San Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@doctorow wrote: [Permalink] Read full topic
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@Boundegar wrote: Do I recall Zucotti Park was one of these? Read full topic
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@the_borderer wrote: It's Gezi Park all over again Read full topic
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@dobby wrote: Socialize losses, privatize profits.This is the neo-feudal wealth diode(at least in feudal times the lords had a nominal responsibility to the serfs they owned).Even though the fee is...
View ArticleClik here to view.
San Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@SmashMartian wrote: dobby: Even though the fee is allegedly going into pubic coffers So the local strip-clubs are going to benefit, then. Read full topic
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@Woodchuck45 wrote: Not quite...this isn't a plan to privatize existing green-space and build a mall on it. The city plans to change a term of the city code requiring private development in one...
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@Skeptic wrote: It seems that there is pretty much zero chance of the fees paid by private developers to get out of these clauses to be anything near the full cost of maintenance, and lack of rental...
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@BingBong wrote: May the books of William H. Whyte fall on their heads from a great height. Read full topic
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@1vw2go wrote: The city should publish a map for all of these spaces and require signage to locate them. Read full topic
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@bolamig wrote: Most sane folks can agree that these hidden parks are not the highest and best use of that real estate. So yes let's replace the requirement with something that serves the public...
View ArticleClik here to view.
San Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@Skeptic wrote: bolamig: So yes let's replace the requirement with something that serves the public better. Such as...? Read full topic
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@robth wrote: SPUR in SF published this. Good map and descriptions of the 'POPOS' (privately owned public open spaces)http://www.spur.org/sites/default/files/migrated/anchors/popos-guide.pdf Read full...
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@dobby wrote: These hidden parks are like the NGO/Not-for-profit orgs which are used to purchase and own art and other nice things, AFAIK these art self-donations actually qualify as a tax deduction!...
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@monkeyoh wrote: 99% Invisible has an interesting episode about the SF POPOS: http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-09-99-private/ Read full topic
View ArticleClik here to view.
San Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@the_borderer wrote: dobby: These hidden parks are like the NGO/Not-for-profit orgs which are used to purchase and own art and other nice things, AFAIK these art self-donations actually qualify as a...
View ArticleClik here to view.
San Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@Brainspore wrote: 1vw2go: The city should publish a map for all of these spaces and require signage to locate them. There are maps out there, at least. Legally all the spaces built after 1985 are...
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@ghostly1 wrote: I really like that, being an annoyance to those taking advantage of these tax breaks by actually holding them to what they've committed to. I wonder though if this sort of thing's...
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@bolamig wrote: There are an infinity of options that would serve the public better than hidden parks. The first one that comes to mind is to calculate actual (not bogus) value of that space based on...
View ArticleClik here to view.
San Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@shaddack wrote: ghostly1: need to get access to a corporate building and there's security and everything, but turns out there's a public space on the 4th floor you can demand access to and spend as...
View ArticleSan Francisco ponders letting luxury property developers take away symbolic...
@doctorow wrote: This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed. Read full topic
View Article