Widgets Magazine
Page 106 of 107 FirstFirst ... 656101102103104105106107 LastLast
Results 2,626 to 2,650 of 2652
  1. #2626

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    however one of cusack's claims was that the lot in question was neccessary for the operation of their building for truck back in ... and with out is they would have to renovate their building and in doing so would have to update a bunch of things that they are currently grandfathers in on and that was why their ask at the ED was going to be so high ..

    now that they are marketing this property for sale for parking the previous claim seems like it was untrue? that being the case the city IMHO should refile their ED claims
    This.

  2. #2627

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by BoulderSooner View Post
    however one of cusack's claims was that the lot in question was neccessary for the operation of their building for truck back in ... and with out is they would have to renovate their building and in doing so would have to update a bunch of things that they are currently grandfathers in on and that was why their ask at the ED was going to be so high ..


    now that they are marketing this property for sale for parking the previous claim seems like it was untrue? that being the case the city IMHO should refile their ED claims
    This is my biggest issue with now seeing this sign. Makes it look like what was said before was a front, and in reality they are a company full of liars.

  3. Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by BBatesokc View Post
    No. I get that gripe. I think it was simply their positioning to try and get the city to give in. I don't necessarily like it, but it's not much different than you get from many sales people/positions. I wouldn't say it rises to the level of 'exploitive' or 'extortion.' The city didn't bite, and the price will be the price. If it's reasonable now, then the city should relook at it, but, if they can get a much higher price then they should IMO. But, yeah, I get where that might annoy some - but to me, that's as outraged as I think the matter deserves.
    then we are in total agreement

  4. #2629

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Maybe the price they want is big enough to solve problems losing the property causes. Or not.

  5. #2630

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    It's helpful to understand the eminent domain process...

    If terms can't be reached amicably, the city can file an eminent domain proceeding and the court then appoints 3 independent commissioners who determine the fair market value. Once that value is established, both sides are obligated.

    So, it's not a simple matter of a property owner wanting too much. The city either chooses not to file or pulls out before the commissioners determine the value, which was the case with UHaul.

    The only reason the city doesn't file (they've done it dozens of times for Scissortail alone) and/or pulls out once they have filed, is because they realize the established price is going to be higher than they want to pay. It has nothing to do with what a property owner is asking because in the end, all that matters is the fair market price established by the court.

  6. #2631

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Understand. If any of that is in response to what I posted, I am referring to whatever the price they want now on the open market.

  7. #2632

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by mkjeeves View Post
    Understand. If any of that is in response to what I posted, I am referring to whatever the price they want now on the open market.
    Just meant that info to clarify because property owners get blamed for being greedy but that is not how it works when it come to government agencies who want to take their land.

  8. #2633

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    But I will add to that, owners who have property taken under imminent domain are entitled to fair market value plus just compensation. That includes things like relocation costs.

    So if the city took their empty lot at fair market value and the owners had to move, the city could be on the hook for all those costs too.

  9. #2634

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by mkjeeves View Post
    But I will add to that, owners who have property taken under imminent domain are entitled to fair market value plus just compensation. That includes things like relocation costs.
    Right.

    The whole idea is the government has to treat property owners fairly, and the court does it best to determine the amount they should be paid.

    And to put it another way, when the city doesn't file or pulls out before the value is established, that is an indication they are not willing to pay an owner the fair value for their property. They went through this with REHCO which owns the vacant lots between the Myriad Gardens and Scissortail Park. The city wanted it for the convention center, swore up and down REHCO was being unreasonable, filed eminent domain but then pulled the plug when they realized the court was going to come in with a number close to what was being asked by the owners. Same exactly thing happened with Uhaul.

  10. #2635
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    6,327
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    But if they were insisting they HAD TO move BECAUSE of the acquisition, it would be pretty disingenuous to then sell the subject land and NOT move. It would prove it wasn't really necessary and just done to try to get the city to pay for a relocation that wasn't necessary.

    Are they just selling the parking area or their whole facility?

  11. #2636

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    ^

    Or maybe they think they can get enough on the free market to justify whatever changes would be necessary to their facility.

    Again, the city could have pressed this issue but they chose not to because they did not want to pay the amount determined by an impartial legal process.

  12. #2637

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    For clarity, is Cusacks trying to sell their entire property or just the space that cuts into the lower park? Do we think Cusack eventually shuts down that entire operation?

  13. #2638

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by aDark View Post
    For clarity, is Cusacks trying to sell their entire property or just the space that cuts into the lower park? Do we think Cusack eventually shuts down that entire operation?
    The sign says 3.2 acres so that would be all their property, not just that empty lot.

  14. Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by jonny d View Post
    Charging a highly inflated price, along with that stupid saying on the sign, is exploitation at least, extortion at worst.
    Yeah saying that a company is extorting the city because the city can't force them to sell their property for what they city thinks it's worth is just stupid. They own it, it's private property and despite what anyone else wants them to do with it...it's not anyone elses decision to make for them. I wish they would sell too but to act like they owe anything to anyone is just ignorant and selfish.

  15. #2640

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by PhiAlpha View Post
    Yeah saying that a company is extorting the city because the city can't force them to sell their property for what they city thinks it's worth is just stupid. They own it, it's private property and despite what anyone else wants them to do with it...it's not anyone elses decision to make for them. I wish they would sell too but to act like they owe anything to anyone is just ignorant and selfish.
    I am just saying that the city shouldn't buy it just because. If they get a fair deal, sure. If not, screw it. No sense paying more than the city feels it's worth.

  16. #2641

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    The sign says 3.2 acres so that would be all their property, not just that empty lot.
    So how does $5.6M for 3.2 acres compared with other land in the area?

  17. Default Re: Scissortail Park

    The lighting on the bridge turned out really nice with the water all around it.

  18. #2643

    MAPS3 Re: Scissortail Park

    Thanks for sharing, Goldfire...

  19. #2644

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    It's impressing me more and more. I love the bridge lighting. I'll be interested to see Christmas errr; Holiday lighting.

  20. #2645

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    So has anyone else noticed the number of people disregarding the signs every couple of yards asking to not walk through the plants on the steeper side of the hill? My wife and I were out walking through the park on Sunday and couldn't believe the number of people who appeared to see the sign and read it but still proceed to walk off the path.

    Also, when we were in the dog park area we witnessed an older gent stand next to his pup as it pooped. The guy looked around, saw us watching him and then quickly left the dog park and start running along the lake. We didn't see him again until we were leaving the dog park in which he still seemed to be looking around to see if anybody was going to say something or just let him get away with it.

    Oh and is the entire park non-smoking? We passed by two couples in the middle of the park that were smoking on a bench. Now I am not entirely upset on this one as we are in an open air place, however the rules are stated and if I am following them then I expect others follow them too.

    Just a few gripes about patrons of the park rather than the park itself.

  21. #2646

    Default Re: Scissortail Park


  22. #2647

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    OSU/OKC Farmers Market merging with Scissortail Park for a new destination Saturday Market.



    https://osuokc.edu/articles/osu-okc-...issortail-park

  23. #2648

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    ^

    This is a great idea. More room, more vendors, more centrally located.

  24. #2649

    Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    ^

    This is a great idea. More room, more vendors, more centrally located.
    I think it's a lousy idea. The parking is going to be a nightmare. It doesn't look to be at all handicap friendly. It's definitely going to drive me back to the old Farmers Market... buying my locally-grown fruits and veggies doesn't need to be part of a 'destination experience'.

  25. Default Re: Scissortail Park

    Quote Originally Posted by swosuknight View Post
    OSU/OKC Farmers Market merging with Scissortail Park for a new destination Saturday Market.



    https://osuokc.edu/articles/osu-okc-...issortail-park
    Big fan of this idea. I'm much more likely to attend at the new location.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Map of Potential Infill Sites in Central OKC
    By shane453 in forum General Real Estate Topics
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 01-22-2012, 11:14 PM
  2. The Lincoln at Central Park / Gardner Tanenbaum project
    By metro in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-16-2011, 11:58 AM
  3. First MAPS 3 Project (70 Acre Central Park)?
    By G.Walker in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01-17-2011, 10:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO