Friday, August 24, 2007

Proposed Land Purchases

The newspapers have run articles recently stating that the town by a 4-1 vote has decided to purchase the Raco and Blythe properties. On the surface it seems like a very good idea for a couple of reasons. The proposed purchase affords the town the opportunity to utitlize the 8,000 sq ft Blythe building as a temporary town hall. This accomodates the staff and space problem that has caused the town to put in the mobile office you see now. It does so at a price that is fair and logistically speaking well positions the town for the future. None of the articles indicated the council voting for the purchase ever ruled out the Downtown project as a location for the new Town Hall. The new town hall was estimated to cost in the neighborhood of $8 million dollars without land and furnishings. Let's just round that number to $10 million. The rushed downtown project has had flaws from the start. Never mind the developer waited 15-17 months after approval to seek easing of 16 of 44 conditions placed upon it by a split council. There has been issues with stormwater, railroad, roads, taking of private lands, and last but not least the sewer/water permit. The proposed land purchase by the town enables them to look at other options for a new town hall especially since there is no guarantee that sewer/water will ever be awarded in the near future and the lack of a workable traffic study may cause more delays.
No surprise that it is reported the Mayor and the towns very own special interest group is against the proposed land purchase. Considering she and the three candidates from the special interest group are being backed by the developer building the downtown project. The mayor stated, "In my opinion, a town hall should be centrally located and a symbol of vision into the future; the heartbeat of a thriving area." Correct me if I am wrong but all three properties in question are centrally located in the downtown area aren't they? I am willing to bet that the distance off the road to the Blythe building is very close to the distance off the road where the new town hall was proposed to be built on the project area. Its not like the Blythe building is off the beaten path and you have to take 3 forms of transportation to get there. Apparently, the Mayor believes the only way for a town hall to be a "vision into the future" is that it has to be built on a grand scale and cost $10 million dollars. Especially if you add in the land swap deal that gives away town assets. The land swap proposed by the Mayor and the majority of the previous council had to be the worse deal in recent history for anyone other than the developer.
The town of Wesley Chapel got a 6 acre gift from the developer doing the downtown project there...we got what? In essence, we gave our assets for an overinflated piece of property to put our extremely decadent new town hall on. The Wesley Chapel project is 44 acres without the 6 gifted, and on it is proposed retail and commercial and not one square foot of residential. We have our 47 acre project with 79% residential (condo, townhomes, and apartments 604 total) and 21% retail/commercial. The Wesley Chapel project has I believe 8 lanes of traffic to afford multiple entrances and exits. We have 2 major lanes and a need to take private land to subsidize the developer for another entrance to a two lane road. If the town hall is not built in the project area, doesn't that enable more retail and commercial space which has been touted as a good tax base? Don't get me wrong, with all its faults that were compounded by the actions of the previous council majority, the downtown project can be good for the town. Since it has been passed, the project will eventually be completed but as the develper stated it will take up to 2 years for completion even if all goes as planned.
So, the current council wants to purchase land reported with renovations $1.6 million dollars. The Mayor and special interest group wants the $10 million dollar white elephant yesterday. The town budget this year was right at $6 million with very little reserve. The question is what does the citizens of the town want to pay for? Is the new town hall more important than public safety? Do you want both? Are you willing to see tax rates at least double to pay for the grandeur of the project?
The vote to purchase the land was not in her favor and she has implied that the process was corrupt...*my words* citizens did not have a say in the process. True..the process has been done so far in closed sessions where land negotiations are done to avoid a run up in price. The council disclosed the proposed land purchase when appropriate and will now have a public hearing on the matter. After that public hearing maybe we should have a public hearing on the proposed new town hall and whether the citizens want it in the project area? We should discuss the infamous land swap while we are at it so we can put this issue to rest once and for all.
The proposed land purchase gives the town options and increases the size of the overall downtown presence. "Downtown" does not have to be located on one 47 acre piece of land or at least 21% of 47 acres. What about the other areas in downtown...existing buildings...they are in the overlay district and subject to rules of the downtown. There are many questions that need to be answered in order to move our downtown forward. Questions some will not want to answer. There are other bigger issues though in our town than the new town hall and project area. Public safety, taxes, roads, traffic, the other villages in the town..will they expect a subsidy for build out? The new town all has to be put into perspective, not allowed to be put on the top 5 issues facing our town.

14 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are right, there are many questions,like whos land joins the Blyth property,who stalled the town center project when Harrell asked to start in phases,why did Mrs Howe make a motion to give back the state 5million dollars that was for Indian Trail Rd for Monroe RD,why the Chestnut Lane project was pulled from MUMPO( some said it was put on the list by mistake)I dont think so,why is there so much hatred from you ,Dan ,shirley,mercedes, of Dean,because he supported Sandy,trying to make Our town a pleasant place to call home,he has more money than yall,(an American Dream).I havent seen or heard the reasons.So if you want to be an Honest Politicion,start now,for if you cant be honest now, you want be IF you are elected.Look at the present councils actions.Do you want the label they have,besides,what you do,say also affects your family,friends,neighbors.So whats it going to be,DO as I Say not as I do.

10:54 AM  
Blogger Lee Godwin said...

Mr. Kindley, I will try to answer your questions as best I can
1. I don't know who's land joins the Blythe property?
2. I guess the state stalled the project since no water and sewer permits exist for that property as of yet. The lack of a required road study seems to have been stalling it...though I understand the town staff has received a copy of the current one and is under review.
3. I will have to ask Ms.Howe about her motion and subsequent vote?
4. Chestnut lane was pulled from MUMPO because it had been place there prematurely. It has since been put back on the thoroughfare map to my understanding.
5. As far as the hatred question..I can't speak for the others you mention..but for me..I don't hate Dean..he like all developers have a job to do. So does the town council. Sometimes the two parties butt heads and opinions differ. A lot of things get done because of developers but that shouldn't be a ticket to do anything they want. In the end the developers are only going to do a project if the profit is right. Its the job of the town to make sure the town is taken care of. I have told Dean I appreciate some of the things he does and sometimes he doesn't get enough credit and maybe too much blame on other things.
I am not a politician...just a concerned citizen wanting to do whats right for the town. I have no developer ties and will not take money to get elected unlike the 3 special interest candidates and current mayor. The current council as well as the previous council all thought they were doing what is right for the town. the future council will think the same. I don't agree with all the things either council has done in the past but there are things that have been done I believe they did the right thing. I am unaware of any label the current council has unless you speaking of the stuff the special interest group calls them. Everyone is not going to be happy with every decision made. There will always be someone unhappy, you have to hope your decisions are in the best interest of the town and its majority.
In reponse to a post on the village scribe...the proposed land purchase is being critized as the mayor stated not being centrally located..why would they want the gribble road property you spoke of? Though I think it could make a great park location...and should be looked into if the price is right.
I will try to find out about the Ms Howe motion and get back. Hopefully this answered some of your questions.

8:03 PM  
Blogger Lee Godwin said...

I was mistaken about the Village Scribe..it was the restrictive ITINFORMED blog that you made your comments. Sorry for the mistake.

8:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lee,I have 2 more questions,where did the the 8million$figure for the town hall come from,also where did the 25million$figure for the ChestnutLane Conn.come from?

9:16 AM  
Blogger Lee Godwin said...

Mr. Kindley,
The answer to the town hall price tag was done in a council meeting and I want to say it was Jan/Feb time frame...not sure.. they had a consultant in talking about the design and cost and other things associated with the new town hall..I am not really sure of the month though.
The Chestnut connector there was a public meeting at the Stallings VFD and I believe that was last fall?? Showed the details of the road and offered up alternate routes..they asked for public input and I believe the route that displaced the least amount of homes was the chosen one. The way I remember it, a lot of the cost had to do with a bridge that needed to go over the railroad because they weren't going to get at grade crossing. Mr. Helms indicated that a light at 74 probably wasn't going to happen either..if a bridge was needed there you can bet the price goes up even more. I think the cost was also given with other meetings with HNTB presenting. I hope that answers your questions.

6:36 PM  
Blogger Lee Godwin said...

Larry,
In answer to your question about Ms.Howe...I asked her. She stated she has never motioned nor voted to give back anything to DOT. Currently, Indian Trail road has 7.8 million dedicated to it for expansion. The town has also a million dollars for the intersection at Monroe and Indian Trail road.
Recently, 4.8 million was dedicated to the Monroe road study for future expansion. Seems a waste of 4.8 million when anyone that travels that road can tell you what traffic is like. Put the money to the expansion already.
To go back to your question about the Chestnut connector. Originally, when I guess your brother was a councilmember, that was when the Connector was put on the map at MUMPO and the cost also.
It was then removed after the HNTB comprehensive plan came out. Eventually it was removed. Then the town went through the proper procedures to get it back on.
Ms. Howe stated you could call her and ask her. There is always the planning staff for information.

12:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You are right,a "civil engineer"gave that figure April 06.As far as asking questions .What is surprising is that TCC/MUMPO had to vote to take Chestnut lane off ,didnt they have to vote the first time it was put on ,if so it was not on by mistake.Also as far as the bridge goes ,the incline from start to finish will look like the bridge over the Cape Fear River in Wilmington,dont you think it would be cheaper to go straight across the railroad than have to climb over 50ft with a bridge?

2:38 PM  
Blogger Lee Godwin said...

Larry,
About Chestnut, there was questions as to how it got where it got in the first place. HNTB put it into the Land Use stating something about the town building and paying for the construction of it. No it was not done properly. Steps were skipped. It was corrected the right way. As far as the cost, absolutely it would be cheaper to have at grade crossing. Problems however exist with that. CSX was not going to allow at grade crossing. The mayor pushed for this one also, it was a safety issue. The ability to go over the tracks allows access to both sides of the tracks when a train goes through or incase of a derailment or such emergency. I don't know if its right or wrong but it is valid it seems.

5:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

From a "civil engineer's" perspective familiar with this project, at one time CSX would have considered an "at grade" crossing if the town were willing to give up at least 2 existing crossings. The town really didn't have 2 xing's to lose within town limits. I can't speak for CSX's position now but safety is the primary concern and a bridge over or a tunnel under the railroad were the only options. A bridge, of course, being the most feasible. That by far was the primary reason the price tag was so high and it is not going to get any cheaper.

6:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well i'm not an engineer,but common since says its cheaper to build a bridge where the ground is level than haul in backfill for both sides of the railroad,from where yall want to put it the grading will have to start close to gribble rd across then to matths/itrd.Also its one crossing for one crossing,not one for two,but what the hay,its your way or noway.

11:34 AM  
Blogger Lee Godwin said...

Larry, I am sorry I am not an engineer either and only know what I have been told at the public meetings on Chestnut extension. The bridge from my understanding takes the begining elevation back a ways from the RR. How far..I am not sure. The Planning staff would have to be asked those technical questions.

7:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course Larry the cheapest place to build a bridge from a construction cost stand point would be where you had the most existing grade separation and would not have to haul in all of that backfill. But under this "common sense" scenerio you may have to build the bridge north of Stallings or even in Monroe. What good would that do Indian Trail. That's why you determine the most feasible alignment and then the safest and most economical way to construct it. But I would agree that politics sometimes get in the way of common sense. Oh by the way Larry, for that project it was a 2 for 1 exchange on the railroad crossings, at least early on. I know I was there. Whether or not that changed later I cannot say but I do know the railroad wanted every opportunity to reduce their liability.

5:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is a good thing the downtown project didn't come into being. Given the town's restrictive sign ordinances and the town's selective, unfair enforcement of those sign ordinances, any retail would not be allowed to flourish in downtown Indian Trail.

3:25 PM  
Blogger Lee Godwin said...

A....
I personally don't believe the town is too restrictive on its sign ordinance. Out of the 1000 or so businesses in IT, the town has had trouble with less than 10. One in particular that keeps shouting the loudest has more problems with the location and the lack of road frontage than with the sign ordinance.
Lee Godwin

11:12 AM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home