Eminent domain deadline comes, but family stays put...

[Paging Tom Morrow]

All of the people who agree with the governments position in this matter lived near the "farm" at some point and know first hand of the situation--and in most cases have no vested interest as they no longer live there.

Everyone who is in disagreement has never seen the palce and obviously doesn't understand the history behind it or what the government is going to do with the land.

Interesting.

Anne

Well, I have seen it as I frequently make trips to Rutgers so I passed by to see what the hub-bub was about.

The place isn't nice. The community will definitely look nicer if a park is on those lands.

That being said, if the gov't is going to take the land, the fair price should reflect the maximum amount that could be reasonably attained by developing houses to be sold at the median price in the surrounding area. The fact that the local gov't is saying, "It's not currently zoned for anything but open space, so we will give you $4m as that is what is worth for pure land value" is a crock of.....

As abuses of eniment domain become more frequent, we need the local politicians to enact laws to protect the land owners, not the needs of major corporations (even if that wasn't the case here).

 

[BuckNaked]

They are actually getting a lot more than pennies on the dollar.

If the land was valued at over $17 million, and they are getting around $4 million, that is indeed pennies on the dollar.

And I don't exactly understand your calculations. You come up with 18 buildable lots on 75 acres of land. At 1/4 acre lots, wouldn't that be 300 buildable lots? Or is my math fuzzy tonight?

Guess I'm just being wishful in hoping to see more land dedicated to open space.

Fine, but don't take it from the rightful owners.

Ideally, I would rather it be land that is currently not used, such as those up for sale to commercial or residential use.

But if that isn't possible, then just take it anyway?

 

[ducklite]

Happened in my hometown...there is an empty corner lot here that a grocery store wanted to build on, except they would have needed a piece of property from another business to make an access way wide enough or something to make the grocery chain happy (instead of making the store fit the lot -- I think for a drive-thru or something like that). The neighboring business didn't want to sell their strip of land. Eminent domain was threatened because apparently the town thought the existing business didn't *really* need that strip of land and was just being selfish for not selling, therefore they would just take it so the grocery store could go in. It got voted down but it was the talk of the town for months as the debates raged on, so that particular grocery store chain went away and amazingly enough another one is interested in it and they don't seem to need to infringe on the other's property to do it (at least the preliminary plans).

It was amazing how many people thought the business was being selfish for not selling and that the government should just take it so that the other business could be built. They could not equate it to the same thing of a neighbor saying "gee, I want a bigger back yard, will you sell me some of yours? No, then gee, I'll just take it because you don't REALLY need that big of a backyard"

Now that would have been just wrong.

Anne

 

[Charade]

All of the people who agree with the governments position in this matter lived near the "farm" at some point and know first hand of the situation--and in most cases have no vested interest as they no longer live there.

Everyone who is in disagreement has never seen the place and obviously doesn't understand the history behind it or what the government is going to do with the land.

Interesting.

Anne

Like I said before, if it were only an eyesore, keep a u hands off! If they were delinquent in paying their taxes or the place was a health/safety risk, then they should put it up for sale to collect back taxes or condemn it and sell it. But they *wanted* it. So they found a reason to take it.

But if the judgment stays and the county ends up with the land, I hope to heck it stays "open space" permanently.

 

[BuckNaked]

Now that would have been just wrong.

Anne

No more wrong that what is being done in this case.

 

[ducklite]

That's my understanding and I don't get it. Unless the place is a health hazard, which would still trigger a condemning process, since when does the government have the right to seize someone's property?

It WAS a health hazard. They were given years to clean the mess up. If the land had been condemned they would truly have gotten nothing--my guess is that they would have been handed $100K and told to go away.

By taking the land via eminent domain the family was given more than it's current value zoned as agricultural land.

Anne

 

[NewJersey]

But if that isn't possible, then just take it anyway?

I'd want to see the state purchase the land, if that's possible?

Just this week, land was purchased by a developer in my town for $6.1 million. I believe it was about 10 acres. Land is quickly beginning to run out in NJ so developers are finding that they have to shell out more and more money. So that land is probably worth $20 million to a developer, at least. I live in a so called 'transit village' so land is priced a bit higher in my town.

 

[BuckNaked]

I'd want to see the state purchase the land, if that's possible?

And if the owner won't sell, then should the government just take it, and then give the owner pennies on the dollar for what it would be worth to a developer?

 

[ducklite]

Well, I have seen it as I frequently make trips to Rutgers so I passed by to see what the hub-bub was about.

The place isn't nice. The community will definitely look nicer if a park is on those lands.

That being said, if the gov't is going to take the land, the fair price should reflect the maximum amount that could be reasonably attained by developing houses to be sold at the median price in the surrounding area. The fact that the local gov't is saying, "It's not currently zoned for anything but open space, so we will give you $4m as that is what is worth for pure land value" is a crock of.....

As abuses of eniment domain become more frequent, we need the local politicians to enact laws to protect the land owners, not the needs of major corporations (even if that wasn't the case here).

It's currently zoned R20/Agriculture and they got more than the current value with that zoning. There was no way the town was going to give them a zoning change or varience for a subdivision, so they walked away with more than the property is worth. Keep in mind that much of that settlement wasn't the land, but the loss of income use on the land for the next 40 years.

Anne

 

[NewJersey]

And if the owner won't sell, then should the government just take it, and then give the owner pennies on the dollar for what it would be worth to a developer?

I'm talking about land HELD for commercial and large-scale residential use. Honestly, with the current state of over-crowding, traffic, and development in my county, I'd rather the state seize land that a developer would have bought to build on and use it for open space.

I'm not talking about land that someone lives on.

 

[Planogirl]

In our area, if a property is an eyesore, proper legal procedures are followed to force the owners to clean up the property. The property is not forcefully taken to make parkland for others.

Personally, I don't care if they owners were out dancing the watusi all around the property each day. The point is that it was THEIR property to do with what they see fit up to a point. Or at least that's what owning property used to be about.

Incidently, I say that as one who believes in protecting wild species even on private property. As much as I believe in that, I do not believe in forcefully taking that same property for any but the most dire needs.

 

[BuckNaked]

I'm talking about land HELD for commercial and large-scale residential use. Honestly, with the current state of over-crowding, traffic, and development in my county, I'd rather the state seize land that a developer would have bought to build on and use it for open space.

I'm not talking about land that someone lives on.

Oh, just land that someone else owns, got it.

If your poor, overcrowded, overbuilt county is so desperate for the ever-elusive yet oh so important open space, then they should pony up the cash and outbid the developers in the open market, rather than seizing it after the developer purchases it, as you suggest.

 

[Charade]

what road is that on? I'd like to see if I can find an sat pic of it.

 

[NewJersey]

Oh, just land that someone else owns, got it.

If your poor, overcrowded, overbuilt county is so desperate for the ever-elusive yet oh so important open space, then they should pony up the cash and outbid the developers in the open market, rather than seizing it after the developer purchases it, as you suggest.

Yeah, I don't feel sorry for that oh so poor developer who wants to turn a 30 acre plot into yet another strip mall, or another set of overpriced McMansions.

 

[NewJersey]

John, it's on South Washington Ave in Piscataway. Google satellite images around here are at least 2 years old, though. I wonder if anywhere else has more recent?

 

[ducklite]

what road is that on? I'd like to see if I can find an sat pic of it.

South Washington Avenue in Piscataway.

Anne

 

[ducklite]

John, it's on South Washington Ave in Piscataway. Google satellite images around here are at least 2 years old, though. I wonder if anywhere else has more recent?

Shouldn't matter. I don't think much has changed over the past couple year son that corner.

BTW--Did you notice the photo in the Home News--you can see how the silo is tipping like the Leaning Tower of Pisa.

Anne

 

[NewJersey]

Shouldn't matter. I don't think much has changed over the past couple year son that corner.

BTW--Did you notice the photo in the Home News--you can see how the silo is tipping like the Leaning Tower of Pisa.

Anne

Yes, I saw that. I drive by a couple farms on the way to a friend's house....never notice that on the farms I pass.

 

[Planogirl]

I must have missed the picture with the crooked silo. It looked pretty straight in the only picture I saw but then that shot was probably taken on a different side.

I don't disagree that property owners should be held to certain standards. But taking their land for any reason literally gives me the creeps.

 

[Charade]

found it.

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=...&ll=40.547404,-74.439615&spn=0.005046,0.01339