Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Northeastern Pennsylvania
 [Register]
Northeastern Pennsylvania Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, Pocono area
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-15-2009, 01:50 AM
 
1,305 posts, read 2,611,650 times
Reputation: 753

Advertisements

pinebrook???lol good luck!!! its a s####hole its speculative at best, a dozer needs to go thru it, that would increase the resale value!!! not trying to rain on your parade, but pinebrook is a losing bet in the RE market....section 8 if your lucky......
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-15-2009, 10:38 AM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,606 posts, read 77,274,241 times
Reputation: 19071
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnqpublic View Post
pinebrook???lol good luck!!! its a s####hole its speculative at best, a dozer needs to go thru it, that would increase the resale value!!! not trying to rain on your parade, but pinebrook is a losing bet in the RE market....section 8 if your lucky......
With all due respect I'd NEVER want to raise my family in Pinebrook now, but it isn't inconceivable that this neighborhood could see its property values climb in the not-so-distant future, especially if both the medical college and downtown really start to take off between 2010-2020. The developer of the Connell Building is already licking his chops at the prospects of luring in medical students to reside in his building, but obviously an "upscale" project (a word he threw out SEVERAL times during the media interviews) would not be in the price range of most students I know. Pinebrook has dirt-cheap housing. A SMART investor lurking on this forum might wish to purchase some of those dingy fixer-uppers and renovate them to be habitable in order to rent them out to the med school students. We're college students. We don't need "fancy" or "swanky" when we're tens of thousands of dollars in debt to begin with thanks to student loans. All we want is a non-leaky roof over our heads and relative proximity to campus.

A part of me feels sorry though for the current residents of Pinebrook---I'd have to guess that perhaps 1/5 to 1/4 of the city's impoverished residents live in this neighborhood or in the adjacent Florence/Midtown housing projects. If gentrification takes hold and squeezes them out, where are they supposed to go? Baghdad? Pinebrook is inarguably the least desirable part of Scranton, and if that is reversed, then the only logical place left for them to migrate to will be South Side.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 11:33 AM
 
1,429 posts, read 3,626,565 times
Reputation: 574
Pinebrook has all the bones to be a great neighborhood, but I'm certainly not claiming it is one at present. You'd really have to clean it up - increased patrols, code enforcement, sting operations, etc., but I think it would pay off.

There is a small stretch of I think Capouse that has some old store fronts, right by the school, and that is where I would try to use some grant money for new sidewalks, street lamps, and seed money for development, a couple blocks in all directions. You set up an achor point and then build off of that. I think a zoning review would be vitally important so as to create the right environment. A city/county project, such as a library branch, or similar ideas like a magistrate's office, outreach office - something should be put there that will fill a vacant or neglected lot, but also be busy and deter a bad element. One or two small empty lots could be purchased or taken by eminent domain and be used for a neighborhood park/greenspace.

Someone mentioned a while back that various sections throughout the city should be given names, so as to create an identity and spur developent, and I wanted to repeat that here. Pinebrook already has a history, but it needs to be dusted off and revitalized. City planners should really come up with an idea of what they want a new Pinebrook to be, and offer KOZs/funding, but only to those types of businesses that fit the master plan. I still say it's an excellent place for the proposed new stadium.

It would be nice if the med school would buy up a chunk of land and build student dormatory housing. A mini 'gated community' could be created to ensure safety; picture the newer red brick U of S dorms on Mulberry along with a high wrought-iron fence, automated gates, and interior parking for students. A shuttle service would help to minimize on-campus parking issues.

Is any part of Pinebrook to be included in the river project? If so, land should be acquired and used for a jumping off point/parking for people who would like to enjoy the trail. This spot could also contain playground equipment, restrooms, a picnic pavillion, etc. The more of the old Pinebrook we can clear away, the better. I would also like to see tax breaks for targeted areas of the city that would provide maybe a 10-15% tax credit if you can show improvements of $500 or more to the outside of your home; fresh paint, flowers, flags - it all makes a difference. Complete renovations, let's say 30k or more, would qualify for a graduated tax credit program, maybe decreasing credits over five years; a 35% credit the first year, 25% the second year, 15%, 10%, and so on. Permit fees in bad areas could be waived so as to encourage investment.

One comment on the Connell project, the liberal use of the word 'upscale' bothered me quite a bit - you're not going to fill 89 'upscale' anythings in the downtown. The city simply will not grow unless there is an urban center, and you need middle class people to build it up, who are not going to be able to afford 'upscale' Hopefully the developers of the two projects slated for Wyoming and Linden will realize this and build for the masses. The best bet for the location would be a multi-story building with a facade that would mimick a brownstone or something similar, so as to look as though each unit has an upstairs/downstairs, but to rather have elevators and seperate floors. One or two store fronts would be wise, but not more than that. Zoning should really be implemented at this point to protect historic buildings/blocks, and also prevent any one story structures from being built in the downtown area.

Last edited by scrantonluna; 01-15-2009 at 12:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Drama Central
4,083 posts, read 9,056,244 times
Reputation: 1893
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrantonluna View Post
One comment on the Connell project, the liberal use of the word 'upscale' bothered me quite a bit - you're not going to fill 89 'upscale' anythings in the downtown. The city simply will not grow unless there is an urban center, and you need middle class people to build it up, who are not going to be able to afford 'upscale'

Zoning should really be implemented at this point to protect historic buildings/blocks, and also prevent any one story structures from being built in the downtown area.
"Upscale" is what the admin wants........ This admin hates the middle class and has done everything they can to oppress the middle class...... Either lower or higher but no middle........ Middle class does not fit into the image that they have for our city.....Scranhattan the hamptons of the pocono mountains..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 01:42 PM
 
1,429 posts, read 3,626,565 times
Reputation: 574
It's probably more that they feel upscale equals more money being spent by tenants, more tax revenue, etc. It's also hard to justify building or renovating one of these properties only to charge a low rent and opertate at a loss. There has to be money in it or people won't undertake any of these projects.

I would have to think that somebody must understand that the downtown doesn't need surf and turf, it's needs more meat and potatoes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 01:54 PM
 
Location: Drama Central
4,083 posts, read 9,056,244 times
Reputation: 1893
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrantonluna View Post
There has to be money in it or people won't undertake any of these projects.

I would have to think that somebody must understand that the downtown doesn't need surf and turf, it's needs more meat and potatoes.

Listen.....The money is being made on these ventures during the construction, considering they are being build pretty much with taxpayer dollars, they are profiting.

The 500 block is FULLY FUNDED $28,000,000 by taxpayer dollars so any % he gets from tenants and or rents is profit...Remember its a KOZ as well so no taxes. There is no constrcution debt that has to be paid back before a profit can be seen.

The Connell building is as well recieving large amounts of taxpayer dollars for their project......Every tax dollar used is one less that they have to worry about paying back....

It can sit empty for years before anything would be felt, because they have the KOZ to fall back on and no project financing to worry about.


They wouldn't be building these right in the face of the empty SU building if there wasn't money to made during the taxpayers financed construction of their projects...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 02:05 PM
 
1,429 posts, read 3,626,565 times
Reputation: 574
Everybody gets their piece of the pie. Better it be spent here than in Erie or Altoona.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 02:42 PM
 
Location: Drama Central
4,083 posts, read 9,056,244 times
Reputation: 1893
Quote:
Originally Posted by scrantonluna View Post
Everybody gets their piece of the pie. Better it be spent here than in Erie or Altoona.
Thats not what I was saying...Sure its better to be built here but there is no reason for people or business to want to move to the downtown, let alone the city, as long as the tax structure for a business is so oppressive. KOZ is fine if it is used for a NEW business but what we have seen is a shop moving from one location in the city to a KOZ, a lateral move to save money. Instead of the KOZ being used to GROW a new business, but if the tax structure at the end of the KOZ is not favorable to a business then they will just move to DC, Archbald, Moosic, etc.....

Basically these projects are only benefiting the developers as long as the city keeps its tax ramparts up in order to keep business away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 03:00 PM
 
Location: Marshall-Shadeland, Pittsburgh, PA
32,606 posts, read 77,274,241 times
Reputation: 19071
Well the way I see it is that if any project were to be majority-funded by tax payers, then it ought to be those geared towards low-to-moderate-income tenants, as if wouldn't be fair to expect a private developer to pony up millions and never recoup his (or her) investment due to the low rental income. Then again, I would also expect construction costs to be lower for low-to-moderate-income-oriented projects because, for example, while in a higher-end project you might be throwing in stainless steel appliances, granite counter tops, marble foyers, track lighting, exposed duct work, balconies, etc., in a lower-end project you'd be throwing in Formica counter tops, basic appliances, one fluorescent light in the kitchen, etc.

Let us assume that it would cost $15,000,000 to develop a low-to-moderate income housing complex of 100 units somewhere in downtown (50 one-bedroom units, 25 two-bedroom units, and 25 three-bedroom units), perhaps along Mulberry Street near to the western gateway to the city from the North Scranton Expressway. Each of those units would be rented out based upon a percentage of the renter's household income, but for purposes of this example let's assign an arbitrary figure of $400/month for a one-bedroom unit, $550/month for a two-bedroom unit, and $700/month for a three-bedroom unit. Let's also assume that the units will be fully-occupied. The developer here could expect a monthly income at full-occupancy of:

$400/month per unit x 50 units = $20,000
$550/month per unit x 25 units = $13,750
$700/month per unit x 25 units = $17,500
Total Monthly Rental Income = $51,250
Total Annual Rental Income = $51,250 x 12 = $615,000

At that rate alone, it would take 25 years for the developer to break even, and that's being generous, considering these figures would be GROSS INCOMES---one would still have to account for replacing a broken water heater, cleaning up after problem tenants once they're evicted, paying for security, wages, property taxes, etc. When those are all considered a project such as this might have a developer barely breaking even every year. As such it only makes sense that the developer should NOT be expected to bear the full brunt of that $15,000,000 figure. Perhaps the developer would pay $5,000,000 with the Federal government chipping in $5,000,000, and the state and city splitting the remainder for $2,500,000 each.

I know you all belly-ache about private developers getting "help" in the way of KOZs, start-up capital from state, Federal, and local sources, etc., but they're in the real estate development business to make a profit---not to run a charity. The more people that move into the city via these projects, the more wage tax revenues that are generated, the more foot traffic that is generated (that will help nurture existing businesses and spur future business growth), and the more vibrant the city looks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2009, 03:53 PM
 
Location: Drama Central
4,083 posts, read 9,056,244 times
Reputation: 1893
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScranBarre View Post
The more people that move into the city via these projects, the more wage tax revenues that are generated, the more foot traffic that is generated (that will help nurture existing businesses and spur future business growth), and the more vibrant the city looks.
This will not happen as long as the wage and mercantile taxes are the way they are right now in the city.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Northeastern Pennsylvania
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top