Comments on: Is Duany “on code” for Newburgh? http://www.newburghadvocate.com/2008/05/19/is-duany-on-code-for-newburgh/ news and information focused on Newburgh, New York, to encourage participation in the democratic process Fri, 21 Nov 2008 03:36:16 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Don DeBar http://www.newburghadvocate.com/2008/05/19/is-duany-on-code-for-newburgh/#comment-9 Don DeBar Thu, 22 May 2008 16:38:02 +0000 http://www.newburghadvocate.com/?p=39#comment-9 Actually, the author obviously has a very clear grasp of the issues facing Newburgh with the huskterism that it suffered in this process. The simple fact that first must be mentioned is that this is primarily a residential project. The next fact that must be mentioned is that residential development is a net loss to the tax base. And the final fact that must be mentioned is that the sale of this land for a residential mega-project means it cannot be developed to draw tourism and other commercial activity - which would enhance the tax base - to the city. This project is transaction-driven. The "charettes" were actually a charade - the pretty little pictures which came out of the charrettes are nothing more than pretty little pictures. The development agreement, however, is the enforceable business agreement which describes, in some detail, a residential waterfront project with a sale of land at about 10% of its market value and the possibility of tax exemption or tax abatement for the developer and its purchasers. I suggest that anonymous do her/his homework and review the actual agreements, legislation and proposed legislation pertaining to this project before spouting off about it. Actually, the author obviously has a very clear grasp of the issues facing Newburgh with the huskterism that it suffered in this process.

The simple fact that first must be mentioned is that this is primarily a residential project.

The next fact that must be mentioned is that residential development is a net loss to the tax base.

And the final fact that must be mentioned is that the sale of this land for a residential mega-project means it cannot be developed to draw tourism and other commercial activity - which would enhance the tax base - to the city.

This project is transaction-driven. The “charettes” were actually a charade - the pretty little pictures which came out of the charrettes are nothing more than pretty little pictures. The development agreement, however, is the enforceable business agreement which describes, in some detail, a residential waterfront project with a sale of land at about 10% of its market value and the possibility of tax exemption or tax abatement for the developer and its purchasers.

I suggest that anonymous do her/his homework and review the actual agreements, legislation and proposed legislation pertaining to this project before spouting off about it.

]]> By: anonymous http://www.newburghadvocate.com/2008/05/19/is-duany-on-code-for-newburgh/#comment-8 anonymous Tue, 20 May 2008 12:27:41 +0000 http://www.newburghadvocate.com/?p=39#comment-8 The author of that article had an extreme misunderstanding of not only the project, but of the value (beyond economic) of the new urbanism. Also, to be clear, Mr. Duany was in Canada the whole time with his design team. He did not just show up to sell a premade product. The density of the project is actually 25 units to the acre, with some areas as high as 80. There are very, very few single-family homes planned. The reason the density appears so low is that the author took in all of the open space which will be converted into parkland and farmland for supplying the area with food. This development goes above and beyond the call of sustainability. It's too bad the author didn't do his homework. To those who actually did, he comes across as a fool and now you are perpetuating the false knowledge. I encourage you to dig a little deeper. The author of that article had an extreme misunderstanding of not only the project, but of the value (beyond economic) of the new urbanism. Also, to be clear, Mr. Duany was in Canada the whole time with his design team. He did not just show up to sell a premade product. The density of the project is actually 25 units to the acre, with some areas as high as 80. There are very, very few single-family homes planned. The reason the density appears so low is that the author took in all of the open space which will be converted into parkland and farmland for supplying the area with food. This development goes above and beyond the call of sustainability.

It’s too bad the author didn’t do his homework. To those who actually did, he comes across as a fool and now you are perpetuating the false knowledge.

I encourage you to dig a little deeper.

]]>