OT: Supermarket developer must also build low-cost housing
- Thread starter Oatka
- Start date
William R. Wilburn
New member
Ledbetter
Sorry about the "justification" rant. You just pushed a hot button.
I have been involved in construction most of my life and have been a building contractor for a lot of years. I have dealt with government bureaucracy so much I have little patience for more intrusion and social experiments. When I first started business I worked along side my crew and did paper-work in the evenings. I could run a four of five man crew on two different sites. Twelve years later I had to spend about 50% of my time dealing with the ever-increasing governmental paper blizzard.
A home that cost $140,000 had $15,000 in fees, permits, and assessments before ground was even broken. And, yes some of those fees were justified and long overdue. Take as an example the sewer and water hook-up fees: The city's water and sewer plants are old and need of repair to the point where a new water-treatment plant was needed. The fees for new hooks-ups rates had been unrealistly low for years. OK. Raise fees and rates to a realistic level. But how do you pay for the new facility. The old residents had benefitted for years from artificially low rates and fees. They city had ten years notification that the water system had to be brought up to federal standards. Did the city council establish a savings program for repairs and replacement. No. The city council, composed of retired people who, although they provided only 20% of the tax base of the city accounted for 80% of the voting citizenry, waited until the last minute and deferred the cost of the new facility to the taxpayers through a bond measure.
Permits get delayed for Two months to Two years while building departments haggle over the TEXTURE of wall siding. Give me a break! Why is this their preview? The answer is that it is not. Every time the rulings were appealed to the state's Land Use Board the city council LOST. The city attorney collected fees not only in this type of action by in civil suits filed against city councilors for ongoing personal vendettas and agendas taken on under the guise of their duties on the council.
Mia culpa on the rant. Hmmm. I seem to be saying that a lot lately. Maybe I had better get my medication adjusted. Just kidding!
William
Sorry about the "justification" rant. You just pushed a hot button.
I have been involved in construction most of my life and have been a building contractor for a lot of years. I have dealt with government bureaucracy so much I have little patience for more intrusion and social experiments. When I first started business I worked along side my crew and did paper-work in the evenings. I could run a four of five man crew on two different sites. Twelve years later I had to spend about 50% of my time dealing with the ever-increasing governmental paper blizzard.
A home that cost $140,000 had $15,000 in fees, permits, and assessments before ground was even broken. And, yes some of those fees were justified and long overdue. Take as an example the sewer and water hook-up fees: The city's water and sewer plants are old and need of repair to the point where a new water-treatment plant was needed. The fees for new hooks-ups rates had been unrealistly low for years. OK. Raise fees and rates to a realistic level. But how do you pay for the new facility. The old residents had benefitted for years from artificially low rates and fees. They city had ten years notification that the water system had to be brought up to federal standards. Did the city council establish a savings program for repairs and replacement. No. The city council, composed of retired people who, although they provided only 20% of the tax base of the city accounted for 80% of the voting citizenry, waited until the last minute and deferred the cost of the new facility to the taxpayers through a bond measure.
Permits get delayed for Two months to Two years while building departments haggle over the TEXTURE of wall siding. Give me a break! Why is this their preview? The answer is that it is not. Every time the rulings were appealed to the state's Land Use Board the city council LOST. The city attorney collected fees not only in this type of action by in civil suits filed against city councilors for ongoing personal vendettas and agendas taken on under the guise of their duties on the council.
Mia culpa on the rant. Hmmm. I seem to be saying that a lot lately. Maybe I had better get my medication adjusted. Just kidding!
William
Sorry to have been away from this but I spent the weekend shooting and working on the lawn at my daughter's school. Got some BrakeKleen in my eye cleaning my pistol (OOWW!!).
Dennis: I wonder myself what happened. I think the short answer is that the people you remember are now outnumbered ten to one by more recent arrivals and their offspring. It's a matter of population density and increasing growth rates, especially in urban areas. People have always come to California to make a better life, as a result, most of them are constantly "on the make." When I have time, I believe I will start your recommended thread on Legal and Political. Having the crookedest state legislature in the country doesn't help.
Powermwt: You're right, it's getting worse and more widespread. I didn't say I liked it either. Local governments have two almost equally repugnant options: make the developer mitigate the "impacts" or make the community live with them. If you're in construction, you know that California community residents generally don't want new development making their cities denser anyway; as a result, local governments now tend to put community costs back onto developers whenever they can.
William: The texture of the walls stuff is hard to take for me too. I'm not defending everything local governments do, just pointing out that they have only two alternatives in the "Safeway situation:" put the costs on the developers or put the costs on the residents. Your comment about deferred maintenance on public sanitary and other facilities is right on the money, and accounts for a lot of the cost of building a new development in California. All of this is related to the limitations placed on the way local governments can raise revenue.
To everybody: By the way, I am a City Councilman and former mayor in the City of Carpinteria, California, population around 15,000. I'm running for reelection this year. It pays $300 per month, so the councilmembers have full-time jobs too, except for one who is retired. Every year, our financial reserves have grown, and all the streets are well-paved. By the way, we occaisionally waive fees for projects that benefit the public, or where the imposition would be unfair. We have never (yet) required a commercial developer to provide new housing, but our local greenhouse industry does burden our limited stock of housing. This has caused residential overcrowding in some of our neighborhoods.
Here's our website:
http://www.ci.carpinteria.ca.us/
You can check out how our $7 million budget is spent and photos of our town. Our residents recently put together a volunteer fund-raising campaign to raise $20 million to purchase 32 acres of coastal open space known as the Carpinteria Bluffs.
I am really involved in the issues presented in this thread, and have given them a good deal of thought over the last ten years of being involved in city government. I knew these issues would be controversial here at TFL, and thanks to Oatka for starting this thread and everybody taking part.
Dennis: I wonder myself what happened. I think the short answer is that the people you remember are now outnumbered ten to one by more recent arrivals and their offspring. It's a matter of population density and increasing growth rates, especially in urban areas. People have always come to California to make a better life, as a result, most of them are constantly "on the make." When I have time, I believe I will start your recommended thread on Legal and Political. Having the crookedest state legislature in the country doesn't help.
Powermwt: You're right, it's getting worse and more widespread. I didn't say I liked it either. Local governments have two almost equally repugnant options: make the developer mitigate the "impacts" or make the community live with them. If you're in construction, you know that California community residents generally don't want new development making their cities denser anyway; as a result, local governments now tend to put community costs back onto developers whenever they can.
William: The texture of the walls stuff is hard to take for me too. I'm not defending everything local governments do, just pointing out that they have only two alternatives in the "Safeway situation:" put the costs on the developers or put the costs on the residents. Your comment about deferred maintenance on public sanitary and other facilities is right on the money, and accounts for a lot of the cost of building a new development in California. All of this is related to the limitations placed on the way local governments can raise revenue.
To everybody: By the way, I am a City Councilman and former mayor in the City of Carpinteria, California, population around 15,000. I'm running for reelection this year. It pays $300 per month, so the councilmembers have full-time jobs too, except for one who is retired. Every year, our financial reserves have grown, and all the streets are well-paved. By the way, we occaisionally waive fees for projects that benefit the public, or where the imposition would be unfair. We have never (yet) required a commercial developer to provide new housing, but our local greenhouse industry does burden our limited stock of housing. This has caused residential overcrowding in some of our neighborhoods.
Here's our website:
http://www.ci.carpinteria.ca.us/
You can check out how our $7 million budget is spent and photos of our town. Our residents recently put together a volunteer fund-raising campaign to raise $20 million to purchase 32 acres of coastal open space known as the Carpinteria Bluffs.
I am really involved in the issues presented in this thread, and have given them a good deal of thought over the last ten years of being involved in city government. I knew these issues would be controversial here at TFL, and thanks to Oatka for starting this thread and everybody taking part.
paratrooper
New member
Hi gang . Let me tell you about Lefrak City in Queens , New York .Samuel Lefrak made a bundle building homes for G.I.'s coming home from WW2 . He then did well building homes for Korean vets . He had money but did not have a monument . Hence....Lefrak City . The plan was simple . Five towers with stores , shops and even professional services underground . These were connected by tunnels so a person could travel to any tower and every shop or service without going outside . The rent was $250 a month for a first floor unit and got more as you went up . Top floor was like $600 . This was in 1963 .
The city thought this was an outrage . All these rich people living together like this was an insult . STOP! They cried . They DEMANDED that 10% of the apts. be rented for $157 a month .( I don't know how that figure came about ) This would allow low income people to taste the good life also . What happens when low income meets high income ? If you want to visit Lefrak City you better do it in the daytime . Sam Lefrak ? He got fed up and moved to Israel . It's amazing what the city can do for you .
If low income housing can pay for itself then the city should get on the stick . They would take the credit while Safeway takes the risk . IMHO Safeway should haul butt and don't look back .Other places lure business . These people are trying to rape somebody . RUN Safeway RUN .
------------------
TOM SASS AMERICAN LEGION NRA
The city thought this was an outrage . All these rich people living together like this was an insult . STOP! They cried . They DEMANDED that 10% of the apts. be rented for $157 a month .( I don't know how that figure came about ) This would allow low income people to taste the good life also . What happens when low income meets high income ? If you want to visit Lefrak City you better do it in the daytime . Sam Lefrak ? He got fed up and moved to Israel . It's amazing what the city can do for you .
If low income housing can pay for itself then the city should get on the stick . They would take the credit while Safeway takes the risk . IMHO Safeway should haul butt and don't look back .Other places lure business . These people are trying to rape somebody . RUN Safeway RUN .
------------------
TOM SASS AMERICAN LEGION NRA
Where does this authority to restrict developement on private property come from?
People who support "planning" are proceeding from the false assumption that government is charged with protecting society. Wrong. Government is charged with protecting the rights of the individual.
Anyone should be free to develope their private property in any manner they see fit, as long as they are not physically harming anyone else.
Pig farm next door? No thanks, but you know what? It's none of my business.
------------------
"Anyone feel like saluting the flag which the strutting ATF and FBI gleefully raised over the smoldering crematorium of Waco, back in April of ‘93?" -Vin Suprynowicz
People who support "planning" are proceeding from the false assumption that government is charged with protecting society. Wrong. Government is charged with protecting the rights of the individual.
Anyone should be free to develope their private property in any manner they see fit, as long as they are not physically harming anyone else.
Pig farm next door? No thanks, but you know what? It's none of my business.
------------------
"Anyone feel like saluting the flag which the strutting ATF and FBI gleefully raised over the smoldering crematorium of Waco, back in April of ‘93?" -Vin Suprynowicz
Ledbetter quote:
"To everybody: By the way, I am a City Councilman and former mayor in the City of Carpinteria, California, population around
15,000. I'm running for reelection this year."
Sir, I hope you win this election...we need more people like you in government...at all levels. GOOD LUCK.
------------------
"Lead, follow or get the HELL out of the way."
"To everybody: By the way, I am a City Councilman and former mayor in the City of Carpinteria, California, population around
15,000. I'm running for reelection this year."
Sir, I hope you win this election...we need more people like you in government...at all levels. GOOD LUCK.
------------------
"Lead, follow or get the HELL out of the way."
Mike Irwin
Staff
I seem to recall that either Washington DC or Philadelphia tried that some years ago with a supermarket chain. Didn't require housing, but some sort of extortionary provision.
The result?
That neighborhood lost not only that store, but within a few years several other stores and services that would have expanded and made the community a better place. Because of the city's stance, however, the residents lost vital services, and the neighborhood became much less family friendly and much less desirable.
Sort of urban renewal in reverse, all through government proxy.
The result?
That neighborhood lost not only that store, but within a few years several other stores and services that would have expanded and made the community a better place. Because of the city's stance, however, the residents lost vital services, and the neighborhood became much less family friendly and much less desirable.
Sort of urban renewal in reverse, all through government proxy.
Gopher a 45
New member
I wish the people coming from California to Austin with the high-tech boom would leave their politics back on the left coast. It's like they've fouled their nest out there and are now busy fouling their new one. Some people are disturbed by change and immediately begin reshaping the present environment to their liking. So far the rot seems confined to Austin, but I hope it doesn't go statewide. I for one cannot stand the thought of Texas going the way of California <shudder>.