Tonawanda seeks proposals to develop city Little League site

[steven]

Hoping to gauge interest in a 16-acre property near the Niagara River, the Tonawanda Common Council this week approved a request for proposals from developers to convert a former Little League diamond near Veterans Park into residential homes.

http://www.buffalonews.com/cityregio...ry/822550.html

[therising]

Why is is that elected officials never understand that residential subdivisions hurt the tax base, instead of improving it?

[WNYresident]

And how did the business base in cheektowaga help control are taxes any better?

[therising]

Originally Posted by WNYresident

And how did the business base in cheektowaga help control are taxes any better?

Look - theoretically, businesses give a town far more in tax revenue than they consume. Look at the building where your business is - what services does the Town provide? Maybe plowing. Do they even give you garbage removal?

Then taken a similarly valued house - they'll have 2.2 rugrats that need to get their asses shipped off to school.

Financially speaking - what do you think brings more benefit to a Town -- a 100,000 sf big box store that pays $200,000 in taxes? Or the the 30 new homes (at say $200k each) that would be needed (paying $7k a year in taxes each) to generate as much revenue?

30 homes = maybe 60 kids in the school system. Plus maintaining the additional infrastructure needed for those homes (plowing, paving, sewer, etc.).

100,000 SF store - maybe the cops get called there a few times a month. Sure, the road in front of it needs to be plowed, but that would be needed even if the store wasn't there. They pay for their own garbage removal, and don't put any kids into the school system.

What makes more sense??

[nickelcityhomes]

I live two blocks from the proposed development and would love to see some new homes built upon that land. I'd buy one of the houses, but there is no way in hell I'll pay $5k+ in property taxes per year.

The COT council needs to get out of the way of the development. Sell the land! It's not Davis, Pilozzi, nor Zeisz's business what is built there. RFP's are just a way for them to politicize the process. None of these guys have a background in property development. Why should they be the determining committee on who has the best plan? Let the developer and market determine that.

Instead of looking for additional revenue via property taxes the COT should be looking at ways to reduce spending. Public enemy number one is the police force. We don't need a dedicated police force for a town of 16,000 people in a low crime area. Ditch the police force and find a way to provide those services in an efficient manner. There's significant cuts to services that could be made at the local level that won't impact the quality of life, including garbage, recycling, parks and rec.

Additional revenue equals additional waste anytime the government is involved.

[Linda_D]

Originally Posted by nickelcityhomes

I live two blocks from the proposed development and would love to see some new homes built upon that land. I'd buy one of the houses, but there is no way in hell I'll pay $5k+ in property taxes per year.

The COT council needs to get out of the way of the development. Sell the land! It's not Davis, Pilozzi, nor Zeisz's business what is built there. RFP's are just a way for them to politicize the process. None of these guys have a background in property development. Why should they be the determining committee on who has the best plan? Let the developer and market determine that.

I'm assuming that the parcel is city-owned, so I think it's perfectly reasonable that the city wants a say in what's developed on it rather than simply selling it and chancing that a future owner won't want to change the zoning to something else.

[WNYresident]

Originally Posted by therising

Look - theoretically, businesses give a town far more in tax revenue than they consume. Look at the building where your business is - what services does the Town provide? Maybe plowing. Do they even give you garbage removal?

YEs they do.

Then taken a similarly valued house - they'll have 2.2 rugrats that need to get their asses shipped off to school.

Can't blame the resident, blame the union/negotiator/townboard that allowed school taxes to clearly get out of hand.

Financially speaking - what do you think brings more benefit to a Town -- a 100,000 sf big box store that pays $200,000 in taxes? Or the the 30 new homes (at say $200k each) that would be needed (paying $7k a year in taxes each) to generate as much revenue?

The homes. Quality of life. I pay about $5400 in total I think for taxes including the star discount. FOR services the town provides. WTF, they ain't mowing my lawn, they ain't doing much of anything except plowing and picking up 1 garbage can a week for the most part. $5400 bucks. I don't care if they say... well your school taxes... are a big part of that. I get a bill that is 5400 simple as that. The town board allows the school to operate within the town and sends me a bill.

OK we have police protection. Yeah right. I don't see a cop sitting in front of my house protecting me. NO they are too busy scedualing court appointments to maximize thier overtime. ANd yes if my house got robbed they will come file a report. I'll give them that much.


30 homes = maybe 60 kids in the school system. Plus maintaining the additional infrastructure needed for those homes (plowing, paving, sewer, etc.).

If the developer pays in full for all the infrastructure when building that stuff it wouldn't be bad would it?. All the town would cover is the maintance cost. like plowing etc...

100,000 SF store - maybe the cops get called there a few times a month. Sure, the road in front of it needs to be plowed, but that would be needed even if the store wasn't there. They pay for their own garbage removal, and don't put any kids into the school system.

What makes more sense??

Make more sense but apparently the town board in cheektwoaga is doing something wrong. THey insisted building the mall and all the box builldings would keep taxes in line. In line to what? The move over taxed area in the USA.

[takethepowerback]

Therising... unfortunately, you're less than informed.

1. The project in question would be an infill in an older community with MORE THAN enough organization and institutional capacity to deal with what would amount to one or two small streets. Taxes received will more than cover additional plowing and garbage pick-up.

2. The nationally recognized number of people per new single family home is 3.5 people per unit. That means roughly 1.5 kids (assuming standard two parents). So it's not 2.2 "rugrats." And since Tonawanda has a shrinking population and small class size, no new teachers or classrooms are necessary and the taxes received will more than cover these new student needs.

3. All infrastructure constructed would be the responsibility of the developer. No cost to the city. And all new infrastructure is vastly improved and has an exponentially longer lifespan than the crumbling stuff currently in the ground in Tonawanda. So longterm O&M costs are less than the existing infrastucture while the homes pay the same tax rate. Again, it's win.

[Linda_D]

Originally Posted by takethepowerback

Therising... unfortunately, you're less than informed.

1. The project in question would be an infill in an older community with MORE THAN enough organization and institutional capacity to deal with what would amount to one or two small streets. Taxes received will more than cover additional plowing and garbage pick-up.

2. The nationally recognized number of people per new single family home is 3.5 people per unit. That means roughly 1.5 kids (assuming standard two parents). So it's not 2.2 "rugrats." And since Tonawanda has a shrinking population and small class size, no new teachers or classrooms are necessary and the taxes received will more than cover these new student needs.

3. All infrastructure constructed would be the responsibility of the developer. No cost to the city. And all new infrastructure is vastly improved and has an exponentially longer lifespan than the crumbling stuff currently in the ground in Tonawanda. So longterm O&M costs are less than the existing infrastucture while the homes pay the same tax rate. Again, it's win.

You bring up good points about how this project is different from the "standard" suburban housing development, especially the ones about the infrastructure and education costs.