PHILADELPHIA | Highrise Development Thread IX

[iheartphilly]

Wtf...did skyscraperpage morph into something else? Someone post something related to a current project or a construction announcement, please.

[nimshady]

Originally Posted by iheartphilly

Wtf...did skyscraperpage morph into something else? Someone post something related to a current project or a construction announcement, please.

Thank you, fixing the taxes in the city is important to the future of Philadelphia's progress but it feels like every other week theres a huge tangent on it that has nothing to do with development

[ScreamShatter]

Originally Posted by nimshady

Thank you, fixing the taxes in the city is important to the future of Philadelphia's progress but it feels like every other week theres a huge tangent on it that has nothing to do with development

I agree. I genuinely enjoy hearing people's thoughts though so appreciate the dialogue. But we haven't gotten pretty off topic.

Let's get back to development conversations.

[Philly-Drew]

Happy Passover and Happy Easter my fellow skyscraper nerds.

[Tlphila]

https://www.philly.com/politics/primary-...egislation-platform-philly-20190415.html

As someone about to buy their first property, this is concerning.. First, anyone think they will appeal the abatement? If so, will existing abatements be grandfathered, and how would this effect property values?

[Aaamazarite]

Originally Posted by Tlphila

https://www.philly.com/politics/primary-...egislation-platform-philly-20190415.html

As someone about to buy their first property, this is concerning.. First, anyone think they will appeal the abatement? If so, will existing abatements be grandfathered, and how would this effect property values?

This study shows the projected effects of ending the abatement and altering it: https://www.phila.gov/media/20180524153805/City-of-Philadelphia-2018-Abatement.pdf Many of the candidates have chosen to simply not believe it and think they know better despite no knowledge of the building industry or economy of the city.

And yes, the abatement is under its first real threat if some of the nuttier candidates actually win. That said, I personally think (hope) some are just pretending to be against the abatement in order to pander to some of the fringe groups that have become very vocal in the last few months.

[Redddog]

This might sound a bit naive but....why is gentrification a bad word now?

[iamrobk]

Originally Posted by eixample

I believe the garage has to be built with conversion in mind from the start, which is rare I believe. Maybe some engineers or architects can shed more light on that.

I think this is generally true, but it was definitely what happened with MLB's current building. They specifically built the lower few floors as a parking garage with the idea that they would, over time, be converted to office space as MLB expanded - which is obviously what happened. (I would have pointed this out earlier but I assumed jsbrook/others all knew.)

[Boku]

Originally Posted by Redddog

This might sound a bit naive but....why is gentrification a bad word now?

This sub is getting so annoying anymore.

[JohnIII]

Happy Easter and Happy Passover to all!

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Aaamazarite

This study shows the projected effects of ending the abatement and altering it: https://www.phila.gov/media/20180524153805/City-of-Philadelphia-2018-Abatement.pdf Many of the candidates have chosen to simply not believe it and think they know better despite no knowledge of the building industry or economy of the city.

And yes, the abatement is under its first real threat if some of the nuttier candidates actually win. That said, I personally think (hope) some are just pretending to be against the abatement in order to pander to some of the fringe groups that have become very vocal in the last few months.

Many people on council or running are definitely against it as it stands. I see very little chance it comes out of this budget cycle 100% in tact. It definitely won't disappear but that doesn't mean it will remain as generous as it is today. Many PEOPLE are against it so this is not about crazy pols who are disconnected from reality. In fact, I would argue Council has largely ignored the growing backlash against the abatement until very recently.

[Redddog]

Originally Posted by Boku

This sub is getting so annoying anymore.

Not sure I understand this comment....

[Aaamazarite]

Originally Posted by cardeza

Many people on council or running are definitely against it as it stands. I see very little chance it comes out of this budget cycle 100% in tact. It definitely won't disappear but that doesn't mean it will remain as generous as it is today. Many PEOPLE are against it so this is not about crazy pols who are disconnected from reality. In fact, I would argue Council has largely ignored the growing backlash against the abatement until very recently.

You're right, a lot of people have been convinced to be against it and the candidates are pandering to them instead of looking at the issue honestly. I think there are certainly arguments for altering/adjusting it but getting rid of it is entirely foolhardy.

[mcgrath618]

Lmao this is just what happens when we have two months of tons of updates and then radio silence for a few weeks. When the May CDR gets posted sometime this week hopefully we'll have something else to talk about

[iamrobk]

Re: the abatement, if you feel strongly about it one way or the other, write to City Council (district and the at large's) and the Mayor and let them know. Like others here I think there will certainly be some level of reform to it in the next budget cycle (next April/May), but what that reform is, who knows. Can't hurt to try to get ahead of the major lobbying if you feel strongly about it...

[Tlphila]

Originally Posted by iamrobk

Re: the abatement, if you feel strongly about it one way or the other, write to City Council (district and the at large's) and the Mayor and let them know. Like others here I think there will certainly be some level of reform to it in the next budget cycle (next April/May), but what that reform is, who knows. Can't hurt to try to get ahead of the major lobbying if you feel strongly about it...

I cannot see them doing away with the abatement realistically, it's a huge net benefit for the city as they make it up with the wage tax. At the least if they change it the homes currently under the abatement won't be changed. Could you imagine the blowback if they tried that!?

[Londonee]

Speaking of taxes and the abatement. I've never heard a great reason why we couldn't figure out a way to do something similar for businesses. Provide a one-time, 10-Year (Business-related) tax break for companies who relocate an HQ from outside the city. Provide minimum requirements so you aren't getting the empty room with a receptionist and a phone but have the breaks be pretty substantial, like you're paying basically nothing as a company - more than KOZ. Keys are that the tax breaks are temporary and the companies must be relocating from outside of the city to earn them. Some companies might move back at the end of 10 years, but that doesn't seem to be happening with residential properties (as opponents claimed it would). Wage Taxes would not be waved, so the benefit to the city will come in the form of wage, sales, and ancillary taxes like the hotel tax.

[Urbanthusiat]

Fun fact of the day - with the latest BLS data (March 2019), Philly has the highest YoY % increase in employment of any of the big northeastern MSAs and the second highest total number of jobs added (which realistically we're only competing with DC and Boston for that spot). 21.9k were added in the city.

[City Wide]

Originally Posted by Londonee

Speaking of taxes and the abatement. I've never heard a great reason why we couldn't figure out a way to do something similar for businesses. Provide a one-time, 10-Year (Business-related) tax break for companies who relocate an HQ from outside the city. Provide minimum requirements so you aren't getting the empty room with a receptionist and a phone but have the breaks be pretty substantial, like you're paying basically nothing as a company - more than KOZ. Keys are that the tax breaks are temporary and the companies must be relocating from outside of the city to earn them. Some companies might move back at the end of 10 years, but that doesn't seem to be happening with residential properties (as opponents claimed it would). Wage Taxes would not be waved, so the benefit to the city will come in the form of wage, sales, and ancillary taxes like the hotel tax.

My guess is that the City's powers that be don't see the two as comparing apples to apples. With real estate its the increase in value that is not being taxed, so the City can try to claim that the abatement isn't costing them anything, with the idea (probably somewhat false)that without the abatement the real estate would not have been developed.

I like your idea. But are you suggesting that other then the wage tax a new business in the City not pay any taxes? That sounds good when you're thinking of XYZ company moving into 10K sq.ft. some place with 25 employees, but what about the bookkeeper who is working out her car and living room and maybe has one part time assistant? If a new law involves details and subtlety then City council is not a good place to look through.

In any case, if this idea were to fly and also for the real estate abatement I think the tax break should be 100% for 5 years and then decreasing 20% per year for the next 5 years.

[cardeza]

Originally Posted by Londonee

Speaking of taxes and the abatement. I've never heard a great reason why we couldn't figure out a way to do something similar for businesses. Provide a one-time, 10-Year (Business-related) tax break for companies who relocate an HQ from outside the city. Provide minimum requirements so you aren't getting the empty room with a receptionist and a phone but have the breaks be pretty substantial, like you're paying basically nothing as a company - more than KOZ. Keys are that the tax breaks are temporary and the companies must be relocating from outside of the city to earn them. Some companies might move back at the end of 10 years, but that doesn't seem to be happening with residential properties (as opponents claimed it would). Wage Taxes would not be waved, so the benefit to the city will come in the form of wage, sales, and ancillary taxes like the hotel tax.

The KOZs basically accomplish this- although they are targeted and not global. It's definitely an idea I thought of as well and its interesting that no one else has proposed it. I think part of the issue would be the blowback from existing companies who would feel they were immediately being put at a disadvantage vs companies eligible for the benefit.