Comment 64126

By bob lee (anonymous) | Posted May 27, 2011 at 21:48:17 in reply to Comment 64089

a couple months ago. They must have been on some kind of long term lease to have stayed around as long as they did. I suspect this is tied in with that; had they demolished it while South Side was there they might have lost that income by destroying the terms of the lease. Once South Side is gone they're paying tax on two empty buildings so why not knock the less marketable one down.

This is just hypothetical, but if true it shows a couple of giant problems: one that we incentivize the creation of brownfields by giving a tax break. Two that we seem to allow people to demolish buildings at will. Property owners need to go through a process to put up buildings so I can't see why they shouldn't go through one to take one down. If there's no way to refuse a demolition permit then why have the permit at all.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools