SkyscraperPage Forum
Viewing Page 237 of 424
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

SkyscraperPage Forum (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/index.php)
-   City Compilations (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/forumdisplay.php?f=87)
-   -   PHILADELPHIA | The Development Thread VIII (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=173431)

Jelly Roll Mar 8, 2012 1:52 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by summersm343 (Post 5619291)
Also, Jonathan Papelbon bought a condo in 1706 Rittenhouse.
Is this the same building Cliff Lee lives in? Interesting in how sports affects the culture of a city in development ways like this. It is trickle down economics.

summersm343 Mar 8, 2012 3:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jelly Roll (Post 5619643)
Is this the same building Cliff Lee lives in? Interesting in how sports affects the culture of a city in development ways like this. It is trickle down economics.
Yes it is :tup:

And Pence lives in Murano
Utley lives in one of the Society Hill towers
Someone lives in the Residences at Dockside on the Delaware River (I believe it is Hamels or Victorino)

Don't ask how I know all of this because I don't even know lol

Cro Burnham Mar 8, 2012 4:22 AM
Usually, I think Nutter is pretty good, relatively speaking.

However, if he wants to eliminate any further miniscule middle class population growth in this town and force an exodus of the existing net-positive tax-paying population, he'll carry through this idiotic idea for the property tax increase he's contemplating.

I am not a homeowner, but I will scream bloody murder about this to my local reps, useless as they are.

I really do not understand most Philly politicians: despite everything, we have managed not to let this city become the next tax-baseless Detroit or Camden, yet they never stop tempting fate so as not to upset a largely dysfunction city workforce primarily set up to vacuum money from everyone's pockets and accounts.

Very, very bad move, Nutter. Has he suddenly lost his mind?

Jelly Roll Mar 8, 2012 4:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham (Post 5619885)
Usually, I think Nutter is pretty good, relatively speaking.

However, if he wants to eliminate any further miniscule middle class population growth in this town and force an exodus of the existing net-positive tax-paying population, he'll carry through this idiotic idea for the property tax increase he's contemplating.

I am not a homeowner, but I will scream bloody murder about this to my local reps, useless as they are.

I really do not understand most Philly politicians: despite everything, we have managed not to let this city become the next tax-baseless Detroit or Camden, yet they never stop tempting fate so as not to upset a largely dysfunction city workforce primarily set up to vacuum money from everyone's pockets and accounts.

Very, very bad move, Nutter. Has he suddenly lost his mind?
Granted I get you do not want your property taxes to go up but Philly has by far the lowest property taxes in the entire region. Also, the real issue is the amount of delinquent properties and Philadelphia's inability to collect or then acquire and sell these properties.

Cro Burnham Mar 8, 2012 4:59 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jelly Roll (Post 5619895)
Granted I get you do not want your property taxes to go up but Philly has by far the lowest property taxes in the entire region. Also, the real issue is the amount of delinquent properties and Philadelphia's inability to collect or then acquire and sell these properties.
I mentioned that I'm not a property owner, so it won't affect me directly unless it forces my rent up. I'm not really worried about that.

Yes, Philly's property taxes are relatively low, but our schools suck (I know, I went to some of the "better" public schools here for 10 years and know how poorly they stack up), the rest of our taxes are obscenely high, 15% - 25% of the city payroll is unnecessary (we can't even fire a crooked cop caught stealing cash and drugs from criminals; so now he has a $70K desk job), and the treasury is leaking DROP money like piss from the panties of an incontinent senile person who forgot his Depends.

And we need a tax hike? I guess, if you think these expenses are legitimate.

NO city taxes should go up unless you don't mind an exodus of net-positive taxpaying families from the city and a population comprised of a larger proportion of net-negative taxpayers.

In this economy, no less.

Nutter must be losing it.

Bad, bad news. I'm shocked. I expected much better of Nutter.

Jelly Roll Mar 8, 2012 5:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham (Post 5619945)
I mentioned that I'm not a property owner, so it won't affect me directly unless it forces my rent up. I'm not really worried about that.

Yes, Philly's property taxes are relatively low, but our schools suck (I know, I went to some of the "better" public schools here for 10 years and know how poorly they stack up), the rest of our taxes are obscenely high, 15% - 25% of the city payroll is unnecessary (we can't even fire a crooked cop caught stealing cash and drugs from criminals; so now he has a $70K desk job), and the treasury is leaking DROP money like piss from the panties of an incontinent senile person who forgot his Depends.

And we need a tax hike? I guess, if you think these expenses are legitimate.

NO city taxes should go up unless you don't mind an exodus of net-positive taxpaying families from the city and a population comprised of a larger proportion of net-negative taxpayers.

In this economy, no less.

Nutter must be losing it.

Bad, bad news. I'm shocked. I expected much better of Nutter.
See, I just do not buy this. The wage tax argument I can understand if you are part of the 23% of the population that lives in Philly and works elsewhere. But if you work in Philly you pay the wage tax regardless and then even with the rise in property tax where do you think these people are going to move and pay less? I get that there are plenty of things the city could do in order to not have to raise taxes but you are kidding yourself if you think you can move out of the city and pay less or even close to the amount of real estate taxes that are paid in the city.

Cro Burnham Mar 8, 2012 5:29 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jelly Roll (Post 5619959)
See, I just do not buy this. The wage tax argument I can understand if you are part of the 23% of the population that lives in Philly and works elsewhere. But if you work in Philly you pay the wage tax regardless and then even with the rise in property tax where do you think these people are going to move and pay less? I get that there are plenty of things the city could do in order to not have to raise taxes but you are kidding yourself if you think you can move out of the city and pay less or even close to the amount of real estate taxes that are paid in the city.
They may move and pay more, but then be able to send their kids to good schools without having to pay thousands for private school. A massive net savings over Philly.

In addition, in order to compensate new prospective buyers/investors for increased operating costs, property values of all types will decline faster, making new development less profitable and therefore less extensive. Before you pooh-pooh this notion, understand that property tax hikes will have precisely the opposite impact of the vaunted tax abatements.

And, um, just what is wrong with getting the city to cut inefficiency and waste first?

BTW, you may be the only person I have ever heard seriously suggest that Philly's tax burden is light. Quite a contrarian perspective.

Have you not noticed that the city has demonstrated a remarkable ability to speedily shed middle class population?

There are many incentives to remain in the city if you are a net user of taxes.

There are not many if you are a net payer, beyond loyalty and appreciation for Philly's peculiar urban amenities. Unfortunately, history has shown that we a small bunch.

Parkway Mar 8, 2012 5:38 AM
This isn't a tax increase it just means that people who own a $500,000 house in Chestnut Hill and people who own at $500,000 house in Graduate Hospital will pay the same amount in property taxes which seems fair.

Morman Temple
It doesn't really seem any less urban than most of the other buildings on the Parkway, for instance City Hall, the PMA or the Franklin Institute.

Jelly Roll Mar 8, 2012 5:44 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham (Post 5619989)
They may move and pay more, but then be able to send their kids to good schools without having to pay thousands for private school. A massive net savings over Philly.

In addition, in order to compensate new prospective buyers/investors for increased operating costs, property values of all types will decline faster, making new development less profitable and therefore less extensive. Before you pooh-pooh this notion, understand that property tax hikes will have precisely the opposite impact of the vaunted tax abatements.

And, um, just what is wrong with getting the city to cut inefficiency and waste first?

BTW, you may be the only person I have ever heard seriously suggest that Philly's tax burden is light. Quite a contrarian perspective.

Have you not noticed that the city has demonstrated a remarkable ability to speedily shed middle class population?

There are many incentives to remain in the city if you are a net user of taxes.

There are not many if you are a net payer, beyond loyalty and appreciation for Philly's peculiar urban amenities. Unfortunately, history has shown that we a small bunch.
It is important to understand that I am saying Philadelphia's property tax burden is light. Also, when compared to other major metro area's Philadelphia's tax burden is in line or less. But the latter does not matter when looking at losing population to the surrounding suburbs. The key thing that I am saying is that real estate taxes in Philadelphia are significantly lower then the surrounding suburbs so unless you do not work in Philadelphia moving out does not lower your tax burden but actually increases it. The wage tax is the reason that people believe that taxes are high in Philadelphia as it is proportional to your income so the more you make the more you get taxed. The key to this is that if you work in Philly you pay this tax regardless but if you work outside the city then this tax becomes a burden. As over 75% of Philly residents work in Philly less then 25% are affected by this tax. That means that for the majority of residents it comes down to straight property taxes which are significantly higher in the suburbs versus the city. Add in the fact that you can be delinquent on your taxes for multiple years and still live in your houses saying real estate taxes are the reason someone would move out of Philly is ridiculous.

Cro Burnham Mar 8, 2012 5:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parkway (Post 5620001)
This isn't a tax increase it just means that people who own a $500,000 house in Chestnut Hill and people who own at $500,000 house in Graduate Hospital will pay the same amount in property taxes which seems fair.
It is an increase of $90 million per year - present value of which is almost $2 billion from the pockets of property owners if you assume a 5% discount rate (considerably more if you consider a lower rate more in line with Treasuries).

Big time wealth transfer from a very mobile population. Just dumb.

See article:

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/br...ther__90M.html


Nutter administration officials said Wednesday that they would seek an additional $90 million in property taxes in 2012-2013 - but that it's not a tax hike.

The new revenue would be collected as the city switches to a system that values property based on the actual market price for tax purposes.

That change also would preserve tax hikes applied in each of the last two years, all of which had been billed as "temporary."

Mayor Nutter, who will lay out details of the city's Actual Value Initiative in his budget address Thursday to City Council, argues that the switch to actual value merely will take into account the rise in overall property values since 2004, the last time any kind of significant reassessment was done.

The city's assessments long have been inaccurate and incomplete. Nutter declared the system so broken that he placed a moratorium on most reassessments in 2010.

While the Actual Value Initiative seeks to correct those inaccuracies, critics have charged that the process amounted to a backdoor tax increase, hidden from meaningful public scrutiny. City Finance Director Rob Dubow rejected that notion Wednesday.

"Values have gone up, and we're capturing that value," said Dubow. "I don't know how it's a fast one if we're telling you what we're doing." . . .

Cro Burnham Mar 8, 2012 5:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jelly Roll (Post 5620004)
The key to this is that if you work in Philly you pay this tax regardless but if you work outside the city then this tax becomes a burden. As over 75% of Philly residents work in Philly less then 25% are affected by this tax. That means that for the majority of residents it comes down to straight property taxes which are significantly higher in the suburbs versus the city. Add in the fact that you can be delinquent on your taxes for multiple years and still live in your houses saying real estate taxes are the reason someone would move out of Philly is ridiculous.
I'm thinking that the owners of higher value properties that will be significantly affected by this tax increase are also more likely either to have or be able to get high-income jobs outside the city. I'd suggest they are a disproportionate share of the unfortunate 25% you mention.

These are also not the type of people to be delinquent on their taxes.

This increase is just bad, bad, bad, all around. Philly is not New York or London. The draws are just too weak. You squeeze people here and it has been proven time and again, they leave. 70 years of history has not made this clear enough?

Jelly Roll Mar 8, 2012 6:10 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cro Burnham (Post 5620028)
I'm thinking that the owners of higher value properties that will be significantly affected by this tax increase are also more likely either to have or be able to get high-income jobs outside the city. I'd suggest they are a disproportionate share of the unfortunate 25% you mention.

These are also not the type of people to be delinquent on their taxes.

This increase is just bad, bad, bad, all around. Philly is not New York or London. The draws are just too weak. You squeeze people here and it has been proven time and again, they leave. 70 years of history has not made this clear enough?
I disagree and believe the opposite. The higher the value of the house the more likely real estate taxes are going to be significantly higher if they purchase a property of the same price in the suburbs. On whether those 25% that work outside the city make more then those that work in the city I am not so certain. Sure, some of those people may be like the NBC bigwigs that work in NYC and live in Philly or work on the main line and live in Philly but I honestly think this is a non-issue. To be clear I think Philly should collect the delinquent taxes before they raise the taxes on real estate but I do not think a real estate tax will be the death blow to Philadelphia.

Parkway Mar 8, 2012 6:20 AM
I also believe that the temporary 1% sales tax from a few years ago expired this year. What I was saying is that while some people's taxes will increase it is not an increase in the overall rate that people are being taxed at with the exception that the "Temporary" increases from the last few years are now permenant. Also remember that BPT and wage tax decreases are suppposed to restart this year.

Cro Burnham Mar 8, 2012 6:42 AM
I guess we just disagree -

I consider a $2 billion wealth transfer a very significant "FU" to a highly mobile population with significant potential gains from moving in the form of better schools, lower insurance costs, greater safety, etc.

Supply and demand principles suggests that a large increase in the cost of supply (i.e., the cost of living in Philadelphia) will result in a large reduction in demand (by taxpaying residents and, importantly, potential residents).

I agree, it is not a death blow, it is just one more (albeit particularly bloody) slice in the death by 1000 cuts that city politicians have administered to this city.

But thanks for reminding us of the resumption of the city's 0.0000000000136754% in annual reductions in wage and BPT taxes. I think the city stands to lose about, say, $312.07 in 2012 in the aggregate from these extremely generous cuts (that may just about wrap up in time for my great grand children's retirements). This should go a long way toward balancing the $90 million they will gain by the property tax "rebalancing". I just hope the city keeps enough to fund DROP in perpetuity. Our workers have earned it.

McBane Mar 8, 2012 1:32 PM
Bad news
 
I just read something very troubling about the new zoning code. I just read this line in an interesting article in the City Paper.

Quote:
As for the new zoning code, Feibush and other developers are terrified it will only make matters worse. As of now, community meetings are a courtesy, not a legal requirement, and that's about to change.
Does anyone know if this is true? NIMBY groups will now have ultimate authority over zoning in their neighborhoods? This is not good news at all.

Here is the article in full: http://www.citypaper.net/news/2012-0...velopment.html

And regarding taxes: Yes, Philly has very low RE taxes but all other taxes are high and you have to put up with trashy streets, crime, poor schools, high car insurance premiums, and, as written about in last week's paper, high PGW bills that subsidize heating bills for the city's poor.

We Got Five Mar 8, 2012 1:49 PM
The Utley's live on the top two floors of the Aria in Washington Square. Hamels and his family moved to Newtown Square more than a year ago - they lived for a short time in Two Liberty. HP is renting at the Murano for the season and Victorino recently moved to south Jersey, I beleive the same neighborhood as Jimmy Rollins.

And Pappelbon lives in the same building as the Lee's - 1706.

What is the deal with the sales tax situation?

summersm343 Mar 8, 2012 3:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBane (Post 5620203)
I just read something very troubling about the new zoning code. I just read this line in an interesting article in the City Paper.



Does anyone know if this is true? NIMBY groups will now have ultimate authority over zoning in their neighborhoods? This is not good news at all.

Here is the article in full: http://www.citypaper.net/news/2012-0...velopment.html

And regarding taxes: Yes, Philly has very low RE taxes but all other taxes are high and you have to put up with trashy streets, crime, poor schools, high car insurance premiums, and, as written about in last week's paper, high PGW bills that subsidize heating bills for the city's poor.
I do not think this is true. I remember reading something like this before but it is blown a little out of proportion. As for the zoning code, this is not a set in stone thing. First it won't go into effect until august, second the code is more of a preliminary code and is designed to be changed and fixed over the next few years until the code is perfect. It won't be set in stone for a few more years.

summersm343 Mar 8, 2012 3:30 PM
http://nakedphilly.com/logan-square/granary-coming/

Great news! Finally a revitalization of the Granary in Logan Square and more units/8 story building will be built next to it. :tup:

summersm343 Mar 8, 2012 3:36 PM
http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/201...ck-homeowners/

Here is an article about the taxes... which aren't really a tax increase at all. It is not even final yet, the article hints city council most likely will not approve it. However, we desperately need money for the school district in some way.

summersm343 Mar 8, 2012 5:49 PM
FINALLLLYYYYY!!!!! :notacrook:

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/lo..._expected.html


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:12 AM.
Viewing Page 237 of 424
Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.