posted by Jefferson Provost at 2:04 PM /
I was just searching the web for some kind of site plan for Washington Park, when I came across the official Mt. Lebanon website's promo page for the project. It contains this tidbit (emphasis mine):
Now, I can see how they would want to name a building after Mike, in recognition of his efforts in educating the Lebo public about Tax Increment Financing, but I'm a relative newcomer here, so I would figure that the second building would be called "Matthews Hall," or something.
[Still haven't found any kind of plans for the site, besides the one corner rendering that everyone has seen.]
Units will be located in two unique buildings, the Madison at Washington Park and the Jefferson at Washington Park.No mention of Polk anywhere, though.
Now, I can see how they would want to name a building after Mike, in recognition of his efforts in educating the Lebo public about Tax Increment Financing, but I'm a relative newcomer here, so I would figure that the second building would be called "Matthews Hall," or something.
[Still haven't found any kind of plans for the site, besides the one corner rendering that everyone has seen.]
Labels: TIF, washington park
15 Comments:
If your interest is sincere,all the information you seek can be viewed at the offices of Mt. Lebanons' Municipal Planner, Keith McGill, AICP,at the municipal building located at 710 Washington Road. Call for an appointment :412.343.3684, or email: kmcgill@mtlebanon.org.
If you go, ask Keith how the presales are going and whether they still intend to close on the property on Nov. 1st. or thereabouts. You may also want to stop by the Howard Hanna office at 607 Washington and ask to see the sales brochure they should have prepared by now -- you may want to take that opportunity to put some handmoney down on one of the $1 million penthouse units, or perhaps a 4th. floor, 2-bdr. unit going for $500,000. Suggest a western exposure, because the St. Bernard bells might be a bit overwhelming if your unit faces Washington Road.
My main interest is sincere, but not especially important. I want to see the overhead site plan. Combining various descriptions of the site I've read, there's apparently going to be a 15-20 ft setback for the building, plus free parking for Starbucks, plus a new turning lane on Washington Rd. The site doesn't seem especially deep, so I'm wondering how they're going to fit all that in, and how much room will be left for the actual building.
I'm also curious about the layout of the proposed turning lane. Presumably it will be a lane to allow northbound traffic to turn left onto Bower hill. (right?) I'm not sure how they plan to do that without requiring southbound traffic to jog right considerably at the intersection.
Keith McGill has all that you ask for, and more. All that I know about what your interest seems to be focused on is what I have learned from public meetings and scanning the few documents made public. Bill Matthews knows more about this project than anyone else in Mt. Lebanon, including some of the developers' representatives who also appear on municipal boards and authorities.
One thing I can comment on has to do with the turning lane you refer to. The added turning lane will be located on Bower Hill Rd. at the corner of Washington and is intended to be a right-turn lane onto Washington. It will hold only three (3) cars so its' utility is questionable. A curbcut allowing traffic into the site will also be on Bower Hill--a bit confusing. This "deal" was created by the developer providing an easement to Mt. Lebanon for the turning lane encroaching or taking some 20 feet of developers property to accomplish two (2) things:(1)muni doesn't have to buy the property, and(2)developer can maintain his original footprint for the building-- you are right, the site is tight and congested. Also,suggest you do not put handmoney down on corner condo's at that intersection because,in addition to the St. Bernard bells, the corner rooms of those condo's will be only 15 or so from traffic, according to drawings available for public inspection.There will be a "public park" at that corner; however, it will not legally be a public park because under Mt. Lebanon law (ie.Chapter XX of the Mt. Lebanon Code a/k/a the Zoning Ordinance) a public park has to be owned and maintained by Mt. Lebanon -- WHICH WILL NOT BE THE CASE HERE.I think the developer calls it a"public park" because it helped justify the TIF in the biased minds of those who approved it."Something is better than nothing"was the argument, I believe. How sad!
Would like to add a P.S. to my preceeding comment. You mentioned a Starbucks in the retail portion of this development? The developer has represented repeatedly in public meetings and in documents that the retail in his project would not compete with retail establishments in "Uptown" or the Central Business District (CBD) -- does the fact that there are two(2) established coffee houses in the CBD (eg. Aldo's and Uptown Coffee)suggest a credibility gap somewhere? Is the Business & Professional Assoc. (BPA)of the CBD going to speak up? Is Mame Bradley and/or the Commission or the EDC going to intercede? Don't bet on it!
Word is that Howard Hanna has pulled out as the marketing realtor for Washington Park. Apparently Zamagias has no model to show prospective buyers, continues to make changes to the plan, and has already raised the prices twice. But at least he got Mt. Lebanon taxpayers to help pay.
And Hootie Hanna , or whatever his name is, personally appeared along with his local cadre in front of the school board not long ago the night the board was to vote on the TIF and couldn't say enough kind things about the developer and his wonderful project. Is the house- of-cards beginning to collapse? Will Mt. Lebanon bring in its' Mt. Lebanon Partnership and Industrial Development Authority to save the day by offering added economic incentives (read that local tax $)as a bail-out? Maybe the Mt. Lebanon Endowment Fund could be utilized as "seed money" to buy a few condos (before the prices are increased again).Maybe the Mt. Lebanon Employees Retirement Fund, as a conservative investment with great upside potential? There are many possibilities---maybe all the public officials who provided unquestioning support would be willing to put their $ where their mouths are and buy a floor or three of condos to keep the ball rolling? "Something is better than nothing"they all said !
Honest question here. What is the risk to Mt Lebanon if the condos dont sell as promised? Were there not protections built into the TIF agreement that says that Mt Lebanon could not end up upside down on this? On the surface there will be a net increase in tax revenue to the District regardless of what happens to the condos. However, if the condos do sell well then obviously we would have even more revenue.
If they build the building Mt Lebanon then has new revenue source even if not a single person buys a condo, no? Also, I thought the County TIF people (forget the actual name) do some sort of guarantee for the TIFs that they approve.
Let me know what I'm missing. Thanks.
*CitizenA*
Confirmed: Howard Hanna Out! Coldwell Banker In!
Citizen A - Yes, the State is guaranteeing the TIF Bonds - so if there is not sufficient tax revenue the Bonds will still be paid off. There is no risk to MTL for the TIF bonds. The risk for the Community is against the lost opportunity of 100% of what could have been built without a TIF.
The other interesting kernel is that had the County “financially participated” in the tax diversion, not just orchestrated it for a fee, they would have required: “The developer will be required to guarantee a minimum tax payment of 100% of the estimated increment irrespective of the percentage of participation in the project by the taxing bodies.” (County TIF Guidelines) Because the County is not “participating” they are not implementing this requirement. Although MTL still could.
This TIF is still the biggest waste of public money this town has ever seen. We have purposefully partnered with a developer that has never done a residential project of any magnitude. They are cutting their teeth on luxury condominiums and attempting to insulate themselves with tax money that should be destined for the schools.
No offense to Coldwell Banker – but if Mr. Hanna can’t sell the SnoCones, who can? (The problem is not the realtor.)
Thanks for that info.
So effectively the risk to Mt Lebanon is the opportunity cost of doing something else that would have practically a guaranteed revenue stream as opposed to a 'possible' revenue stream for the condo complex.
If there really is no risk (if nothing is done then nothing changes or if something is done and no new revenue is generated because the development is a flop) then it seems to me that that encourages the municipality to 'shoot for the moon' and go with the proposal that on paper would generate the most possible tax revenue to the municipality.
It would seem to me that the 'something is better than nothing crowd' was simply tired of seeing that property go undeveloped and this was a plan that appears as though it might actually get done.
Personally, I am not sure which side on fall into on this one. You want the property developed, it hasn't been developed for years and years and years. What I dont know is why it hasnt been developed..political reasons perhaps? Too much money for infrastructure improvements on the corner perhaps (which would IMO make the TIF make sense)?
I don't know. If Howard Hanna did indeed pull out and we used their forecasted demand to do our calculations, does this deal now go back to square one?
*CitizenA*
btw, there are two Bill's in this thread...are they the same?
*CitizenA*
The two Bills are different.
Had the Municipality gone for the "moon" it would have selected the competing project. That project was a potential 5 phase project that would have developed the entire block and the investment would have dwarfed the Zamagais project - all without a TIF. Had anyone in the Municipality done a quantitative analysis this would have been obvious.
As far as why the properties sat idle for so many years - the MLPA purchased the properties many years ago at the direction of the Municipality, in order to build a "Gateway to MTL" project. The Municipality just got serious about development in the late 90's and then botched it every step of the way.
This project was to be different. They specifically sought out qualified developers with a demonstrated record of success in similar porojects..
Instead they selected a developer with "ZERO" experience in this type of development.
But the developer's project manager was on the MLPA board.
How does such a blatent conflict of interest exist in the business transactions of our municipality?
Do we have an local ethics board? Does the municipality have an investigative compliance officer such as private business?
Bill,
Very good information. The perspective you give is eye opening to say the least.
What was the competing project in the case of the Washington/Bower Hill deal?
James
I'm not sure where I stand on the TIF issue, but if I may, I'd like to offer a few alternative "facts" to those propounded by the conspiracy theorists on this blog.
I do not know Mr. Zamagias personally (he's at least entitled to have his name spelled correctly), but I can share with you that he is an accomplished real estate developer. His company developed Robinson Town Centre and the Robinson Mall, which by all accounts have been huge successes, while providing all of us with great alternatives to the aging South Hills Village. Zamagias has also developed a number of other shopping centers and office parks around our region.
To contend that Zamagias has ZERO experience with residential real estate is simply false. Zamagias has developed and currently manages an 88 unit apartment and retail complex adjacent to Virginia Commonwealth University in Richmond, VA. Zamagias is also working closely with the Virginia Historical Society to renovate the old Firestone Building in Richmond for a mix of commercial and residential uses.
Therefore, I am certainly willing to conclude that Zamagias has the ability and experience to develop and manage real estate, whether it be for commercial or residential purposes.
I do know Mr. Ballon personally, and I can assure you that his relationship to Zamagias was properly disclosed. Further, the implication that Mr. Ballon did something improper or unethical is without merit. Further, I also know that the character and ethics of certain other members of the Parking Authority are outstanding and they have the best interests of Mt. Lebanon in mind.
Lastly, I would note that Mt. Lebanon is currently looking to fill some openings on the Parking Authority. I would certainly encourage those commenters on this blog who seem to have all of the right answers to volunteer for a 4 year term and share your insight, experience and vision with the rest of the community.
Hello all,
I know that some readers disagree with Dave's statements above. I've reviewed some comments submitted since his was posted. I'm going to reject those and other comments that relitigate the Washington Park TIF process. Were conflicts properly disclosed? Were other options fairly considered? Should critics volunteer for duty rather than posting to this blog? We've been down those paths before at Blog-Lebo. If you want to go there again, find another venue. Thanks.
Mike
<< Home