Quote:
Originally Posted by Labroco
Yes!
But that portion could have been recreation for Red River College or community green space and be done with it. The balance of the site to be sold without all the preconditions of CV development agreements. Realty taxes would be flowing by spring time.
Let the planning department determine appropriate use not CV. It’s not their mandate to do so! Millions have been spent so far on consultants and “community consultation” and they have no funding yet to build anything that I’m aware of or has been announced.
Stop competing with building owners in the area by providing brand new government subsidized commercial and retail space. You will never fill these beautiful historic buildings when government subsidized space floods the area.
Provide $20,000,000 for masonry repairs, windows, roofs, electrical, elevators and plumbing...
Best wishes over the holidays ...
|
green space for red river college students to frolic around in? That's the vision for the exchange district?
So the planning department says it should be multi family residential and commercial...then what? The planning department tries to develop the public caveat site? The planning department runs an RFP and sells the land to the highest bidder? I don't think you know what a planning department does. It is precisely CV's mandate to work with developers to do what is best for downtown. Creating a landmark public node won't be done by a developer or the planning department.
I welcome government intervention to do create a project for the public good. Yeah it may put a few low rent tenant spaces back on the market, but to make an impact on the city, i'm all for it. Hopefully it inspires some property owners in the area to develop the underused land they own. The goal is to leverage the property to make the exchange district a more desirable place to live and work so adjacent property owners are better able to fill their spaces. It is not competition. Its helping current land owners by creating a catalyst and a destination. We cant be held back from greater aspirations because a few low rent tenant spaces might go back on the market. They are developing the public site with affordable housing and a public market. What developer would do that? Developers don't build big vision, public good projects. They build to their pro-forma. We need both to be successful as a city. Its what government should do.
Why would you not want development agreements to ensure developers build what they say they will. They protect the public interest and put pressure on developers so they don't just take a property and sit on it forever. This isn't about taxes flowing as fast as possible, its about creating the best thing for downtown and the city.