FeedZone defense in the Heights leave kids in the lurch
June 29, 2006 in The Wire
Alexis Khazzam decided to build a park. Unfortunately, he built part of it on a street easement. He says it was an honest mistake. My two cents: It seems to me that a smart cookie like Alexis Khazzam should have known that you just don’t start building without checking to make sure it’s legal. Building on top of a city easement — essentially, that means it’s not Khazzam’s property, but the village’s — is a big mistake to make. Perhaps he knew about the easement, but went ahead anyway figuring that they wouldn’t say “no” once the park was built because they would look bad. And Phil Luciano certainly seems to take Khazzam’s side a bit more than he does the village’s zoning board.
That’s too bad. ‘Cause I am 100 percent in favor of what Khazzam is doing. For crying out loud, let the guy do what he wants with his property. The article never really states what the village needs the easement for, and he’s willing to agree to let them tear up the court of they really need to. And the reason givens for turning him down were silly, like that it might encourage other people to start using their property the way they wanted to. Well, heaven forbid. It seems to me that any law that can’t be justified on grounds other than it’s the law, or that we want everything to be uniform, is a bad law and deserved to be ignored. The zoning board isn’t elected, but the politicians who appoint them are, and were I resident, I would certainly be inclined to vote against politicians who think this was the correct decision.
And thanks to the loss of their neighborhood school, kids on that side of Prospect Road have lost their local basketball courts. It would have been nice to have new ones.
But I guess bureaucrats and their love of telling people what to do with their private property trumps the need to give kids healthy things to do.
June 29th, 2006 at 11:03 am
All one needs to do is pick almost any street in the Heights and look at the homes and business’ mixed in together. Look at the buildings some homes have on their lots and the additions they have had throughout the years. The Heights is worried about zoning so they decide to pick on someone who is really trying to improve and area? (without a TIF no less, listen up Peoria) Christ! It all boils down to the elected politicans. Their egos are so large I am surprised they fit into the same council chambers without creating a vortex!
June 29th, 2006 at 11:26 am
Wasn’t there another incident like this near Rome or the riverfront part of Peoria Heights? I think it was a guy who cleared some abandoned land owned by the Park Dist and turned it in to a park (heaven forbid).
I mean really… Why in the world would they jump on a guy for doing a good thing?
Besides that, I thought easements were the same as a right of way. The town/village/ect has the right to do whatever with that land but the adjacent property owner still has the right to use it in the mean time. Maybe they are not the same but I know that is how right of ways work. Heck, with an ROW you even still get taxed on the land.
June 29th, 2006 at 11:41 am
Easement:
“An easement is the right of use over the real property of another. The right is often described as the right to use the land of another for a special purpose. Unlike a lease, an easement does not give the holder a right of “possession” of the property, only a right of use.”
- Entire article @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easement
Right-of-Way
“An easement that permits one to travel across the real property of another, or the strip of land subject to such an easement. A right-of-way may confer rights to an individual (such as a neighbor), entity (such as a railroad) or the public as a whole. ”
- Entire article @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-of-way
June 29th, 2006 at 11:45 am
1. Looks like he may have a case if he wants to tke it to court.
2. Heights village board looks like bad guys, no matter what the reasoning.
3. Just goes to show you that there ain’t no politics like small town politics.
June 29th, 2006 at 12:10 pm
Zoning Law:
“No structure shall be constructed or erected on a lot or tract of land or moved to a lot or tract of land, which does not abut a public street, or permanent easement of access to a public street. Such easement shall have a minimum width of twenty feet unless an easement of less width was on record prior to the effective date of this Ordinance.”
– PEORIA HEIGHTS 1970 ZONING ORDINANCE AS AMENDED, Section 5.1(e), http://www.villageofpeoriaheights.org/ZoneOrd1.pdf
Abut:
“In property law, when two parcels abut it means they are adjacent to each other and up against each others’ borders.”
– Entire article @ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abut
June 29th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
June 29th, 2006 at 12:15 pm
1. As far as I know, the courts have pretty consistently upheld municipal zoning laws.
2 & 3. Agreed.
4. I hope he doesn’t start building anything at Junction City without checking first.
June 29th, 2006 at 2:37 pm
Some jealous malcontent must have made a stink. Perhaps it is true what I have come to believe.
The people up there deserved Kris Jain.
June 29th, 2006 at 2:41 pm
Chase: This really isn’t anywhere close to the Grandview. This is closer to the entrance to Grandview Drive.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:30 pm
Yep. Two different areas completely, probably a few miles apart at least. I grew up in the Heights and that’s a nice little place for a small park. What usually happens at such parks is they get some of the older basketball playing crowd in there that takes over the court for many hours in the day. If this is a public park, they have as much right to it as they want. If it’s private property, it’s going to cause some issues regarding who gets to use it and who doesn’t. This is the issue outside of the zoning ordinances that the board thought about. It would probably cause some conflict in a social way.
Darn shame, too. There really is no good playground in that area.
Additionally, is the “Grandview Hotel” area actually in the Heights? Including that Anderson lady that threw the fit about it? I thought the Heights stopped before that area.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
You people just don’t get it. Khazzam built a basketball court about two feet from a public street, and in essence put it in a FRONT YARD! How many of you folks would like to have a basketball court in the front yard of your neighbor’s property? And he keeps saying he’s building this for the “children”! Bullsh*t! He built it for HIS kids and THEIR friends! You think anyone else’s kids will be able to play there without being yelled at by Khazzam??? He’s playing this up like he’s some kind of martyr, well he’s a multi-millionaire who is used to getting HIS way, and he’s basking like a seal in the sun in all of the sympathy from the folks who don’t know the facts. Drive by the place, people, and tell me that’s a great place for a private park. Get a grip.
June 29th, 2006 at 4:42 pm
Ha ha ha ha……… I never knew a rich guy with a good looking wife could stir up so much caring from the folks he won’t be inviting to his private park. And yes the private park is in what is, in truth, a front yard, even though there is no home there.
So what if the Heights has a thousand other zoning problems? Those are in the past, and this is now. I applaud the zoning board for doing the right thing even when they knew they would knock down a hornets nest with this crapola.
I’m simply amazed that so many of you have fallen for his angelic stature on this. It was for his kids only and then he turns it around like he was making the private park for any waif that happens by.
Did I already say: Ha ha ha ha ha?
June 29th, 2006 at 5:32 pm
might want to add if you read Lucianos column, Kazaaaaaaaaaam says that this is a “neighborhood” park. so what does that mean? can anyone from Peoria Heights go there to play? I think if Kazaaaaaaaaaaaaaam says that it’s a public park and that the poor kids on the other side of the tracks can come over to play hoops, the thinking might change. everyone here thinks that’s what he said, but he didn’t say that. it’s a neighborhood park, so his neighbors can use it. if the Heights needs a public park that’s fine. lets see if Kazaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaam says anyone can use it, even the black kid from Averyville. doubt that he will.
June 29th, 2006 at 5:46 pm
He should simply apply for a variance and everyone go on their way; his brother in law lawyer Tom Leiter canhandle this for him- this guy means good and should be rewarded for what he has done for the Heights and North Peoria (getting rid of Chase and Carney both)!
June 29th, 2006 at 5:53 pm
Yeah, reward the guy. That’s frickin’ stupid. What excuse will they have when the guy on Monroe Ave. asks for a variance so he can put a pool in his front yard? Don’t you think it’s about time that our elected officials treat everyone the SAME? God, you make me sick. Puke.
June 29th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
he’s rich, dude. let him do what he wants, when he wants to. can you imagine the problems hes gonna cause for the mayor and the board now? the dude on monroe can’t do that. all they have to do then is tell the guy on monroe “no”. that’s what the old mayor wouldve done right? look where it got him. oh yeah he got his ass beat in the election.
never mind.
June 30th, 2006 at 2:46 am
FACT: Khazzam calls this a park “for the children.” Phil Luciano hops on board, as well as a number of posters here, who clearly don’t have all of the facts. Khazzam then goes on to define “for the children” as being for the children in his neighborhood. He makes no mention of ANY other children in Peoria Heights, or anywhere else, having a standing invite to come by.
FACT: Khazzam had a “stop work” order on the property, and ignored the law, putting in a “fire pit” at the other end of the property. Is the “fire pit” for the children, too?
FACT: The basketball court is virtually on top of the road. How safe is this? Have you heard of a chain link fence that can keep a car from going through it? The fence will have to be six feet tall to have a chance of keeping the ball from bouncing over it often, and INTO the road.
FACT: No matter what Khazzam thinks, Beach St. is NOT his private alley. The BACK of his house fronts onto Beach St., so you have to go ACROSS a PUBLIC street to get to his private park.
FACT: Since the private park is situated at the FRONT of listed county properties, if the board gives an approval for this, then the next person who wants some sort of recreational set-up in his/her front yard will be able to point to this case as a precedent.
FACT: Khazzam and his builder HAD to know they were building on Village right of way. How stupid do they think we are? They just didn’t CARE. I have never seen such an unsympathetic character get so much sympathy, from people on this blog who don’t have any of the facts. They’re just going with their gut instincts because they hear “for the children.” Yeah, for Khazzam’s children and their buddies. ONLY. How long will this be a park “for the children” if a group of Heights kids from outside Khazzam’s little Grandview Drive area oasis happen by, wanting to dribble the ball on the new court? Can you say “seconds”?
FACT: Until the blog repliers here live next door to a basketball court in their neighbor’s front yard, it might be best to get all of the FACTS before hurling insults at the zoning board and elected officials.
June 30th, 2006 at 7:12 am
Ohenry: I don’t think anyone was insulting anyone on this subject.
And by the way, it sounds like a lot of you just don’t like Mr Khazzam. I wonder if your outcries would be the same if it was Mr Born and Raised in Peoria Heights that built this court “for the kids”. I doubt it.
June 30th, 2006 at 8:43 am
Putting the issue aside for a moment…
The vitriol you’re reading, Tony, is just more of the same in P-Town. It’s classism. This is the heritage of being in an old pro-union town. We hate and distrust anyone with money, anyone developing property or trying to, anyone proposing we spend a dime (even if it’s not actually our dime) on something that would bless someone other than the working-class man.
Did anyone read the paper this morning? Besides Junction City, Kazaam is dropping big bucks into starting another company here — and eventually bringing all of its production, shipping, etc. to our fair city.
What’s his angle? I’m sure he’s trying to screw us all with this product, too. The rich…you just can’t trust ‘em.
June 30th, 2006 at 8:48 am
Snarky… Wow. Thanks for putting it in a format that I couldn’t come up with. I agree 100%.
June 30th, 2006 at 1:03 pm
Henry-
Referring to Beach Street: It’s only a street in name. If you think this is a busy thoroughfare with many, many cars passing on it every hour, then you need to go check it out. It’s barely more than an alley. The roads in Glen Oak Park get more traffic on them in one hour than Beach Street sees in 10 hours. So referring to the court that sits “virtually on top of the road”, it does so IN NAME ONLY. And that’s a FACT! Now calm down.
June 30th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
Floyd sez: “that’s a FACT!”
I sez:
Flashbacks to “Kids in the Hall” episodes?
June 30th, 2006 at 2:34 pm
Floyd: Don’t forget that on this forum, when faced with a situation where you are short on facts you can substitute sensationalism.
“
June 30th, 2006 at 3:28 pm
Uhm, let’s see now. Because Beach St. is not very wide, then it doesn’t qualify as a street even though there are homes on it. And, because Kazaam has mucho buck-ohs, then it should be okay no matter what he does, right? Well, the classism is in your minds, fellas. So long as you have the money, go ahead and break the rules. Let’s go one step further. Do you think of you dunder-heads would be taking up the cause for a 45 year old worker at K’s if he was turning vacant land into his own park and putting a basketball court two inches from the street? Doubt it. You people are amazingly dense. Hats off to you all. Sheeeesh.
June 30th, 2006 at 3:51 pm
Ohenry, now the insults abound. Looks like you’ve proved your point so well.
Yes, exactly. Because Beach Street is an alley is a good reason.
This is not about Mr Khazzam having money. It’s about YOU being jealous that he built a park “for the kids”. It’s about YOU not liking him because he is new to the area and changing things. We “dunder-heads” would probably support anyone who chose to do something for the community on their own. I posed the question to YOU: If this were Mr Born and Raised in Peoria Heights would YOU be raising a stink? Doubt it. Even someone who is amazingly dense can see right through this. So, did Mr Khazzam fail to invite YOU to a cookout that he had, or did YOU just decide from the beginning that you didn’t like him when Mr Mucho buck-ohs moved in to the neighborhood.
Yes, hats off to you as well. The Pessimism of Peoria strikes again. Stay tuned for more ideas and changes to be quashed next time.
July 1st, 2006 at 1:49 am
Tony, this is NOT about Khazzam building a park for “the kids.” This is about Khazzam building a basketball court and a fire pit for HIS kids and their friends. On top of that the basketball court is 3/4 on Village right of way. I wouldn’t care if it was built by my brother-in-law, it’s WRONG. Now, why can’t you see that? The Classism is coming from YOU, pal. If Khazzam was not a multi-millionaire who had just done away with the Grandview Hotel, YOU would not be singing the praises of a guy who built this private “park,” now would you?
You are willing to let the privileged get away with anything, and the rest of the neighborhood be damned. WHY can’t YOU see that? I wouldn’t be going to a cook-out at Khazzam’s even if I was invited. I don’t care WHAT he does with his own property, but he is WELL onto Village property, and ANYONE else who would do such a thing would be told to tear it down, so WHY NOT him, too, huh?
Bottom line is this…… IF he would have done this the correct and legal way (which ANYONE knows that HE knows how to do), ALL of this would have been avoided. But because he’s MR. KHAZZAM, savior of the northside, you’re willing to give him a “break” on it. What does that say about YOU, Tony? One more time, this playground is NOT for the “community.” It is for the “neighborhood” kids. NOWHERE has he ever said that it is for the COMMUNITY. It’s just people like you and Phil Luciano that just love to rip into governments that have said it’s for “the community.”
And, one more time, this has NOTHING to do with Mr. Khazzam not being from Peoria Heights. Hell, I’M NOT from Peoria Heights. It’s just wrong for a guy to think that just based on who he is, he can break any law around and everyone just smiles and says “thanks for doing that.” That type of favoritism has to end, and it looks like it’s ending now.
I’m damned glad people like YOU aren’t on a zoning board, Tony. At least, I hope you’re not.
July 1st, 2006 at 1:59 am
“And thanks to the loss of their neighborhood school, kids on that side of Prospect Road have lost their local basketball courts. It would have been nice to have new ones.”
This is what Billy said originally. As if, because Mr. Khazzam was building something for “the community,” then the naughty zoning board should give him a pass on the the area the court was built on.
Well, Billy, you can call a man just as good as the next guy can. Why don’t you call Mr. Khazzam and VERIFY that the court is going to be open to ANYONE who wants to use it? You know, a REAL park that any kid can use, just like you said in your original statement.
Come on, let’s get to the bottom of this. Let’s find out what Mr. Khazzam’s intentions are regarding the “community” basketball court. I think you’ll find out that any kid outside of the circle of friends that his OWN kids have will NOT be considered part of the “neighborhood.”
Any time you want, you all can stop your grovelling, and start applying THE LAW as it’s meant to be applied… that everyone is EQUAL……. it’s still America, as far as I know.
July 1st, 2006 at 9:10 am
Everyone is equal, you say? You’ve casted aspersions about this guy’s true intentions. He told Luciano that it is “for the kids to come and play”. I’m going to guess that whomever decides to call and ask him this (silly) question, he’s going to say that yes, kids not necessarily from his neighborhood would be welcome.
Part of having money and owning things is deciding what you want to do with them. If he doesn’t want the ghetto rats with the bumping systems and the many many hours of basketbal being played, with the inevitable rim ripped from the backboard, then he should be able to remove them. Since this does border on a zoning issue, here’s the real problem.
And another thing-it’s not like he built this basketball court on someone’s yard. He didn’t put lines down the middle of YOUR driveway. It was partially built on a VARIANCE. That’s land that’s owned by the village and NOT in use, but they retain the right to use it. And he said that if they NEEDED it, they could have it. But once again, take a look at Beach Street. That street hasn’t changed EVER. If I recall correctly, half the street is surrounded by woods. I may be wrong on that, might have it confused with another little street up along there. It’s kind of like if you owned a swingset, but never used it until I came over and started using it. Then you get mad and tell me to get off it. Then you either get on it and swing, or you continue to let it sit there unused.
Henry, your need to base this argument on our tolerance of rich people walking over everyone and dropping terms such as classism tells me that perhaps it’s time for you to stop taking your Marxist literature so seriously and grab some fiction.
There. That’s my insult. Sorry it’s not as exciting as “dunder-heads”. And I used up all my good thoughts on the “swingset” theory.
July 1st, 2006 at 1:41 pm
Floyd, again, it’s always helpful to be dealing with the facts before you start throwing opinions around. He specifically said “NEIGHBORHOOD” park, and in fact, gave an exact number of NEIGHBORHOOD kids in the area that he was going to have play there.
Now, you may call my question “dumb,” but once more, please know all of the facts before you even assess that. Perhaps you can assign “fairness” to my takes instead of “Marxism.” I know that using the author of the Communist Manifesto puts me in a far darker light… but, again, I think it’s best to be working with the facts, and not just what you THINK you read.
July 1st, 2006 at 3:46 pm
Good reply. My retort:
Unfortunately, you are taking every word in print and putting it as the exact truth, trying to dictate the context. If the next question from Luciano’s mouth is “So, is the park only for these 22 kids?”, do you REALLY think the answer is going to be “Absolutely. Only these kids, and their parents.”??? Any park in a neighborhood is a neighborhood park. It’s a city park. It’s a playground. It’s whatever you call it. Because he chose to build a park in a neighborhood and call it a neighborhood park does not mean he would stand up and say, “All you other-than-Grandview-address kids aren’t allowed here.”
Now don’t accuse me of knowing the facts. I read Luciano’s article. If a person can’t make the assumption that I made at the end of my last paragraph, then we can safely rule out all written word because, according to your assumption, we are not allowed to read between the lines and derive meaning from black-on-white text.
To go ahead and come full-circle, if he really DOES intend to pick and choose who plays in his park, then the use of this village-owned property is not justified. If it a park that anyone would be welcome to visit, then it should not be an issue. And let’s don’t talk about Beach Street, and its viability as a “street” anymore. Take a drive up there sometime, and you’ll see what I’m referring to.
Thank you. Drive safely!
July 1st, 2006 at 7:28 pm
Half of my front yard is a ‘right of way’… in fact for most everyone in my neighborhood, half of their front yard is a ‘right of way’. A couple years ago I had a problem with a rental tenant who had an inability to properly drive and park his vehicle on pavement. This naturally tore up a significant part of my yard, both in the ‘right of way’ and out. I made several inquiries with various departments of the city to figure out what exactly I could do. I only got more confused in the process. Some folks told me that the ‘right of way’ part was indeed my property and thus had full ownership rights to it, other than the city’s ‘right’ to do their own thing to it. I had others tell me that the front part wasn’t mine at all. This naturally begged the question as to why exactly I was expected to mow it. What I was looking for was whether I could drop some big rocks there or not. Again vagueness. I was left with the impression that I could do virtually anything landscape wise to it but had to recognize that the city could tear it up at will if they needed to do something there. I never got around to having a lawyer try and clarify all this too me. Seemed an awful great expense for a question that should have a clearer answer.
I don’t know what this Khazzam guy is thinking but if the Heights is just as confused as Peoria is… well no wonder he just went ahead.
I guess all I am saying is that the whole ‘right of way’ business is not exactly clear cut and it kind of depends on who you ask.
July 2nd, 2006 at 1:42 am
All this talk about the right of way, but the bigger problem is that even though there is no house at that section, Khazzam has put a basketball court into a “front yard.” If the zoning board had given me a variance for that, what would stop the next guy who wanted to put a basketball court, a tennis court, or a pool in his front yard? Or someone taking an empty lot and doing the same thing that Khazzam is doing? Does anyone who posts on here really want to have a nearby neighbor who has a basketball court right next to the street? There are reasons for zoning laws. And, there are reasons why some guys put stuff in without consulting the zoning board… they know that it’s not going to be approved.
‘Nuff said.
July 2nd, 2006 at 1:51 am
Oh, and Floyd, it would have been really easy for Khazzam to say, “This is a park for anyone in Peoria Heights,” rather than saying how many kids are in the “neighborhood.” And, just because it is a “park,” unless it is owned by the city, it is NOT open to anyone who happens by. If you put up some monkey bars on a lot you own, YOU still control who can play there, don’t you think? If you put a pool in, YOU control who can swim there, right? Don’t you think that Khazzam would have every right to move kids on who are playing on his basketball court? Of course he would! It is ONLY a “city park” if the city owns it, right? Just because it LOOKS like a city park, does not mean it IS a city park, unless it is owned BY the city. I think Khazzam should be asked what he will do if a group of kids from the other side of Peoria Heights comes over and plays on his basketball court for several hours. I think it’s a fair question. And, I believe that he would likely reply, “That court should be used by who I allow to use it, cause I paid for it.” It’s the reply I would give if I owned it. If he truly wants it to be a park for EVERYONE, he will deed it over to the Heights to be run as a city park for EVERYONE. Would that color anyone’s opinon of the situation if he stated that he will control who plays on HIS property?
July 2nd, 2006 at 7:00 am
Two things: Why doesn’t anyone just say it. What if a group of BLACK kids from the “otherside” showed up to play?
The other? What happens if a kid gets hurt on that property. Who is liable?
July 2nd, 2006 at 7:39 am
Prego Man, you got it. That’s the undiscussed feature of this scenario, and Emtronics labeled it. If this guy is around and a bunch of Black kids show up and play basketball, the fun begins. If he chases them off, clamining private property, then the basketball court shouldn’t be there. If he says that they can play at the park, then it’s considered up for grabs by the community, therefore a true neighborhood park. Simple as that.
And you also got it right-he ought to offer to give it to the Village. Then see what they say about it.
July 2nd, 2006 at 11:00 am
That’s another part of the problem. Obviously, the Village isn’t going to sign over the right of way for Khazzam to own, and yet 3/4 of the court lies on Village property. What if a kid gets hurt on that section of the court? Do you think Khazzam will take responsibility? What will his insurance company think if this “neighborhood park”? I wonder if he’s checked into that yet. Even if it’s just the Grandview Area kids out there, that’s a helluva insurance risk increase.
Plus, you open up the basketball court to everyone (which I seriously DOUBT Khazzam EVER had plans of doing), you’re going to be brining in some hard-core basketball dudes from even the South Side of Peoria. Not that that is wrong, right, indifferent, or whatever, but I’d bet my life that Khazzam never had that in mind.
Someone earlier stated that all of the facts have not been understood in this case. I think the more that the public delves into Khazzam’s plans for this “park,” and the more they realize that he went way beyond his legal powers to put it in, I think the more they’re going to realize that the Peoria Heights Zoning Board acted responsibly and for the good of ALL.
I know that the mayor wants to have more open land for parks, etc., and that will likely happen in the near future. The old Kelly Avenue site would have made A GREAT park AND parking lot area, but the previous mayor Earl Carter forced through the Heritage Square thing… and look what’s going on there… NOTHING. I think that’s a goodly reason why that snake was voted out of office. I don’t think the Beach St. location is the best for a public park… no street parking available… no really good access… but, we’ll see if Khazzam truly had ALL of the area in mind, or just HIS OWN.
Thanks for the good banter, guys. Have a great Fourth.
August 10th, 2006 at 5:20 pm
It is pointless to qualify Alexis Khazzam’s intentions. Just look at the results. DO you like it? Does it make sense in your environment? etc… But beware!
Mr Khazaam’s resume is very dodgy and made up mostly thanks to his inheritance and yes, his lovely wife. His ambition and ruthlessnes are what matters to you, they should be obvious to everybody. Unfortunately he is still in the phase of garnering support in the Peoria community untill he is uncovered as he was where he lived previously.
February 14th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Excellent, love it! http://www.roche-tamiflu.info/Acuvue-bifocal.html