For a fortnight, I thought Sedgwick County’s proposal to drop a cool $14 million on 808 acres of prime industrial land the city of Bel Aire can’t give away was going to slip under the radar.
Brother, was I wrong!
The proposed purchase and installation of a rail spur is the talk of the city’s development community, and not in a positive way. The word “bailout” keeps coming up.
The proposal is being characterized by developers in a variety of ways: A knee-jerk reaction to Siemens’ decision to locate near Hutchinson – ironically, on a big chunk of land near a rail spur; an attempt by the county to save one jurisdiction from financial ruin; an ill-fated reach for a huge industrial client.
And in several meeting rooms, as the county going into direct competition against private developers.
There’s some truth to that argument. Can the county wait for years while the area pursues the ever-elusive Toyota plant? Probably not. So the alternative becomes subdividing the land into smaller development chunks – and going into competition against the city’s private developers.
Not a real incentive for private development, is it?
Sedgwick County’s idea to establish a huge industrial park’s got some merit – but you can fairly wonder if a tract with a bad track record of development interest is the place to start.
This chunk of land certainly looks like a bad idea – for Bel Aire back in the days when its council went into the real estate development business.
And for Sedgwick County now unless the land is de-annexed and the county makes its peace with local developers.
4 Comments
My recommendation – sent to one of the Commissioners:
Develop an inventory of all properties currently in government hands – County and City – that could be offered for development.
Offer the cities – especially small cities – County support in marketing.
Focus on brownfields (e.g. Bridgeport) where utilities are in place and there has been a history of contamination and groundwater is not used for drinking. This way when there is a spill the consequences are not that severe.
A question not answered in Bel Aire – why can the County succeed where Bel Aire could not? If there ARE things the County can do why not just let County do on behalf of the city?
Add to the property inventory ‘willing’ private land that could be ‘pieces’ of a puzzle for development. This way if a dozen parcels had to be assembled they might already be in inventory.
“…A question not answered in Bel Aire – why can the County succeed where Bel Aire could not?…”
Does the county commission have a brother-in-law developer, and the Bel Aire not?
Now that you’ve read the “what I’m hearing” post, a couple of thoughts:
It’d be a good idea, I think, if the county reached out to some of these developers for, at the very least, an intellectual partnership.
These are guys whose business has been complicated by the fear of the great economic unknown, and I suspect that’s some of what’s driving their anguish today.
And then, de-annex the land. We live in an era of bailout fear, and getting the county back in jurisdiction will solve a bunch of that.
Over $17,000 per acre for undeveloped land, then adding a railroad spur and services. What is the true cost with improvements? Why is Bel Aire being paid and why isn’t the land being donated to the county for their involvement since property tax revenues would still go to Bel Aire? Is there another site that would make more sense in the county and what would that cost be? As it stands, there is no justification or definition as to what should be done. Welcome to Kansas politics as usual….