate well to avoid legal hassles, fees, etc. of trying to go through eminent domain.

Because of the compensation, it is hard ot prove discrimination, etc.

Best of luck.

It might save it, Unpa. Bennett, you can call Randy Black at the Historic Preservation office- 645.6821

Historic preservation takes forever.

If they can blight your neighborhood, which I am guessing they can pretty easily, then there really is not anything you can do.

It is called "Highest and Best Use."

We have been in the process of buying 95 houses across from our existing center to expand. There were about 4 houses, (3 businesses and one landlord) who would not sell. After a couple of years, and many appeals, we won eminent domain. The point it, their neighborhood is not ghetto at all, but could be blighted because of interstate proximity and economics. Land in the U.S. is always up for grabs if it is not being used to its highest and best use, meaning money making capacity.

So, if your house was located across the street from Easton, and Easton wanted to buy your neighborhood to expand, they can win eminent domain because the land your house sits on is worth more to the economy as part of a shopping center than as a private residence.

maybe we can scooby doo some ghost pirates or something to halt this? WTF?

Thanks for the historical pres. number. I will add that to my bag of tricks.

I'm pretty torn about this, really. I would of course like something to be done about my neighborhood, and in a way this would be potentially good for the "city in general," but I just have a problem with the way it is being brought about. I mean it will be an improvement to the city, but as far as the neighborhood, it's just being relocated to the other side of the highway. Nothing is going to be resolved as far as the neighborhood goes. Sure there will be new jobs, but I seriously doubt that the gangsta drug dealer is going to want to get a job at The Gap, and I'm pretty sure that Abercrombie and Fitch is not going to hire the hooker that looks like Ron Perlman from the "Beauty and the Beast" TV show. That plus the fact that probably 70% of the neighborhood are renters, so they're all going to be SOL w/o comp. anyway.

I know that they have been working on this for a while behind the scenes. I know that whatever victory we may eke out will probably be only temporary. But like Cameron said, "I gotta take a stand." I'm not going to get too worked up about it, but I'm going to do what I can. It seems like we've got a good plan of action in order as of now, so I'll just see what happens. thanks to everyone for all the info and support.

You would have to prove it to be unconstitutional. The government's power to regulate land use is based on the state's police power to pass laws to protect the public health, saftey, morals and general welfare. The Supreme Court has upheld the government's right to impose zoning laws.

Building codes, zoning and environmental laws were created to protect citizens from faulty building materials, misuse of land and environmental hazzards. It was the onset of "skyscrapers" which led to this type of mandating. Too many people were killed in fires or collapsed buildings and something had to be done.

Appropriation is intended for the property to benefit the public. You will generally see this when utility lines and roadways expand. Most people view this as fair and reasonable. It's when eminent domain is exercised in property development that people get upset over it. Stands to reason, they are tearing down homes and businesses. That happens with new roadways, too.

Who is exercising eminent domain? Is it the city? Just curious, what is the intended use for the land?

The city would have had to offer the owner market value and he clearly refused. I'm betting they sent in inspectors to flag code violations and he was given 30 days or so to bring the building up to code. Eminent Domain is used as a last resort when all other attempts have failed. Has the owner been to court in relation to an appropriation lawsuit? He would have to prove that the intended use would not benefit the public. That's nearly impossible to do.

This is how developers get a bad rap as being coldhearted and money hungry. Maybe they are, but no one complains when neighborhoods get cleaned up and crime is reduced. I love High Street and wish to G-d I could walk the length between campus and downtown but I get freakin scared at the type of people who mill around there. Campus Partners and other developers are closing the gap between developed and blighted areas to form a cohesive, usable area. Sure, they're making money off it otherwise they wouldn't do it. But the public has to want it. Developing pockets of land are usually part of big future plans. It may seem unreasonable at the time but eventually it will be completed. These things take time. Personally, I would rather the city take steps to improve our city rather than let it fall into disrepair.

Eminent domain probably is abused in some respects but is it all that surprising? It's your elected officials imposing it.