Quote:
Originally Posted by exit2lef
This was a major topic of discussion at the Downtown Voices Coalition meeting this morning. Even if legal, this use of eminent domain seems tone deaf. It's one thing to use state power to acquire property that is needed for a bridge or some sort of essential infrastructure that has to be in a specific location. It's another to use it for an academic building that could probably be modified to fit on available land.
|
Here's a copy of how ASU plans to use the lot for the house:
The current plan is to demolish it and turn it into a green space. This is to satisfy the "at least 5% open space" requirement. With the lot, the green space comes out to 5.8%.
Here's a couple other plans breaking down why they have to acquire the property, and why they have to demolish it:

Without the lot at all, their green space comes out to only 3.2%
If they acquire the lot and kept the house as-is, it's only 4.8% (0.2% shy of the 5%... or roughly 292.65 sqft... It's a patch of grass with the square footage footprint of a full-sized school bus).
I think the use of eminent domain is egregious in this instance. It's basically the City of Phoenix buying the land (even though it's ASU suing, pretty sure at the end of the day it's CoP that's gonna be on the title) and you're telling me they can't issue a variance for their own
code?
This is the reason why ASU "must" acquire the property, it's not for the building itself, it's to comply with the city open space requirement.