OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

[flyingember]

The downtown streetcar TDD already covers the port authority project so I don't see more property taxes working.

Track is at ~40 million per mile. I figure payback of bonds at 120% of the cost to have a working number. It's approx 0.75 miles worth of track needed. it's almost a 25% increase in the line length

My rough guess is $36 million would be needed to pay back the cost.

across 20 years that's $1.8 million per year. that would take a major retail destination to get that high. a 1% sales tax would require $180 million in sales. The worldwide Ikea store average, a major regional destination, is just $86 million per year.

500 residential units, more than this first phase, would take $3600 per year each in taxes to pay for this segment

so funding for this segment would need to come from more than a TDD

[pash]

.

[taxi]

A new bridge for the streetcar and peds only connecting to Columbus Park would be nifty.

[FangKC]

Pash, I seem to recall that there is also a plan to build a hotel next to the Isle of Capri casino. If that is built, I assume that is what you alluded to when you said the Port Authority expects to pull in more income from the casino lease.

[pash]

.

[DaveKCMO]

*chimes*

if they wanted, the port authority could draw a special district wherever they wanted and use it to fund streetcar. it would not have to be a TDD.

since NKC has failed to act (or even meet basic funding criteria) for a streetcar expansion across the river, a riverfront streetcar extension is all the more attractive.

[pash]

.

[beautyfromashes]

It's a distraction. The reason it has less parking is because there is no demand for parking in the area. It will solely be used for the development. IP&L could be used for P&L, SC, etc. And the thought of a streetcar expansion there is my exact point. The streetcar needs to go to The Plaza/UMKC, not to empty park land on the river. Focus people!

[pash]

.

[pash]

.

[kboish]

Looking around the Port Authority's website I noticed this new incentive tool/power the port authority has. A Port Improvement District. I think this was created in 2013.

http://www.portkc.com/index.php/develop ... -district/

The Port Improvement District (PID) is a new economic development tool which provides bonding capability for projects within designated districts using sales and use taxes and/or real property taxes to pay off the bonds. For more information, please see sections 68.20 through 68.60 of the Missouri Revised Statutes.

Projects where the PID will be most useful are projects where development or redevelopment involves environmental cleanup, energy conservation, or building efficiencies.

Eligible areas for the PID are those involving the acquisition, operations, maintenance, rehabilitation or construction of any building or infrastructure determined by Port KC to be significant in or in furtherance of history, architecture, archaeology or culture of the country, state, or any political subdivision of the state of Missouri.

The taxes accessible through the PID are additional Real Property Tax (RSMo 68.235) and additional Sales and Use Taxes up to 1 percent in 1/8 percent increments (RSMo 68.245).

Costs eligible to be paid with these tax revenues are very broad and include studies, plans, surveys, professional services, administrative fees, land acquisition, demolition, grading, construction of new buildings, rehabilitation of old ones, repair, financing costs, relocation costs, and other expenses (RSMo 68.205). There is not necessarily a maximum time period for the redirection taxes to run.

The PID district is created by filing a petition approved by the Port KC board and presented to the County Circuit Court. The levying of taxes within the district must be voted by registered voters living in the district, or if there are no voters living in the district then by the property owners. Once passed, Port KC has the capability to issue revenue bonds or notes (RSMo 68.040.1).

Those bolded portions are very interesting and very broad. Has this been used in KC yet?

[pash]

.

[kboish]

I don't think thats the same thing.

http://www.pitch.com/FastPitch/archives ... developers

For that they just issued tax exempt bonds to help finance the deal. In the PID they can actually impose a tax to raise revenues. For this they need to file something with the County Clerk and get 60% voter approval of residents (or of property owners if there are no residents)

[pash]

.

[beautyfromashes]

But to return to the point—what about this development strikes you as "suburban"?

It's basically a modern Fountain View on the Plaza without the walkable connection. It's the riverboat casinos of Kansas City residential development. If it wasn't for the Port Authority and the unique arrangements that they have, it wouldn't get built. Would I prefer people live here than Blue Springs or Liberty? yes. Are there thousands of better locations in the urban core for 400 units? absolutely!

[flyingember]

Locations that the owner doesn't want to put 400 units on is in no way a better location.

[beautyfromashes]

Locations that the owner doesn't want to put 400 units on is in no way a better location.

Actually, no.

[pash]

.

[beautyfromashes]

[... I think the other parcels will get snapped up and built on quickly. Voilà, a nice new riverfront neighborhood.

But, this is my entire point that you don't want to hear. We don't need another neighborhood. We have so many areas with existing historic stock or close to dense areas that need those residents, and they are walkable to the streetcar and other established amenities. 1/4 of the CBD is grass or parking lots. I know that demand is high for people wanting to live in the city, but it's not an unbounded demand. If you're going to meet the demand with new construction, put it in the right location. An empty field on the other side of the tracks is not the best location.

[flyingember]

What other locations are there that the port authority owns and wants to put residential on? Best plays very little into it, there's far more pressing realities that come into play about where a project goes.

sometimes you get the place the owner has or can buy, can be profitable at (size to height ratio), has no rezoning fights, NIMBYs or land remediation, then is somewhere they can market the site, people can afford the rent levels they're proposing. and so on...

It's a super complex situation. So we get projects that fill in decades-long empty lots and it's not perfect but take it over waiting another 25 years for perfect.