« Before you try to reinvent a place, you should be able to equal it. | Main | News for Forest City Lovers and Love-to-Haters »
July 30, 2007
EMINENT DOMAINIA
Duffield St. Underground, NY Times writes major Eminent Domain article, fails to mention Brooklyn
The NY Times ran a lengthy article about eminent domain in the Tri-State region, and forgot to mention Atlantic Yards, currently the largest and most ham-fisted of all the region's projects, and one being developed by their business partner, Bruce Ratner. They also neglected to mention Brooklyn altogether, where Atlantic Yards isn't the only taking in town.
The article fails to mention Brooklyn anywhere in the article, even though the Duffield Street homes are threatened with eminent domain for the purposed of economic development. Duffield Street is remarkable because the City wants to destroy a potentially important historic destination for ill-defined economic benefits.
NY Post, TASTY APPLE DANISH EYED FOR CONEY IS.
The NYC Economic Development Corporation flew in a couple of Danish bigwigs from a company specializing in running one of Europe's historic amusement parks to discuss the redevelopment of Coney Island, since Joseph Sitt's plans have failed to impress everyone.
With Sitt controlling 10 acres of prime boardwalk real estate, both he and City Hall will have to reach a compromise or risk Coney Island remaining stagnant.
The city could theoretically try taking Sitt's land through eminent domain, but Lieber said he's "not ready to go there" when asked about condemnation.
The [Wilmington] News Journal, Letters to the Editor
One reader explains why using eminent domain for a private project is un-American:
When the government takes somebody's property and turns into a library, that is a public use. But when the government takes somebody's property and turns to a richer buyer at a multiple of the price, that is not fair and not American.
I grew up in a Communist country and I came to the United States exactly because this sort of thing was not supposed to happen here.
Another reader points out the downside of some state eminent domain "reform" bills:
Delaware trumpeted the laws it passed last year as a local cure for the problem but all they actually did was make it easier for the state and municipalities to take property by laying out exactly what they needed to do.
U-T Opinion Online, Costco the bully -- of both rivals and churches
It is no coincidence that the states where [eminent domain] takings are most rampant--such as New York, New Jersey, and California--tend to be littered with densely packed population clusters. Between zoning parameters and the stubborn space crunch, it can be tricky to plunk down a new megastore in such areas. Building a new Home Depot or Target outlet in, say, the North Jersey suburbs often means razing existing homes and businesses. Most retail powerhouses have relied on municipal condemnation powers as a last resort, when negotiations with property owners have failed. Yet few have done so as frequently as Costco.
When city leaders genuflect to big-box retailers, nothing is sacred, not even church property...
World Net Daily, City ousts congregation
If you thought that condemning land for Costco was an anomaly, taking church land happens in NY State too, only when this congregation bought a building as a permanent home in which to hold services, no one told them that the town of North Hempstead was already planning to use eminent domain.
Property purchased by a small congregation in the state of New York is being seized through eminent domain by local government, which claims the property is "blighted" and zoned for business.
St. Luke's Pentecostal Church bought the property -- including a moderately-sized, run-down building -- in 1997 as a permanent home for its congregation of just over 100 members. The church has been meeting in rented facilities for more than 20 years.
But the town of North Hempstead stepped-in last year to purchase the property as part of its redevelopment project.
La Tribuna Hispanica USA, Hempstead: Gran proyecto y grandes exigencias
Not to be confused with N. Hempstead, the Town of Hempstead has its own plans to "confiscar 58 propiedades privadas (bajo la ley del "eminent domain")."
Posted by lumi at July 30, 2007 8:28 AM