This time out, I took the city to task for failing to hold up its end of the bargain. When they suggested that the city should slow down development because we could no longer afford the steep cost of initial infrastructure investment, I saw various shades of red.
If you can’t compete, get out so that someone else can come in and try. I wrote this in the hope that some of the folks who work in planning at city hall might read it and get this hint.
Development vital to continued growth
Published Saturday, November 5, 2005
Free Press London
The City of
’s call to slow down development is, to put it charitably, boneheaded. London Londonlags behind powerhouses like Kitchenerand in attracting new, forward-thinking businesses and the high-income residents who work for them. Cambridge
The city’s argument that it can’t afford to lay out the cash for initial development is a cop-out, an admission that
’s planners aren’t up to the job. London
It’s even more galling as homeowners face another year of tax hikes that outstrip the inflation rate. If development comes to a screeching halt, we’ll all pay more.
might want to consider a new approach to planning and partnering with developers. Instead of focusing on huge tracts of land at the city’s edge, why not urge developers to build infill projects toward the city’s core? London
And since developers profit from civic investment in infrastructure, could they not assume a greater share of the initial investment?
The same old ways of managing development no longer work. City planners must figure out new ways to keep-30-
from losing its competitive edge – without bankrupting the people who live here. London