Before everyone calls the Whambulance and starts crying that I am am cooking up new city government conspiracy, STOP. I am posting about Item #6 on the city council agenda out of curiosity (DOC: TheGreatLandSwap ).
This is the first time on an agenda I have seen such a ‘swap’.
1) Why does Schoeneman own land that our bike trail is on to begin with?
2) Why not just sell the land to the city? Why swap it?
3) Why would they ‘give/swap’ land that is adjacent to the RR relocation project that hasn’t been completed yet?
Just questions. No conspiracies . . . yet.
Schoeneman’s have tried to develop their river bank property for many years. Cecil rode with me years ago and as we tooled along talking about cars, roadbeds, lumber and the riverbank old lumberyard.
For those who did not know Cecil, and his brother Al, they were long time businessmen who helped build much of Sioux Falls and the area. The family lumber business started in Doon Iowa before South Dakota had railroads. As Sioux Falls grew their family started the lumberyard along the river. Through the years the Schoenemans have been great citizens of the city. When asked by most any group in town to help promote an event or project, they pitched in with money, connections or planning skill.
One of the topics Cecil chatted about was what to do with the lumberyard. He and Al were getting up in years and they still wanted to promote the town they loved. There were many unsavory developers and city officials who wanted to take their property one way or the other. The old lumberyard was long considered an eyesore, a mess, a disgrace or something that should be condemned for removal.
Schoenemans owned the land all the way to the river’s edge. Cecil liked the bike trail, the bridge across the river actually went through their property. They gained nothing by having the bridge and bike trail, it was a civic thing to do. To make something of downtown and use the riverbank. Cecil was excited about the growth of east bank and the possibilities.
As Cecil aged, his eyesight degraded, then his brother Al died, he loved to go for rides and talk about the possibilities. Cecil died a few years ago leaving his son Al to carry on. I know Cecil and Al would be excited with the changes to the lumberyard land.
The bike trail is an orphan left over from the development. I do not know any details of the proposed swap sale, but I can understand why it needs to be done in some way. The city developed a bike trail on private property, people could have gotten hurt on the property and Schoenemans could have been been held liable, not good. The city has spent millions of dollars on the riverfront without having any ownership, not good.
This deal is cleaning up a mess left over from the flooding of 1969. To do this Al Schoeneman is willing to trade it for the two parcels outlined above. I do not know his motivations but it makes sense to me. My question is this, when the city gains ownership, what does the mayor have in mind for the riverfront? How many more millions does he plan to spend?
Another cool Cecil story. Did you know Cecil was one of America’s best sports car racing drivers? He owned many fine sports cars over the years. When Ferrari would introduce with a new model, Cecil would get a call from Mr Ferrari so he could buy the first one. He knew how to drive them and was known in worldwide racing circles. One of the people I miss in Sioux Falls, someone who just wanted to make things better. He lived quiet, worked behind the scenes and got things done. I was glad to know him.
SiouxRiverStepSitter on 07.08.13 at 12:12 am
The city has spent millions of dollars on the riverfront without having any ownership, not good.
Is this why the City appears to be willing to GIFT Al Schoeneman with two parcels of land that are in very close proximity to the railroad relocation project?
See siouxfalls.org
Home Page Key Resources (right hand side of page)
Top 10 City Projects
Downtown Sioux Falls Rail Yard Development
Public Outreach
12-11-12 City Council Presentation
page 7
(you will NOT find these docs attached to the Informational meeting itself)
Where are all the investigative reporters (both newspaper and TV) on this one!
Sounds like there is a whole lot more to be told about this land SWAP story!!!
SRSS – Do you think once the land swap occurs, Al will sell the land back to the city OR gift it as a tax write-off. It is certainly a mysterious deal.
Can’t wait to hear Darin Smith/i.e. Mike Huether’s explanation of this at tomorrow night’s Council meeting!
There had better be some PUBLICLY asked questions by the peoples’ representatives, and not the usual rubber-stamping.
A few months ago, I made up my own idea for how best to re-develop the East Bank into a cohesive urban district. Not really related to the discussion here, but maybe somebody here would find it interesting:
http://goo.gl/maps/C9QGw
bong, bong, bong goes the rubber stamp
Isn’t this the berm with flood plain elevation designated Corp of Engineers? It’s a permanent easment of no value a developer is trying to swap for prime real estate. Another Huether scandal?
Look at the PDF document, there is one that looks like it is old as the hills. I wonder if that is the original deed on the land?
It’s dated 1898. It seems to me this slipped thru the cracks. What makes this interesting is the land swap. I guess we may get answers Tuesday night.
it is an interesting piece of property. you would almost need to own or control the neighboring parcels. One or both are apear to be abandoned rail line land. The possibility to lease or sell the land for billboards or office tower might work.
Thought about the consolidate than eventual donation for riverfront parkland. If estate planning it could PEKAS.
PEKAS / work
The trade is to provide the new development on the Schoeneman property (CNA & the hotel) with overflow parking. The new pedestrian pathway in this development connects to the land in question and will be utilized in full when the hotel opens this fall. It is great to see this project doing so well. It would be nice to see a more comprehensive vision for downtown outlined in a public forum.
@TomH – Love your depiction of East Bank’s redevelopment potential!
SFS – That has been the consensus that I have been hearing also, and makes sense. Even though we don’t really need a pedestrian bridge there since 8th Street has a perfectly good sidewalk on it, I’m just saying. But the overflow parking makes sense. I still think it is bizarre that it took 115 years to realize the city needed to acquire property that our bike trail sits on. Who says that MMM doesn’t get things done, he spends millions, but still gets things done 🙁
What’s surprising about the length of time things sometimes take for governmental actions? With an institution that has “employee turnover” rate for elected officials EVERY YEAR dictated by law, and the demands from “the public” that appointed/hired officials not become long-term employees and a very antagonistic view toward anyone who does – the institutional memory is practically non-existent.
An example from a eighboiro9ng town from their last council meeting; irate “property owner” complains that city installed a section of water main on “hois property” without notification. City engineer informed him that that ;and was purchased by the city for use as a future street in 1918 – according to records at register of deeds. “Property owner” claims that when he “purchased the property” the surveyor saids that 66 foot x 398 foot piece was included in his pourchase – and he paid the “previous owner” full value for it. Then claimed that “it was fenced as part of the whole parcel” and that “if it’s fenced in for 20 years – it’s yours”. Asked if a claim on the land had been filed – “I don’t know – but I know I paid for it when I bought it”. When? 2002. There was no record of the piece ever having been transferred from the city ownership to any other party post 1918. Begins to look like the “previous owner” and the “surveyor” took the “property owner” for a few thou with their fables about fencing and “property rights” – doesn’t it?.