Did some digging.. we shall see how this goes. The parcel already possesses access through an old city ROW with Reed Ave. (It is specified as a causeway.) The ROW is also included on the parcel's legal description. Unless something has changed since 2007 for that ROW (extremely unlikely) the developer doesn't seem to have access issues. With that in mind, I really don't see how this doesn't get pushed for approval. Seems to me too that the developer 'could' even get rewarded for developing this.. Here's why:
- Very clearly was sold with unusable/contaminated soil
- Almost completely surrounded by registered Brownfield's
- Property is still within the CCBD
Between a brownfield & ccbd classification, there are grants/incentives for: planning, cleanup, REV (tax) grants, completion grants, and some smaller ones that just come to mind... With Riversedge being right there too.. and Artea.. seems impossible to stop. The contaminated soil also means the cost of replacing all the soil just got heavily discounted.. making foundations cheaper.
Also not sure which map is right or wrong, but COJ shows the parcel as having large chunks of Flood Zone X. Makes it that much harder to fight when it reaches committee if that is correct.