The Great Clarksville TX War: Where's Enfield?

[dilbert firestorm]

a dispute on where the historic Enfield Drug store is located.
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...post1058516398

Location of Nau's Enfield Drug store by the owners themselves.
http://nausdrug.com/about-us/

Nau’s Enfield Drug is home to Austin’s only original full-service drug store, soda fountain, and grill. Nau’s has been serving West Central Austin since 1951 and has become a beloved, historic landmark. No matter where you live in the Austin area, you can experience Austin’s friendly neighborhood drug store, located in the middle of Clarksville on the corner of 12th & West Lynn.

a different fight of another sort.
to tear down a house in disrepair deemed to be historic.
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...stin-hi/nrShb/

[DSK]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

a dispute on where the historic Enfield Drug store is located.
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...post1058516398

Location of Nau's Enfield Drug store by the owners themselves.
http://nausdrug.com/about-us/


a different fight of another sort.
to tear down a house in disrepair deemed to be historic.
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...stin-hi/nrShb/

I went into that shitty store and asked the guy behind the counter where Clarksville was, and he said I was in the middle of it.

I guess that loser was Assup. The place is a dump - it looks like some drugstore you see driving through an insignificant small town in the middle of nowhere.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

a dispute on where the historic Enfield Drug store is located.
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...post1058516398

Location of Nau's Enfield Drug store by the owners themselves.
http://nausdrug.com/about-us/


a different fight of another sort.
to tear down a house in disrepair deemed to be historic.
http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news...stin-hi/nrShb/

Arnie ziffle ... HOMELESS??????

OH, THE HUMANITY!!!






From the heights of success to destitute. SNICK!

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by DSK

I went into that shitty store and asked the guy behind the counter where Clarksville was, and he said I was in the middle of it.

I guess that loser was Assup. The place is a dump - it looks like some drugstore you see driving through an insignificant small town in the middle of nowhere.

if you read the 3rd link, the owner of the business are having money problems and are fighting the city of Austin to tear down the "historic" derelict house so they can sell the property for higher value.

I don't like these "historic" laws that prevent owners from doing something to their property as they see fit.

[Yssup Rider]

HAHAHAHAHAHZHZZAAAMSDJEJEOFKWN F FMSHAHAHAHAHAHAHSH!

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

a dispute on where the historic Enfield Drug store is located.
http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?...post1058516398

Location of Nau's Enfield Drug store by the owners themselves.
http://nausdrug.com/about-us/

http://www.austintexas.gov/sites/def...larksville.pdf

http://propaccess.traviscad.org/clie...prop_id=386095

http://propaccess.traviscad.org/clie...rop_id=110111#

Note the Exemption Code (or the lack thereof). Historical = HT

Clarksville is a dedicated historical district that was determined based upon public and private information provided to the governmental bodies (Federal, State, and Local), which determine the status for the purposes of preservation, grants, and taxing exemptions. It is an administrative process based upon documents and testimonials submitted in proper authenticated formats to assure the integrity and reliability of the information provided.

Nau's ENFIELD Drug Store (the owner of which leases the premises from the actual landowners of the real estate) have NEVER been able to obtain an "Historical" exemption (and neither have the landowners) because they have been UNABLE TO PROVE they were located within the HISTORICALLY identified area known as Clarksville.

Recent administrative squabbling by landowners who "believe" they are in the historical district, but are not, to preserve certain buildings that are to be torn down have failed, because they cannot prove they were a part of Clarksville. Realtors and investors have a monetary interest in marketing the land as being a part of "Clarksville" (which has an historical significance as an "all Black" neighborhood) so they can increase the prices they can ask and people will pay to claim they are a part of that history ... just like Nau's ENFIELD Drug Store.

It's unfortunate, and sad, that developers and business owners would attempt to use the historical significance of the actual area of Clarksville to increase revenues by marketing their status based on false assumptions. They can't get the exemption for tax purposes or grants for developing in an historical area, but they use a fictitious claim to advance their own personal monetary goals.

As can be seen on this board .... their "marketing is working to a degree ... until the unwitting purchasers try to capitalize on the representations made to them prior to acquiring their new ownership.

For those who walked through the Clarksville neighborhood long before the "MoPac Freeway" was constructed it was obvious where "Clarksville" ended based on the appearance of paved roads (you were out of "Clarksville") and the predominantly White residents as one approached West Lynn. Nau's ENFIELD Drug Store on West Lynn was one of the only businesses immediately available once one had left "Clarksville" and in those days Black people were not allowed to sit at the lunch counter in the drug store, which was yet another FACTUAL basis to prove that the drug store was NOT in a "Black community"!!!

[DSK]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

if you read the 3rd link, the owner of the business are having money problems and are fighting the city of Austin to tear down the "historic" derelict house so they can sell the property for higher value.

I don't like these "historic" laws that prevent owners from doing something to their property as they see fit.

I wrote a response but LL nailed it, so I'm withdrawing my post.

P.S. Assup still sucks.

[Yssup Rider]

You boys have nothing better to do than to start another Clarksville thread? Have at it, JL confirmed what we've all known all along ... That Nau's is In Clarksville and LLephantMan is a cocksucker.

Meanwhile. Drumpf is on the verge of a nervous breakdown and may have to drop out before the second debate.

Clarksville it is!


LMAO @ gripping dipshits.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by DSK

P.S. Assup still sucks.

That and redundant posting is about all he can do.

He sure can't read maps and appraisal district findings!!!!!

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You boys have nothing better to do than to start another Clarksville thread? Have at it, JL confirmed what we've all known all along ... That Nau's is In Clarksville and LLephantMan is a cocksucker.

Meanwhile. Drumpf is on the verge of a nervous breakdown and may have to drop out before the second debate.

Clarksville it is!


LMAO @ gripping dipshits.

oinky boy, the clarksville debate was off topic in the Hillary's unfit thread. so I tried to end that by starting a new thread on that topic.

anyone tell ya you smell?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

I don't like these "historic" laws that prevent owners from doing something to their property as they see fit.

Many of these "historic" owners accepted the benefits of the tax breaks and grants available for "historic" properties after having submitted applications and documentation to prove they are "historic" in nature ( or a part of an "historic" district). They sell it at a profit to a new owner who wants to make another profit on a developer's dream project. But they bought an "historic" property.

The historical "associations" are just like "subdivision associations" .... and if one closely evaluates the "boardmembers" who run the association and impose their whims on the property owners you will discover that some, if not most, are multi-property owners (often rental properties), and they are trying to protect their own investment properties to help themselves in their business venture(s). You will discover discriminatory enforcement practices because of it.

If one wants to do as "they see fit" with their own property, then they need to get some land out in the country in a predominately rural county or parish where the local government folks don't want anyone fucking with their property so they won't fuck with yours.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Many of these "historic" owners accepted the benefits of the tax breaks and grants available for "historic" properties after having submitted applications and documentation to prove they are "historic" in nature ( or a part of an "historic" district). They sell it at a profit to a new owner who wants to make another profit on a developer's dream project. But they bought an "historic" property.

The historical "associations" are just like "subdivision associations" .... and if one closely evaluates the "boardmembers" who run the association and impose their whims on the property owners you will discover that some, if not most, are multi-property owners (often rental properties), and they are trying to protect their own investment properties to help themselves in their business venture(s). You will discover discriminatory enforcement practices because of it.

If one wants to do as "they see fit" with their own property, then they need to get some land out in the country in a predominately rural county or parish where the local government folks don't want anyone fucking with their property so they won't fuck with yours.

not all historic districts get tax breaks & benefits.

Even worse property owners get harassed by the historic commission in a gestapo like fashion if they alter one part of their property "deemed" not historical. In some cases they (commmission) physically remove the offending non-historical piece and fine the owners.

I've always believed that if a govt. declares a building to be "historic", the govt. should own it by paying the owners for the building and maintain and rent it out as a landlord.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

not all historic districts get tax breaks & benefits.

Even worse property owners get harassed by the historic commission in a gestapo like fashion if they alter one part of their property "deemed" not historical. In some cases they (commmission) physically remove the offending non-historical piece and fine the owners.

I've always believed that if a govt. declares a building to be "historic", the govt. should own it by paying the owners for the building and maintain and rent it out as a landlord.

You are correct in that the discussion on Clarksville should not have been brought up in a thread on Hillary being unfit to be POTUS. For some reason, LexusLiar thought it appropriate.

The discussion is over. The map on the City of Austin website clearly places the establishments in question directly in the middle of the neighborhood known as Clarksville.

GAME, SET, MATCH.

Feel free to continue as you and others see fit. I'm done with this issue.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

You are correct in that the discussion on Clarksville should not have been brought up in a thread on Hillary being unfit to be POTUS. For some reason, LexusLiar thought it appropriate.

The discussion is over. The map on the City of Austin website clearly places the establishments in question directly in the middle of the neighborhood known as Clarksville.

GAME, SET, MATCH.

Feel free to continue as you and others see fit. I'm done with this issue.

wrong post to qoute.

[Yssup Rider]

I'm with you Speedy.

These Clarksville deniers are loonies!