Let's not mix issues. Fasano should not be given a building in the redevelopment zone because he is liked and Fishman is not.
I do not agree with land banking. I believe that the redevelopment agreement states that if a property is taken, progress must be made within 1 year.
Property should not be stuck in limbo but that is the fault of those who agreed upon this agreement. Sad but true, Fishman has every right to take advantage.
Skip Bernstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Skip Bernstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Â…the building should be saved. My issue is Fasano only paid around
500 for the Baronet years after the redevelopment agreement. I am
sure you would agree even the building as is when he purchased but was
excluded from redevelopment would have gone for more. I also would
not like to see the city give away more in the form of building height
so that Fasano could this building and property for such a price."
Curious, is your "issue" broad enough to cause you any concern for the
fact that Fishman has not a development agreement but a land banking
agreement, which forces owners of lands in the "blighted" zone another
26 years to pay carrying costs and realty taxes, until at the option
of Larry, to then be forced to sell at a price less than Fasano's?
Do you Yahoo!?
Next-gen email? Have it all with the all-new Yahoo! Mail Beta. __._,_.___
SPONSORED LINKS
| Asbury park nj real estate | United state flag | Asbury park nj |
| Asbury park real estate | United state travel |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "AsburyPark" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
__,_._,___
