06-10-2017, 10:27 AM
(06-10-2017, 09:12 AM)jeffster Wrote:(06-10-2017, 09:02 AM)ijmorlan Wrote: If that’s true then it’s yet another screw-up in the design of property taxes. I’m a bit unclear — is it simply because the property would be worth more fully enclosed, and therefore the mill rate would apply to a higher assessment, or is it because of special provisions related to some legalistic definition of the use of the property?
As to your second point, I’m not clear on what you’re saying. Nobody would ever want to visit one store, then walk to another? Or they would, but they would be more comfortable being rained on while they do so?
The Boardwalk, Sunrise Shopping Centre are examples of successful shopping centres that are not enclosed. Many who'd go there are not there window shopping but are actually going to buy something. I imagine this would be no different, only it has a few more twists.
I didn’t say they were unsuccessful. I said they are terrible design, and for reasons that have nothing to do with preferring more urban areas over the suburbs.
By the way, I also think the area around Conestoga Mall has a terrible design, but the problem isn’t the fact that the pedestrian circulation areas within the mall have a roof over them and climate control.