Quote:
Originally Posted by cardeza
so you are saying no demo permit should ever be issued unless a construction permit for a larger, taller building is included? We know countless examples of developers that tear down a building just to use that parcel as a temporary parking lot to generate revenue in the short term. When two private entities engage in a sale there is very little say in the matter by the government. If the government is the conveyor of the land they have the right to put in stipulations, but you cannot do that when no public land or money are in involved. Imagine if you brought a fixer upper house and the government mandated that your renovation be done within 2 years or they apply a special tax to your parcel. Would anyone be OK with that? Of course not. All kinds of things could slow up your progress.
|
You are going off in 50 different directions all unrelated to the topic that is being discussed in this thread. This discussion is not about when "two private entities engage in sale." It's also not about putting conditions on how fast a homeowner has to finish their renovations. This is about a landowner tearing down a viable building (whether or not it is in advance of a sale of the property to another party) and not doing anything on it while they wait for financing or the market to change, or try to flip the project - whatever. Most of us are probably just thinking of the types of projects built by big-time developers rather than one-off home demolitions (although that is an issue too). Yes, a state government (or a municipality to the extent the state authorizes it) definitely has the authority to put conditions on demolitions and building. At the very least, in the situation you describe where a developer tears down a building to use as a parking lot to generate revenue while figuring out a development, the city can - and should - prevent that through the zoning code.