Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Washington Park Moves Forward

Washington Park, a $44 million mixed-use development planned for Mt. Lebanon, has been designated a tax increment financing district and has received a $5 million tax guarantee from the state.

“We have a contract pending for the sale of three units. Starbucks has expressed interest in coming to the site. We’ve talked to a few boutique grocers. We’re working very hard to study what the demographic wants to see there,” says Michael Heins, CFO with Zamagias Properties. “It’s a great location from the standpoint of access to Uptown Mt. Lebanon. It provides exceptional access to Downtown and the stadiums.” Amenities will include wine storage, exercise facilities and 38 unique floor plans. Additional retail may include a spa and wealth management firm.

Link: www.popcitymedia.com/developmentnews/pittsburghcondos0718.aspx

Labels: ,

Bookmark and Share

25 Comments:

Blogger Bill Matthews said...

Q. Things are going so well - why could the project not be self-financing?

A. The developer not only wanted to make money - it wanted to make a ton of money.

July 17, 2007 10:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah! Good for them. Here's hoping that the people who buy condos there start sparking a mini-boom in the central Mt. Lebo business district. My guess is that they won't be taking a lot of karate classes which seem to be the only new businesses moving in. Any guesses on what's going to move in to the soon-to-close pajama store?

July 18, 2007 9:14 AM  
Blogger Mike Madison said...

I'm going to put in a word in support of karate stores and martial arts providers. (And I've never taken a martial arts class, and neither has any member of my family.)

First: Their owners pay the rent and work hard at building and sustaining the businesses.
Second: There's obviously a demand for them.

And the problem is?

The knock on "karate stores" seems to be that they're "low class" for Mt. Lebanon. I have no interest in punishing allegedly "low class" storefronts, because if I did, as "class czar" I would get rid of The Saloon (the name itself shows a problem); Potomac Bakery (not up to fancy bakery standards); Mineo's and Caruso's (Pizzaiolo is much more chic!); CC's (if you lunch, go to Bistro 19); and the QwikMart (can't you spell?), just for starters.

That's *irony* speaking. All of those businesses should *stay* as long as it makes business sense for them to do so. Welcome to Mt. Lebanon to the karate studio.

July 18, 2007 9:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bring the grocers, leave the Starbucks. Like we need a 3rd coffee shop, especially one that's not up to the standards of Aldo & Uptown.

CAM

July 18, 2007 9:37 AM  
Blogger Bill Matthews said...

Washington Park residents are most welcome to the Community = but don't expect a huge increase in business to come to the Central Business District. It will be similar to what the immediate neighborhoods deliver today. Not the $14,000 spend per year, per resident the Municipality advertised.

Think about this. Washington Park will be about a 5 minute walk to the Cedar / Washington intersection. Now draw a "5-minute-walk" cirle centered at the intersection. How many folks in that circle spend $50 per week ($2,500 per year uptown)? Why will the new residents be different?

Every extra dollar is important, but it takes the whole Community to keep Uptown vibrant. We need to make an effort to shop Uptown - for things we want and would buy anyway - not just to support the businesses. And in return, the building owners need to fill the spaces with businesses providing goods and services we want. They benefit and we benefit. No charity here.

July 18, 2007 11:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

HIIIIIIIIIIII-YAH

July 18, 2007 10:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not sure why I just laughed so hard at that comment...but I did.

Hey, wasnt there a 'redevelopment' project out there last year that was giving funds to stores in downtown Mt Lebanon to improve their storefronts? What happened to this?

*CitizenA*

July 19, 2007 11:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Domo Arigato.

I remember that and asked the question a while ago as well. The stores at the corner across from the new fountain received monies to improve their storefronts. One of them was Potomac Bakery. I want to know what came of that money.

On another note. My wife and kids were at the 500K giant waste of a new playground yesterday. Apparently 4 kids have broken legs on one of the pieces and a bunch of the playground is awash in yellow caution tape. Heavy rain has also spilled mulch and sand downhill as well, covering the bottom playground floor with it. Seriously, can we do anything right in this town?

July 19, 2007 1:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sue Rose’s primary election website said a building fully taxed and valued at $8,000,000 would bring in the same amount of taxes as Washington Park with a $42,000,000 construction cost and $10,000,000 of school taxes sucked away from our kids education in annual $500,000 installments for as many as 20 years.

Figures from the Janney Montgomery Report put the number closer to $9-$9.5 million on a fully taxed building.

Act 1 limited the millage the school district can raise then REFERENDUM kicks in.

How does the Board justify spending $500,000 yearly when millage is restricted by Act 1?

I can’t believe the PTA hasn’t spoken on this issue unless they are being treated like mushrooms by the District.

July 19, 2007 3:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting facts about that new playground with the IKEA looking playequipment.

Judging by the results of the New playground, I think the citizen/taxpayers should be very cautious about the particulars of a new swimming pool.

July 19, 2007 10:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The playground is not a proper memorial to a dead FBI Agent. Let's use the swimming pool money to repair our playground mistakes and honor Martha Dixon properly.

July 19, 2007 11:08 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 3:19

How much money would the District be getting if that land was not developed for the next 20 years? It wasnt developed for the last 20.

In the case of this TIF, I am for it and will be happy to see the construction that takes place on that corner.

Sometimes business does need incentive to invest. They are taking a risk in putting up this building and we are mitigating some of that risk by provided some deferred taxation. It makes their investment more palatable. Note that we are not actually GIVING money to them. You cannot give what you do not have.

I will submit to you that the AMOUNT that we are giving up seems about double what it should be. IMO this should be at most a 10 year deal, not 20. My concern is that if we didnt give the TIF then how much longer would that property effectively go untaxed? Immediately upon ground breaking, that property will bring more revenue to the district than it has over the last 20 years.

Do you know what is coming down the pipe for the District? Short list...High School Renovation or Construction (minimum $60 million), teacher pension make up provisions (amount TBD but believed to be in the millions), elementary school bonds coming due ($5-6 million). This all while our teachers get 5% pay raises per year with very little health care contributions. We need the revenue.

This school district is losing kids. It won't be long before we actually have to consider shutting down schools- ones that were just renovated even.

I would much prefer that none of our taxes were deferred for the Washington Park plan, but short of a building falling out of the sky with proper municipal improvements attached, I just don't see how it would have happened.

July 27, 2007 11:50 AM  
Blogger Bill Matthews said...

1) There was another development that would have generated more tax money without a TIF in its first phase - and if seen to completion of its 5 phase plan for the entire block - their investment would have far exceeded the investment of Zamagias Properties.

2) The alternate plan though would not have included space for a Starbuck's, reportedly a critical decision criterion.

3) Interesting Economic Development strategy at play here - provide a public subsidy to a project to compete with local, independent businesses.

3) The taxing bodies hired the School District's financial advisor to conduct a financial analysis of the project - even though the advisor said he was not qualified to conduct the feasibility analysis required to independently confirm the "need" for a TIF, before he was engaged.

July 29, 2007 1:56 PM  
Blogger Bill Matthews said...

To help Starbuck's compete with the higher quality coffee houses - Starbuck's will have "Free Parking." No parking meters to contend with for its customers. The parking will be paid for in large part with tax dollars deferred from the schools (80+ percent). With this kind of Economic Development we should be high on someone's list.

July 29, 2007 6:15 PM  
Blogger gina said...

What are the enrollment numbers over the past 3 to 5 years at the elementary schools? I've heard the concern before about declining enrollments and have always wondered what the stats are.....thanks :-)

July 29, 2007 9:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

High School Renovation
Teacher Pensions Make-Up
School Bonds Coming Due
Teacher Pay Raises of 5%
Low Healthcare Contributions

All were cited by July 27 at 11:50 a. m.
Then he said we need the revenue so we should give a TIF requiring more revenue

The Mt Lebanon Schools have an out of control COST problem from construction and teacher contracts. A building that gives us taxes of an $8-9 million building fully taxed won’t help.

July 29, 2007 11:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Was just at the new playground tonight and it's such a disgrace. First the name of park sign that was on the wall is missing. Two of the rides had caution horses around them, but the kids with their parents were playing on the broken or dangerous equipment. Lastly, why is there a dirt path from the first level to the second level of the playground? The whole thing is such a waste of precious money.

July 29, 2007 11:13 PM  
Blogger Mike Madison said...

Joe Wertheim asked me to post this on his behalf:

Gina, here are the enrollment numbers, taken from the DeJong study for new/renovated high school;
K-12
1997 - 5,448
1998 - 5,751
1999 - 5,728
2000 - 5,672
2001 - 5,616
2002 - 5,616
2003 - 5,576
2004 - 5,505
2005 - 5,454
2006 - 5,436
Projected total in 2016 - 5,216

July 30, 2007 6:31 PM  
Blogger gina said...

Joe (and Mike!)

Thanks for the numbers...very interesting....

July 30, 2007 8:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What interests you about the enrollment numbers, Gina?

July 30, 2007 10:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've heard that Markham has to add an extra 1st and 2nd grade class/teacher. I see a comeback.

July 31, 2007 9:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dang Starbucks. I swear, they are trying to take over the world.

So, with the student population, didn't Mt Lebanon end up re-opening one of the schools at around 1998? I could have sworn I heard that they had one fewer elementary school until that time. A drop of 500 students between 1998 and 2016, that's at least the number that goes to one elementary school.

July 31, 2007 11:51 AM  
Blogger Joe Wertheim said...

The 7 elementary schools have been open for the 21+ years that I have lived here, and I believe for many, many more years than that. If you want to start a riot suggest that one be closed!

July 31, 2007 7:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can I proactively suggest that one of the schools be closed by 2016 in anticipation of a 500 student dropoff from its 1998 population high?

Hopefully that wont cause a riot!

I am having trouble finding the links but my history reading tells me that the middle schools were located within the High School building at some point. Then the student population shot up a bit and they reopened the middle schools.

Where's Carol Walton when you need her?

If I find the stories again, I will be sure to try and post them here. It could very well be that I am off by 10 years (it may have happened in 1988 not 1998).

August 02, 2007 11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is getting a little far away from the TIF topic but I found that link that was talked about. There was construction and the information appears to be correct.

http://www.mtlsd.org/HighSchool/SchoolHistory.asp

1984-86 the high school was renovated to make room for the middle schools. The middle schools then moved out in 1998 and moved into Jefferson and Mellon.

Interesting that we should have about the same number of students this year as we had in 1997 with two fewer school buildings. Not suggesting that anything should be closed, just saying that it is interesting.

*CitizenA*

August 02, 2007 11:21 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home