588
Senior MemberSenior Member
588

Post1:19 AM - Jun 18#326

ldai_phs wrote:
1:03 AM - Jun 18
@dbInSouthCity Why is it that St. Louis City is soo stingy with tax incentives for new development? I recently read the even New York City offers an automatic 100% property tax abatement for 35 years if you build new multifamily.
A lack of education.  Pandering to their base.  Local politicians don't understand and or downplay the difficulty and risk that is associated with any real estate development let alone development in St. Louis.  If they did, they would roll out the red carpet for  infill developments that will eventually hit that tax roll.  The large infill urban developments that we all get excited about require institutional capital.  That capital has lot of options and for it to be invested here requires  as much risk as possible to be taken of the table.  

859
Super MemberSuper Member
859

Post1:55 AM - Jun 18#327

ldai_phs wrote:@dbInSouthCity Why is it that St. Louis City is soo stingy with tax incentives for new development? I recently read the even New York City offers an automatic 100% property tax abatement for 35 years if you build new multifamily.
The NYC program also has strict affordable housing requirements ranging from 20% to 50% of the units being affordable/rent controlled permenantly. They also have hefty prevailing wage requirements.

100% for 35 years is totally cool when 50% of the units are permenantly affordable units lol.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk


442
Full MemberFull Member
442

Post2:44 PM - Jun 18#328

^Great point and let's also remember we had 16 years of the Slay administration who's only play was to give developers large and small whatever they wanted with minimum strings attached. The present "stinginess" is a natural reaction to that profligacy. 

I wish SLDC/BOA/BEA took a more long-term, strategic approach to subsidizing private development (as StlAlex describes for NYC) rather than the now-standard Community Benefit Agreement, which looks more like a "what's in it for me" shakedown by the local NGO mafia. Its a better approach than that taken by the Slay administration, but still leaves much to be desired.

The real solution of course is to phase out the "improvements" component of the real estate tax and transition to a full Land Value Tax.

1,111
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,111

Post2:46 PM - Jun 18#329

StlAlex wrote:
ldai_phs wrote:@dbInSouthCity Why is it that St. Louis City is soo stingy with tax incentives for new development? I recently read the even New York City offers an automatic 100% property tax abatement for 35 years if you build new multifamily.
The NYC program also has strict affordable housing requirements ranging from 20% to 50% of the units being affordable/rent controlled permenantly. They also have hefty prevailing wage requirements.

100% for 35 years is totally cool when 50% of the units are permenantly affordable units lol.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk
NYC until recently only required 20% affordable at 80-135% AMI. 110%+ is what you’d call new construction market rate here.

430
Full MemberFull Member
430

Post2:22 PM - Jun 26#330

We Could Actually Save The American Mall

A fun little watch, about what reimagining a mall site could work and look like.

1,156
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,156

Post7:18 PM - Today#331

The ZOUP released its Draft Development Standards: https://www.zoup-stl.com/copy-of-draft- ... zoning-map

There's stuff that's good or fine but I'm not a fan of the Transitions requirements between zones (see page 26). From what I understand they could require setbacks of 10 feet between mixed use/commercial buildings if they have different height requirements. Which does not a cohesive urban space make imo. 

Read more posts (-19 remaining)