Quote:
Originally Posted by Knight Hospitaller
Seems simple to me. No demo permit without a construction commitment (with certain "outs" in case of a major unexpected turn of events).
|
Right, but then what do you do when they don't follow through with their commitments? You have to impose a tax, a fine, or, I suppose, a really large fee for the permit to start building. Or I guess you could make the landowner post a bond that they would forfeit if they didn't build?
I think one of the underlying issues with respect to underused property in the city is our taxation system. We do have a split tax rate where the land is given a separate value from what is built on the land. However, the property value ascribed to land should be a much higher percentage of the total valuation as compared to the improvements on the land. Right now, we are vastly undervaluing our vacant land in this city. I realize this isn't really related to the current debate, but it would eliminate to some degree people sitting on undertaxed, underbuilt lots.