Stairs on the north side, at Portland St., from what I understood.Stairs from the end of the ramp to the new park, or something else?
The linear park at City Place will go right into the new park.
Stairs on the north side, at Portland St., from what I understood.Stairs from the end of the ramp to the new park, or something else?
I'll reiterate. How do you write that into law? "If this thing costs more than we project, the City reserves the right to demand more." ? City building doesn't work that way. Things like Sec.37 are precise and legally binding.
I'll reiterate. How do you write that into law? "If this thing costs more than we project, the City reserves the right to demand more." ? City building doesn't work that way. Things like Sec.37 are precise and legally binding.
Can't the agreement simply enclose the plans and specs of the design and any reasonable costs of construction thereof? I see contracts all the time that require the construction of some addition or improvement subject to certain reasonable restrictions or caps on on cost. A set of stairs couldn't have been included in those plans and specs?
How about an amendment going through the approvals process through TEYCC then City Council?
City building doesn't work that way. City building doesn't mean making crossing a bridge more difficult than it should be.
(Also, thanks Chester for the $30k estimate.)
Come on. I fault them. Really, how much more could one set of stairs cost? $10,000? $20,000 max? from a developer making millions upon millions? It's practically a rounding error.
It seems a little absurd that it wasn't designed with stairs in the first place, and that rather than the developer charged with building it paying for these stairs, the community is forced to scrounge up s. 37 money from other developers.
I agree, we demand way too little from developers. Things are much too one sided, in favour of developers. I wonder how much other large cities get from developers, in terms of development fees, taxes and other benefits.
I agree, we demand way too little from developers. Things are much too one sided, in favour of developers. I wonder how much other large cities get from developers, in terms of development fees, taxes and other benefits.
This has been a pain point for me for years. Builders will always do the bare minimum....and the bare minimum (decided by the city - building codes) are poor in many regards. "It's to code" is developer speak... The gravy train needs to end.
PS: I understand developers have to pay the city for a lot of different things....but they just pass those costs on to the buyer at closing anyways...and the city allows it.