Quote Originally Posted by CuatrodeMayo View Post
I am quite aware of the arguements supporting this situation. It's sad that athletics take such a precedence at this university.
It's money actually. Money takes priority. Athletics are just a vehicle to obtain more money.

Because our state legislature, in its great wisdom has decided to support higher ed less and less, the burden of support has fallen to the schools themselves. Those schools have had to pass along those costs to the students. This is squeezing many out of higher ed completely.

Projects like these are undertaken with the future in mind. Years from now, these athletics facilities will probably provide OSU with a lot of profit and donations. That's money which won't have to go into tuition hikes.

Yeah, we bitch about it now, but 20 years from now, the controversy surrounding the taking of the land will be forgotten and hopefully OSU has a proud (and profitable) athletic tradition.

Currently, OSU faculty are paid less than any other faculty in the Big XII. It's good to see that the administration is not happy with the status quo.

That is a lot of "if"s.

ED CAN be used as a tool to fuel growth. Use ED for "public use" projects. MAPS is the perfect example of public investment spurring private investment. Why not follow the same example? Once the civic aspect of the plan has been completed, allow the market (plus TIF) to work within the framework of the plan and within guidelines simlar to the ones I presented above. I'm pretty sure you don't need to use ED to rezone.
Sure it's a lot of "ifs." But nothing is ever so simple as "We tried it and it failed." Additionally, any development in the future will be riddled with "ifs." That's the nature of the beast.

The best thing a municipality can do is to limit those ifs and try to achieve the creation of an environment which people will want to live and work in while adhering to strictly urban designs.