Seems like the council members who were initially in support of this "backed off" as a result of pressure from the lot owners. With vacant lots being only 20% of Marco's property owners I don't know why this didnt get more support. Many of the lot owners are sitting on the sidelines and letting the home and condo owners pay for the infrastructure upgrades, street paving, etc. In the end, that will make their properties that much more valuable, and it didn't cost them a penny. Then, when it's all paid for, they can come back and build or sell their appreciated property. Not a bad deal for them. For a City Council that is always complaining about not having enough money, they really missed the boat on this one.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
PBH writes:
Seems like the council members who were initially in support of this "backed off" as a result of pressure from the lot owners. With vacant lots being only 20% of Marco's property owners I don't know why this didnt get more support.
Many of the lot owners are sitting on the sidelines and letting the home and condo owners pay for the infrastructure upgrades, street paving, etc. In the end, that will make their properties that much more valuable, and it didn't cost them a penny. Then, when it's all paid for, they can come back and build or sell their appreciated property. Not a bad deal for them. For a City Council that is always complaining about not having enough money, they really missed the boat on this one.
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.