Question of the Day

[newarenanow]

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/loc ... er-655678/

I've been reading about this for about a year or so now. This guy owns the auto body shop on Rt 28. He has continue to fight to keep his shop there, where it has been for over 30 years. He said he doesn't know where to relocate or if he has the money to do so (he is getting $250K for the property from the county). I think he has spent a lot fighting to keep the location though.

The question is, whose side are you on, the shop owner or the county and the emminent domain? I know it's the law. But just out of principality, in a way I feel bad because the guy and all of his hard work is going to go away if he can't find a place to relocate and he could be screwed in the long run. But at the same time, it is the ONLY shop/building left along that highway that is being totally rebuilt to be a main artery into the city and for the good of the city, the project needs completed.

Thoughts?

[count2infinity]

Is his property really worth a quarter mil?

[KennyTheKangaroo]

it kind of blows but lets face it, no public project of any worth would be completed without it. it should be noted that his piece of crap auto body shop building of wouldnt fetch $75k in the open market.

[Troy Loney]

Is his property really worth a quarter mil?

The property definitely isn't. I'm guessing the value the business along with the property...so we'd have to see this local yocal's tax return to know if he has a legitimate gripe.

[newarenanow]

Is his property really worth a quarter mil?

If he tried to sell it on the open market? Probably not even close. But he is losing his business and will have to pay money to relocate it along with other costs such as purchasing a building where it is probably more expensive. I'm sure they work all of that in. But I think the guy, instead of just taking the money and moving, has spent a huge chunk fighting a fight he was never going to win in court. And that is his problem.

[meow]

Is his property really worth a quarter mil?

If he tried to sell it on the open market? Probably not even close. But he is losing his business and will have to pay money to relocate it along with other costs such as purchasing a building where it is probably more expensive. I'm sure they work all of that in. But I think the guy, instead of just taking the money and moving, has spent a huge chunk fighting a fight he was never going to win in court. And that is his problem.

This is my thinking. You aren't going to win this fight, so just pack it in. 250k is a nice amount for an eminent domain case.

[mac5155]

It's the general principle I think is what's irritating. I don't know much about this case at all. But lets say he gets $250k for his land.

Remember back when everyone was being asked to sell their land for the airport to get bigger? Know what the airport is going to do in the coming months/years with that land? Get filthy rich off it by drilling for natural gas. It's a precedent that's been set and I applaud him for standing up for what is his.

[PghSkins]

I don't like eminent domain either, but there is more to the story than the short article linked

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/route-28-owner-will-fight-settlement-652286/

Basically, PennDOT gave the guy $115k. He got a lawyer and fought that, the lawyer got him $245k. Then, he claimed that he did not authorize the lawyer to settle. He wanted half a million. In those 4 sentences I go from very sympathetic to somewhat sympathetic to... would you please just go?

[Eismann]

I don't like eminent domain either, but there is more to the story than the short article linked

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/route-28-owner-will-fight-settlement-652286/

Basically, PennDOT gave the guy $115k. He got a lawyer and fought that, the lawyer got him $245k. Then, he claimed that he did not authorize the lawyer to settle. He wanted half a million. In those 4 sentences I go from very sympathetic to somewhat sympathetic to... would you please just go?

Pretty much that for me. I like the removal of hazards/obstructions because I take 28 as my main commute, but that business caused no delays for me. I still don't get the 'you agreed to this...no, I didn't' situation.

[columbia]

It's the general principle I think is what's irritating. I don't know much about this case at all. But lets say he gets $250k for his land.

Remember back when everyone was being asked to sell their land for the airport to get bigger? Know what the airport is going to do in the coming months/years with that land? Get filthy rich off it by drilling for natural gas. It's a precedent that's been set and I applaud him for standing up for what is his.

The airport obtained the mineral rights at the same time?
If that's true, then the people who were forced to sell the land were not very smart (assuming they owned those rights).

[mac5155]

It's the general principle I think is what's irritating. I don't know much about this case at all. But lets say he gets $250k for his land.

Remember back when everyone was being asked to sell their land for the airport to get bigger? Know what the airport is going to do in the coming months/years with that land? Get filthy rich off it by drilling for natural gas. It's a precedent that's been set and I applaud him for standing up for what is his.

The airport obtained the mineral rights at the same time?
If that's true, then the people who were forced to sell the land were not very smart (assuming they owned those rights).

I am under the assumption that they did, seeing as they plan to seek 18% royalties off the production of wet gas.

My point is, the people may not have had a CHOICE to keep the mineral rights.

[Digitalgypsy66]

On a semi-related note, I left Pittsburgh in 1990 and they were widening Rt 28. Are this the same project, or are they widening it again?

[PghSkins]

On a semi-related note, I left Pittsburgh in 1990 and they were widening Rt 28. Are this the same project, or are they widening it again?

Well, I got here in 1999 and it has never not been under construction, so we could probably conclude that it's the same project.

[llipgh2]

I don't like eminent domain either, but there is more to the story than the short article linked

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/business/news/route-28-owner-will-fight-settlement-652286/

Basically, PennDOT gave the guy $115k. He got a lawyer and fought that, the lawyer got him $245k. Then, he claimed that he did not authorize the lawyer to settle. He wanted half a million. In those 4 sentences I go from very sympathetic to somewhat sympathetic to... would you please just go?

I agree. He's just being a greedy jerk now.

[newarenanow]

On a semi-related note, I left Pittsburgh in 1990 and they were widening Rt 28. Are this the same project, or are they widening it again?

Not sure what they did back then, but I think they started out towards the Harmarville area and worked their way into the city.

28 has been worked on for at least a decade from Etna to downtown, but they are entering the final phases. It was much needed and will be a major artery w/o any stop lights into the city when this is done.

[meow]

It's the general principle I think is what's irritating. I don't know much about this case at all. But lets say he gets $250k for his land.

Remember back when everyone was being asked to sell their land for the airport to get bigger? Know what the airport is going to do in the coming months/years with that land? Get filthy rich off it by drilling for natural gas. It's a precedent that's been set and I applaud him for standing up for what is his.

The airport obtained the mineral rights at the same time?
If that's true, then the people who were forced to sell the land were not very smart (assuming they owned those rights).

I am under the assumption that they did, seeing as they plan to seek 18% royalties off the production of wet gas.

My point is, the people may not have had a CHOICE to keep the mineral rights.

There are cases of people retaining their mineral rights when they lose the surface to eminent domain - none of which are in Pennsylvania, however. That's really on the land owners to investigate whether or not they are going to lose the mineral rights prior to signing the surface away.

[mac5155]

There are cases of people retaining their mineral rights when they lose the surface to eminent domain - none of which are in Pennsylvania, however. That's really on the land owners to investigate whether or not they are going to lose the mineral rights prior to signing the surface away.

That's more or less my point. If for some reason a massive chunk of gold (highly unlikely) is found on his land 40 years from now, wouldn't he want to have it? Yes, the $250k is nice, and yes he seems to be just a greedy individual, but not everything is as cut and dry as it seems.