THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Sunday, November 3, 1996 TAG: 9611020115
SECTION: VIRGINIA BEACH BEACON PAGE: 06 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letters
LENGTH: 136 lines
I am writing in response to a letter that appeared in Friday's Beacon, which expressed concern about the powers of a redevelopment and housing authority. It contained several inaccurate and misleading statements.
First, the letter stated that City Council must ``pay a `highest and best' use price for land it condemns for public use,'' but that ``under an authority, the city can pay residential prices for land it condemns for future use as commercial or industrial property.'' In reality, pursuant to state law, a redevelopment and housing authority must follow the same statutory procedure for the condemnation of private property, including the same rules for appraisal of a property's value, that the city is presently required to follow when it condemns property for public use.
Second, the letter cautioned that ``Virginia Beach residents who live along all the `corridors to the Oceanfront,' including Laskin Road, 19th and 22nd streets, Norfolk Avenue and Winston Salem Avenue, should be wary of the condemnation powers of this proposed authority.'' Pursuant to state law, an area must be ``blighted,'' ``deteriorated'' or contain ownership or title problems, or other adverse property conditions, before the area can be designated by an authority as a ``redevelopment area,'' and before the property therein can be acquired by condemnation.
Furthermore, the determination that an area is blighted or deteriorated, or that it suffers from adverse property conditions, must be based upon strict statutory criteria, must be set forth in a ``redevelopment plan'' that has to be approved by City Council prior to being implemented, and is subject to judicial review. Therefore, it is misleading, at best, to suggest that the residents in all of the ``corridors to the Oceanfront . . . should be wary of the condemnation powers of this proposed authority.''
My purpose in responding to the letter is not to advocate the activation of a redevelopment and housing authority in Virginia Beach. Instead, my purpose is to clarify the law on these issues.
Randall M. Blow
Deputy City Attorney
City of Virginia Beach Consider this before answering ballot question
The Virginia Beach City Council has the power today to remove, prevent or reduce conditions of blight or deterioration in areas that are detrimental to the health and safety of the community. That is why we have housing codes and housing code enforcement. I can appreciate the unique circumstances of Burton Station, but unique circumstances is an insufficient condition to establish an independent political body with broad sweeping powers. And why was this issue, which is as important as the Comprehensive Plan, fast tracked?
To my knowledge, there has not been an uprising from any citizens' groups demanding this authority to be formed.
Now let's take a look at these so-called blighted areas, and ask a few questions:
How many areas to be condemned are there?
Where are they located?
Are the neighborhoods to be condemned identified and described in the comprehensive plan?
Will industrial zoned areas that contain blight be included in this plan, and will the authority also condemn industrial zoned property for resale to another developer for their profit?
Is there a current projection of funding that would be needed to acquire properties that have been identified and designated as blighted or deteriorated and targeted for condemnation?
Will taxpayer dollars be used to purchase condemned private property for private developers' use? Will private developers be required to bid to purchase condemned private property for private gain and profit?
Other than the right to condemn private property for private profit, what advantages do a redevelopment and housing authority provide that aren't already available to the City of Virginia Beach?
A housing authority has never been needed in Virginia Beach and is not needed now. The only need that is being publicly touted by some of our City Council members is that of promoting ``economic development'' at Burton Station. The city has hit a stumbling block in areas of Burton Station, but the council knew when the process of purchasing properties began, obstacles would arise. Some residents simply feel that the price that has been offered isn't enough, which may or may not be true. Some residents also have offered their land for a long-term lease, just like the private sector. If condemnation isn't for common good for all the citizens, which is the guideline for our current system of eminent domain (schools, roads, etc.), then why don't we just let the demands of the free market rise to their own profitable levels, and let the developers and speculators assemble parcels on their own? The fact remains, governmental pursuit of economic development is not a legally recognized, nor constitutionally permitted basis for the exercise of condemnation powers.
If such an authority were going to exist, then it must also be mandated that such an authority would be directly accountable to the citizens through the electoral process. The authority should be comprised of all of the City Council members. Under that scenario, members could be voted out of office for abusing the dictatorial power inherent in such an authority.
In a letter to council members following a phone survey, City Manager Jim Spore stated that, ``However, those who do not know enough about the issue and those who have misconceptions about an RDA make up a significant portion of the population - significant enough to affect the outcome of the referendum.'' So we now must begin the process of somehow convincing the public into believing that a housing authority will be this wonderful panacea designed to create opportunities for economic development. But we never, never expose the pitfalls of the process, and those who will ultimately suffer from these actions. This is a very bad piece of legislation if you happen to believe in individual property rights.
To those who wish to give away another of your rights to the government, that is your choice. Regarding condemnation choice, it is paramount for the future rights of property owners that this referendum be defeated. Anything less will have a detrimental effect on the stability of the citizenry and their ability to plan for the future.
In deciding this matter, please remember that Burton Station can be resolved without creating a new authority. The Norfolk Airport Authority can assist us in acquiring some of the property in Burton Station if condemnation is the only method of last resort. As a matter of fact, it already has.
In closing, please remember one sobering truth: Never give government a tool that can be used against you in the future. This one can!
Robert K. Dean
Dean is a former member of the City Council. Keep Farmer's Market at its current location
For the risk of redundancy, I elected not to speak at the City Council meeting regarding the future site of the Farmer's Market. Many of the speakers made factual and sometimes humorous points; one point was not addressed. Economic Development.
I have lived in the city most of my adult life, and with retirement approaching, I choose to live (retire) in rural Virginia Beach. Intellectually, I know that the Dam Neck-Princess Anne Road corridor will be developed in the future. I feel that this development must be done with great care.
Wouldn't it be nice if future business people could stop for lunch at the market or stroll through Princess Anne Park, unlike the Pembroke or Red Mill Farms areas? Please note that our civic league was one of the few that supported the amphitheater and soccer developments.
Please rebuild the market at its current location and promote the concept for all of Hampton Roads.
Liz Reynolds
President,
Landstown Community
Civic League
Oct. 24 by CNB