Submitted by ChillyGraham t3_xvi4vp in springfieldMO
pile_of_holes t1_ir2xdi4 wrote
Reply to comment by FriendshipIntrepid91 in It’s gone. Most well-known home in University Heights demolished Tuesday morning by ChillyGraham
A property owner has the right to ask what they like for their property in a real estate transaction. Their only responsibility is to pay the property taxes, and ensure the property is maintained such that it does not become a nuisance. Sadly, the former owner was obviously not holding up their end on that second point, and the City had the responsibility to enforce this, and didn’t.
The eventual buyer (developer) took on the responsibility to maintain the property. They purchased several aging homes on lots with single family zoning in place. They do not have the right to expect the zoning to be changed to fit their pre-existing idea of the highest and best use for the property, but rather the option to go through the process of re-zoning, which, in the City of Springfield, involves being forthright and open about the development plan, and gathering feedback from the community in instances where the property is within the bounds of a recognized neighborhood association, as is the case here.
The fact that the seller may have wanted more than the property was worth with the zoning that was in place is irrelevant.
The fact that the developer bought it anyway, and has taken the stance that they are doing us a favor, but will only do it if allowed to do so in exactly the way they want, is what I believe has caused so much bristling among the neighbors. The houses were doomed years ago, and I think reasonable people will agree.
The developer is catching heat because they clearly know what is best, and have done fuck all beyond conducting the required community meeting to try and gain any support, or show that they are open to modifying their plan to make it more palatable to their neighbors, who have legitimate concerns.
FriendshipIntrepid91 t1_ir32s0b wrote
That's my point, the owner was asking a price no homebuyer was going to pay. So they knew a developer of some sort was the only way they were going to sell. So everybody in the neighborhood is mad at this developer but not their former neighbors who started this whole situation.
xchadrickx t1_ir3a32i wrote
An item is only worth what someone is willing to pay. I see no fault of the seller who received the price the open market would bring.
If other comments are to be believed, the home could have been converted into a B&B for people with loved ones in the hospital. The neighborhood opposed this, the house was sold at market rate, this is the outcome.
In some cases a home is worth nothing and the property it sits on is worth much more. That's unfortunately just the world we live in, not a world created by the seller. If you were going to sell a piece of real estate would you take a considerable amount less money because you were concerned it may become a vape shop and iPhone screen repair suite? Of course not, because then it personally affects you. Considering the reality of the situation it's not hard to understand.
FriendshipIntrepid91 t1_ir3bpaz wrote
But the house wasn't sold at market rate. That's why it no longer exists. The developer is hoping to recoup his money by rezoning the lot.
I personally would not take less, but I'm also not one of the people complaining about rezoning.
xchadrickx t1_ir3ddwj wrote
The rate is what someone on the open market is willing to pay, I explained this as simply as possible. If you aren't willing to take a lower amount out of some false sense of altruism, why do you not feel silly insisting that someone else should? Why would you hold someone to a standard that they must make a sacrifice that does not benefit them, when you just stated you would not do the same?
FriendshipIntrepid91 t1_ir4tvwi wrote
What one niche developer is willing to pay for a parcel of land is not market rate for a home. If that house was listed anywhere near market rate, it would have sold 10x over in this market. The homeowner knew about the possibility for development at that intersection so they held out for a non homebuyer.
I'm not blaming the actual homeowner. I'm asking why all the people in that neighborhood that seem to care so much only blame the developer, I explained this as simply as possible.
xchadrickx t1_ir4u0na wrote
Did the property sell? That's what the market was willing to pay.
FriendshipIntrepid91 t1_ir5l6s2 wrote
Not sure if you are a simpleton or if you truly do not have the ability to differentiate between residential property and commercial property. Commercial property is worth significantly more. The house was not priced to sell in the "housing market". And now the city will give in to the developer and rezone it commercial. Because as you so clearly know, money is all that matters in this world.
xchadrickx t1_ir5owzw wrote
And what is this property going to be used for?
VaderTower t1_ir3ckqu wrote
Bravo, you explained the situation very well.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments