RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTubelifeontwowheels wrote >>
How is that even similar to your proposal?
The developer has to "convince a commission" (actually two in this case) to build this project.
Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Development
Proposals to strengthen cities/regions
[33 posts] [10 contributors]
Topic Rating:
(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:
Rate this topic:
-
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM
ehill27 wrote >>
lifeontwowheels wrote >>
How is that even similar to your proposal?
The developer has to "convince a commission" (actually two in this case) to build this project.
The developer also moved to a jurisdiction they perceive as less restrictive which goes to my point.
Posted 2 years ago # -
ehill27
Short North
Login to Send PM
lifeontwowheels wrote >>
The developer also moved to a jurisdiction they perceive as less restrictive which goes to my point.And you know that how? Regardless, the point is that they have chosen to deal with a commission (or two), despite your previous assertion.
Perhaps you should talk to some of the folks on the west side about their feelings on irresponsible growth.
Posted 2 years ago # -
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM
ehill27 wrote >>
lifeontwowheels wrote >>
The developer also moved to a jurisdiction they perceive as less restrictive which goes to my point.And you know that how? Regardless, the point is that they have chosen to deal with a commission (or two), despite your previous assertion.
Perhaps you should talk to some of the folks on the west side about their feelings on irresponsible growth.Pizzuti’s most recent plans call for a hotel as high as 15 stories in Italian Village on the east side of High Street, depending on the number of guest rooms. The Italian Village Commission approved a variance for the 11-story Ibiza condominium tower at 830 N. High St. That project, which includes a public parking garage, remains unbuilt while its developer tries to secure financing.
I'd say based on past precedent, there is a reasonable claim to the company feeling the IV commission would be more favorable.
Again, I have no issue with a commission working to ensure a build fits within the fabric of the community. But to force and require a company to utilize a property that does not suit their needs goes beyond that and ignores the reality of typical big box development.
Do I want to see sprawl and irresponsible growth curtailed? Certainly. Just not at the risk of losing businesses to another city or community simply because a developer feels they will have an easier time.
Creating these stringent rules is only going to push business away and do the exact opposite of what you claim. Get the stable developments in, guide the infrastructure build out and building designs to better suit the particular neighborhood and use that new investment to attract others who have a more progressive vision and could utilize those existing spaces.
Posted 2 years ago # -
ehill27
Short North
Login to Send PM
@lifeontwowheels
It wouldn't make much sense to force business to utilize property that does not suit their needs. That was not being suggested.
Creating and enforcing rules as one entity for the entire region could solve much of the growth-related problems facing Ohio.
Posted 2 years ago # -
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM
ehill27 wrote >>
@lifeontwowheels
It wouldn't make much sense to force business to utilize property that does not suit their needs. That was not being suggested.Sounds like you were advocating that earlier:
I couldn't agree more with your suggestion that business be persuaded (required) to utilize abandoned property before authorizing them to build on new land. This is a rule that can be fairly easily implemented in any city or town. The problem is, what stops the town or city next door from luring that business away? What's in it for that municipality to play nice and NOT lure that business away from their neighbor?
Agreed, but when there's a site that is suitable, a company should not be authorized to go elsewhere
Posted 2 years ago # -
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM
ehill27 wrote >>
I'm confused. Perhaps you should re-read the last sentence you re-posted.No, I'll just reread your response when I asked who would determine what was suitable for a business:
The decision would be made by those in charge of regulating development.
So you are taking what should be a decision by a private company and placing it in the hands of a commission or individual with no knowledge of the company to determine where they should be. It's a process that would be very flawed and could be highly politicized (or better, NIMBY-ized).
The perception of force and antagonism when taking away the ability of a company to choose the most beneficial location, rather than creating a development plan or overlay that would guide buildout of new structures and the accompanying infrastructure (while still allowing free choice on the businesses part), is not conducive to creating new jobs or investment.
Posted 2 years ago # -
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM
That's what I quoted.
Posted 2 years ago # -
ehill27
Short North
Login to Send PM
A second plug for changing development practices, this one from the Brookings Institution and the Greater Ohio Policy Center...
"The report recommends rewarding local governments for innovation, explicitly permitting local government tax sharing, modernizing Ohio's planning statutes..."
Posted 2 years ago #
You must log in to post.
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus.