Maybe, just maybe, giving tax breaks to multi million dollar corporations isn’t a great idea when the city is running a deficit and planning on cuts to services
The easiest word to say is NO. It’s a word that the city council needs to use
Sewer Connection Fees. Shit. Who proposed or is the driving force behind this Ordinance? I'm assuming Taylor.
It is tougher than you would think to buy, demo, entitle and build a project within the current 5 year horizon. I'd be OK with 7 years with conditions. Let me explain,
Sewer credits for mulitfamily were around $5000 per unit 2 years ago, but are now worth $11,000 based on a rate adjustment.
Consider allowing full transfer of sewer credits for 7 years. After that, for any credit the value of the credits reverts to the credit value when the properties were demolished. Jacobs will not be aboard!
I've heard that Jacobs is trying to lease the land to developers and is looking for a developer to take on a most or all of the residential building. This is an almost impossible situation. Lenders don't care for land leases and most developers don't want such a big risk, they prefer to build, lease and then build again, not to be strung out like Jacobs. It seems that Jacobs is following some inspired vision and not a typical development scenario.
Maybe, just maybe, giving tax breaks to multi million dollar corporations isn’t a great idea when the city is running a deficit and planning on cuts to services
The easiest word to say is NO. It’s a word that the city council needs to use
Sewer Connection Fees. Shit. Who proposed or is the driving force behind this Ordinance? I'm assuming Taylor.
It is tougher than you would think to buy, demo, entitle and build a project within the current 5 year horizon. I'd be OK with 7 years with conditions. Let me explain,
Sewer credits for mulitfamily were around $5000 per unit 2 years ago, but are now worth $11,000 based on a rate adjustment.
Consider allowing full transfer of sewer credits for 7 years. After that, for any credit the value of the credits reverts to the credit value when the properties were demolished. Jacobs will not be aboard!
I've heard that Jacobs is trying to lease the land to developers and is looking for a developer to take on a most or all of the residential building. This is an almost impossible situation. Lenders don't care for land leases and most developers don't want such a big risk, they prefer to build, lease and then build again, not to be strung out like Jacobs. It seems that Jacobs is following some inspired vision and not a typical development scenario.