"DARKNESS ON THE EDGE OF TOWN" bruce springsteen
Along with all this power news our city still seems to involve itself in thing I believe not in their control. Example Monday, Painesville council will decide what a 'family' is? From recommendations from the Planning Commission. Who should know better than them?
At last Thursday 09/12/13 Planning Commission meeting the developer of the 'Retreat at River's Edge' the one near where Bank St. S.State St. meet. It seems there is a deed restriction for those Condominium owners that restricts Section 8 rental, guess who wants to change that deed restriction? It seems that with that deed restriction people can't get FHA financing, and must go 30% down on a conventional loan. My first thought was that someone from the city or planning commission would tell him that was out of their juristition, but they all kept listening, for over an hour. The developer even showed his intentions claiming after his development was finished the city could reinstate the restrictions, like that would ever happen. As I listened I thought of Brentwood remember there would be no Section 8 housing there either?
The developer stated that there were some rental units in the development but those were being rented out at between $1000/$1200 a month hardly Section 8 numbers. Let's think about this. Your parents buy a unit in that development as their final home, they pass on leaving you with the property. Your presently carring a mortgage on your $300,000 home in Concord, your son's in his second year at Kent State, and you can't sell or rent your parent's home at near the number you want....but you could rent it section 8 at $700.00 a month. With the Feds guarantee and well look $700.00 is better than nothing, right?
I remember the fight to build those Condos in the first place the Westwood/ Meridan area was opposed to it. The only reason some on council voted yes was because of the deed restrictions, now years later do a bait and switch?
Now in the end the Planning Commission let the developer 'table' this what ever it was without public comment. When I asked to make a statement in opposition I was told by the chairmen, "This isn't a public meeting item." He was corrected by Mr. Lyons claiming it was a public item but was an administrative one? I told them both that's why things are so screwed-up around here and left.
The comment I wanted to make was can five people on a board, or even seven on city council change a deed restriction? Would it stand-up in court? Also the developer will take this back to the association for a vote. My feeling are if the vote isn't 56-0 it can't be changed because who in the association can change anothers deed? Look people stick with what a FAMILY is or isn't. Rulings on this one could cost you alot in lawyer fees.
Along with getting you into terrible electric deal, unable to keep chuck holes filled. Now they want to get involved in your deeds to your property?
posted by terminator1 @ 8:26 AM
2 Comments
2 Comments:
No doubt the only reason they are debating what a family is, is to accommodate the illegal Mexicans that like to live 50 to a little house, or 20 grown men to a little house, and then park 20 huge vehicles to a property and call their female neighbors PUNTAS.
Not only did a past city council (including Hada) purposefully bring all the illegals into this town, changing everything here, and bringing down all of our property values, now they plan to stupidly change the meaning of family, so their way of life can be accommodated -- and to hell with the town or your neighborhood.
Here's a solution to the problem -- just get rid of the illegals. For anyone who is thinking of changing the meaning of family, I hope the change comes not only to your neighborhood real soon, but I hope it comes next door to you.
And for former councilpersons Abby DelaMotte (was that her name?) and Bill Horvath who were the ringleaders in bringing the illegal Mexicans here, I hope those 50 Mexicans are living next door to you right now, and not just the rest of the city and citizens.
There is no good reason why these people shouldn't be in their own country, let alone have OUR city and country have to accommodate them in every way possible, including now having an asinine debate on what is a family.
Just let me guess -- it's 50 Mexicans living in the same small house, or 20-30 grown Mexican men living in the same small house. If this city comes up with a definition of family, it had better be to PROTECT the legal citizens from what is going on here, and not to hurt them, or their property values, any further.
9:06 Your reasoning about this matter is valid. I believe this "what is a family" has more to do witha party purchasing a house in an R1 area, and then letting 4/6/8 strangers in some kind of recovery program to collect rent from each individual and then claim to the city that this represents a family? There has been 3 or four families popping up around town and it seems the city wants to make the definition of a family at least to comply to these arrangements?
Where all this could lead to presently unknown. I have been told these 'group homes' have more rights than most of us believe. I guess what allows this to not be assisted living is no one is left on the property to overlook these people?
Yes, your example holds merit only because the city allows so many people per footage in a home. Remember the 458 story?
Now on top of everything else what about 3/4 college students renting a house in an R1 area? Are they also considered a family?
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home