Our City Online

Messageboard - Development

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Seeking questions on City Annexation / Pay as We Grow

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Development Seeking questions on City Annexation / Pay as We Grow

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #77939
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    As a sort of follow up to THIS STORY, I’m sitting down with Dan Williamson and Greg Davies at City Hall on Monday to discuss the city’s development plans, annexation policies, and the other types of things they are working on to avoid some of the problems discussed in that Dispatch article. It sounds like they weren’t completely happy with the way that article turned out and wanted to provide some additional information that they felt was overlooked or pushed aside.

    I wanted to see if there were any additional questions for these guys that anyone might have for me to take along? What do you want to know?

    #302217

    gramarye
    Participant

    Does the city consider tax-sharing agreements such as those described in the Dispatch article that the city has with Dublin and New Albany good substitutes for annexation?

    How would the city respond to Gene Krebs of Greater Ohio? From the Dispatch article:

    Gene Krebs, co-director of the anti-sprawl group Greater Ohio, said Columbus’ growth has created an illusion that everything is fine when the city’s core continues to hollow out with vacant and abandoned houses.

    “They need to examine if their internal policies conflict with each other,” Krebs said. “Are they encouraging expansion to Zanesville” while trying to revitalize the central city?

    Will the city rethink its less aggressive annexation policy if it results in the specter of Columbus becoming landlocked by incorporated areas?

    #302218
    Jason Powell
    Jason Powell
    Participant

    Streetcars? Light rail?….we shouldn’t even have to ask, because it shouldn’t even be an issue….that’s all.

    #302219

    johnwirtz
    Participant

    1. When greenfield development does take place in Columbus, what is the city doing to encourage it to be mixed use and multi-modal?
    2. Is the Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) zoning code optional? If so, why isn’t it mandatory?
    3. Does “pay as we grow” include costs of providing public transit to new areas?
    4. What would happen if Columbus refused to extend water and sewer service to accommodate new greenfield development? Would other cities be able to do it on their own or would the land remain undeveloped?

    #302220

    Mercurius
    Participant

    I’ve always liked the idea of a green belt (not an urban growth boundary,) impact fees, linkage fees and mitigation fees for new builds and aggressive multi jurisdictional transfer of development rights programs.

    #302221

    Alex Silbajoris
    Participant

    I’d like to see more about brownfields and infilling, and green design as a guiding principle when developing.

    #302222
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Thanks everyone! Keep em comin’! :D

    #302223

    Columbusite
    Member

    1 – jpizzow’s statment as a question: why is it that no one has to ask for sprawl, but we have to ask for multi-modal, mixed-use development? Why isn’t it already provided so that people have a choice?

    2 – In sprawling areas of the city why do city leaders think it’s “bike-friendly” to have highway speed vehicles buzzing by cyclists in a tiny, debris-filled lane at a close distance?

    3 – Why in residential areas is the city choosing to build lots of sprawl and traffic inducing cul-de-sac roads, which results in us spending tens of millions of dollars adding several lanes to arterial roads to accommodate more traffic and more sprawl?

    4 – What zoning laws are impeding multi-modal, mixed-use development and why haven’t they already been changed?

    5 – Why does the city hinder COTA’s performance by bussing to car-dependent areas of the city?

    #302224

    CbusIslander
    Participant

    jpizzow wrote >>
    Streetcars? Light rail?….we shouldn’t even have to ask, because it shouldn’t even be an issue….that’s all.

    I second this.

    #302225

    hb
    Member

    I like Mercurius’ ideas of green belt impact fees. On the flipside, have they ever thought about incentives such as reduced permitting fees, quicker P&Z approval process, etc. for developers interested in brownfield and infill developments?

    #302226

    Brant
    Participant

    gramarye wrote >>
    Will the city rethink its less aggressive annexation policy if it results in the specter of Columbus becoming landlocked by incorporated areas?

    I think the city sees it as an either/or situation: Either we aggressively annex, or we get hemmed in by our suburbs and end up just like Cleveland and Cincinnati. This makes for a pretty antagonistic relationship between the city and its suburbs.

    This prompts the question: Is there an alternative or compromise to “annexation v. stagnation”? What might that look like?

    #302227

    johnwirtz
    Participant

    Brant Jones wrote >>

    gramarye wrote >>
    Will the city rethink its less aggressive annexation policy if it results in the specter of Columbus becoming landlocked by incorporated areas?

    I think the city sees it as an either/or situation: Either we aggressively annex, or we get hemmed in by our suburbs and end up just like Cleveland and Cincinnati. This makes for a pretty antagonistic relationship between the city and its suburbs.
    This prompts the question: Is there an alternative or compromise to “annexation v. stagnation”? What might that look like?

    Continue to annex, but then build smart growth instead of auto-dependent, throw-away places that nobody cares about.

    #302228

    johnwirtz
    Participant

    hb wrote >>
    I like Mercurius’ ideas of green belt impact fees. On the flipside, have they ever thought about incentives such as reduced permitting fees, quicker P&Z approval process, etc. for developers interested in brownfield and infill developments?

    I like this idea. I would also like to ask if they’ve considered incentives for LEED-ND or cluster/conservation development.

    #302229

    Columbusite
    Member

    Brant Jones wrote >>
    Is there an alternative or compromise to “annexation v. stagnation”? What might that look like?

    It would have looked like this:

    The annexed land would have consisted of several middle-class, low-density, but multi-modal neighborhoods. If Columbus had pursued that path, think of where we would be on a national and even international scale and what it would have meant for streetcars and light rail in this city. We would most certainly have several “High Streets”, not just one. Then taking what John said about disposable places that no one cares about, look at: Morse Rd, Hamilton Rd, Brice Rd, etc, etc, etc. Now ask yourself which is better.

    #302230

    Columbusite
    Member

    I also have to ask: where were/are OSU leaders using their influence to guide development in this city?

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)

The forum ‘Development’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe to the Columbus Underground YouTube channel for exclusive interviews and news updates!

CLICK HERE TO SUBSCRIBE