Why is the Lancaster EastPort Commerce Center not succeeding?

[Lancaster Resident]

In today's Buffalo News Stephen Watson reports that 128 acre EastPort Commerce Center owner Uniland Development Co. will have to pay back $490,000 it received in a federal community development block grant that was funneled to it through the Erie County and Lancaster Industrial Develpment Agencies, if it can't attract a tenant to the vacant industrial park by March. Uniland spent $7M on the park that has sat empty for the eight years it has been in existence. In 2003 and 2006 CarQuest showed interest in the site but nothing materialized from it. Others have shown interest in the site but again nothing has materialized. Uniland has been successful with their industrial parks elsewhere in this area, e.g. CrossPoint Business Park in Amherst, so development officials say they are at a loss as to why EastPort has been so unsuccessful thus far. The most recent notable lost opportunity for EastPort was Yahoo which chose Lockport instead to build a new data center. Reporter Jennifer Lysiak covered this loss in the Lancaster Source at that time. In this article Supervisor Giza explains why Yahoo was a lost opportunity for EastPort. EastPort Commerce Center is located on the corner of Walden and Pavement, adjacent to the highly controversial Lancaster Airport that Supervisor Giza was a strong supporter of at that time (hopefully not anymore!!). Here are Supervisor Giza’s quoted words as to why Yahoo was lost “We were No. 1 on their list at one point but all of a sudden, the airport on Walden Avenue was mentioned. They didn’t want to be near an airport or a railroad. I don’t know why the railroad, but for the airport, they didn’t want the risk of a plane crashing into the facility. So it moved us down on the list”. The article goes on to say “Giza believes the airport was the corporation’s biggest concern…”.

This is very ironic considering that the Lancaster Airport was awarded 3 IDAs by the Lancaster Industrial Development Agency that Supervisor is the Chairman of, created no jobs (and admitted they would not in their IDA applications), has recently refused to pay their very low property taxes (relative to their approximately 140 acres of land and over $10 million of taxpayer/FAA funded airport improvements---they only paid about as much as two or three homes), lowers the quality of life and increases risk for residents living under their flight path, lowers the value of nearby residential property, and sent Yahoo packing (and how many others?) when they found out they were nearby. It is also interesting to note that the EastPort Commerce Center is not nearly as badly affected by the airport as the nearby residential area yet this was not considered when Supervisor Giza was a supporter of the airport and its expansion plans. All of this to heavily subsidize hobby pilots (most of which do not live in Lancaster) on the backs of the taxpayers! Supervisor Giza’s past support for the Lancaster Airport has to rank right up there with the Colecraft building for the biggest mistakes of his tenure as Supervisor, and hopefully one he would decide differently if he could do it over again. These are the kind of mistakes Lancaster can no longer afford.

[WNYresident]

Why were they given grants in the first place?





This stuff has to stop.....

[Lee Chowaniec]

One of he prime reasons Yahoo decided against moving into the Eastport Commerce complex is because they did not want to lease the property from Uniland, but wanted to purchase land and do their own development. Where property along Walden Avenue may go for anywhere between $20,000 to $40,000 an acre, Uniland wanted somewhere around $75,000 an acre. Yahoo would not pay it.

Uniland came in promising the world in their 2003 Esport Commerce development plan. Tnd snowed the powers to be to get seed money for infrastructure in return for jobs. With the exception of one business, nothing has panned out and you sure won't get an answer why from Uniland or form the Town of Lancaster.

The police / court building project wasteful costs, the Lancaster Airport project and frivilous IDA'S granted, the money spent on renovating / reconstructing Town Hall, the sale of the Depew Library and money spent to convert the building for OEM purpose, and the minimal publication of crime news in the town are sensitive subjects to our town fathers. Information on such matters is doled out only as needed and/or in such fashion that favors the town.

[Lancaster Resident]

Lee: Yes the decisions by Yahoo and other companies not to locate in the EastPort Commerce Park likely involved a number of factors, and the cost per acre that Uniland was asking for may be a big one too. One would think that their business plan for developing EastPort would be similar to the successful one they used at CrossPoint in Amherst, including the sale/price or leasing of the land. So there is more to the story. It is sad how the Lancaster powers to be have fallen prey to hyped "pie in the sky" false promises. The Lancaster Airport also claimed that they would be an "economic engine" for Lancaster to help win support and IDAs from Supervisor Giza, and the powers to be fell for that one too. Important decisions need to be made less superficially from now on.

[shortstuff]

Adaptive reuse initiatives~~~the practice of reusing industrial tax breaks for projects by just facilitating the move of a business (Tom Bike Shop), or using money from agencies such as HUD to facilitate or initiate job creation (low income in this instance) year after year in the hopes that the grant monies are fullfilled by the obligation of the business. This is where reviewing these grants on a regular basis and charting their progress ~~ if the progress is unsuccessful~~the use of a "claw-back" clause should be instituted.

In the case of the Eastport Commerce Park, this project is mystifing at best. CrossPoints on Millersport Hwy is very successful. Uniland actually donated the land to the Chapel. We can play the "let's see and figure it out" game but bottom line Uniland took handouts and now need to pay it back. The cost of the land is an odd thing, HUD grant was to help Uniland facilitate business to provide "low paying" job creation. Low job creation vs high price tag land deals? Does that make sense to you? I think the unsuccess of that project has a lot more behind the story than meets the eye.

Take the airport for instance, over 10 million dollars in FAA funding only because they convinced the LIDA this will be a successful engine bringing in job creation. Well let's see Yahoo vanished because of aircraft, housing development has halted because of aircraft, and I am not sure where the economic stimulus idea came from? Lancaster Airport put on their LIDA application--No job creation---completely contrary to what the LIDA grant is intended for.

We need to start looking at the reasons why the IDA is so willing to hand out abatements without the notion that the economy is struggling--why put more burden on the taxpayers when it is not necessary to give tax breaks to businesses that don't need it.

Careless, lack of oversight and downright wrong---the people cannot tolerate this kind of Corporate Welfare subsidized incentives anymore.