Jones Store block..anybody care to explain what is going on?

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 9:07 am

Who owns it, who's got rights to develop on it, what tif district is it in....any information...this is getting crazy with Bridges, Time Equities, DST, who ever else all fighting over the same crap.

zonk · Post by **zonk** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:33 am

Archon, out of Dallas I believe, is the current owner. Time Equities (TE), New York, has a contract on the Jones Store and City Center Square. Closing date is unknown. Development rights for the Jones store are currently up in the air...Bridges used to have it but they lapsed. In light of TE involvement, all TIF, PIEA have been put on hold. There should be a proposal by TE for both properties soon...TIF continued their plan until 11/10...PIEA is being held at the City.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:11 pm

from today's biz journal:

The prospective owner of the former Jones Store Co. building and City Center Square in downtown Kansas City wants a property tax abatement to help finance improvements to the property.

Time Equities Inc.'s request, filed Oct. 30, could conflict with a tax increment financing proposal made by the owner of One Kansas City Place. The TIF request, from a group led by Larry Bridges, includes the Jones Store site.

Philip Gesue, Time Equities' acquisition director, said he's not deterred by Bridges' plan, which the Kansas City TIF Commission is to consider on Nov. 12.

"We are anticipating we will own the Jones Store site in the next month-and-a-half," Gesue said.

Gesue said he expects Kansas City officials to balance Time Equities' pursuit of tax abatement through Chapter 353 of the Missouri Urban Redevelopment Corporations Law with Bridges' TIF request.

Chapter 353 eliminates property taxes on improvements for 10 years and halves them for an additional 15 years.

TIF diverts city taxes generated by new business to offset developers' cost of building public improvements such as garages.

"The plan that's best for the public will be the successful plan," Gesue said.

Andi Udris, CEO of the Economic Development Corp. of Kansas City, said he expects to propose a solution by Friday, when packages for the upcoming TIF hearing will be distributed.

"We're going to propose a solution that will keep both parties happy," Udris said.

Still to be resolved are the garage's size -- Bridges wants 1,564 spaces, while Time Equities asks for 2,000 -- and its configuration. Spaces cost more to build below ground than above ground.

The garage is to be publicly owned.

If the 1200 Main TIF District is approved by the Kansas City, Bridges could gain control of the Jones Store site through eminent domain.

Charles Miller, a lawyer with Lewis Rice & Fingersh LC who represents Bridges, has said his client has considered condemnation but would prefer to negotiate a settlement.

Speed argues against litigation. Eminent domain could take years to resolve.

Bridges needs more parking to bring Waddell & Reed Financial Corp. to One Kansas City Place. The Overland Park-based mutual fund company would help fill space vacated by Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP, which is moving to a new headquarters at 2555 Grand Blvd. in Crown Center.

Time Equities' tax abatement request would help finance construction on the Jones Store block in addition to the garage, including new stores and apartments, an outdoor plaza and landscaping.

The New York-based developer hasn't set a budget for the work, Gesue said.

Time Equities wants enough parking to serve City Center Square, which has been short on parking since opening 25 years ago, as well as One Kansas City Place and other neighboring buildings.

Gesue said he has talked with One Kansas City Place's owners about the garage but hasn't reached agreement.

Bridges couldn't be reached for comment.

"Any development that goes on this site needs to be quality development," Gesue said. "What the public gets is a landmark building that makes a statement. What the developer gets is to build that without losing money."
REACH JIM DAVIS at 816-421-5900 or jdavis@bizjournals.com.

Â© 2003 American City Business Journals Inc

So no matter who ends up owning the Jones Store it's going to become a city owned garage either way? Anybody else confused or am I just an idiot?

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 6:22 pm

From what I've read, Bridges plan is completely dependent on Waddell and Reed moving downtown. If that does not happen, I'd be big money he'd sit on the property and not do anything. The Time Equities plan is not dependent on a potential new tenent. This plan would add more parking, and that would increase the marketability of Citi Center. So I think i'd go with the out of town developers. The in town folks don't have the best track record.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:02 pm

if time equities gets the property (i bet they do) Bridges could still use the garage to pull down W&R, right?

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 10:07 pm

Who gives a rip about W&R? I don't really. If we can land them, great. But they are corporate wellfare at it's worst. They have been jacking with both states now forever, they already left KCMO once and will probably do it again.

We need H&R Block, we need to do everything in our power to land Block Downtown. This is a worldwide, high profile company that has a proven track record of being a good urban KCMO corporate citizen. They have already done more for KC than companies much bigger like Sprint.

W&R doesn't care about Downtown, they just want a real cheap lease and once they get in, they will probably get tired of it in five years and start looking to move back to KS.

Bridges has done almost nothing for Downtown. They have office space, but they are not aggressive developers nor do they seem to do what's in the best interest of KC. Its just a real estate company. KC has not had an aggressive local developer since the Frank Morgan empire. We need some new blood, some out of town blood that will come in and aggressively develop property at higher densities and more mixed use.

Let the NY firm do their thing, so we might loose a few leased floors of One KC Place, the building will fill up even faster and at higher rates if Downtown was a more desirable place to be and from what I can see, the NY firm knows a little more about that than the local firms who have done nothing for 20 years.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 12:47 am

Grid...good point....and I agree

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 8:19 am

Good article in today's business section of the Star. In addition to the garage, the Times plan adds retail and housing, as well as an outdoor plaza to front the propsed south loop development. I like this plan a lot.

zonk · Post by **zonk** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 9:43 am

the latest indication is that W&R will move downtown...We'll see if it actually happens. Agreed...they are the poster child for corporate welfare!!!! The TE proposal is solid, and could possibly be done with conventional incentives (i.e. straight taxabatement, no super-TIF). I've seen the proposed layout and elevations, they are going to blow everyone away!!! Their plan could accomodate W & R if needed. However, their primary interest is providing more parking for City Center. Lets keep our fingers crossed that this time something might actually happen.

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:25 am

any of this sound familiar?

City failed with Maison project
-- Cincinnati Business Courier -- 1998-06-08: selected excerpts:

It must have been extremely frustrating for Cincinnati Economic Development Director Andi Udris and others negotiating for a Maison Blanche department store downtown to hear the news about Mercantile Stores' sale to Dillard's Inc. Years of negotiations were negated in an instant -- with nothing to show for them but a nearly empty building at Fifth and Race streets.
The city knew back in 1994 that it wanted to build a new department store for McAlpin's. The original idea was to have the store move from its Fourth Sreet location directly into the new digs, but as we all know, McAlpin's and parent Mercantile got tired of waiting and pulled
out of downtown in early 1996....

...But as the old saying goes, you make your own luck. And Cincinnati's history is one of interminable yakking, delays and directional switches. Getting the Lazarus store at Fountain Square West was the equivalent of completing a triathlon with a ball and chain attached to your foot. In that decade-long debacle, numerous development ideas bit the dust, leaving that prime real estate to serve as a parking lot for several years.

And we cringe at the thought of long-pending projects still undone -- an enlarged convention center, a Kroger store to serve the growing residential population downtown, a T.J. Maxx in the former Gidding Jenny building. The specter of what might ensue on the riverfront -- where a pell-mell rush to mega-retail was halted by city council -- is too painful to contemplate.

Cincinnati speaks wistfully of being a "gazelle" city -- but gazelles know how to run. This city is more like a hippopotamus ensconced in a major mud puddle. How to get moving? It would be helpful if city council would cooperate in changing its make-up so that someone would be in charge and have the power to make deals happen quickly. But that, too, is stuck.

Someone had better toss the hippo a rope, before we all sink.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:31 am

ahhhh, pretty pictures, everything must be alright...

From this.....

To this...

See, renderings...everything is cool.

TheDude · Post by **TheDude** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:34 am

if you want renderings, stop by BNIM or CDFM2 sometime, they have drawn thousands of dreams that never will be. but i agree, they are pretty pictures, those folks are very talented.

DanCa · Post by **DanCa** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:38 am

So are they going to close off the street to creat a pedestrian mall? That's what it sounded like in the article to me.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 11:45 am

Dude..I know, I was being "funny"

Dan...don't think so, just to the right of the picture on the extreme south part of the block will be greenspace where a surface lot now is.

zonk · Post by **zonk** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 3:06 pm

dude...somebody...explain to me why the city/EDC needs to be in the parking business?

Czar · Post by **Czar** » Tue Nov 04, 2003 3:09 pm

Time to get on board of the crazy train or get the hell out of the way!

FangKC · Post by **FangKC** » Wed Nov 05, 2003 2:07 am

I guess it's better to have developers fighting over the rights to develop a parcel of property than not having anyone interested at all. Hopefully, since there are two parties with different plans, the City will get to choose the better one and we'll all benefit.

KCRag Forum