Now that the mayor has met with Temple officials he is no longer bashing the Eagles over how they handle the rent with Temple. The truth is that both Temple and the Eagles feel that Temple would be better off with their own stadium
So at the meeting he focused on Temple's neighbors. Most of the community groups are looking for a handout so the way I see it, Temple needs to budget another $10 mil to $15 mil to make them happy. As they say you have to pay the piper. Grease some palms. We went thru this when we built the bball arena.
Temple also needs to show them how traffic, parking, trash and noise will be handled...
Now that the mayor has met with Temple officials he is no longer bashing the Eagles over how they handle the rent with Temple. The truth is that both Temple and the Eagles feel that Temple would be better off with their own stadium
So at the meeting he focused on Temple's neighbors. Most of the community groups are looking for a handout so the way I see it, Temple needs to budget another $10 mil to $15 mil to make them happy. As they say you have to pay the piper. Grease some palms. We went thru this when we built the bball arena.
Temple also needs to show them how traffic, parking, trash and noise will be handled...
You've left something out of your equation: What's in it for the Mayor and the councilpersons? Temple's paying out to the North Philly "community" doesn't add to the politicians' power or provide them with campaign funds. It won't be as easy as just writing a check.
(This post was last modified: 12-18-2015 05:13 AM by Enriquillo.)
(12-18-2015 09:00 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: Temple, you own the real estate yes? Draw up the plans and go get your permits.
Temple has the land and if it was this simple construction would be underway. Getting the permits is the issue so Temple is doing all their legwork (finding out which local civic groups will require a sizable “donation”) on the front end as opposed to filing for permits and then having the project held up forever by city hall. You don’t want to file for the permits only to then find out that you don’t have all the local “leaders” and the mayor’s office on your $ide.
There will be two budgets for this project, one for the actual construction of the stadium, and the second to pay for all the local “approval$” and sudden unforeseen zoning i$$ues that arise for a project this size.
A hidden camera clip from the latest stadium meeting is below.
(12-18-2015 09:00 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: Temple, you own the real estate yes? Draw up the plans and go get your permits.
Temple has the land and if it was this simple construction would be underway. Getting the permits is the issue so Temple is doing all their legwork (finding out which local civic groups will require a sizable “donation”) on the front end as opposed to filing for permits and then having the project held up forever by city hall. You don’t want to file for the permits only to then find out that you don’t have all the local “leaders” and the mayor’s office on your $ide.
There will be two budgets for this project, one for the actual construction of the stadium, and the second to pay for all the local “approval$” and sudden unforeseen zoning i$$ues that arise for a project this size.
A hidden camera clip from the latest stadium meeting is below.
We all know big boss city leaders need to get greased, however my tone would be we are building a stadium ......no need to meet with the mayor this early. The mayor does not issue permits, the appropriate dept does that. The mayor probably has no legal authority to stop the project, phuck him. Look if you are doing something controversial like eminent domain that is different.
Tulane had issues with our neighbors and the City as well. In our case, it was upper crust neighbors. It delayed the stadium project. At one point, the university filed a lawsuit against the City. It all worked out in the end, although I wish that our former president had flexed the University's considerable muscle a little more, because we made some concessions that we shouldn't have.
I guess it must be different in my old home state of PA, but here in LA, state institutions can pretty much ignore city requirements. They don't even have to get a building permit.
If I were Temple, I would be focusing on the economic benefits of this stadium to the surrounding community (beyond what Temple already affords). Seems like the neighborhood wants to focus on any perceived negatives. Here's the reality...
As most any college town/area knows, there is an economic benefit to Saturday football games in the fall. I would have to assume there are bars, sandwich shops, stores, pizza places, etc...around Temple in the Broad Street area. Putting a 35K stadium in a place where parking is a premium means those places will be jam packed on Gamedays. Students will be everywhere, parents coming in...and they will all want to be within walking distance of the stadium. Property values will be positively affected. This could have a multi-block affect. In other words, this should be looked at as an opportunity to redevelop the neighborhood.
So focus on the landowners, focus on the business owners...long time residents, not so much. In reality they are impediments to economic progress. They are not entitled to "rent" their space. This is an opportunity for the neighborhood to go to market rate prices and reduce/limit subsidized situations. Yeah, Grandma may have to move...that's life.
(This post was last modified: 12-18-2015 10:02 AM by HP-TBDPITL.)
(12-18-2015 09:00 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote: Temple, you own the real estate yes? Draw up the plans and go get your permits.
Temple has the land and if it was this simple construction would be underway. Getting the permits is the issue so Temple is doing all their legwork (finding out which local civic groups will require a sizable “donation”) on the front end as opposed to filing for permits and then having the project held up forever by city hall. You don’t want to file for the permits only to then find out that you don’t have all the local “leaders” and the mayor’s office on your $ide.
There will be two budgets for this project, one for the actual construction of the stadium, and the second to pay for all the local “approval$” and sudden unforeseen zoning i$$ues that arise for a project this size.
A hidden camera clip from the latest stadium meeting is below.
We all know big boss city leaders need to get greased, however my tone would be we are building a stadium ......no need to meet with the mayor this early. The mayor does not issue permits, the appropriate dept does that. The mayor probably has no legal authority to stop the project, phuck him. Look if you are doing something controversial like eminent domain that is different.
Like it or not it all comes back to the Mayor’s office. I checked out the Philadelphia Department of Licensees and Inspections who issues all the building permits, enforces zoning rules and does all the inspections. It’s run by Carlton Williams, he answers to Alan Greenberger, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, Deputy Mayor Everett Gillison and Mayor Michael Nutter (soon to be Mayor Jim Kenney).
It might be difference in other parts of the country but you’re not building a project with the size and visibility of a football stadium in a city like Philadelphia without the blessing of the Mayor’s office.
The mayor elect is just doing what any astute politician would do and he has no direct authority regarding zoning approvals anyway. Darrell Clarke the City Council rep for Temple's district is the key person in all of this and fortunately for Temple they have employees who have a better grasp of the situation than message board posters.
The broad framework for neighborhood relations already exists outside of traffic management and stadium design. Temple has been working with Clarke for about a year on establishing a special services district in the neighborhood. It won't be as large in scope as the University City Services District that Penn helped to launch, but it will provide similar services e.g. street cleaning, enhanced security services, improved lighting, etc. The majority of the operating funds are to come from Temple and area landlords. The city may provide some funds as well. Some landlords are opposed to the idea, but ultimately the NID should get approved and I think that Temple moving forward with a stadium probably increases the odds that the NID happens.
Temple already has an agreement with the Laborers District Council to build a job training center at the former William Penn site where the new athletic fields are being built currently. They'll do set asides for neighborhood trainees for stadium construction and operations jobs and also for jobs with the special services district.
There will still be vocal neighborhood opposition but this will give Clarke enough cover and incentive to support the stadium. The beauty of this strategy is that Temple benefits from it. It's not just flat bribe paid to a local community development corporation controlled by a politician.
The UCSD has had a very positive effect on the neighborhoods surrounding Penn and Drexel. Though Temple doesn't have Penn's deep pockets, they can still create an NID that will improve the neighborhood.
Edited to add: Temple needs City Council to approve decommissioning two blocks of 15th street in order to build the stadium. There's all sorts of consternation each time one of the universities in the city makes such a request. So, this isn't just a zoning matter. Clarke is City Council President. That's why he's so important in this process.
(This post was last modified: 12-18-2015 10:38 AM by LostInSpace.)
(12-18-2015 10:13 AM)LostInSpace Wrote: Temple has been working with Clarke for about a year on establishing a special services district in the neighborhood.
A Special Services District. That's the answer! The Mayor appoints the managing director at $250,000/year, and the Councilman gets the deputy director for, say, $200,000. Sounds like a lot, but they'll need to kick some of that income back up the chain. Both jobs, of course, require leased SUVs to make up for the kickbacks. Should be room for plenty of no-show jobs too. Then there's the law firms and consultants - more money flowing up.
Finally, somebody here who speaks Philly! Those of you who are taking the "community" as something other than pawns to be exploited are what Mr. Dangerfield would call "boy scouts".
(12-18-2015 10:01 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote: If I were Temple, I would be focusing on the economic benefits of this stadium to the surrounding community (beyond what Temple already affords). Seems like the neighborhood wants to focus on any perceived negatives. Here's the reality...
As most any college town/area knows, there is an economic benefit to Saturday football games in the fall. I would have to assume there are bars, sandwich shops, stores, pizza places, etc...around Temple in the Broad Street area. Putting a 35K stadium in a place where parking is a premium means those places will be jam packed on Gamedays. Students will be everywhere, parents coming in...and they will all want to be within walking distance of the stadium. Property values will be positively affected. This could have a multi-block affect. In other words, this should be looked at as an opportunity to redevelop the neighborhood.
So focus on the landowners, focus on the business owners...long time residents, not so much. In reality they are impediments to economic progress. They are not entitled to "rent" their space. This is an opportunity for the neighborhood to go to market rate prices and reduce/limit subsidized situations. Yeah, Grandma may have to move...that's life.
(12-18-2015 10:01 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote: If I were Temple, I would be focusing on the economic benefits of this stadium to the surrounding community (beyond what Temple already affords). Seems like the neighborhood wants to focus on any perceived negatives. Here's the reality...
As most any college town/area knows, there is an economic benefit to Saturday football games in the fall. I would have to assume there are bars, sandwich shops, stores, pizza places, etc...around Temple in the Broad Street area. Putting a 35K stadium in a place where parking is a premium means those places will be jam packed on Gamedays. Students will be everywhere, parents coming in...and they will all want to be within walking distance of the stadium. Property values will be positively affected. This could have a multi-block affect. In other words, this should be looked at as an opportunity to redevelop the neighborhood.
So focus on the landowners, focus on the business owners...long time residents, not so much. In reality they are impediments to economic progress. They are not entitled to "rent" their space. This is an opportunity for the neighborhood to go to market rate prices and reduce/limit subsidized situations. Yeah, Grandma may have to move...that's life.
They are not black owned businesses, so that isn't the issue.
(12-18-2015 10:43 AM)Enriquillo Wrote: A Special Services District. That's the answer! The Mayor appoints the managing director at $250,000/year, and the Councilman gets the deputy director for, say, $200,000. Sounds like a lot, but they'll need to kick some of that income back up the chain. Both jobs, of course, require leased SUVs to make up for the kickbacks. Should be room for plenty of no-show jobs too. Then there's the law firms and consultants - more money flowing up.
Finally, somebody here who speaks Philly! Those of you who are taking the "community" as something other than pawns to be exploited are what Mr. Dangerfield would call "boy scouts".
The NID is generally speaking a good idea. As for what you wrote, that's not how NID's work. They don't create city patronage jobs and that's not Clarke's angle either. His financial interest is in getting campaign contributions from real estate developers who support the NID concept. His political interest and Temple's political interest is in having something tangible they can point to as an effort to calm tensions and provide better services in a rapidly changing neighborhood. There are examples of successful NIDs in the city currently, but for a variety of reasons getting sufficient support to launch one in North Philly is a much more challenging task.
Clarke has wanted the NID to happen for a good while and the current attempt is the outcome of a failed attempt to create an NID in which Temple wasn't really involved. Given the stadium issue the timing is good for Temple to participate. The hard core Temple haters are never going to be appeased. Clarke and Temple both know that. But it's a win nonetheless for Temple and Clarke if they get the NID established.
(12-18-2015 10:01 AM)HP-TBDPITL Wrote: If I were Temple, I would be focusing on the economic benefits of this stadium to the surrounding community (beyond what Temple already affords). Seems like the neighborhood wants to focus on any perceived negatives. Here's the reality...
As most any college town/area knows, there is an economic benefit to Saturday football games in the fall. I would have to assume there are bars, sandwich shops, stores, pizza places, etc...around Temple in the Broad Street area. Putting a 35K stadium in a place where parking is a premium means those places will be jam packed on Gamedays. Students will be everywhere, parents coming in...and they will all want to be within walking distance of the stadium. Property values will be positively affected. This could have a multi-block affect. In other words, this should be looked at as an opportunity to redevelop the neighborhood.
So focus on the landowners, focus on the business owners...long time residents, not so much. In reality they are impediments to economic progress. They are not entitled to "rent" their space. This is an opportunity for the neighborhood to go to market rate prices and reduce/limit subsidized situations. Yeah, Grandma may have to move...that's life.
They are not black owned businesses, so that isn't the issue.
Not sure what that has to do with it. I'm talking about "Green" though...money flowing in the College area, money for parking, money at the businesses, money for additional rents at off campus housing, and finally (listen up Mr. Mayor) money for taxes, both sales taxes and rising property tax value. You weren't going to get that money from Temple renting the Linc. So, in all reality, especially with a $100 million or so construction project happening in North Philly...HOW SHORTSIGHTED WAS THIS MAYOR WITH HIS ORIGINAL STATEMENTS ABOUT DOING THIS LIKE PITT. Not sure if this guy is a businessman or not, but mouthing off before you know anything about it is not good leadership. And you are the face of the city.