Summerset at Frick Park wants to keep its property taxes (Pittsburgh: how much, new home)

[pman]

Summerset at Frick Park...now seeking tax-increment financing, or TIF, to divert $24 million in property taxes from the neighborhood to pay for infrastructure improvements, including roads and a new bridge...the development has proven popular since the first units were sold in 2001, with most lots bought and occupied.
Legislators now say the project can afford to pay for itself -- or look for someone else's help....According to the draft legislation, the TIF would take 75 percent of the property tax revenue from a portion of the neighborhood's already-occupied homes, as well as 45 percent of the revenue from any new homes built. That'll go to public infrastructure, including new pipes, roads and bridges, as well as the grading and environmental remediation required to make the site habitable.

Read more: Tax break sought to finish housing at Pittsburgh's Summerset site - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
seems a little dubious, 75% of existing revenue? that's real cash the city would be giving up. perhaps a compromise would be keeping only the language for the new homes? still tempting to just walk away, the developers are in it, its a proven development, seems a good bet they'll find a way to make it work without subsidies

[Moby Hick]

I don't understand the details, but it seems a little strange to me also. I haven't heard of making a TIF retroactive to things already built without one and I can't figure out where they are talking about putting in a bridge. What they are asking for works about to over $100k a housing unit, which seems high. Maybe they figured there's no harm in trying or maybe the reporter missed a part of their argument, but I don't see the case.

[ditchdigger]

Way back when, the original plans called for a bridge over Nine Mile Run, connecting the Squirell Hill side of the plan with the Swisshelm Park side. That was scrapped a long time ago, and in fact there is a pedestrian bridge built there now, as part of the Frick Park walking trail. Some additional acreage for Frick Park was always part of the plan.

The site work on the Squirell Hill side was done in phases, with remidiation and grading work taking place well in advance of the infrastructure work starting. All of that is completed on the Squirell Hill side, but the Swisshelm Park side hasn't been touched yet.

[trotter_rej]

The bridge would be in the valley over Nine Mile Run. The road would connect Commercial and the Phase 3 area to the other portions of the development and ultimately out to Browns Hill Road.

Edit: My post overlapped with ditchdigger's. I don't think that part of the plan was scrapped, as the image I uploaded was from a presentation made in November 2012.

[Moby Hick]

Originally Posted by ditchdigger

Way back when, the original plans called for a bridge over Nine Mile Run, connecting the Squirell Hill side of the plan with the Swisshelm Park side. That was scrapped a long time ago, and in fact there is a pedestrian bridge built there now, as part of the Frick Park walking trail. Some additional acreage for Frick Park was always part of the plan.

That might be different. I hadn't realized they were still opening up new acres. It might be worth it to put a TIF the buildings on the newly developed land. I'm still opposed to the retroactive TIF on what they already got. Maybe if there were something useful and new, like a gondola to Duck Hollow.

[ditchdigger]

I don't think that part of the plan was scrapped, as the image I uploaded
was from a presentation made in November 2012.

Yeah, it was. If they could afford new graphics for a presentation they wouldn't need 24 milion in TIF, would they?

Here's a picture of that pedestrian bridge. You can see from the accompanying map, that the location matches the plan you posted.

Panoramio - Photo of new bridge over 9 mile run

Maybe if there were something useful and new, like a gondola to Duck
Hollow.

That'd get BrianTH's vote, wouldn't it?

[pman]

Originally Posted by Moby Hick

That might be different. I hadn't realized they were still opening up new acres. It might be worth it to put a TIF the buildings on the newly developed land. I'm still opposed to the retroactive TIF on what they already got. Maybe if there were something useful and new, like a gondola to Duck Hollow.

or to homestead/smoke tacos. yes it all seems very dubious. how much additional revenue would be expected for the city and does it exceed the revenue theyd be giving up? the equation is a lot different than when its state money (opm)

[eschaton]

Man, the rendering of phase 3 is awful.

I mean, I knew they didn't want to connect the grid with Swisshelm Park because the city wasn't willing to pay for it, but they have back yards directly abutting the back of the street ends in that neighborhood - ensuring that the roads will never be continued through. What an awful idea.

Also, poor Duck Hollow is surrounded.

[trotter_rej]

Originally Posted by ditchdigger

Yeah, it was. If they could afford new graphics for a presentation they wouldn't need 24 milion in TIF, would they?

Here's a picture of that pedestrian bridge. You can see from the accompanying map, that the location matches the plan you posted.

Panoramio - Photo of new bridge over 9 mile run

Yes that pedestrian bridge already exists, but at the community meeting with the developer in Nov. 2012, the new road and bridge that would either parallel or replace the pedestrian one was still being discussed as part of the plan.

[pman]

Originally Posted by eschaton

Man, the rendering of phase 3 is awful.

I mean, I knew they didn't want to connect the grid with Swisshelm Park because the city wasn't willing to pay for it, but they have back yards directly abutting the back of the street ends in that neighborhood - ensuring that the roads will never be continued through. What an awful idea.

Also, poor Duck Hollow is surrounded.

since they are applying for public money the city should be able to dictate design (if approved), the design screams (hey, it's still 1995!)

The Rubinoff Company partnered with Montgomery & Rust, Pennrose Properties, Ralph A Falbo Inc. and EQA Landmark Communities to develop and build this community

Summerset at Frick Park - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


perhaps of interest

Nine Mile Run was originally a wooded stream valley, nestled between the areas of Squirrel Hill and Swisshelm Park. In 1910, Frederick Law Olmstead recommended it as the best opportunity for a large park within the city, writing, "Its long meadows of varying width would make ideal playfields; the stream...will be an attractive and interesting element in the landscape; the wooded slopes on either side give ample opportunity for enjoyment of the forest for shaded walks and cool resting places." ..[SIZE=4][/SIZE]
[In October 1995, the URA paid $38 million for the 238 acre site. 116 acres of which was deemed developable...Its total public financing was just under $39 million.

http://www.cmu.edu/steinbrenner/brow...ine%20Mile.pdf]

In 1994, the city revealed plans to develop the site into a strictly residential neighborhood. The success of the nearby Rosemont development showed a strong market for new urban residences, and the mayor believed that the key to the revitalization of Pittsburgh was to lure suburbanites back into the city limits.

which explains the sprawlish design of the site

last but not least

The development is thriving, shown by its ability to raise the property taxes for the area. The project is expected to generate over $2.9 million in annual revenue.

it also received $11.7 million from a city bond, $3.1 million in land proceeds, $330k EPA grant, $750k foundations, $12.5 million RACP, $742k state growing greener, $1.5 million LCTF, $8.2 million PWSAthe main benefit is increased property tax revenue which they now want to get rid of. I'd say it's probably a raw deal. btw, where is the commercial strip for the neighborhood?