As most of you know there is a debate going on about a local business that wants to rebuild in it current location. Hanson's Auto Service has to redesign there property do to a State road project on Trinity road.
What is the debate about? With the remodeling that Hanson's must do they have to go farther back which interfere with a house and the home owners don't want to sell. The house was not taken by the State. The owners of the house are claiming that there property will depreciates if Hanson's auto service is allowed to do what they want to.
Both sides have talked and have not been able to settle on an agreement to this point. The Hanson's have said they will put up a fence and a few other things to try to separate there property from the home owners. I don't believe that the home owners like that.
Well I listened to the debate at the council meeting on Monday I came to wonder a number of things.
What is it that the owners of the house want? It does not seem like they want to stay there. It seems like that they just wont more money then Hanson's is offering. What I understand is that the Hanson's are offering market value, why should they offer more.
The Hanson's have also said they the business has been there for 50 years, that is true however when they say this they make it seem like they have owned it all that time. This is not true in fact they have only had if a short time. I don't remember how long about 5 years or so. The owner that sold it had it for some time. Why is that they make it seem like they have had it all this time.
Anyway this is a tuff one for me I am not sure what I think. My head says that this seems fishy it is almost like emanate domain. On the other hand I feel for the Hanson's you must remember this is all because of the a State project.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I think the residents of the house that would be affected by this project are within their rights to demand more than market value for their home.
If it were your home would you accept only market value, considering that you have to invest the time needed to find another home, pay the closing costs associated with the home loan to purchase that house, then go through the hassle of moving?
I would not accept an offer of simply market value. There is no reason Hansen's should not have to pay to hire a company to move the family's belongings to their new home, and give the family another $15,000 or so to cover the loan closing costs and in conpensation for the inconvenience the move causes them.
I feel for Hansens, and beleive they should have received more than their $40,000 settlement from the state for the location, but their inconvenience doesn't give them the right to basically screw over another property owner.
It's a $2 million project. They can afford the additional $30,000 or so it will cost to make moving worth it to the family who owns the neighboring house. Otherwise, they should find a new location.
It's property rights people. Homeowners have every bit the rights to enjoy their property as a business does.
Post a Comment