--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "cwpvt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's been a year, can't the City force them to remove what is there
> if they are not going to use it? Or hire someone to remove it and
> bill the owner. I would assume that if they can arrest someone for a
> porch, they can have the owner (who is still in business) fined until
> it's gone. The same thing with the Metropolitan, why is that hulk
> still standing. I would have to assume they removed the good part,
> because they were afraid that someone was going to force them to
> restore it. If I remember correctly, the city sent an engineer over
> who said it was unsafe, or that was the excuse anyway! Wouldn't the
> remains qualify the same way?
>
=============================================================
It would actually be better to include the Esperanza site in the
parking discussion. The part that is built is the proposed parking levels.
It could be finished as such rather easily forming the base of a
future tower expansion should the economy warrant.
The City could exercise Eminent Domain, take the site, make it public
property and then lease the rights to operate it as Parking with some
commercial uses perhaps.
Thank you for the thought, I see myself in your post
Several terms come to mind:
- Selective Enforcement
- Malicious Prosecution
I've been photo documenting various sites for years.
It's clear that there is some 'Personalizing' going on.
Werner
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
