Wednesday, August 15, 2007

Regarding yesterday's Seattle Times article: City may buy back land it sold to Vulcan

Developers should pay a significant portion of the cost of new infrastructure, but not all of it. The developer (in this case, Vulcan) should pay for mitigation of environmental impact and should pay much of the costs of new roads, new mass transit and new utility service. However, it's appropriate for the city or other municipal authorities to use tax revenues to help pay for upgrades and improvements (like a new power substation) in order to provide services for tax payers.

Funding for new infrastructure in the South Lake Union neighborhood comes from various sources, including the City of Seattle, Vulcan, existing property owners and new property owners in the neighborhood. This is as it should be.

People and businesses that own property in new developments should absorb a larger portion of the cost of infrastructure improvements because they will benefit more than other tax payers. This is exactly what’s happening in South Lake Union. In addition to paying property taxes, residential and commercial property owners in South Lake Union are paying for new infrastructure through a Local Improvement District (LID). Over the coming years, the LID will collect $25 million from all property owners in the neighborhood to help pay for the new streetcar. A similar mechanism is being used for funding improvements to the utility infrastructure in the neighborhood.

Increasing density and combining residential and commercial developments are effective means for reducing urban sprawl, minimizing the use of single-occupant vehicles and enhancing the quality of life for all Seattleites. The mixed-use development in South Lake Union is accomplishing these goals and has won the coveted 2006 Urban Land Institute's Award for Excellence, and all the new residential properties are designed to be LEED-certified. This is the best type of new development that can be done, and since our population is growing, we need new development.

We all share the benefits, so shouldn't we all share the costs?

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home