Saturday, April 08, 2006

NURBs Infect Camarillo,1375,VCS_165_4606751,00.html

Any changes would not come overnight. Planners expected initial changes probably would take as long as five years, and it would be from 15 to 20 years before the single-story strip malls and huge parking lots were transformed into pedestrian paseos, wide sidewalks, cafes, stores and homes sitting on top of office and commercial spaces.

The only problem? The owners and shopkeepers don't want this. The bigger problem? The City has spent millions for something that will end up cost the city more millions all for private benefit.


Anonymous said...

I've done business with Vic Montgomery at RRM for decades and I'll tell you straight up this redevlopement aint gonna take 20 years.

Once this area is officially declared a redevelopement zone, private developers will come out of the woodwork with proposals that will result in millions of tax dollars for the city, and hefty profits for themselves.

The city simply needs to declare parcels "blighted" in order to invoke the power of emminent domain and take the property from the current owners so private developers can have at it.

"blighted" can mean whatever the city wants it to mean, and under current state law there aint a goddamn thing the property owners can do except delay the inevitable.

Rob Dawg said...

You got dat right brudder. The whole NURB secret agenda is about going in, doing quick and wrong and moving on to the next unsuspecting municipality. Look at the Ventura crew. They screwed up Pasadena and Portland and promise they got it right this time.

If you want to play "blighted" I've got a doozy. "Blight" is the new
rationale for anything an urbanist wants.

Blight, what is that? In Oxnard, CA a blighted urban area is one of
the last undeveloped tidal wetlands in SoCal. The Ormond Beach area is
home to at least 4 endangered species and is an integral part of the
Pacific Flyway. Nevertheless it is a blighted urban area eligible for
favorable "re"develoment and tax incentives.

See? Some of the last remaining undeveloped coastal wetlands in Southern
California and it gets a "blighted" designation. It's the old "when all
you've got is a hammer everything starts to look like a nail." As the
tricks of urbanists lose their aura they resort to increasingly more extreme
leaps of faith to advance agenda.

Anonymous said...

I hear what you are saying Robert, but in the vast majority of these cases the issue is not some philosophical battle or conspiracy, but simply money.

Right after the Supreme Court ruled in favor of New London, CT in their precedent-setting eminent domain suit, every state and federal legislative body promised to “set things straight” by outlawing the taking of private property for purely financial purposes. Since then not one goddamn state, federal, or local law has been passed to protect private property from being taken by governing bodies solely for the purpose of generating tax revenue, nor am I aware of any pending. The reasons are obvious; a developer comes to the city and proposes to generate millions in sales tax revenue if they simply declare a block consisting of vacant lots, an old gas station being used as a used car lot, and some run-down old retail buildings to be “blighted”, and allow him to build it out. The fact that the developer will make a fortune himself is of no concern to the city, and if the developer happens to be politically or family connected, so much the better.

I could name for you at least a dozen specific cases that fit this exact scenario between San Luis Obispo and Thousand Oaks alone, Robert.

The rights of the property owner do not enter into this equation at any step of the way, and that is a fact that will probably never change; it’s toothpaste out of the tube.