North River Decision Nears
City should step back from North River
Link (GFWBW)
“The North River project could be a potential boon for Fort Wayne. Like the Harrison Square development slowly taking shape several blocks to the south, North River would include a mix of residential and retail space and, as envisioned, would include a large regional attraction like a water park. The project would draw people to the area and potentially act as a catalyst to redevelopment of the city’s neglected riverfront.
Because they negotiated their way through the obstacles and hurdles that arose while trying to finalize the deal that created Harrison Square, city staff are well capable of overseeing the proposed North River project. The city doesn’t want to lose that momentum and is reluctant to put North River on the back burner. And yet it should, for a couple of reasons.”
“Next year also will be an important one for the city’s finances. Property-tax reform adopted by the state Legislature is expected to result in a shortfall for Fort Wayne over the next few years. To bring its budget back into balance, the city will need to cut or reduce services, and it will be forced to make tough choices. Revitalizing the North River area would be a significant accomplishment, but is it justifiable if it comes at the expense of reductions in basic services provided by the city, such as police and fire protection or parks?
The new director of the Downtown Improvement District, Richard Davis, thinks his organization can play a role in attracting a developer for the North River project. The city should be open to letting organizations such as DID as well as the private sector take the lead on the North River proposal. It’s a sound project, but in light of current circumstances, it’s a project that doesn’t warrant being high up on the city’s priority list.”
There are two ways to encourage private development downtown, however, the city seems focused on only one of those: Providing tax incentives/public money/etc. for downtown development? Why have we neglected the other end of the spectrum: Discouraging private development in the suburbs? Allowing sprawl only increases the amount of services the city is bound to provided. We don’t currently have the population growth to sustain continued suburban development…. The end result is a doughnut and a much larger infrastructure spread over an essentially unchanged tax base. Annexation only helps to a certain extent….
Patrick, I am with you. Development is going to happen, it is - whether good or bad - part of the American spirit. I am for limiting suburban development all together - be it private or public. If Fort Wayne wants urban development then it needs to be not only the most attractive, but its suburban competitor needs to be bridled. Most of the private sector is going to do what they are used to (suburban sprawl), unless that option is taken away. Limited suburban sprawl won’t push them out of Fort Wayne, if they still know they can make money they will fall in with what is allowed (urban development). The city shouldn’t play to the will of the private sector, the city should be looking out for the interests of its citizens, even to the point of limiting “growth”.
I do like the idea of the DID taking on the North River program, but also think that if the city wants this done they are going to have to give the project some positive backing.
I’m as strongly in favor of a dense, urban city and as strongly opposed to sprawl as anyone you’re likely to meet.
That said, I’d like to know how Patrick and Jcanada propose to stop what is legal business activity under current laws.
Until an informed, determined, vocal majority of citizens recognizes that sprawl is contrary to its best interests and demands change from state and federal legislators or elects new ones, some developers will continue to use their political and financial capital to do what maximizes short-term returns, even when the long-term effect upon the community is negative.
There’s a lot of money behind sprawl, and there are enough well-connected people who don’t flinch at the cost of fifteen-mile commutes, that I don’t anticipate Indiana making a legal commitment very soon to favor urban density over suburban sprawl.
I’m not cynical. I’m just skeptical.
Here’s a start:
http://save.cedar.creek.googlepages.com/
Nothing like fighting urban sprawl by approving a massive, 139 acre subdivision for the ultra-rich (homes are projected to go for over $ 1,000,000) at the far reaches of Allen County. Not to mention, this housing addition will be smack dab in the middle of some of our most prized natural areas.
The Canyon Cliffs housing development should be the poster child for how NOT to plan a community in the 21st century, and a strong example of poor land management.
It is sad to watch our government officials continue to approve these types of housing developments and manage our resources like we are living in the 1980’s.
Any way we could persuade the folks orchestrating Canyon Cliffs, to “swap” their picturesque land for the barren land at the North River ???
In response to Robert, I agree that there needs to be a mindset change among current elected officials (or a wholesale change to officials that share an urban mindset) but I don’t see how legislation plays into this at all. What purpose are zoning boards, planning departments, commissioners, etc. if their only job purpose is to rubber stamp private development? Those people, departments, and processes are in place in order to control development within the community, hopefully for the positive! I remember reading in the newspaper once one of the Allen County Commissioners saying something to the effect of “who am I to dictate development?” My thoughts: You are a County Commissioner….. that is your job!
I suppose I’m skeptical too, however, with all the talk of urban redevelopment among our government officials it sure would be nice to see them follow those words up with some action.