Six Light

Come here for discussion about the new downtown entertainment district.
User avatar
Bill Durban
Parking Garage
Parking Garage
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 11:07 am

Re: Six Light

Post by Bill Durban » Thu Mar 09, 2017 3:15 pm

What's the purpose in Cordish throwing out Fives and Sixes whenever they aren't yet willing to give details about Three and Four? Are they just trying to get the locals to salivate?

UrbanKC
Pad site
Pad site
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2016 10:21 am

Re: Six Light

Post by UrbanKC » Thu Mar 09, 2017 4:59 pm

Bill Durban wrote:What's the purpose in Cordish throwing out Fives and Sixes whenever they aren't yet willing to give details about Three and Four? Are they just trying to get the locals to salivate?
Probably all in negotiations with the city, and discussing market, funding, land ownership, other deals etc...

Things don't really have to be "public" until the initial planning and development submittal. Then, whatever is on the plans is public. But they don't have to voluntarily release any information.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16780
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Six Light

Post by DaveKCMO » Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:56 pm

one would hope that since Five and Six are probably not part of the original development agreement that the city could negotiate better terms?

User avatar
Bill Durban
Parking Garage
Parking Garage
Posts: 25
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 11:07 am

Re: Six Light

Post by Bill Durban » Thu Mar 09, 2017 7:48 pm

UrbanKC wrote: Things don't really have to be "public" until the initial planning and development submittal. Then, whatever is on the plans is public. But they don't have to voluntarily release any information.
So I guess we could assume then that both Three and Four Light are pretty much a done deal since they are now looking at development beyond.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6967
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Six Light

Post by flyingember » Thu Mar 09, 2017 7:54 pm

Bill Durban wrote:
UrbanKC wrote: Things don't really have to be "public" until the initial planning and development submittal. Then, whatever is on the plans is public. But they don't have to voluntarily release any information.
So I guess we could assume then that both Three and Four Light are pretty much a done deal since they are now looking at development beyond.
For Three they already announced ground breaking before Two is finished. We don't have to assume on that one.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4643
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Six Light

Post by earthling » Thu Mar 09, 2017 8:27 pm

And supposedly 4 will be targeted as a hotel/residential combo. Would think they'd want an operator or flag identified before committing.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6967
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Six Light

Post by flyingember » Thu Mar 09, 2017 10:00 pm

earthling wrote:And supposedly 4 will be targeted as a hotel/residential combo. Would think they'd want an operator or flag identified before committing.
If a hotel, who says they haven't? There's a lot of companies that want to control announcements.

User avatar
grovester
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3768
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Six Light

Post by grovester » Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:05 pm

I would venture that had other developers know the kind of deal KC was willing to make, there might have been other suitors. I don't fault Cordish for being business people, but I don't buy any hint of altruism or urban heroism.

geeman68
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 656
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 12:22 am
Location: Kansas City, MO

Re: Six Light

Post by geeman68 » Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:58 pm

It would be great if they offered to develop the "north loop" section.

KCTOGA
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 120
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 12:06 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Six Light

Post by KCTOGA » Fri Mar 10, 2017 5:00 pm

Cordish deserves a lot of credit. After transforming A homeless area, just rite stamp CO. & little else after 6pm. Doubt to many companies were interested or would be sticking around and have this much of a vested interest as they do.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Power & Light
Power & Light
Posts: 28755
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: Six Light

Post by KCPowercat » Fri Mar 10, 2017 5:51 pm

StrangerThings wrote:
grovester wrote:Yeah, "buy in" is not the term I would use to describe the Cordish position during the original P&L negotiations.

I don't remember any other developers willing to throw in a few hundred million dollars and actually be able to follow through. Congrats to Cordish for being good negotiators, blame the city for making the deal they did. They've learned their lesson now.
Yes Cordish deserves credit for coming to the table at the beginning, nobody is saying any different. Nothing wrong with wanting more developers downtown...especially ones that might not put big white "X LIGHT" on top of each building. Variety is the spice of life.

User avatar
grovester
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3768
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Six Light

Post by grovester » Fri Mar 10, 2017 5:59 pm

Back on point, diversification is always a sound strategy. If not for the streetcar, I think the perceived "success" of the P&L would still be up for debate.

User avatar
grovester
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3768
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Six Light

Post by grovester » Sat Mar 11, 2017 12:28 am

Hey Buddy, I'm happy that the P&L is there, it jump started downtown revitalization. I don't think the city owes anything to Cordish.

It was just a transaction.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 13191
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Six Light

Post by FangKC » Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:47 am

StrangerThings wrote:Why bring in other developers when you've got a good working relationship with Cordish? Not to mention, It would be a slap in the face to essentially seek out other developers when only a few like Cordish were willing to buy in to the original downtown revitalization idea. "Hey Cordish, invest millions with us to help turn around downtown so we can ultimately bring in competition to you guys."
It was one deal. The City doesn't owe Cordish exclusivity. Any developer is always welcomed by the City to propose, or bid, on a development anywhere in the City. Any city government that only worked with one developer would be subject to accusations of favoritism. Relying on primarily one developer can lead to stagnation. This had severe ramifications in the past with Stan Durwood in the South Loop, and Tower Properties in the North Loop.

Other developers doing projects might produce better developments, and variety. One might argue that MAC Properties, DST, Sunflower Development, Shirley Helzberg, and Brad Nicholson, have created as much change in Kansas City by doing a variety of smaller projects, which en masse are as important as what Cordish has done.

Keep in mind that Cordish could sell out at any point, just like Highwoods sold most of the Plaza. Corporations aren't necessarily loyal to cities. Even ones that were founded in the city can leave it.
Last edited by FangKC on Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4643
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Six Light

Post by earthling » Sat Mar 11, 2017 1:22 pm

I sense someone is closely affiliated with Cordish and desires unrealistic exclusivity. Should be obvious that the more big ticket hirise developers the merrier. The City and downtown orgs need to get the word out to big ticket national hirise developers - downtown living demand is high, KC is pulling off over $2/sqft and free streetcar is huge benefit to tie many downtown services together.

aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12251
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Six Light

Post by aknowledgeableperson » Sat Mar 11, 2017 3:55 pm

I sure the word is out there. And it has been shouted out more than once.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6967
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Six Light

Post by flyingember » Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:50 pm

There's nothing wrong with a period of exclusivity that comes with being able to build on city land financially, logistically, etc, but it should have an end date. Like they have to meet certain benchmarks along the planning process in a set timeframe.

Think of the idea of having a five year contract to develop city parcels to city specs and it comes with a need to do any city project wanted.
This contract should start with a set of stringent requirements and an open bid process of course.

Go with the contract type with renewal periods where the terms can be modified if wished and the contract ended or continued as is.


A private project the land owner can do whatever they want with identifying developers and having exclusives.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6967
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Six Light

Post by flyingember » Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:17 pm

The problem is not doing something is a fundamental property right.

I can go out into the country, buy a piece of land and do nothing on it if I want. The same applies for a property downtown.

There's ways to encourage not doing nothing like fees for certain uses, maintenance standards and such but that's not requiring someone to build. I open a lot of tickets for tall grass and weed removal. It's an easy place to build up the fines for a truly deadbeat landowner.

But you can see how the methods aren't forcing someone to do something but by ideally making it expensive not to do something.

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 4362
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Six Light

Post by beautyfromashes » Thu Mar 16, 2017 1:46 pm

It seems waiting/pandering to one developer is part of the reason DT took so long to happen in the first place. God love Stan Durwood, but we waited way too long for his plan to come to fruition.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6967
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Six Light

Post by flyingember » Thu Mar 16, 2017 3:20 pm

This is why I like the idea of multipliers on property taxes in certain zoning types, like UR districts where the goal is new construction or renovations.

The land and building value would remain the same, this would be a special assessment on the city property taxes.

Pick a random parcel downtown. Each parcel has a value which is changed by it's position relative to another parcel but is also largely based on the land use. This would be an assessment that applies as if this parcel would assess by the county for much more. ex if you are a parking lot surrounded by 5 story buildings you would special assess close to as if you're a five story building.

Each building has a multiplier based on distance and position. A building on the same block would be 0.9, on a corner across would be 0.95 and touching or across the street 1.0, whatever makes the most sense. Farther away the multipliers become 0.8, 0.6, 0.5, 0.3 and so on. These numbers would be before any abatements, it would be the true assessed value and city building value would apply to the math. The idea is the closest buildings have the most impact so they affect the assessment the most.

You feed these property tax values into a formula, subtract your city tax amount so this is on top of that number and pop out the special assessment. Could have something where you immediately reduce the number to zero if it's within 5 or 10% of your actual property cost.



This discourages teardowns. You can't get out of this tax by removing the building. it encourages building early, not waiting to be last, because your taxes creep up as other projects finish.

It encourages your project being the same size, quality and cost or better when you do build or renovate. You want a building that brings you to a zero multiplier or to be the building setting the rate for the area.

It discourages doing nothing where everyone around you has done something while not penalizing an owner surrounded by nothing.



What does this allow? It allows stopping doing tax abatements for schools, library and such and move over to reducing special assessments in a bigger manner.

Take this special assessment and let the owner use it as a tax credit against the cost of renovation work, new building construction, tenant refinishes, historic building maintenance work, small improvements like adding bike racks or sidewalk seating and the like. Allow pooling. If you own two parcels combin the two to pay for a building renovation. Allow applying future credits for 3-5 years, where the owner picks the start and end dates. A smaller project surrounded by big ones could pay zero special assessment for several years but after that it would pay a lot. A bigger project might pay some or no special assessment for decades because it's big enough not to.

The idea is to minimize taxes through density and building before the tax can hit you, or hit as hard. It encourages large landowners to do work on any property to minimize their total downtown taxes. Commerce couldn't sit on a bunch of valuable parking lots and expect to pay almost nothing on them without doing major work on another property.

Post Reply