Page 2 of 7
Re: OFFICIAL - Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 4:57 pm
by pash
.
Re: OFFICIAL - Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:44 pm
by flyingember
pash wrote: And I'm pretty sure I heard something about the city talking with ZipCar about providing spaces for an expansion downtown. Or did I dream that?
You heard this
Re: OFFICIAL - Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 04, 2016 5:50 pm
by FangKC
Is US Bank still operating that drive-up window? If US bank is still operating in the building, since it will be undergoing renovation does that mean US Bank will be leaving? I ask because I wonder if the drive-up lanesbmight possibly be open for future development, or a new wing on that building that might over up that blank wall.
Re: OFFICIAL - Traders on Grand
Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2016 12:40 am
by dnweava
harbinger911 wrote:One of the top 10 ugly buildings downtown. I hope this happens
2 other top 10 fugly buildings.
1) Oak Tower
2) Old Federal Reserve (north side)
Oak Tower isn't that bad, but would look so much better if they would return it to it's original look...
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2016 1:01 am
by FangKC
Oak Tower, imo, even in its' present state, is better looking than City Center Square.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:30 pm
by Eon Blue
DaveKCMO wrote:it might help a household of two who already work downtown get rid of one (or both) cars.
*waves*
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sun Mar 06, 2016 9:28 pm
by Midtownkid
I wish someone would pay for them to 3-D print tiles to make a new facade that is like the old one.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2016 2:02 pm
by joshmv
http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... ement.html
Traders on Grand conversion will get tax break on top of tax break
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Thu Mar 17, 2016 2:58 pm
by herrfrank
dnweava wrote:harbinger911 wrote:One of the top 10 ugly buildings downtown. I hope this happens
2 other top 10 fugly buildings.
1) Oak Tower
2) Old Federal Reserve (north side)
Oak Tower isn't that bad, but would look so much better if they would return it to it's original look...
Unfortunately, that ornamentation was stripped and discarded in the 1970s façade change. Thank heavens that the 1970s ornamentation was also subsequently removed, as the building looked so out of place for its 20+ "disco" years.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2016 1:53 am
by FangKC
A couple of interesting tidbits from the article:
The PIEA board members also considered the fact that the project's assessed valuation, and thus the base, stand to be lowered by the building's conversion from a commercial use to residential use, which is taxed at a nearly 50 percent lower rate.
This is something to keep in mind when there is cheering for an office building conversion to residential. When a building goes residential, it is taxed at a much lower rate. Thus, it is becoming more important to build new office space--to replace some of the lost tax base.
In addition to the $102,000 "base," the developers have agreed to make additional payments in lieu of taxes to the taxing jurisdictions in the amount of $12,000 for each of the first 10 years. Another $18,000 in tax revenue to be split by the jurisdictions will come from a 70-space parking lot south of Traders on Grand, which the developers will purchase from the city's Land Clearance for Redevelopment Authority.
It appears this might affect the Copaken proposal for the 12th and Grand site. If he wants to develop that site, he's going to have to buy back the Traders on Grand parking lot, and probably work out a deal with them to include parking for that building in his new project.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2016 7:08 am
by Eon Blue
FangKC wrote:This is something to keep in mind when there is cheering for an office building conversion to residential. When a building goes residential, it is taxed at a much lower rate. Thus, it is becoming more important to build new office space--to replace some of the lost tax base.
Which illustrates the need for Land Value Tax. Almost certainly, the building will be a better asset to the city and downtown as a fully-occupied residential building than its current state.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2016 10:50 am
by DaveKCMO
note that the taxing jurisdictions did NOT oppose incentives for a Westport hotel or the armour boulevard apartments:
http://www.kansascity.com/news/business ... 46002.html
▪ MAC Properties’ reconstruction of four vacant historic multifamily properties at 100-118 W. Armour into 34 apartment units. The agency granted 95 percent abatement over 16 years, to supplement an $840,000 contribution from the Midtown Business Interruption Fund. The Old Hyde Park neighborhood fully supports the project, and construction could begin this fall.
▪ Wichitawest Hospitality’s plans for a $10 million, 95-unit Marriott extended stay hotel on 39th Terrace in Westport. The agency granted a 90 percent property tax abatement for five years and 75 percent abatement for 15 years, with payments in lieu of taxes of $1.4 million over those 20 years. The taxing jurisdictions did not object.
i'm calling this out as clear bias towards midtown (or against downtown). what happened to the "only 50%" stance?
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2016 11:19 am
by aknowledgeableperson
"i'm calling this out as clear bias towards midtown (or against downtown). what happened to the "only 50%" stance?"
I would say each case is different. There are two things to consider. One would be the period of the tax abatement. Second, the PILOT payments may equal or come close to the value of the abatements for the non city/county taxing authorities.
Don't know, just speculating.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Fri Mar 18, 2016 8:05 pm
by kcexpress
harbinger911 wrote:One of the top 10 ugly buildings downtown. I hope this happens
2 other top 10 fugly buildings.
1) Oak Tower
2) Old Federal Reserve (north side)
Sorry...Nothing comes even close to the AT&T Long Lines Building!! I've always nicknamed it "the sore thumb of downtown", because that's exactly how it sticks out!! Paint it, throw some LED lighting on it, glass panels, something!!
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 12:20 am
by joshmv
I agree about AT&T being the worst looking building downtown. It's horrendous in every way. I don't really mind Oak Tower though.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sat Mar 19, 2016 9:10 am
by moderne
The Traders building has some historical significance. It was the first post war high rise office building built in a moribund downtown. And that was an entire 17 years after the war!
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:23 am
by DaveKCMO
i'm told the "petitioners" are considering legal action on this incentives package.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:37 am
by pash
.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 10:50 am
by Highlander
pash wrote:Not surprising given the abatement-on-top-of-abatement aspect. Are developers and officials completely oblivious to the recent backlash?
That said, I hope somebody makes the case that this and other residential projects will create significant new unabated earnings and sales taxes, unlike abatements that shift office workers around while abating their earnings taxes. Of course, the minor taxing jurisdictions don't get a slice of the sales-tax and earnings-tax pies. ...
With so many incentive-bearing projects in KCMO, I wonder how projects without them can compete. It seems they would have to demand higher rents and would be at a fairly significant economical disadvantage.
Re: Traders on Grand
Posted: Sun Mar 20, 2016 11:18 am
by pash
.