Skip to comments.91-Year-Old Woman in Lawrence Resists Developer
Posted on 03/23/2014 4:25:51 PM PDT by nickcarraway
From Indiana Street near the edge of the University of Kansas campus, you can barely see the top of Georgia Bells house.
Georgia Bell bought her modest home near the University of Kansas campus in 1946 for $850. On Wednesday, she was formally offered $600,000 for it. A five-story residential and retail complex could soon spring up uncomfortably close by. The developer says she can stay, but things will be very different.
It sits at the bottom of 26 old, steep and uneven concrete steps. Two city officials descended those steps recently to talk to Bell about selling her place to a Chicago developer.
The man has offered what seems a reasonable price for a one-bedroom, 840-square-foot house built nearly a hundred years ago, especially considering the roof sags and leaks. Shes got a plywood patch in the kitchen floor, and the front door has no header so Bell, 91, crams a towel up there to block the cold wind.
The siding is rotting away like old food.
The developers offer: $600,000. Considering Bell and her husband gave $850 for the house in 1946, one might think she saw this Chicago fellow coming. But after nearly a year of talk, shes turned him down. She feels like shes being forced out of the home where she raised six children. Their photos hang on the walls.
I done broke the ice here and now they want to sweep me out, she said. I got nowhere to go and its like I dont matter.
Lawrence officials and the developer, Jim Heffernan of HERE LLC, made clear she can stay. No one is talking about forcing her out through eminent domain.
We have no desire for that, Heffernan said.
His companys plan calls for a five-story, state-of-the-art residential and retail complex with 156
(Excerpt) Read more at kansascity.com ...
At 91 years old....take the money and go someplace tropical.
Batteries Not Included.
Here a hospital wanted to buy half of a block of residential property to expand a very needed parking lot. The difference here was this was a Baptist hospital and a little old lady who wanted to stay in her home. She sold her property to the hospital but continued to live there until she died and the the hospital tore down the house and made her lot into a little garden spot at he entrance of the parking. Funny how compassion works.....
Offer her an even million ... she might do it then ... :-) ...
Interestingly, she was interviewed on the radio. She is, in fact, asking for 1 million and claims she is not getting that much because of the color of her skin. Hmmmm....
Maybe she doesn’t want to.
Old folks get stubborn. I know, my dads 93, WWII pilot, and he’s stubborn as ever, why not, he fought for it. It becomes a pisser at times but you have to respect and accommodate your elders.
“Go someplace tropical”, yea, maybe, if that’s what she wants. If not, leave her alone.
End of story.
"In the 1980s when she refused to move from her apartment building after it was purchased by Donald Trump. He wanted to evict her in order to tear down the building, but after going to court, she was allowed to stay. In 1998, it was ruled that Trump could turn the apartments into condos, and she was, therefore, given $750,000 compensation."
*Kelo's Little Pink House* New London, CT
This is what the piece of land that Kelo's house occupied now looks like:
After the houses were destroyed, nothing happened. No R&D complex, no gentrified condos, no influx of high-net-worth PhDs. Nothing. An empty lot with weeds
Edith Macefield Ballard, Seattle WA
You always see some odd house in an industrial area where the owner refused to sell and now the owners can’t even give the property away. You feel bad for them, but once the majority of the owners have sold out and the project is moving forward with or without you take the money before it’s too late.
I understand the attachment to the house, but the neighborhood is gone now, and but it’s not like they’re offering her chump change...$600K is good money.
I hope to Heaven neither you or anyone in your family are faced with being forced from your home by developers/city fathers. I don’t think you realize what happens to elders when they are uprooted without their consent.
Is that property worth $600K or should she haggle with them for a million? I’m sure there is a FReeper who is into real estate that can give a more informed answer.
I understand the elderly just fine. I know that they get fixated on principle.
I drive by two houses every day that are essentially worthless. They are both surrounded by 10’ chain link with razor wire on three sides. A major chemical plant on three sides, and there they are several hundred feet apart. The value of these houses is gone, and the company is not interested in buying them as they went ahead with their project without them. The elderly people who lived the last years of their lives there died years ago and they essentially got zilch.
This is one of those unpleasant situations where an elderly woman is being displaced from her home. But in this case, she wants the money, it’s just not enough for her.
I hate these new college dorms. And people wonder why they graduate with 6 figure debt. However, the developer is not kicking the woman out of the house using eminent domain. They offered her a very fair price for her home, and she didn’t take it. Now she has to live with that decision.
Ouderkirk...Do you remember, when you sold your principles? How much did you ask; and what have you settled for, in warm compensation?
What I’ve learned is that preaching at someone is a one-way convo leaving one side feeling self righteous & the other side misunderstood.
I love it when the *self-righteous* become zealots. ;D
Perhaps the house could be moved (or rebuilt) in an acceptable location?
Six children and xxx number of grandchildren and none of them can be bothered to help maintain her house or to take her in.
And the city of Lawrence appraises her hovel for 93 grand.
Integrity abounds doesn’t it?
I just knew someone would post that.Good one.
As a conservative, it’s her right to ask for $1 million. It’s her right to not take any offer until it’s worth $93,000 again. I wouldn’t want to live in a country where she would be forced to sell.
If you can find a single elderly GOP elected official, it would be a miracle.
I don’t understand your position here.
I am not being self righteous...I am pointing out simple facts. I understand this old woman’s position. She has her little house and she doesn’t want to move out. She’s happy where she is. Under the current situation.
That is about to change. The neighbors have sold out, and this project is going forward with or without her.
I drive by two houses surrounded by a chemical plant, because I work in that plant. The elderly folks who refused to sell to the company when they built their facility 20 odd years ago got nothing. They they had their house, and great for them, they stood on principle, but in the end, the company built their plant around them and rendered their properties worthless. Once the plant went into production, these people wanted to sell at the previously offered price and the company declined since they didn’t need/or want their property any longer. What did they gain? Nothing. The project went ahead despite their intransigence.
This project is going forward, with or without her. I am not cheerleading on this, merely stating a fact. Right now, this is not being done with eminent domain, I would imagine that they will go the eminent domain route (in light of Kelo) in which case she gets the $93K instead of $600K. I am merely stating fact.
Where is the line between standing on principle and foolishness?
An elderly woman is
being displaced from her home in exchange for $600,000, which sum is negotiable.
You advance statism for freedom and liberty, then why not just give up the pretense and call yourself a Liberal - Democrat?
You seem to be able to read all sorts of things into what I said, instead of reading what I actually said.
I have not advanced statism in any sort.
I have not offered an opinion except take the money, and run.
Stating the obvious, that it appears that this woman is the last of her neighbors to sell her property to this developer. The neighborhood as she knew it is going to change, whether she wants it to or not.
I stated the obvious that the project is going forward with or without her.
I didn’t say that the state should move on eminent domain, I said that they probably will.
I discussed two houses I am familiar with where the owners refused to sell to the company who had purchased all of the neighboring properties and went ahead with their project without/around them and they ended up with nothing but a house in the middle of a chemical plant.
The opinion I offered was that when presented with a choice of 6X the value or taking zero, that 6x was the way to go.
You should pay closer attention instead of muttering alone in the dark about advancing statism.
Of course it is her right (and should always be). It is just interesting that she is playing the race card to try to get it.
Continue to promote your Statist philosophy and liberalese rantings....these antiquated documents should be revised to reflect the changing times, anyway......ROFLOL............. that'll get you and Mrs. Bell "40 acres and a mule". To laugh.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.