There are currently 2 users and 167 guests online.
SoKno Waterfront Update
Submitted by bizgrrl on Fri, 2007/10/26 - 9:00am.
The City of Knoxville South Waterfront Development Department has published a newsletter (PDF Format) with current information regarding the project.
Highlights:
Apparently some residents in the area are still concerned about homes being condemned and acquired. The City says: "We have not and will not condemn any homes unless they have reached the point of dilapidation and are no longer habitable, and the homeowner refuses to fix the problem. KCDC and the SW Advisory Board are working toward solutions to avoid condemnation in the long term."
Question: are there any homes in the area suspected of being condemned?
Public improvement projects underway. "As many as 12 projects with an estimated construction value of not less than $30 million began ..."
Private development discussions. 2nd phase of Cityview condos (last time I looked they don't yet have any elevation on the 1st phase), waterfront area behind South Knoxville Elementary on Langford Ave. (owned by Riverfront Properties and Cardinal South, both of Knoxville), and the "tank" farm on Island Home Ave. at the entrance to the Island Home community.
Meetings, meetings, and more meetings. South Waterfront Advisory Board meets on the 4th Thursday every month. Oops, that was yesterday. Public meeting on Tuesday, Nov. 13th at 6pm, to review "draft schematic designs for South Waterfront public improvements". This meeting will be held at the Kerbela Shrine Temple in SoKno, 315 Mimosa Ave.
Susanna Bass. Eff. Oct. 8th, new South Waterfront Project Manager.
For some reason I never noticed they are calling this the Knoxville South Waterfront versus the South Knoxville Waterfront. Guess they want residents of SoKno to know to whom they belong.
Submitted by Carole Borges on Fri, 2007/10/26 - 2:33pm.
When my brother-in-law was looking at properties we came upon the big new condo project. It was at the end of an area with homes that were...well...less than beautiful. The real estate agent we were with told us she had 2 houses in that area and that you could buy both for $29,000--no a/c or heat, everything probably needed fixing. The reason I asked was that it was clear to me no condo owner would ever put up with having to drive by a little cluster of homes that looked so shabby, so I thought eventually the properties on that stretch would appreciate dramatically.
These must be the homeowners that are worried about losing their homes. If they are that's kind of sad. A blighted area is not necessarily a good thing, but low-income people probably feel lucky to own anything. They also won't have enough money to pay for improvements. If their houses weren't officially condemned they would just continue to live there. Now the properties will probably all be torn down. That's progress and it's not necessarily a bad thing, but I can understand the emotions the people must have.
Shouldn't that land be re-evaluated. It has to be worth more, even as an empty lot, than before all the development started, before the street became in effect an approach to a pricey property. I don't know how these things work, but somehow I suspect everyone will be just fine with the removal of dozens of families from that area that looked so run-down. I just hope they profit even if absent from the development that might oust them.
There's an old thread on this around somewhere, and you can find a ton of info at the City's website - but...
There are no plans to take anyone's property by eminent domain to turn over to a developer. The City might end up taking small amounts of property for infrastructure improvements, but even in those cases eminent domain would be a last resort.
If someone chooses to sell their property that's a totally different matter. But even then there are restrictions on what can be built in the current residential areas with the idea toward keeping them single family residential.
Goose Creek is on the Advisory Committee for the KCDC redevelopment area, and can give you more details about what they're doing.
"The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones." - John Maynard Keynes
Carol,
If the plumbing, electrical, mechanical, and health inspectors all show up at one time, you building is condemned before the inspection starts. Once the example is made, everyone else in the neighborhood usually gives up rather easy and takes a reasonable offer.
Submitted by Carole Borges on Fri, 2007/10/26 - 8:57pm.
Last year, the owner moved in with his girlfriend and rented it out. The tenants, and he had a falling out, so they called in all the inspectors and the next thing you know, the house was deemed uninhabitable. Now the owner wants to fix it up, but he can't because he doesn't live in. He also can't move back into bevause its uninhabitable. Dam! Catch-22. He's handy and estimates he could fix the place up very nicely for about $10,000. If he has to hire licensed guys, the price goes way up. Anyone who has made an offer on the house now that it is condemned has been looking to get it for a song, so he won't sell. He says he's saving his money and maybe next year will start to work on it. Meanwhile I have this nice empty house next door that is going nowhere. It just doesn't seem right.
Submitted by Up Goose Creek on Fri, 2007/10/26 - 7:08pm.
homes that were...well...less than beautiful
Gee, thanks for the vote of confidence Carole :-P. I have been doing a bit of work to the front of my little house in the last few weeks. But I hope you'll wait and come back next spring when the flowers are blooming and the porch is finished. You'll see all kinds of progress if I can just get myself weaned from these pesky interwebs.
We're not all pitiful down on the Pike. Most of the houses are well maintained. I do know one couple who are fairly well off but keep their home a bit scruffy so they don't stand out.
You want shabby? I wish I could take you back to 4th & Gill in the late '70s. Talk about shabby. Back then you could buy 2 big ole houses for $22K.
I'm sure glad my neighbors don't share your brother's negative attitude.
___________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
Submitted by Carole Borges on Fri, 2007/10/26 - 8:58pm.
My post was meant to point out how bad it was for people who don't have a lot of money when developers move in. I'm well aware of how many nice houses there are in South Knox.
My brother-in-law was actually very taken with the area I described, but he found another house up on Repass Road, that he fell in love with. He turned down some nice properties in Fountain City and Oakwood Lincoln Park because he thought the neighborhoods weren't "comfortable feeling". He chose South Knox because he liked it best.
I guess my trying to describe the properties through someone else's eyes (the kind of people who want everything to be rehabbed and tidy) didn't work. My own little hovel is no showplace, but it's beautiful to me. That's the kind of feeling I wanted to get across. My apologies if I seemed to offend anyone.
My comment was about how the inspectors operate, not your neighborhood.
In Mechanicsville, the inspectors were sometimes used to take property when the owner didn't want to sell. The grocery store at the corner if University and Western was condemned for that reason. The owners had remodeled and updated the building. All the work was done by licensed contractors and inspected by the city codes department. Less than six months after the final inspection, a completed team of inspectors came in and condemned the building. After hearing what happened to the grocery store, other businesses sold out without a fight. I understand the grocery store got a fair price, but didn't really want to sell.
Now the properties will probably all be torn down. That's progress and it's not necessarily a bad thing, but I can understand the emotions the people must have.
... I don't know how these things work, but somehow I suspect everyone will be just fine with the removal of dozens of families from that area that looked so run-down.
I don't always get the point.
Tearing down property for "progress" is inevitable. In the case of SoKno re-development, I'm not sure it is necessary in any circumstance except where someone business owner or individual wants to tear down.
Why do you suspect "everyone" will be fine with the removal of "dozens" of families from the area?
Sometimes progress initiates problems in neighborhoods. The development of the JWP brought down SoKno east (?) of Chapman Hwy. I cannot say it often enough. Progress? I can't say it was. Detrimental to hundreds, if not thousands of homes and families? Yes. Sevier Ave., South Haven, Island Home and more are/were wonderful "city" neighborhoods negatively affected with a big slash through the area to get more people to the burbs. I wonder if more people would have needed to get to the burbs if there was more effort spent keeping this area even more beautiful.
Submitted by Carole Borges on Sat, 2007/10/27 - 7:30am.
Usually when I write something I get my point across, but this time I obviously failed miserably. The "everyone" I mentioned was a satirical poke at the developer-types. By "progress" I meant the slash and burn and pain that occurs to the original residents when developers come in. That was supposed to be a joke too. I am totally. I mean TOTALLY of the same mind that you are. What I wrote was supposed to slam the developers not applaud them. It really makes me feel creepy that I chose to write my feelings in a way that made me appear the mirror opposite of who I am. Oh, well. Life is full of risks. I wrote what I wrote and I'm horrified that it all got misconstrued. Satire is tricky. This time my whole approach backfired. Let me be clear.
I think South Knox is a great place to live. I spend a lot of time there and it has many wonderful things to offer.
My brother-in-law loves being from South Knox. He chose to live there in spite of the fact that he could have afforded to live almost anywhere.
I HATE seeing beautiful old established neighborhoods destroyed just to build condos or developments. I have been a victim of this more times and in more cities than I can tell. Always moving, moving, moving one step ahead of developers.
I do not look down on people whose homes do not look like a magazine ad. I live in and love a tiny little house that would probably not impress anyone but me. My yard is not neat. All kinds of things need repair. Who cares? It's my home and I love it & I know many homeowners feel the same way about their property.
Again, I am totally chagrined to think I somehow wrote something that was so universally seen as just the opposite of what I intended.
Submitted by Up Goose Creek on Sat, 2007/10/27 - 8:52am.
I understand that the state law allows homeowners to live in a condemned house. Perhaps in theory they are not allowed to do repairs besides electrical (and plumbing?) but I have not known this to be enforced. If that's the case, this needs to be adressed through city council. Our city does not need more abandoned buildings.
Joe, that is sad to hear the tale of the grocery store. Do you recall when this occured? Who was the mayor? Becky Wade is in charge of codes enforcement now and she seems very ethical. She has promised our neighborhoods no codes sweeps.
P.S. Carole, I understand it is pretty easy to get a light duty contractor's license - up to $70K. Your neighbor might want to look into that.
____________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
It was several years ago when the grocery store was condemned, and I believe Victor Ashe was mayor then. The codes inspectors have always been fair, but when the chain of command was pushing, they had to decide between a pay check or a favor.
When Victor Ashe was mayor, the Building, Fire, and Beer inspectors would hit some buildings and businesses until they closed or sold. During the last city redo of Market Square, I believe the city was trying to close the businesses with the construction project. It could have been done different and allowed businesses more public exposure during construction. It also seemed to have taken longer than it should.
When the Old City first started it was a booming business area, but city rule slowly changed that. The merchants in the Old City were not allowed to decorate city property (poles, sidewalks, ect) during the Christmas holidays. The city would not allow directional signs to direct customers to the Old City, but the state did approve it. When the streets and sidewalks were repaired, the city stretched the project out over two years, which was the end of several businesses.
In my opinion, Mayor Haslam has been great for businesses in the city. He doesn't drive businesses to his views like Mayor Ashe did, but lets the citizens and businesses direct the city.
Submitted by Kiersten on Sat, 2007/10/27 - 9:26am.
Joe is right on target. This is the kind of thing you will be seeing all over South Knoxville. The property seizures in other parts of the city for developers tells you what to expect. Keep your eye on the Brownlow School too. I know some things look good but that is when to be very very careful.
What you can "expect" is what is written right into the south Knox redevelopment plan - that property will not be taken from individuals to sell to developers.
Read the documents on the City website if you didn't participate in the process last year and then get back to us.
"The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones." - John Maynard Keynes
When my brother-in-law was looking at properties we came upon the big new condo project. It was at the end of an area with homes that were...well...less than beautiful. The real estate agent we were with told us she had 2 houses in that area and that you could buy both for $29,000--no a/c or heat, everything probably needed fixing. The reason I asked was that it was clear to me no condo owner would ever put up with having to drive by a little cluster of homes that looked so shabby, so I thought eventually the properties on that stretch would appreciate dramatically.
These must be the homeowners that are worried about losing their homes. If they are that's kind of sad. A blighted area is not necessarily a good thing, but low-income people probably feel lucky to own anything. They also won't have enough money to pay for improvements. If their houses weren't officially condemned they would just continue to live there. Now the properties will probably all be torn down. That's progress and it's not necessarily a bad thing, but I can understand the emotions the people must have.
Shouldn't that land be re-evaluated. It has to be worth more, even as an empty lot, than before all the development started, before the street became in effect an approach to a pricey property. I don't know how these things work, but somehow I suspect everyone will be just fine with the removal of dozens of families from that area that looked so run-down. I just hope they profit even if absent from the development that might oust them.
There's an old thread on this around somewhere, and you can find a ton of info at the City's website - but...
There are no plans to take anyone's property by eminent domain to turn over to a developer. The City might end up taking small amounts of property for infrastructure improvements, but even in those cases eminent domain would be a last resort.
If someone chooses to sell their property that's a totally different matter. But even then there are restrictions on what can be built in the current residential areas with the idea toward keeping them single family residential.
Goose Creek is on the Advisory Committee for the KCDC redevelopment area, and can give you more details about what they're doing.
"The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones." - John Maynard Keynes
Carol,
If the plumbing, electrical, mechanical, and health inspectors all show up at one time, you building is condemned before the inspection starts. Once the example is made, everyone else in the neighborhood usually gives up rather easy and takes a reasonable offer.
Last year, the owner moved in with his girlfriend and rented it out. The tenants, and he had a falling out, so they called in all the inspectors and the next thing you know, the house was deemed uninhabitable. Now the owner wants to fix it up, but he can't because he doesn't live in. He also can't move back into bevause its uninhabitable. Dam! Catch-22. He's handy and estimates he could fix the place up very nicely for about $10,000. If he has to hire licensed guys, the price goes way up. Anyone who has made an offer on the house now that it is condemned has been looking to get it for a song, so he won't sell. He says he's saving his money and maybe next year will start to work on it. Meanwhile I have this nice empty house next door that is going nowhere. It just doesn't seem right.
homes that were...well...less than beautiful
Gee, thanks for the vote of confidence Carole :-P. I have been doing a bit of work to the front of my little house in the last few weeks. But I hope you'll wait and come back next spring when the flowers are blooming and the porch is finished. You'll see all kinds of progress if I can just get myself weaned from these pesky interwebs.
We're not all pitiful down on the Pike. Most of the houses are well maintained. I do know one couple who are fairly well off but keep their home a bit scruffy so they don't stand out.
You want shabby? I wish I could take you back to 4th & Gill in the late '70s. Talk about shabby. Back then you could buy 2 big ole houses for $22K.
I'm sure glad my neighbors don't share your brother's negative attitude.
___________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
My post was meant to point out how bad it was for people who don't have a lot of money when developers move in. I'm well aware of how many nice houses there are in South Knox.
My brother-in-law was actually very taken with the area I described, but he found another house up on Repass Road, that he fell in love with. He turned down some nice properties in Fountain City and Oakwood Lincoln Park because he thought the neighborhoods weren't "comfortable feeling". He chose South Knox because he liked it best.
I guess my trying to describe the properties through someone else's eyes (the kind of people who want everything to be rehabbed and tidy) didn't work. My own little hovel is no showplace, but it's beautiful to me. That's the kind of feeling I wanted to get across. My apologies if I seemed to offend anyone.
Hmmmmmm. I feel very comfortable in Lincoln Park. pgs
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
You don't know me or my neighbors, do you Joe?
___________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
My comment was about how the inspectors operate, not your neighborhood.
In Mechanicsville, the inspectors were sometimes used to take property when the owner didn't want to sell. The grocery store at the corner if University and Western was condemned for that reason. The owners had remodeled and updated the building. All the work was done by licensed contractors and inspected by the city codes department. Less than six months after the final inspection, a completed team of inspectors came in and condemned the building. After hearing what happened to the grocery store, other businesses sold out without a fight. I understand the grocery store got a fair price, but didn't really want to sell.
Now the properties will probably all be torn down. That's progress and it's not necessarily a bad thing, but I can understand the emotions the people must have.
... I don't know how these things work, but somehow I suspect everyone will be just fine with the removal of dozens of families from that area that looked so run-down.
I don't always get the point.
Tearing down property for "progress" is inevitable. In the case of SoKno re-development, I'm not sure it is necessary in any circumstance except where someone business owner or individual wants to tear down.
Why do you suspect "everyone" will be fine with the removal of "dozens" of families from the area?
Sometimes progress initiates problems in neighborhoods. The development of the JWP brought down SoKno east (?) of Chapman Hwy. I cannot say it often enough. Progress? I can't say it was. Detrimental to hundreds, if not thousands of homes and families? Yes. Sevier Ave., South Haven, Island Home and more are/were wonderful "city" neighborhoods negatively affected with a big slash through the area to get more people to the burbs. I wonder if more people would have needed to get to the burbs if there was more effort spent keeping this area even more beautiful.
Usually when I write something I get my point across, but this time I obviously failed miserably. The "everyone" I mentioned was a satirical poke at the developer-types. By "progress" I meant the slash and burn and pain that occurs to the original residents when developers come in. That was supposed to be a joke too. I am totally. I mean TOTALLY of the same mind that you are. What I wrote was supposed to slam the developers not applaud them. It really makes me feel creepy that I chose to write my feelings in a way that made me appear the mirror opposite of who I am. Oh, well. Life is full of risks. I wrote what I wrote and I'm horrified that it all got misconstrued. Satire is tricky. This time my whole approach backfired. Let me be clear.
Again, I am totally chagrined to think I somehow wrote something that was so universally seen as just the opposite of what I intended.
You need the [/sarcasm] tag.
SoKno is in transition. It is important to keep vigilant on retaining the area's personality and retaining/bring back the beauty of the community.
I understand that the state law allows homeowners to live in a condemned house. Perhaps in theory they are not allowed to do repairs besides electrical (and plumbing?) but I have not known this to be enforced. If that's the case, this needs to be adressed through city council. Our city does not need more abandoned buildings.
Joe, that is sad to hear the tale of the grocery store. Do you recall when this occured? Who was the mayor? Becky Wade is in charge of codes enforcement now and she seems very ethical. She has promised our neighborhoods no codes sweeps.
P.S. Carole, I understand it is pretty easy to get a light duty contractor's license - up to $70K. Your neighbor might want to look into that.
____________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs
It was several years ago when the grocery store was condemned, and I believe Victor Ashe was mayor then. The codes inspectors have always been fair, but when the chain of command was pushing, they had to decide between a pay check or a favor.
When Victor Ashe was mayor, the Building, Fire, and Beer inspectors would hit some buildings and businesses until they closed or sold. During the last city redo of Market Square, I believe the city was trying to close the businesses with the construction project. It could have been done different and allowed businesses more public exposure during construction. It also seemed to have taken longer than it should.
When the Old City first started it was a booming business area, but city rule slowly changed that. The merchants in the Old City were not allowed to decorate city property (poles, sidewalks, ect) during the Christmas holidays. The city would not allow directional signs to direct customers to the Old City, but the state did approve it. When the streets and sidewalks were repaired, the city stretched the project out over two years, which was the end of several businesses.
In my opinion, Mayor Haslam has been great for businesses in the city. He doesn't drive businesses to his views like Mayor Ashe did, but lets the citizens and businesses direct the city.
Becky Wade is no longer in charge of codes. She just took a different job in Madeline Rogero's department.
"The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones." - John Maynard Keynes
Joe is right on target. This is the kind of thing you will be seeing all over South Knoxville. The property seizures in other parts of the city for developers tells you what to expect. Keep your eye on the Brownlow School too. I know some things look good but that is when to be very very careful.
What you can "expect" is what is written right into the south Knox redevelopment plan - that property will not be taken from individuals to sell to developers.
Read the documents on the City website if you didn't participate in the process last year and then get back to us.
"The difficulty lies not so much in developing new ideas as in escaping from old ones." - John Maynard Keynes
Post new comment