Town Center Development Meeting:
Did you Go, Please Provide Your Evaluation?
Did you Go, Please Provide Your Evaluation?
Readers Comments and Questions Below:
The Jacobsen Development Company has been ill served by its association with the City's redevelopment Agency and the attitude and practices of it Head, Mr. Tom Schwab aka Grand Terrace City Manager.
The real issues which are irksome to the previous land owners, the current land owners, and the neighbors of the proposed project are numerous. Nearly all of those issues are a result of bad public relation practices of the CRA and Mr. Schwab and his staff.
Yes the property was zoned as commercial. However, when that zone change came about the prior owners were not severely limited to their ability to sell their property. The real interference with the enjoyment of their property rights resulted when the City Redevelopment Agency came up with the Development Plan and locked the development potential into one single big Development. The next error of the CRA's Public Relations is that they got between the Developer, and the Private Land Owners, suggesting that there would be eminent domain used against hold outs, and single sourcing the development without public meetings before the land and development deal went forward, all in closed meetings until after the deals were through escrow.
To compound the Bad Public Relations that the CRA has accumulated against this development is the fact that commercial property on the open market is valued at a different rate than what the "Private Owners" were forced to sell at. (That force, either by zone change, use limitation, Planning Restrictions, or threats of eminent domain, it is all force and does not leave the full property rights to the previous owner in full effect.)
The CRA's plan to sign a long term lease for the purpose of providing space for a library also seems like a Deal that is suspicious. How much will a long term lease cost? Who will be profiting from this transaction financially. Is it right that the CRA in effect is acting as a land broker, and skimming income off of their actions. Do not the original property owners have right to the share of that income? Is it legal for the CRA to enter into a long term lease that is being proposed for the
The real issues which are irksome to the previous land owners, the current land owners, and the neighbors of the proposed project are numerous. Nearly all of those issues are a result of bad public relation practices of the CRA and Mr. Schwab and his staff.
Yes the property was zoned as commercial. However, when that zone change came about the prior owners were not severely limited to their ability to sell their property. The real interference with the enjoyment of their property rights resulted when the City Redevelopment Agency came up with the Development Plan and locked the development potential into one single big Development. The next error of the CRA's Public Relations is that they got between the Developer, and the Private Land Owners, suggesting that there would be eminent domain used against hold outs, and single sourcing the development without public meetings before the land and development deal went forward, all in closed meetings until after the deals were through escrow.
To compound the Bad Public Relations that the CRA has accumulated against this development is the fact that commercial property on the open market is valued at a different rate than what the "Private Owners" were forced to sell at. (That force, either by zone change, use limitation, Planning Restrictions, or threats of eminent domain, it is all force and does not leave the full property rights to the previous owner in full effect.)
The CRA's plan to sign a long term lease for the purpose of providing space for a library also seems like a Deal that is suspicious. How much will a long term lease cost? Who will be profiting from this transaction financially. Is it right that the CRA in effect is acting as a land broker, and skimming income off of their actions. Do not the original property owners have right to the share of that income? Is it legal for the CRA to enter into a long term lease that is being proposed for the
Anonymous said...
The community meeting was well attended even though city notice was very limited. Tensions are high about putting a Huge BIG BOX Lowes Home improvement across from Terrace elementary school. Folks expressed concerns about student safely, busses, traffic flow, day workers, loitering and truck traffic on Michigan. Most felt that the OAC was a better location for Lowes. No one has ever seen a library building next to a home improvement big box, will we be the first?
11:58 PM
The community meeting was well attended even though city notice was very limited. Tensions are high about putting a Huge BIG BOX Lowes Home improvement across from Terrace elementary school. Folks expressed concerns about student safely, busses, traffic flow, day workers, loitering and truck traffic on Michigan. Most felt that the OAC was a better location for Lowes. No one has ever seen a library building next to a home improvement big box, will we be the first?
11:58 PM
Another Anonymous said....
This appeared to be a meeting "off the record" so people could get a pat on the head by those in the know, who said they really could not "say" yet how things will go. But how high would you like that wall to be along La Paix street? and what color? How about NO WALL directly along a public street? We will show you pretty pictures, and then we will build it anyway!How about no emergency fire gates from shopping centers into residential neighborhoods, how about NO PLANNed semi truck traffic down Michigan?!? Keep our town. Attend every thursday night!
Questions Another Reader Asks:
I understand that some of the property owners along Barton are getting payments from the city, what are these payments for? Is is every month, weekly or quarterly? What is the KEEP program shown in the city check register. Are some owners paid for cooperation with the city? are other owners denegrated for waiting to stay in their homes? Disclose all payments to property owners past, present and future during the planning process to completely change our town.
Citizen's Reaction to Meeting:
Developer says he came to "build the city's plan, your plan" but the citizens don't feel that way! We didn't write the plan that was done largely in private by CITY STAFF. Misinformation is easier to come by at city hall, than is accurate information. In affect, we do not believe in our elected or HIRED city officials to protect us and our property, but have come to find they are against our own quite enjoyment of our property as they have become an arm of OVER development and fear of the future. Is this the kind of government we wish to employ?
