HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Mar 7, 2020, 11:04 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
When a City Should, Shouldn’t Give Public Incentives to Developers

When Invest Atlanta Leaders Dish on City Should, Shouldn’t Give Public Incentives to Developers


Mar 2, 2020

By Sean Keenan

Read More: https://atlanta.curbed.com/2020/3/2/...aks-incentives

Quote:
Determining when it’s appropriate to hand over public incentives to help propel private developments in Atlanta has become a contentious issue. A recent summit helped bring that issue front-and-center, while formulating ideas on how it might be resolved.

- Atlanta developers have argued that nudges like tax breaks can support projects that might otherwise have trouble being realized, resulting in economic stimuli and jobs in areas that are traditionally underserved. --- Opponents of the practice, however, have contended that in Atlanta’s thriving, current real estate market, few reasons are viable for offering tax abatements to big developers, as projects would likely materialize with or without public help. --- Additionally, the logic goes, if a private investor doesn’t have to pay, say, property taxes for projects, someone—the Atlanta Public Schools system, for instance—ultimately feels the impact.

- The Downtown Facade Improvement Grant fund has helped primp aging buildings in and around downtown, a small revitalization effort that can pay dividends for non-affluent communities, such as the historic Sweet Auburn district. --- In a recent newsletter recapping the panel discusison, ThreadATL praised Invest Atlanta board member Fred Smith for “openly questioning the public benefits of big incentives for projects like the Gulch and the Georgia Aquarium expansion. “Smith is reminding Atlanta that it’s not enough to spur investment for its own sake; we have to consider what Atlantans are getting in the way of benefits.”

- The panel also hashed out the need to better define the urbanism goals of the city, which are now being boiled down into the new Intergovernmental Agreement between the city and Invest Atlanta. On a similar front, the panel discussed how Invest Atlanta should better focus on equity and inclusion when determining if and how to support private developments. --- Essentially, the question is: How can officials ensure that locals or minority- or women-run businesses are incorporated into projects that could ultimately impact them? The city and Invest Atlanta are working with nonprofit Enterprise Community Partners to address such questions.

.....



A massive project on the Beltline’s Eastside Trail, for which the developer sought $22.5 million in tax incentives. New City Properties

__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Mar 8, 2020, 1:49 AM
Nite's Avatar
Nite Nite is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,986
America never ceases to amaze me.
paying developers to develop land for them to make a crazy profit from. .
Here i am in Toronto, a city that is raking in billions of dollars it's charging developers to build on land they already own in a process that takes at least 2 years of red tape and developers are can't stop building as much as they can.

Unless all units in this development are subsidized housing, this makes no sense

Last edited by Nite; Mar 8, 2020 at 2:12 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:57 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.