Advertisement

Archive for Tuesday, October 28, 2008

City may sell land for riverfront project

October 28, 2008

Advertisement

Plans for a new retail, residential and office district near the Kansas River in North Lawrence are scheduled to take another step forward tonight.

City commissioners will formally consider a contract that would sell unused city property to a development group that has proposed building the project.

Developers have proposed turning the area near Johnny's Tavern, 401 N. Second St., into a mixed-use district. But the first step is acquiring property from the city and a drainage district that own property near the levee.

The property is vacant ground that abuts the levee. The contract proposes selling the property for $1.75 per square foot. The city and the drainage district own about 4 acres in total. The sale would be contingent upon the project receiving the necessary approvals from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which is responsible for ensuring the levee is protected.

Commissioners meet at 6:35 p.m. today at City Hall, Sixth and Massachusetts streets.

Comments

deskboy04 5 years, 5 months ago

Maybe they could turn the land into a bus depot.

0

cowboy 5 years, 5 months ago

Merrill , oh crap theres no hope , youre right merrill , shut down all new building permits forever , don't do anything and isn't life wonderful , kum bay ah my lord , kum bay ah....

0

macon47 5 years, 5 months ago

300 grand will fund the mt bus system forabout 20 days

0

Richard Heckler 5 years, 5 months ago

Last I heard residential lots were commanding around $60,000. Figure 4-5 residents per acre.Infill is good. However it does not justify perpetually flooding the markets which can decrease property values, nor does it payback the taxpayers and further promotes economic pollution . There are vacancies galore throughout Lawrence.This is more about local corporate welfare which blindly attracts support. I say build a new Johnnys and call it Johnny's Concert Music Hall aka Grand Ole Opry Lawrence style. This will generate tax revenues.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 5 months ago

"Looks like Bozo's agenda is revealed::.. he is just against any development, anytime, anywhere."Huh? All I'm sayin' is don't give away city property. Sell it for its assessed value.

0

cowboy 5 years, 5 months ago

Merrill confirmed as village idiot...latest news flashthis is levee frontage ground , you could probably put a road thru it but not a structure , thay have all the ground for the structures already , your logic on the value is flawed. Contrary to the normal Im against everything posters North lawrence looks alot better these days and has some viable businesses operating , they have gotten rid of many of the eyesore properties and it looks pretty nice. i say go for it !

0

flyin_squirrel 5 years, 5 months ago

Merrill,So which is it, infill or sprawl? you constantly complain about urban sprawl costing the tax payers and now you are complaining about infill.And this is not 4 acres of residential, retail, or waterfront. It is small tracts of land that make up 4 acres which are next to the levee and cannot see the ugly poluted river.Get a life or better yet leave town Merrill. Your constant whining is getting old.

0

Fort_Aubrey 5 years, 5 months ago

Amend my comment about Bozo to include Merrill. How predictable.Turtles all around.

0

macon47 5 years, 5 months ago

what about the birds, the skeeters, the frogs?.where is your mercy?it is just money, we dont need itwe have a sales tax that will pay for alot of fun stuff

0

Richard Heckler 5 years, 5 months ago

4 acres of residential/ retail space at todays value = $960,000 which means taxpayers are taking a hit. 4 acres of waterfront view for less than million = theft. Typical Chamber of Commerce republican thinking.Considering both retail and residential markets are flooded how much will that development cost taxpayers? If residential growth paid for itself and was financially positive, we would not be in a budget crunch. But with increased numbers of houses you have increased demand on services, and historically the funding of revenues generated by residential housing does not pay for the services, they require from a municipality."

0

hawkperchedatriverfront 5 years, 5 months ago

How soon before Johnny's can be torn down. That building needs to go as well. All of it. Just hope the motel can attract deaf mutes, cause those trains will keep everyone up even drunks.

0

sjschlag 5 years, 5 months ago

If the developer is fronting the cash, go ahead and sell. The city needs all the money it can get. I still think this development could go bad- look at how everything else is faring in north Lawrence. Let's just hope the city doesn't have to buy it back and find a hotel/call center to live there.

0

Fort_Aubrey 5 years, 5 months ago

Looks like Bozo's agenda is revealed........ he is just against any development, anytime, anywhere. Pull your head back inside little turtle, and hope Lawrence and the world stay the same for you.

0

ese 5 years, 5 months ago

Maybe the city should use the 300,000 to study the issue of selling the land. The city shouldn't jump into anything without studying all the angles.

0

flyin_squirrel 5 years, 5 months ago

$300k for flood land? I think for once the city may come out ahead on a deal. And if this developement moves forward it could be awesome for Lawrence, downtown, and North Lawrence.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 5 months ago

" even if they fail big time it would still be better than a trailer park"The people living in the trailer park would beg to differ.

0

bangaranggerg 5 years, 5 months ago

If they get this right it's going to be awesome. even if they fail big time it would still be better than a trailer park and power lines.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 5 months ago

"This developer has bought up all the other necessary property over the past few years and I know of a property owner that came out very well on their land sale."Then there is no reason the city shouldn't come out well, too. If $300,000 is what it's really worth, then sell it. If it's worth twice that much, then that is not a good deal.

0

Pilgrim 5 years, 5 months ago

Informed (Anonymous) says:And what is its value if it just sits there, vacant, not bringing in any money? What kind of maintenance does the city have to do on that land currently? At what cost?******Don't worry. That was just bozo's Pavlovian response to the word "developer." (Pant, pant, drool, drool)

0

Norma Jeane Baker 5 years, 5 months ago

And what is its value if it just sits there, vacant, not bringing in any money? What kind of maintenance does the city have to do on that land currently? At what cost?Sell.

0

cowboy 5 years, 5 months ago

Lets see , four acres of flood ground , $300,000 sounds fair. This developer has bought up all the other necessary property over the past few years and I know of a property owner that came out very well on their land sale. This is a net plus for Lawrence IMO .

0

spiderman 5 years, 5 months ago

4 acres for $300,000 not bad.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 5 months ago

That comes to about $300,000. What is it's appraised commercial value?

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.