I've lived near some of McKee's northside properties and have heard enough about this whole Blairmont thing to take a wait and see attitude. With the glacial pace of development in St. Louis it'll be a miracle if anything gets built in 5 years.
- 33
@goat314 - I could issue a press release like this too.
Where are your critical faculties? Are you satisfied with the feasibility, the funding, and the track record of the developer? Do you think we are all just big liars north of Delmar?
What about the 4 C's - capacity, collateral, credit and capital. McEagle does not meet the bar with any of these for the large project laid out. He can, I think, with significant public money, make some nice office buildings on 22nd downtown. Did you know that the old AGE tower is nearly vacant because there is no rental market for office space in that location? Also maybe can do the bridge project... doubt he break ground at Pruitt-Igoe in the next 10 years.
Then what happens? Can we at least talk this through with the level of scrutiny a credit union gives to a used car loan before everyone hands over our tax money?
Where are your critical faculties? Are you satisfied with the feasibility, the funding, and the track record of the developer? Do you think we are all just big liars north of Delmar?
What about the 4 C's - capacity, collateral, credit and capital. McEagle does not meet the bar with any of these for the large project laid out. He can, I think, with significant public money, make some nice office buildings on 22nd downtown. Did you know that the old AGE tower is nearly vacant because there is no rental market for office space in that location? Also maybe can do the bridge project... doubt he break ground at Pruitt-Igoe in the next 10 years.
Then what happens? Can we at least talk this through with the level of scrutiny a credit union gives to a used car loan before everyone hands over our tax money?
barbara_on_19th wrote:@goat314 - I could issue a press release like this too.
Where are your critical faculties? Are you satisfied with the feasibility, the funding, and the track record of the developer? Do you think we are all just big liars north of Delmar?
What about the 4 C's - capacity, collateral, credit and capital. McEagle does not meet the bar with any of these for the large project laid out. He can, I think, with significant public money, make some nice office buildings on 22nd downtown. Did you know that the old AGE tower is nearly vacant because there is no rental market for office space in that location? Also maybe can do the bridge project... doubt he break ground at Pruitt-Igoe in the next 10 years.
Then what happens? Can we at least talk this through with the level of scrutiny a credit union gives to a used car loan before everyone hands over our tax money?
At this point we can either work with McKee or get bulldozed. I'd rather work with McKee in a civil manner and maybe we will get some crumbs of the plate. Its not that You, Doug, and Michael aren't making noble arguments, its that Paul McKee is a filthy stinking rich developer that can pay off politicians and pretty much has everybody down at city hall on a leash (including your alderman). Whether we like it or not Paul McKee will get his way.
Trust me I'm one of the most bleeding heart, liberal, save the world humanitarians on this forum, but I'm very much aware that this is America and despite what you heard about liberty, freedom, and nobility, special interest and money make this country go round for better or for worse.
Despite what McKee has done already, a successfully completed project like this could really be a game changer for the city and the region. This may very well be a tide that lifts all ships, rather than a lunatic captain throwing the helpless overboard to keep the booty to himself
- 33
OK, reading your quote below...
Do you think that northsiders in the project area *aren't* aware that we can work with McKee AND get bulldozed? He's told us to our faces that he can take our homes if he wants to, and we can take his price now or his price later. We've known for at least 3 years now that our votes don't matter, our alderwoman doesn't matter, our reps and senators don't matter, our governor doesnt matter, our beloved president does not matter, and McKee gets audiences with the Pope too. We get it. We are not stupid.
When you say "I would rather work in a civil manner", you seem to imply that the neighbors have not been civil. What have we done? Complained to the Citizens Service Bureau, our Alderwomen, our Mayor. Mowed McKee's lawns. Lobbied in Jefferson City. Complained to the supposedly free press. Complained to our neighborhood groups. Boarded McKee's buildings. Called the FD when seeing flames in McKee's buildings. Held endless meetings at the (gasp!) library. Made appointments with the city counselor. Called the cops on the brick thieves. Met with brick theft detectives. Moved McKee's illegally evicted tenants and chipped in for their down payments when they never got their security deposits back. Invited hundreds of people on tours of the neighborhood, sometimes in buses. Um, that's my definition of civil. Hospitable and neighborly, even.
Why is everyone so horrified by this exceedingly civil dissent against thuggery? This is how we get a better class of developer or a better project from this low-class developer. You don't get your tax dollars spent wisely by sitting down nicely and saying "yes sir! no sir!". You also don't get respect by shutting up and saying, please sir, would you evict some more neighbors and neglect and demo and burn some more stuff around here, please.
We have *ALWAYS* from day one known McKee has the power to railroad some sweetheart deal through our craven government and take our homes for a pittance. Do you think that means we should take it in silence? I'm a first amendment supporter, myself.
At this point we can either work with McKee or get bulldozed. I'd rather work with McKee in a civil manner and maybe we will get some crumbs of the plate. Its not that You, Doug, and Michael aren't making noble arguments, its that Paul McKee is a filthy stinking rich developer that can pay off politicians and pretty much has everybody down at city hall on a leash (including your alderman). Whether we like it or not Paul McKee will get his way.
Do you think that northsiders in the project area *aren't* aware that we can work with McKee AND get bulldozed? He's told us to our faces that he can take our homes if he wants to, and we can take his price now or his price later. We've known for at least 3 years now that our votes don't matter, our alderwoman doesn't matter, our reps and senators don't matter, our governor doesnt matter, our beloved president does not matter, and McKee gets audiences with the Pope too. We get it. We are not stupid.
When you say "I would rather work in a civil manner", you seem to imply that the neighbors have not been civil. What have we done? Complained to the Citizens Service Bureau, our Alderwomen, our Mayor. Mowed McKee's lawns. Lobbied in Jefferson City. Complained to the supposedly free press. Complained to our neighborhood groups. Boarded McKee's buildings. Called the FD when seeing flames in McKee's buildings. Held endless meetings at the (gasp!) library. Made appointments with the city counselor. Called the cops on the brick thieves. Met with brick theft detectives. Moved McKee's illegally evicted tenants and chipped in for their down payments when they never got their security deposits back. Invited hundreds of people on tours of the neighborhood, sometimes in buses. Um, that's my definition of civil. Hospitable and neighborly, even.
Why is everyone so horrified by this exceedingly civil dissent against thuggery? This is how we get a better class of developer or a better project from this low-class developer. You don't get your tax dollars spent wisely by sitting down nicely and saying "yes sir! no sir!". You also don't get respect by shutting up and saying, please sir, would you evict some more neighbors and neglect and demo and burn some more stuff around here, please.
We have *ALWAYS* from day one known McKee has the power to railroad some sweetheart deal through our craven government and take our homes for a pittance. Do you think that means we should take it in silence? I'm a first amendment supporter, myself.
Because people like you and Doug turn people off. Too emotional, too extreme. The Phoenix must first die before it is reborn.barbara_on_19th wrote:Why is everyone so horrified by this exceedingly civil dissent against thuggery? This is how we get a better class of developer or a better project from this low-class developer. You don't get your tax dollars spent wisely by sitting down nicely and saying "yes sir! no sir!". You also don't get respect by shutting up and saying, please sir, would you evict some more neighbors and neglect and demo and burn some more stuff around here, please.
We have *ALWAYS* from day one known McKee has the power to railroad some sweetheart deal through our craven government and take our homes for a pittance. Do you think that means we should take it in silence? I'm a first amendment supporter, myself.
McKee said he plans to use eminent domain very sparingly — only a handful of homes are in the planned "job-creation areas," and the distressed-area tax credits can't be used on eminent domain property — and will "reuse, retain and maintain every building that can be saved."
McKee also said he's sorry for the secrecy around the project these past five years, as he bought up property without saying what he was doing. He said he was just trying to keep prices in check.
"If there's anything to apologize for, it's that," he said. "But I didn't know how else to collect all this land."
McKee has met in small groups with some neighborhood residents, but he plans to attend a community meeting tonight and address them in full for the first time. He wants their input, he said, and their help, to fill in the crucial details that will make the big vision into a reality.
"This is the beginning of a 15-year process," he said. "It's a vision. Not a plan. We're a long way from the finished product."
^Your personal property isn't being threatened by McKee.
Entire City Blocks of your neighborhood weren't demolished by McKee.
Forgive me if I happen to care about neighborhoods outside my own immediate area and have the ability to empathize with those that have dealt with his criminal contempt for the past 5 years.
Are you referring to the Near North Side?
I suppose you agree with Peter Kinder that the area looks like Berlin after WW2? I suppose you think the progress in ONSL is insignificant and could never spread to St. Louis Place, JVL, or Hyde Park with proper leadership and resources absent a blockbusting slumlord? The idea that the area must die first comes from outdated planning ideas and sheer racism that actively lead to the areas planned decline evident in the Team Four Plan and the idea of Planned City Shrinkage. These are the same ideas that Jane Jacobs so critically bemoaned and have been debunked ever since. Urban Renewal, Slum Clearance, Negro Removal, whatever you desire to call it, was a categorical failure and did far more harm than good.
Simply replacing Urban Renewal's superblocks or suburban styles with New Urbansim does not change the fact that it eviscerates our City. 500 acres, that the Post Dispatch says McKee wants to redevelop, will permanently be 500 acres of irreplaceable City lost to obsolete planning theories.
ONSL progress occured despite the fact that these areas were deemed unworthy of saving. Citizens made efforts and placed value upon the buildings. They didn't need a large developer, especially one that has demolished entire blocks west of Florissant. If you can't see that and believe that McKee is a saint then you really need to reexamine history and also ponder how you would feel if this occurred Downtown next to your loft.
Posit that Larry Rice bought something like the Park Pacific, filled it with homeless people, dumped trash all around it, perhaps it began to be brick rustled. How would you feel then if aldermen, police, the Mayor, the CSB, consider if no one cared at all and Larry Rice wouldn't explain his intention and why he's allowing the building to deteriorate. But then Larry says that building must go as apart of his larger, grand vision for downtown which will create 1 million new jobs and bring 2 trillion in investment.
How could you believe him, take him seriously, when he has so violated your neighborhood and you see that abuse daily? How then would you feel? Would you sit around like Ned Flanders or would you become upset?
When people talk about this "development and investment," perhaps they should realize a large human component is involved. These are peoples lives, their primary investment, many people worked for years rehabbing in ONSL and are threatened. Some thought the progress in ONSL could have spread to other areas making the area near what it was decades ago.
A savior doesn't go around devaluing neighborhoods only making them worse so he can change the demographics and re-create it in his "image," which isn't even original and based upon racist, outdated planning theories which have been proven entirely wrong.
A savior would have rehabbed the Clemens Mansion years ago, funded the nomination of a local National Register Historic District on St. Louis Avenue, rehabbed hundreds of buildings instead of demolishing them, built wonderful new infill construction, funded or at least lobbied for the creation of community housing corporations in J-V-L and St. Louis Place, and done all of this in a manner which respects existing residents and follows the principles of full disclosure and the democratic process. He would have sponsored a charette and invited neighborhood residents to come. He would have included everyone because this is our City, we are stakeholders, and should have been included from the beginning. If he did all of this then he would have deserved public support and even subsidy, but since he has done none of these things, and only devalued the area, I cannot support this "development."
Entire City Blocks of your neighborhood weren't demolished by McKee.
Forgive me if I happen to care about neighborhoods outside my own immediate area and have the ability to empathize with those that have dealt with his criminal contempt for the past 5 years.
The Phoenix must first die before it is reborn
Are you referring to the Near North Side?
I suppose you agree with Peter Kinder that the area looks like Berlin after WW2? I suppose you think the progress in ONSL is insignificant and could never spread to St. Louis Place, JVL, or Hyde Park with proper leadership and resources absent a blockbusting slumlord? The idea that the area must die first comes from outdated planning ideas and sheer racism that actively lead to the areas planned decline evident in the Team Four Plan and the idea of Planned City Shrinkage. These are the same ideas that Jane Jacobs so critically bemoaned and have been debunked ever since. Urban Renewal, Slum Clearance, Negro Removal, whatever you desire to call it, was a categorical failure and did far more harm than good.
Simply replacing Urban Renewal's superblocks or suburban styles with New Urbansim does not change the fact that it eviscerates our City. 500 acres, that the Post Dispatch says McKee wants to redevelop, will permanently be 500 acres of irreplaceable City lost to obsolete planning theories.
ONSL progress occured despite the fact that these areas were deemed unworthy of saving. Citizens made efforts and placed value upon the buildings. They didn't need a large developer, especially one that has demolished entire blocks west of Florissant. If you can't see that and believe that McKee is a saint then you really need to reexamine history and also ponder how you would feel if this occurred Downtown next to your loft.
Posit that Larry Rice bought something like the Park Pacific, filled it with homeless people, dumped trash all around it, perhaps it began to be brick rustled. How would you feel then if aldermen, police, the Mayor, the CSB, consider if no one cared at all and Larry Rice wouldn't explain his intention and why he's allowing the building to deteriorate. But then Larry says that building must go as apart of his larger, grand vision for downtown which will create 1 million new jobs and bring 2 trillion in investment.
How could you believe him, take him seriously, when he has so violated your neighborhood and you see that abuse daily? How then would you feel? Would you sit around like Ned Flanders or would you become upset?
When people talk about this "development and investment," perhaps they should realize a large human component is involved. These are peoples lives, their primary investment, many people worked for years rehabbing in ONSL and are threatened. Some thought the progress in ONSL could have spread to other areas making the area near what it was decades ago.
A savior doesn't go around devaluing neighborhoods only making them worse so he can change the demographics and re-create it in his "image," which isn't even original and based upon racist, outdated planning theories which have been proven entirely wrong.
A savior would have rehabbed the Clemens Mansion years ago, funded the nomination of a local National Register Historic District on St. Louis Avenue, rehabbed hundreds of buildings instead of demolishing them, built wonderful new infill construction, funded or at least lobbied for the creation of community housing corporations in J-V-L and St. Louis Place, and done all of this in a manner which respects existing residents and follows the principles of full disclosure and the democratic process. He would have sponsored a charette and invited neighborhood residents to come. He would have included everyone because this is our City, we are stakeholders, and should have been included from the beginning. If he did all of this then he would have deserved public support and even subsidy, but since he has done none of these things, and only devalued the area, I cannot support this "development."
First, houses aren't investments. They are just places to live. Everything is impermanent. Attachment will get you every time...Doug wrote:^Your personal property isn't being threatened by McKee.
Entire City Blocks of your neighborhood weren't demolished by McKee.
Forgive me if I happen to care about neighborhoods outside my own immediate area and have the ability to empathize with those that have dealt with his criminal contempt for the past 5 years.
Again, this is where you lose people. You're too extreme. McKee a criminal who burns down buildings and rustles bricks? Rhetoric like this undermines any argument you may have. You simply turn people off. Someday you will get it. (If you are the uber-intellectual you claim to be.)
And I care. I care about bringing jobs back to North St. Louis. I care about improved infrastructure. I care about bringing vitality back to this part of the city. Don't you? No, you just hate McKee. Better ask Darth Vader how that whole hate thing worked out for him.
- 33
@innova8ion -- It is "too emotional and too extreme" to ask about capacity, collateral, capital and character before forking over our tax dollars and relinquishing several key functions of government to a for-profit organization? Wow, your bar is low for critical analysis.
Or maybe you meant that it is somehow unfair to include McKee's past and current behavior in the project area in a consideration of capacity and character? If you want a home equity loan, the bank comes to visit the physical location for which you want to borrow the money. He's working in this area now, his behavior is still unprofessional, sub-par and harmful to my own well-being and property values.
Is there a point at which he will suddenly start behaving like a responsible property owner? When is that going to happen? In the meantime, we are supposed to pretend it has already happened? You may like it in your feel-good bubble of relying on what the big guys tell you (voted for Bush twice, right?), but I'm in the reality-based community where I'm sipping my coffee, typing on the internet and looking out my window at his real-live current 24-7 failure.
Or maybe you meant that it is somehow unfair to include McKee's past and current behavior in the project area in a consideration of capacity and character? If you want a home equity loan, the bank comes to visit the physical location for which you want to borrow the money. He's working in this area now, his behavior is still unprofessional, sub-par and harmful to my own well-being and property values.
Is there a point at which he will suddenly start behaving like a responsible property owner? When is that going to happen? In the meantime, we are supposed to pretend it has already happened? You may like it in your feel-good bubble of relying on what the big guys tell you (voted for Bush twice, right?), but I'm in the reality-based community where I'm sipping my coffee, typing on the internet and looking out my window at his real-live current 24-7 failure.
Why the passive agressive insult? Doug already put us on notice that anyone opposing your viewpoint is stupid. We get it. We're stupid and you're smart.barbara_on_19th wrote:@innova8ion -- It is "too emotional and too extreme" to ask about capacity, collateral, capital and character before forking over our tax dollars and relinquishing several key functions of government to a for-profit organization? Wow, your bar is low for critical analysis.
And no, your example isn't extreme. But when you continue making false accusations, people stop listening. If you only realized how you hurt your own cause. I think this is why lawyers don't typically represent themselves in court.
First, houses aren't investments. They are just places to live. Everything is impermanent. Attachment will get you every time...
Truly spoken like someone who is unaffected by this whole thing. It's easy to be detached when you have nothing to lose.
And you know, i've been reading the comments on the post story and everyone is like "hurray mckee, demolish NSTL" if i was a resident of NSTL i'd be feeling pretty insulted, esp. knowing that McKee hasn't exactly improved or even stabilized the community, he's actually let it fall into further disrepair.
Yeah, having polite discourse is fine, but how does the little guy prevent being screwed?
I'm all for reinvestment in NSTL, but this is STL we're talking about, right? City of plans? City of tearing it down for softball fields and parking garages? I have huge doubts this plan will ever achieve what the plan spells out...again, this is STL, and I hate to sound negative, but we don't exactly have a track record of success with things like this.
If it gets done, i'll gladly eat my foot, but somehow I'm not too worried about it.
My claims aren't false. Have you been seen the destruction for the past two years like I have? Have you written about it? Have you done any investigation? Have you called McKee's offices? Have you done anything?
The appearance of stupidity can result when people speak on issues they have obviously have no familiarity with and attack those that do.
But I don't want to get into personal attacks. I respect you and the things you've done. Instead explain why I'm wrong. Explain why McKee had to do what he did, why he didn't rehab the Clemens Mansion right away? Explain why he didn't donate to the Mullanphy Emigrant Home rehab effort? If he's a savior with unlimited resources then why has he done what he did?
Ultimately we don't need an explanation because the facts are omnipresent to those who have been paying attention to his actions and view them in historical context.
The appearance of stupidity can result when people speak on issues they have obviously have no familiarity with and attack those that do.
But I don't want to get into personal attacks. I respect you and the things you've done. Instead explain why I'm wrong. Explain why McKee had to do what he did, why he didn't rehab the Clemens Mansion right away? Explain why he didn't donate to the Mullanphy Emigrant Home rehab effort? If he's a savior with unlimited resources then why has he done what he did?
Ultimately we don't need an explanation because the facts are omnipresent to those who have been paying attention to his actions and view them in historical context.
Doug wrote:My claims aren't false. Have you been seen the destruction for the past two years like I have? Have you written about it? Have you done any investigation? Have you called McKee's offices? Have you done anything?
I like and respect you as well. Of course there is a bit of truth to what you claim. Many buildings are unoccupied. Decay was likely to result. There have been arsons and brick rustling. Like you, I believe the perpetrators should be caught and punished.
Where we separate are the ridiculous claims that McKee is an arsonist and brick rustler. Do you have pictures of him out there that I've missed? Is this what you believe or are you taking the more sensible approach that others are responsible?
I'll respond to your questions a bit later, as well as to some points made in Claire Nowak-Boyd's well-written blog posting here: http://is.gd/C6jb
The phoenix must die before it is reborn...olvidarte wrote:And you know, i've been reading the comments on the post story and everyone is like "hurray mckee, demolish NSTL" if i was a resident of NSTL i'd be feeling pretty insulted, esp. knowing that McKee hasn't exactly improved or even stabilized the community, he's actually let it fall into further disrepair.
I think this is the crux of the issue. If this can be accomplished in a more equitable manner, it will be good for all parties.olvidarte wrote:Yeah, having polite discourse is fine, but how does the little guy prevent being screwed?
Yeah, let's give up and be chumps.I'm all for reinvestment in NSTL, but this is STL we're talking about, right?
innov8ion wrote:
The phoenix must die before it is reborn...
Kindly review my response to this statement on page 9 and quantify what exactly you are advocating.
Doug wrote:
But I don't want to get into personal attacks. I respect you and the things you've done. Instead explain why I'm wrong. Explain why McKee had to do what he did, why he didn't rehab the Clemens Mansion right away? Explain why he didn't donate to the Mullanphy Emigrant Home rehab effort? If he's a savior with unlimited resources then why has he done what he did?
The simple answer is to save money. He most likely does not have unlimited resources. He probably wanted to use the money in the actual development, rather than spending money here and there in an effort to appease people.
^You've stumbled upon the difference between greenfield development and urban redevelopment. There is that sticky problem of people living there. Possibly one of McKee's underestimations. You can't just ignore the existing residents.
I understand that in development you don't really want to show your hand too soon, but is it too much to ask to at least maintain your property and show a little respect to the existing residents?
Saving money or not, you are right that he does not have unlimited resources. In fact, he has minimal bank financing at this point. Since he is going to get the DALATC, that maintenance would be partially reimbursed anyway.
I understand that in development you don't really want to show your hand too soon, but is it too much to ask to at least maintain your property and show a little respect to the existing residents?
Saving money or not, you are right that he does not have unlimited resources. In fact, he has minimal bank financing at this point. Since he is going to get the DALATC, that maintenance would be partially reimbursed anyway.
- 479
innov8ion wrote:First, houses aren't investments.
Huh? You don't want to sell you house for more than it cost you to buy?
Houses are the only investments most people ever make.
innov8ion wrote:
Where we separate are the ridiculous claims that McKee is an arsonist and brick rustler. Do you have pictures of him out there that I've missed? Is this what you believe or are you taking the more sensible approach that others are responsible?
No, I never saw the fat white man himself with a can of gasoline and a sledgehammer as that would probably attract too much attention, but he bought previously occupied buildings. If we wanted to save them, include them in his project, he would have them protected. If they were a part of his investment, then they would be treated as such. They weren't. His buildings burned and were rustled. Why? Because he does not want them in the way. He also wanted to scare surrounding residents into giving up their property for cheap, thus getting them out of the way as well.
At the very least he does not care. So either McKee is coordinating the efforts or he's negligent. The spectrum ranges from nefarious criminal to slumlord. Either way we should not associate with such an villain. I believe strongly that he planned this from the beginning and thus he should be in prison. I'm not the only one who shares such views regarding his intent.
- 1,026
this discussion is getting heated ... perhaps this would be usefull: what problems do you guys see with what McKee claims to be pursuing? In other words - if we take what he says at face value and give him the beneift of the doubt ... how does his proposal fare.
I'd like to hear that anaylsis. I also want to hear why people have doubts as to his stated intentions - his alleged past trangressions and the like. But personally, it seems that the second area of discussion(whether we can trust his stated intentions) becomes mute if we decide that his intentions - as stated - are a bad idea to begin with. I'm not exactly clear what his stated intentions are .....
I'd like to hear that anaylsis. I also want to hear why people have doubts as to his stated intentions - his alleged past trangressions and the like. But personally, it seems that the second area of discussion(whether we can trust his stated intentions) becomes mute if we decide that his intentions - as stated - are a bad idea to begin with. I'm not exactly clear what his stated intentions are .....
- 33
ecoabsence wrote:innov8ion wrote:First, houses aren't investments.
Huh? You don't want to sell you house for more than it cost you to buy?
Houses are the only investments most people ever make.
Michael is right. A paid-off 3000 sqft brick house in good repair on the near northside is an extremely solid investment. The way our 1880's houses are designed, they usually have a second floor or back half that was originally a two-family. Not only do you have a place to live in a safe neighborhood, and tangible "real property" that you can get a loan on if needed, you can make $500-$900 a month renting out a second or third floor. I know that because that is how I live.
A major source of angst and anger in this whole thing has been McKee offering $50K-70K for paid-off family homes, and then coming to our churches and face-to-face threatening residents with even worse prices through eminent domain later if we did not sell now. Even assuming there is no for-sale housing market, we still have a strong rental market, and by 'cash flow' pricing models alone the houses are worth more than that.
Add to that the long-and-recent StL history of taking people's homes for for-profit development. I know a family in StL Place that has been eminent-domained by McEagle projects twice in the last 10 years (Kinloch and Cool Valley). I know another targeted family with a home in the acquisition footprint that was eminent-domained out of McRee town. A third family which fought & lost a previous FPSE eminent domain action and almost divorced under the stress. When you chase the city's working-class minority population around multiple short-term neighborhoods, each time driving down their equity, you get a loss of accumulated, generational wealth that affects the families and the community as a serious tragedy.
Imagine if your parent's home, your home and your in-law's homes were all eminent domained at half or a third of their cash-flow value over a decade. Multiply this by a community and you get a bitter, hard, unyielding position that we might as well go down fighting, because we would rather lose with some dignity. Not fighting is being complicit in our own destruction. Motto in south St Louis Place these days... it is better to die on your feet than live on your knees.
You don't want the emotional argument, then treat people fairly in the first place.
barbara_on_19th wrote:ecoabsence wrote:innov8ion wrote:First, houses aren't investments.
Huh? You don't want to sell you house for more than it cost you to buy?
Houses are the only investments most people ever make.
Michael is right. A paid-off 3000 sqft brick house in good repair on the near northside is an extremely solid investment.
This is highly debatable, especially considering the area. As I'm a licensed real estate agent, please provide me a block, or set of blocks, and I'll happily provide unaltered purchase history for the specified properties.
- 33
@ttricamo, there are more ways to value a property than last price (as the stock market sets prices on common stock). I was pointing out that when you want to eminent domain a family home, you can value the asset by cash flow, like you do an annuity. When you are choosing to deprive a family of their real property, you put a value on their existing home based on *its value to the family* by evaluating the cash flow potential rather than by a "comp" purchase analysis of a market depressed by the eminent domain action. Our bankers are not required to mark-to-market, why do we stick the little people with the leanest possible eval?
Of course we have minimal purchase history of maintained homes on the near northside. What we have are 20-yr, 40-yr and even century families with a paid-off home that is free to live in, in a *desirable location* (I know you don't agree with this, but apparently McKee does) with good quality of life, where the home can generate rental income. By placing the only value of existing homes on sales price, you are saying that an annuity is not a good investment once it is closed to new investors, or a new car is not a good investment once you have purchased it. A solid real estate investment that you do not sell pays off in a roof over your kids and grandkids and/or rental income in their pockets. We have families up here where that initial investment is still supporting the great-great grandkids.
Of course we have minimal purchase history of maintained homes on the near northside. What we have are 20-yr, 40-yr and even century families with a paid-off home that is free to live in, in a *desirable location* (I know you don't agree with this, but apparently McKee does) with good quality of life, where the home can generate rental income. By placing the only value of existing homes on sales price, you are saying that an annuity is not a good investment once it is closed to new investors, or a new car is not a good investment once you have purchased it. A solid real estate investment that you do not sell pays off in a roof over your kids and grandkids and/or rental income in their pockets. We have families up here where that initial investment is still supporting the great-great grandkids.
- 479
A little on how the Distressed Areas Land Assemblage Tax Credit works in this situation:
http://ecoabsence.blogspot.com/2009/05/ ... oject.html
http://ecoabsence.blogspot.com/2009/05/ ... oject.html