Anonymous
12/12/2023 19:28
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
It’s better for the developer.
Of course. The developer who is likely a heavy donor to the mayor, right?
Anyone see this? Does not bode all that well re: management of this project or the silly co-housing ideas. Bowser's agencies are administrative disasters.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/dc-sold-properties-for-affordable-housing-half-are-still-vacant/ar-AA1loOwz
Any evidence that ground leases are better for the developer? The article cited above says it is a better deal for the owner/city
Also any evidence that a hypothetical developer will be a heavy donor to the mayor? I'm sincerely asking. I did a little digging and found a scandal regarding a donor from 2017:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-council-report-bowser-administration-favored-top-donor-in-contracting/2017/06/14/5799a712-5134-11e7-b064-828ba60fbb98_story.html
But I don't see any other issues or anything in the past six years...
Whether or not it's a good deal for the city will entirely depend on the terms of the lease. Both the amount of rent and any potential costs borne by the city.
The only thing that is certain is that it won't be anywhere near as rosy as the proponents proclaim.
The history of this mayor, this council and this ANC does not fill one with confidence. There will be more shoes to drop.
Anonymous
12/12/2023 19:00
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
It’s better for the developer.
Of course. The developer who is likely a heavy donor to the mayor, right?
Anyone see this? Does not bode all that well re: management of this project or the silly co-housing ideas. Bowser's agencies are administrative disasters.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/dc-sold-properties-for-affordable-housing-half-are-still-vacant/ar-AA1loOwz
Any evidence that ground leases are better for the developer? The article cited above says it is a better deal for the owner/city
Also any evidence that a hypothetical developer will be a heavy donor to the mayor? I'm sincerely asking. I did a little digging and found a scandal regarding a donor from 2017:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dc-politics/dc-council-report-bowser-administration-favored-top-donor-in-contracting/2017/06/14/5799a712-5134-11e7-b064-828ba60fbb98_story.html
But I don't see any other issues or anything in the past six years...
Anonymous
12/12/2023 18:35
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
It’s better for the developer.
Of course. The developer who is likely a heavy donor to the mayor, right?
Anyone see this? Does not bode all that well re: management of this project or the silly co-housing ideas. Bowser's agencies are administrative disasters.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/dc-sold-properties-for-affordable-housing-half-are-still-vacant/ar-AA1loOwz
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:58
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
I'm sorry but 99 year ground leases are not normal in the US. Isn't that the sports stadium model?
"In a long-term ground-lease structure, a private party or governmental entity owns a development site, leases the land to a developer and receives rent over the term of the lease. This structure has become a very common element in the US real estate market......For landowners, a ground-lease structure creates plenty of benefits. A successful development project by the ground tenant creates a long-term secure passive income stream. Long-term ownership is retained. Control over development can be exercised, a critical issue for public land owners. Ownership of the improvements vests in the landowner at the end of the lease term.
Public-entity landowners have become more appreciative of a ground-lease structure as an alternative to sale. In addition to realising the economic benefits of a public/private partnership, public landowners can try to achieve social goals in a proprietary capacity that can go beyond what they may do in their governmental capacity. These can include imposition of architectural and design requirements, affordable housing requirements in rental housing developments, local and disadvantaged worker hiring obligations, prevailing wage requirements, and other public benefits, such as public parking, day-care facilities, community rooms, and bicycle storage and repair operations. The ground-lease structure can allow the governmental entity to impose these costs on the developer in exchange for the developer’s paying less rent, thus avoiding the scrutiny and challenges that might arise if the costs appeared in an actual governmental budget."
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a590ad1-647d-46ad-8a70-0505a31fa0a9
This all sounds lofty and inspirational. But what is the minimum amount of affordable housing that this project must contain in order for a developer to be able to develop this public asset?
Let's just be clear on issues: It was asserted that a ground-lease was uncommon and a bad deal for the city. I was responding to that assertion.
On to this distinct assertion:
Regular IZ set-aside requirements for affordable units are generally as follows:
8%-8.33% of the total residential floor area for buildings constructed out of steel and concrete, and
10%-12.5% of the total residential floor area for buildings constructed out of wood.
https://planning.dc.gov/inclusionaryzoning#:~:text=Regular%20IZ%20set-aside%20requirements%20for%20affordable%20units%20are,floor%20area%20for%20buildings%20constructed%20out%20of%20wood.
PP here, and I shouldn't have posted so quick. This may not be the most accurate. Disregard and I'll try to find it. PP above says 30%...
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:58
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
I'm sorry but 99 year ground leases are not normal in the US. Isn't that the sports stadium model?
"In a long-term ground-lease structure, a private party or governmental entity owns a development site, leases the land to a developer and receives rent over the term of the lease. This structure has become a very common element in the US real estate market......For landowners, a ground-lease structure creates plenty of benefits. A successful development project by the ground tenant creates a long-term secure passive income stream. Long-term ownership is retained. Control over development can be exercised, a critical issue for public land owners. Ownership of the improvements vests in the landowner at the end of the lease term.
Public-entity landowners have become more appreciative of a ground-lease structure as an alternative to sale. In addition to realising the economic benefits of a public/private partnership, public landowners can try to achieve social goals in a proprietary capacity that can go beyond what they may do in their governmental capacity. These can include imposition of architectural and design requirements, affordable housing requirements in rental housing developments, local and disadvantaged worker hiring obligations, prevailing wage requirements, and other public benefits, such as public parking, day-care facilities, community rooms, and bicycle storage and repair operations. The ground-lease structure can allow the governmental entity to impose these costs on the developer in exchange for the developer’s paying less rent, thus avoiding the scrutiny and challenges that might arise if the costs appeared in an actual governmental budget."
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a590ad1-647d-46ad-8a70-0505a31fa0a9
This all sounds lofty and inspirational. But what is the minimum amount of affordable housing that this project must contain in order for a developer to be able to develop this public asset?
Let's just be clear on issues: It was asserted that a ground-lease was uncommon and a bad deal for the city. I was responding to that assertion.
On to this distinct assertion:
Regular IZ set-aside requirements for affordable units are generally as follows:
8%-8.33% of the total residential floor area for buildings constructed out of steel and concrete, and
10%-12.5% of the total residential floor area for buildings constructed out of wood.
https://planning.dc.gov/inclusionaryzoning#:~:text=Regular%20IZ%20set-aside%20requirements%20for%20affordable%20units%20are,floor%20area%20for%20buildings%20constructed%20out%20of%20wood.
IZ doesn't really apply here because of the surplussing and city RFP process. Per my previous post, 30% will be the minimum.
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:56
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
I'm sorry but 99 year ground leases are not normal in the US. Isn't that the sports stadium model?
"In a long-term ground-lease structure, a private party or governmental entity owns a development site, leases the land to a developer and receives rent over the term of the lease. This structure has become a very common element in the US real estate market......For landowners, a ground-lease structure creates plenty of benefits. A successful development project by the ground tenant creates a long-term secure passive income stream. Long-term ownership is retained. Control over development can be exercised, a critical issue for public land owners. Ownership of the improvements vests in the landowner at the end of the lease term.
Public-entity landowners have become more appreciative of a ground-lease structure as an alternative to sale. In addition to realising the economic benefits of a public/private partnership, public landowners can try to achieve social goals in a proprietary capacity that can go beyond what they may do in their governmental capacity. These can include imposition of architectural and design requirements, affordable housing requirements in rental housing developments, local and disadvantaged worker hiring obligations, prevailing wage requirements, and other public benefits, such as public parking, day-care facilities, community rooms, and bicycle storage and repair operations. The ground-lease structure can allow the governmental entity to impose these costs on the developer in exchange for the developer’s paying less rent, thus avoiding the scrutiny and challenges that might arise if the costs appeared in an actual governmental budget."
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a590ad1-647d-46ad-8a70-0505a31fa0a9
This all sounds lofty and inspirational. But what is the minimum amount of affordable housing that this project must contain in order for a developer to be able to develop this public asset?
By city law, 30% is the minimum. But it could be more depending on the AMI requirements and what the developer is willing to offer.
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:56
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:I think social housing is nice in theory, but do we really expect people to pay market rates for units in a building where 2/3 are affordable or deeply affordable? How does that work in other cities?
The required MPDU (moderately priced dwelling units) can be somewhat smaller or have less expensive internal finishes than the market rate units. They just need to blend in with the rest of the units. You pay more, you get more.
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:54
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
I'm sorry but 99 year ground leases are not normal in the US. Isn't that the sports stadium model?
"In a long-term ground-lease structure, a private party or governmental entity owns a development site, leases the land to a developer and receives rent over the term of the lease. This structure has become a very common element in the US real estate market......For landowners, a ground-lease structure creates plenty of benefits. A successful development project by the ground tenant creates a long-term secure passive income stream. Long-term ownership is retained. Control over development can be exercised, a critical issue for public land owners. Ownership of the improvements vests in the landowner at the end of the lease term.
Public-entity landowners have become more appreciative of a ground-lease structure as an alternative to sale. In addition to realising the economic benefits of a public/private partnership, public landowners can try to achieve social goals in a proprietary capacity that can go beyond what they may do in their governmental capacity. These can include imposition of architectural and design requirements, affordable housing requirements in rental housing developments, local and disadvantaged worker hiring obligations, prevailing wage requirements, and other public benefits, such as public parking, day-care facilities, community rooms, and bicycle storage and repair operations. The ground-lease structure can allow the governmental entity to impose these costs on the developer in exchange for the developer’s paying less rent, thus avoiding the scrutiny and challenges that might arise if the costs appeared in an actual governmental budget."
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a590ad1-647d-46ad-8a70-0505a31fa0a9
This all sounds lofty and inspirational. But what is the minimum amount of affordable housing that this project must contain in order for a developer to be able to develop this public asset?
Let's just be clear on issues: It was asserted that a ground-lease was uncommon and a bad deal for the city. I was responding to that assertion.
On to this distinct assertion:
Regular IZ set-aside requirements for affordable units are generally as follows:
8%-8.33% of the total residential floor area for buildings constructed out of steel and concrete, and
10%-12.5% of the total residential floor area for buildings constructed out of wood.
https://planning.dc.gov/inclusionaryzoning#:~:text=Regular%20IZ%20set-aside%20requirements%20for%20affordable%20units%20are,floor%20area%20for%20buildings%20constructed%20out%20of%20wood.
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:35
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
I think social housing is nice in theory, but do we really expect people to pay market rates for units in a building where 2/3 are affordable or deeply affordable? How does that work in other cities?
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:33
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
I'm sorry but 99 year ground leases are not normal in the US. Isn't that the sports stadium model?
"In a long-term ground-lease structure, a private party or governmental entity owns a development site, leases the land to a developer and receives rent over the term of the lease. This structure has become a very common element in the US real estate market......For landowners, a ground-lease structure creates plenty of benefits. A successful development project by the ground tenant creates a long-term secure passive income stream. Long-term ownership is retained. Control over development can be exercised, a critical issue for public land owners. Ownership of the improvements vests in the landowner at the end of the lease term.
Public-entity landowners have become more appreciative of a ground-lease structure as an alternative to sale. In addition to realising the economic benefits of a public/private partnership, public landowners can try to achieve social goals in a proprietary capacity that can go beyond what they may do in their governmental capacity. These can include imposition of architectural and design requirements, affordable housing requirements in rental housing developments, local and disadvantaged worker hiring obligations, prevailing wage requirements, and other public benefits, such as public parking, day-care facilities, community rooms, and bicycle storage and repair operations. The ground-lease structure can allow the governmental entity to impose these costs on the developer in exchange for the developer’s paying less rent, thus avoiding the scrutiny and challenges that might arise if the costs appeared in an actual governmental budget."
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a590ad1-647d-46ad-8a70-0505a31fa0a9
This all sounds lofty and inspirational. But what is the minimum amount of affordable housing that this project must contain in order for a developer to be able to develop this public asset?
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:10
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
Are you correct or is the poster after you?
What are the size of these lease payments?
I don't know what the exact terms are, because no ground lease has been executed. But if you want to know more about how common these are, here are some sources:
https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/market-sectors/real-estate-investing/commercial-real-estate/ground-lease/
https://www.rockefellergroup.com/news/jv-led-by-stonebridge-and-rockefeller-group-officially-breaks-ground-on-washington-d-c-s-first-new-office-development-of-2023/
https://dmped.dc.gov/page/waterfront-station-ii
We don't know what the projected lease payments are or how much "affordable" housing the development will contain.
But the future for the "Chevy Chase Civic Core" is welcoming, vibrant, inclusive, equitable and glorious!*
* for the crony developer that is chosen.
Sure, be mad that the specifics aren't worked out yet. And it is fair to be skeptical that the goal will be achieved. But it isn't wrong to have a goal/vision.
I was just answering the question about 99y ground leases. They are common and the city does generate significant revenue from them. It is not as though they are getting 0 and forfeiting 99 years of property taxes.
Actually they are common. There are several public facilities just in NW DC that has them including the West End library and the Apple store on Mt Vernon Square.
That is literally what I said?
Anonymous
12/12/2023 17:05
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
Are you correct or is the poster after you?
What are the size of these lease payments?
I don't know what the exact terms are, because no ground lease has been executed. But if you want to know more about how common these are, here are some sources:
https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/market-sectors/real-estate-investing/commercial-real-estate/ground-lease/
https://www.rockefellergroup.com/news/jv-led-by-stonebridge-and-rockefeller-group-officially-breaks-ground-on-washington-d-c-s-first-new-office-development-of-2023/
https://dmped.dc.gov/page/waterfront-station-ii
We don't know what the projected lease payments are or how much "affordable" housing the development will contain.
But the future for the "Chevy Chase Civic Core" is welcoming, vibrant, inclusive, equitable and glorious!*
* for the crony developer that is chosen.
Sure, be mad that the specifics aren't worked out yet. And it is fair to be skeptical that the goal will be achieved. But it isn't wrong to have a goal/vision.
I was just answering the question about 99y ground leases. They are common and the city does generate significant revenue from them. It is not as though they are getting 0 and forfeiting 99 years of property taxes.
Actually they are common. There are several public facilities just in NW DC that has them including the West End library and the Apple store on Mt Vernon Square.
Anonymous
12/12/2023 16:57
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
I'm sorry but 99 year ground leases are not normal in the US. Isn't that the sports stadium model?
"In a long-term ground-lease structure, a private party or governmental entity owns a development site, leases the land to a developer and receives rent over the term of the lease. This structure has become a very common element in the US real estate market......For landowners, a ground-lease structure creates plenty of benefits. A successful development project by the ground tenant creates a long-term secure passive income stream. Long-term ownership is retained. Control over development can be exercised, a critical issue for public land owners. Ownership of the improvements vests in the landowner at the end of the lease term.
Public-entity landowners have become more appreciative of a ground-lease structure as an alternative to sale. In addition to realising the economic benefits of a public/private partnership, public landowners can try to achieve social goals in a proprietary capacity that can go beyond what they may do in their governmental capacity. These can include imposition of architectural and design requirements, affordable housing requirements in rental housing developments, local and disadvantaged worker hiring obligations, prevailing wage requirements, and other public benefits, such as public parking, day-care facilities, community rooms, and bicycle storage and repair operations. The ground-lease structure can allow the governmental entity to impose these costs on the developer in exchange for the developer’s paying less rent, thus avoiding the scrutiny and challenges that might arise if the costs appeared in an actual governmental budget."
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=4a590ad1-647d-46ad-8a70-0505a31fa0a9
Anonymous
12/12/2023 16:53
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
Are you correct or is the poster after you?
What are the size of these lease payments?
I don't know what the exact terms are, because no ground lease has been executed. But if you want to know more about how common these are, here are some sources:
https://www.fool.com/investing/stock-market/market-sectors/real-estate-investing/commercial-real-estate/ground-lease/
https://www.rockefellergroup.com/news/jv-led-by-stonebridge-and-rockefeller-group-officially-breaks-ground-on-washington-d-c-s-first-new-office-development-of-2023/
https://dmped.dc.gov/page/waterfront-station-ii
We don't know what the projected lease payments are or how much "affordable" housing the development will contain.
But the future for the "Chevy Chase Civic Core" is welcoming, vibrant, inclusive, equitable and glorious!*
* for the crony developer that is chosen.
Sure, be mad that the specifics aren't worked out yet. And it is fair to be skeptical that the goal will be achieved. But it isn't wrong to have a goal/vision.
I was just answering the question about 99y ground leases. They are common and the city does generate significant revenue from them. It is not as though they are getting 0 and forfeiting 99 years of property taxes.
Anonymous
12/12/2023 16:29
Subject: Chevy Chase Community Center Redevelopment
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:This does not bode well for downtown. Wonder how tightening credit may impact the CC project?
https://www.bizjournals.com/washington/news/2023/12/07/dc-madison-highland-office-conversion-treasury.html
Not as much. Because DC is retaining the land and entering into a 99-year ground lease with the developer, the developer will not have to pay the land acquisition costs for the Civic Core. This provides more project flexibility.
How is that better? DC takes on the main risk + doesn't get any property tax revenue.
DC gets lease payments equivalent or greater than tax revenue. It is locked in and a safer revenue stream for the city. It is a normal and common practice.
I'm sorry but 99 year ground leases are not normal in the US. Isn't that the sports stadium model?
That's the only model the DC government has experience with "negotiating."
All this for rental apartments? Wonder what the overlap is between supporters of this and opponents of the stadium deals.