Since posting my "Church of the URD" a couple of days ago, I've received several comments from readers, which, I believe, are worth reading. In addition, Bill and I have been asking more questions of the honchos involved. We appreciate the time they've given us in trying to explain the fine points of the urban renewal concept as well as providing more insight into the City's overall approach toward financing needed infrastructure improvements.
We intend to continue learning as much as we can about future plans that affect us and our home directly. In the process, maybe we'll drudge up a few answers for the general public. So, I'm happy to use this as a forum for people's thoughts and questions. If there's a way to find answers, I'll do it.
Below is my latest response to comments on the "Church of the URD" posting from Thursday, where other comments can be read.
Update: We heard back from Frances Ogilvie last night, and I received a response from Kody Van Dyke. Essentially, both said that, in addition to urban renewal funds, the City is reviewing other options to help pay for the road. LIDS, according to Kody, are on the list, along with block grants, a Federal economic development grant, urban renewal, the city general fund, and impact fees.
Apparently all play a part in the potential mix to upgrade the local infrastructure.
Frances told Bill similar information and suggested that the City has options on how and to whom they impose the LIDS. The North Division improvement project imposed LIDS on businesses but not residents.
I also learned the 2.5 million dollars allocated in the plan for land acquisition/easements for road right-of-way involves purchase of land from the railroad. In property owners' cases, they will have a choice of giving up needed land/easements through condemnation, voluntary sale or donation.
So, this is what I know for sure, and we'll continue to study this and ask questions. Our motive is personal. We love our place/home and want to exhaust every means possible to remain here as long as we can afford it. To us, it's not just a piece of dirt for more metal buildings and pavement.
2 comments:
So maybe you can sell the easement for the price of the LID, if it comes to that.
And you thought just a few months ago, that the view with the airport was your biggest problem.
Hang in there, the two of you..
after all it is still HOME, your home... no other will match it.
Good for Councilman Ogilvie, not only for responding to your legitimate concerns, but also for taking the time to understand the issue. Unfortunately, its not the standard operating procedure for a few on the council, or some running for council currently. It's easy to accuse others of poor motives if you're not taking the time to do the necessary homework on complicated issues like this one. At least he's trying to get a major project started, one that's been needed for quite a long time. He's a good guy who's worked hard to be a positive force on the council, and ought to be re-elected. Another member of the council, though, seems to spend his time making false accusations towards others who are actually trying to contribute something. I hope everyone is paying attention, and thateveryone understands how their votes can have consequences that will affect us personally, sooner or later.
Post a Comment