Supreme Court To Decide Whether Gov Can Seize 94-Year-Old’s Home, And Keep The Profits

[LouderVol]

As good a place as any to put this.

This happened to a buddy of mine several years ago, the local utility district ran sewer down his road to service a new subdivision being built. Even though his property wasn't annexed into the city like the subdivision property was he was still forced to connect to the new sewer line. He and several others living on that road fought it as far as they could but in the end were forced to connect. It was quite expensive for the connection fee, running the pipe to his house and connecting, he had to reroute his plumbing outlet from the back to the front. He was also required to demolish his septic tank. All in I want to bet it cost him close to 10 grand. Now he could afford it but what happens to people that can't? They were going to cut off his water if he didn't connect by a certain date.

$4,350 for a sewer hookup they didn’t ask for, but ‘anyone who is within 150 feet must connect’

forced utility connections are a huge issue. they can force you to buy things you don't need, or will never use.

even for the green crowd. if you collected 100% of your power, water, and managed your waste water on site, you are still required to connect to the grid. makes absolutely no sense.

it its some bs about selling the house to the next person, fine, require installation to be covered by the seller at/before the sell date with proof of connection. no need to disrupt.

I have a client in Nashville doing a multifamily project that had a similar issue. We got a letter from the city/utility company saying there was capacity to connect to one system vs going out the back to a second system. going out the front was a shorter distance so great. came back later during permitting and told us if we wanted to connect to the front as the letter said the client was going to have to pay to upgrade like 1/2 mile of pipe to the next invert. going to cost the client 1/2 million bucks and delay the project big time. we are also going to have to go through the brain damage of getting the permits for that work and shutting down the road.

 

[hog88]

forced utility connections are a huge issue. they can force you to buy things you don't need, or will never use.

even for the green crowd. if you collected 100% of your power, water, and managed your waste water on site, you are still required to connect to the grid. makes absolutely no sense.

it its some bs about selling the house to the next person, fine, require installation to be covered by the seller at/before the sell date with proof of connection. no need to disrupt.

I have a client in Nashville doing a multifamily project that had a similar issue. We got a letter from the city/utility company saying there was capacity to connect to one system vs going out the back to a second system. going out the front was a shorter distance so great. came back later during permitting and told us if we wanted to connect to the front as the letter said the client was going to have to pay to upgrade like 1/2 mile of pipe to the next invert. going to cost the client 1/2 million bucks and delay the project big time. we are also going to have to go through the brain damage of getting the permits for that work and shutting down the road.

TN allows (think it’s called) spot annexation, where a developer can request annexation on a particular property without it being physically adjacent to the city. That causes a lot of problems for people like my friend.

 

[LouderVol]

TN allows (think it’s called) spot annexation, where a developer can request annexation on a particular property without it being physically adjacent to the city. That causes a lot of problems for people like my friend.

yeah. works out for everybody but the end owner. The developer doesn't have to pay development costs, because the city covers those utilities. The city gets a nice fee and extended tax base, without going through the process of an actual annexation. the taxpayer/utility users cover the cost in their taxes/bill.

 

[Vol since 77]

forced utility connections are a huge issue. they can force you to buy things you don't need, or will never use.

even for the green crowd. if you collected 100% of your power, water, and managed your waste water on site, you are still required to connect to the grid. makes absolutely no sense.

it its some bs about selling the house to the next person, fine, require installation to be covered by the seller at/before the sell date with proof of connection. no need to disrupt.

I have a client in Nashville doing a multifamily project that had a similar issue. We got a letter from the city/utility company saying there was capacity to connect to one system vs going out the back to a second system. going out the front was a shorter distance so great. came back later during permitting and told us if we wanted to connect to the front as the letter said the client was going to have to pay to upgrade like 1/2 mile of pipe to the next invert. going to cost the client 1/2 million bucks and delay the project big time. we are also going to have to go through the brain damage of getting the permits for that work and shutting down the road.

I deal with this frequently in Metro and if they can get a developer to upgrade existing utilities, that's what will happen. It saves them money by not doing a capital improvement project and if the developer says no, there's plenty of others that will do it (at least currently since there's so many that want to develop/build in Nashville). I don't necessarily agree with it, but I do see their point of not putting it on the taxpayer and instead the developer (who is making millions $$$). Developers from out-of-state is who we have the most trouble with as well because they like to ignore the rules/regs and then ask for early releases and such, which isn't going to happen no matter how much they lie. I currently am dealing with 2 like that, one from Arizona and another one from Florida. Neither want to bother with following recommendations or rules/regs but want to cry about not being able to pull building permits or receive CO's before their utilities and grading are even complete.

 

[LouderVol]

I deal with this frequently in Metro and if they can get a developer to upgrade existing utilities, that's what will happen. It saves them money by not doing a capital improvement project and if the developer says no, there's plenty of others that will do it (at least currently since there's so many that want to develop/build in Nashville). I don't necessarily agree with it, but I do see their point of not putting it on the taxpayer and instead the developer (who is making millions $$$). Developers from out-of-state is who we have the most trouble with as well because they like to ignore the rules/regs and then ask for early releases and such, which isn't going to happen no matter how much they lie. I currently am dealing with 2 like that, one from Arizona and another one from Florida. Neither want to bother with following recommendations or rules/regs but want to cry about not being able to pull building permits or receive CO's before their utilities and grading are even complete.

hehe. one of the projects I was thinking of was in Metro.

the issue is the city isn't being upfront about it. we got approved without any upgrades, got the permits for all the underground. but after going through all of that and paying for the permits, the city held up some unrelated permit to go back and get the developer to do the upgrades after previously approving.

 

[Vol since 77]

hehe. one of the projects I was thinking of was in Metro.

the issue is the city isn't being upfront about it. we got approved without any upgrades, got the permits for all the underground. but after going through all of that and paying for the permits, the city held up some unrelated permit to go back and get the developer to do the upgrades after previously approving.

Lol, that certainly doesn't surprise me. The new progressive liberal mayor they just elected is not a good person (probably not any worse than any other politician) and I'll leave it at that. I think they should at least split the cost with the developers but as long as they have 300 or more new projects per year, I don't see any change like that happening. My only wish is the out-of-state developers learn or hire someone in the area to go through the process.

 

[hog88]

Lol, that certainly doesn't surprise me. The new progressive liberal mayor they just elected is not a good person (probably not any worse than any other politician) and I'll leave it at that. I think they should at least split the cost with the developers but as long as they have 300 or more new projects per year, I don't see any change like that happening. My only wish is the out-of-state developers learn or hire someone in the area to go through the process.

I've heard the same about the new mayor. Also expect gentrification to go into overdrive.