Jump to content

Wachovia South Tryon Projects


Southend

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Here is an article today about the Wachovia building. The city would be stupid not to help. The end of the article is very interesting too...

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/bus...es/12071699.htm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

:w00t:

"600 condos and 35- to 40-story office tower"

the city NEEDS to get on board. Surely if they can't use TIF bonds, they can work out a deal similar to the Grubb or Pappas deals where taxes paid to the city go into to project-related infrastructure that would normally be city responsibility (parking decks for the retail projects... but arts for the office/mixed use project).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:w00t:

"600 condos and 35- to 40-story office tower"

the city NEEDS to get on board.  Surely if they can't use TIF bonds, they can work out a deal similar to the Grubb or Pappas deals where taxes paid to the city go into to project-related infrastructure that would normally be city responsibility (parking decks for the retail projects... but arts for the office/mixed use project).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

According to the article we are talking about 1,000,000 square feet in the new Wachovia tower. YEAH BABY !!! B)

BofA's bldg is right around 1.1 million if that gives you an idea of the structure we would be looking at. If Wachovia moves forward with this plan it will add so much to the S Tryon side of Dtwn. I was so excited when I read the article this morning I spilled coffee all over myself. :w00t:

Now if we can get a tenent to sign with BofA in their new proposed tower on North Tryon we would have two unbelievable "bookends" to the already awesome skyline we know as Charlotte. :thumbsup:

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1m sq feet could really let them make this tower their HQ. 40 stories with a hat could make it taller than the jukebox, and be a huge shift for the skyline.

the line about the BofA tower is really intriguing. they better hurry up, though or all the really good arts projects will be wrapped up in the wachovia tower (WFU, Theatre, Bechtler, Mint)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told you guys it was going to be bigger. Can't wait to see an actual rendering.

600 condos is more than I heard about. The figure I heard was 300. Call me pleasantly surprised...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If it will go through, that will increase atlrvr's estimates of population in the Center City by nearly a thousand. Of course it seems like a long road to ground breaking. Let's take a wait and see approach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I told you guys it was going to be bigger. Can't wait to see an actual rendering.

600 condos is more than I heard about. The figure I heard was 300. Call me pleasantly surprised...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

RHJ. How do you feel about the cities involvement in the project? I guess what I am trying to ask, is do you see them throwing some bucks in the deal or simply putting it off ? I know the city is strapped for cash ,but Wachovia is ready to start construction. To be quite Frank, they would have put a crane up yesterday if they were not serious about the arts package. They NEED the space. Trust me when I say that. If the city drags their feet on the deal, Wachovia is simply going to put up a tower minus the wonderful arts package. If the city turns their noses up on the deal., the tower that Wachovia would build would be roughly the same size as 3W, in height now Sq Footage.

:(

C'mon City

A2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think 3 wachovia is about 900,000 sq ft and 32 floors. It really depends on how large the footprint is. That shorter section of the building on College really detracts from the height it could have had. It would be awesome to see such a large building on south tryon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, this is true and good at the same time (not for Wachovia, but for everyone else, competition is always good).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I would have thought that First Union would have learned their lesson by now as NCNB has been opening a can of "whup ass" on them for the last 30 years. :lol: Maybe we will finally get the 80 story after all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where do you think the city will get the money for this? Bonds? Deferred taxes? They struggled to balance the budget this year and as you all know, cut many programs. CMS is looking at a bond referendum already. Do you think that Charlotte tax payers will approve a city bond?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have thought that First Union would have learned their lesson by now as NCNB has been opening a can of "whup ass" on them for the last 30 years.    :lol:  Maybe we will finally get the 80 story after all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We did go from 34 stories to 40, lets hope it will go higher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so maybe I don't know all of the ins and outs of the rental car tax and what it can be used for. But, I would personally rather have this than the Nascar HOF. If we don't get the HOF could that money eventually be used to bolster the ASC's plans?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where do you think the city will get the money for this?  Bonds? Deferred taxes? They struggled to balance the budget this year and as you all know, cut many programs.  CMS is looking at a bond referendum already.  Do you think that Charlotte tax payers will approve a city bond?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

the idea is to to not spend any resources that would have been part of a past budget, but rather leverage net-new taxes from a specific project to buy yourself a more valuable project, and thus even more taxes over the long run.

The city borrows against future taxes earned from a project and spends the money on infrastructure around the project that make the project more valuable. That increased value directly increases the amount of properties taxes paid when the project comes online. The city only agrees to invest an amount that yields a payback over a few years. The city negotiates protection from losses if the future taxes do not materialize.

This is called public-private partnership, and creates new value for both public and private entities.

Even Don Lochman agrees that it is a fiscally responsible approach, as he voted for it for the Grubb and Pappas projects.

It is very complicated, but when negotiated correctly, the city basically gets the long term benefit of the better project, for arguably little or no risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the idea is to to not spend any resources that would have been part of a past budget, but rather leverage net-new taxes from a specific project to buy yourself a more valuable project, and thus even more taxes over the long run. 

The city borrows against future taxes earned from a project and spends the money on infrastructure around the project that make the project more valuable.  That increased value directly increases the amount of properties taxes paid when the project comes online.  The city only agrees to invest an amount that yields a payback over a few years.  The city negotiates protection from losses if the future taxes do not materialize.

This is called public-private partnership, and creates new value for both public and private entities.

Even Don Lochman agrees that it is a fiscally responsible approach, as he voted for it for the Grubb and Pappas projects.

It is very complicated, but when negotiated correctly, the city basically gets the long term benefit of the better project, for arguably little or no risk.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What they might be giving up, though, is the chance that a private developer would find the project attractive enough to build a major project without government contributions. But, in this case, I think that the increased value from the cultural amenities would present a win-win situation where value created pays for the cost of the cultural amenities. People would probably pay a butt-load to be amongst all those museums and close to the park in 3d ward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.