OFFICIAL - East Village

[grovester]

I still think it's executives and company heads driving location selection. I have never once in my life been asked where I wanted my job to be located. I've worked in public relations/public affairs for large organizations and never once did any of my employers poll employees where they wanted to work.

That and huge piles of cash.

[normalthings]

Maybe Creative Planning was but not the firm I was referring to. Creative Planning is all sales and no real asset mgt or trading as far as I understand.

[chaglang]

CP offers asset management services.

[normalthings]

CP offers asset management services.

I thoughts it’s all advisory into non creative planning products. Is that wrong?

[dukuboy1]

Hopefully the trend will be for more major companies to move downtown and build a presence there. Plus as someone who lives in the Northland I would welcome the population to help land more amenities and such up here. It's very easy to get to downtown and the location is close. Plus we have wonderful easy access to highways up here to get anywhere in the city easily.

[chaglang]

CP offers asset management services.

I thoughts it’s all advisory into non creative planning products. Is that wrong?

They have their own products.

[FangKC]

These partners operate key parking lots near some of Downtown's hottest development areas

...
One key player may hold the answer to that speculation. A partnership has spent the better part of 20 years buying strategically located sites, many of them parking lots that it operates in and near the Downtown Loop.
Sharing a space

Real estate investor Tim Brown came to know physician entrepreneur Jeff Dunn through a mutual friend more than 20 years ago. As JTB Properties, the pair made their first acquisition in 2004 of an approximately 1.3-acre lot northeast of 11th and Holmes streets in the East Village.
...
In the East Village, the group in 2005 bought 0.4 additional acres of surface parking, just north of its first lot at 11th and Holmes. A 0.35-acre parking lot followed in 2014, across Holmes and south of 10th Street.

Today, with just more than 2 acres, JTB Properties is the East Village's third-largest landowner, behind VanTrust Real Estate LLC, which has development rights to the area, and the city of Kansas City.
...
Outside the East Village, the partners bought a 0.64-acre lot in June 2021 just east of the eight-block area, northeast of 11th and Charlotte. Within the area's northwest wing, Brown owns a small apartment building under a separate entity, 612kcmo LLC.
...
And in March, JTB scooped up 0.46 acres of parking south of Interstate 670, between Holmes and Charlotte. Just west of Holmes, JTB bought a 0.3-acre lot in May 2019, plus a 0.58-acre lot s
...

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... 2022-05-09

[TheLastGentleman]

I hate how the Biz frames this as being some sort of smart real estate investment, and not what it is, which is holding back downtown with landbanking

[DColeKC]

I hate how the Biz frames this as being some sort of smart real estate investment, and not what it is, which is holding back downtown with landbanking

I mean it is. Maybe not for the public but buying up parking lots and making some money off them all while playing the long term game waiting for the big fish to come overpay for the property is smart.

It’s not like they refuse to sell these properties but they know someone will pay up eventually.

[normalthings]

I hate how the Biz frames this as being some sort of smart real estate investment, and not what it is, which is holding back downtown with landbanking

There are north loop lots owned by small fish that have not been bought up and developed. The guys in the article are relatively small fish too.

[TheLastGentleman]

There are north loop lots owned by small fish that have not been bought up and developed. The guys in the article are relatively small fish too.

I don’t follow

[Rabble]

I hate how the Biz frames this as being some sort of smart real estate investment, and not what it is, which is holding back downtown with landbanking

There are north loop lots owned by small fish that have not been bought up and developed. The guys in the article are relatively small fish too.

The north loop lots made sense when the surrounding buildings were derelict. But except for Epstein Hardware, virtually every building in this area has now been restored. How is that possible without one piece of new construction? Why haven't the lot owners taken advantage of this neighboring investment and at least built something? Are both the big fish and little fish waiting to sell their lots for 40 story buildings?

[Karambit25]

The north loop lots made sense when the surrounding buildings were derelict. But except for Epstein Hardware, virtually every building in this area has now been restored. How is that possible without one piece of new construction? Why haven't the lot owners taken advantage of this neighboring investment and at least built something? Are both the big fish and little fish waiting to sell their lots for 40 story buildings?

It's unconscionable. Why doesn't the city raise their property taxes? What's going on here?
The developers are skipping over these lots because the land bankers want too much.
The city has to get real and get these lowlifes to move the properties. I'm all for capitalism but this ain't it. That land should be taxed as much as if there was a 10 floor residential building was on it.

[FangKC]

One of the North Loop lots that DST owned was sold recently with an adjoining building at 7th and Central.

I expect that the parking lot just north of the 21c/Savoy Hotel will be sold soon. It's also owned by DST and they are liquidating their real estate parcels.

[DColeKC]

The north loop lots made sense when the surrounding buildings were derelict. But except for Epstein Hardware, virtually every building in this area has now been restored. How is that possible without one piece of new construction? Why haven't the lot owners taken advantage of this neighboring investment and at least built something? Are both the big fish and little fish waiting to sell their lots for 40 story buildings?

It's unconscionable. Why doesn't the city raise their property taxes? What's going on here?
The developers are skipping over these lots because the land bankers want too much.
The city has to get real and get these lowlifes to move the properties. I'm all for capitalism but this ain't it. That land should be taxed as much as if there was a 10 floor residential building was on it.

How is that fair? You wouldn't tax someone's home as if it's a 12 bedroom, 10,000 Sqf home when it's really a 3 bedroom, 2,500 sqf home. Even IF you were a bully at city hall and wanted that property for development. There's eminent domain, the city can use it.

Understand the frustration but don't see the point in calling smart business people lowlifes for taking advantage of a situation. That's literally capitalism!

[DColeKC]

I'm jealous I didn't start buying up every damn thing I could, including parking lots 15+ years ago.

[WoodDraw]

We make taxation policy choices all the time, there's nothing inherently immoral about that.

[FlippantCitizen]

How is that fair? You wouldn't tax someone's home as if it's a 12 bedroom, 10,000 Sqf home when it's really a 3 bedroom, 2,500 sqf home. Even IF you were a bully at city hall and wanted that property for development. There's eminent domain, the city can use it.

Understand the frustration but don't see the point in calling smart business people lowlifes for taking advantage of a situation. That's literally capitalism!

Using eminent domain so private companies can do development seems way more thuggish than adjusting tax policy to get the right incentives in place for city priorities. Not to mention very uncommon for eminent domain to be used in such a way.

[DColeKC]

How is that fair? You wouldn't tax someone's home as if it's a 12 bedroom, 10,000 Sqf home when it's really a 3 bedroom, 2,500 sqf home. Even IF you were a bully at city hall and wanted that property for development. There's eminent domain, the city can use it.

Understand the frustration but don't see the point in calling smart business people lowlifes for taking advantage of a situation. That's literally capitalism!

Using eminent domain so private companies can do development seems way more thuggish than adjusting tax policy to get the right incentives in place for city priorities. Not to mention very uncommon for eminent domain to be used in such a way.

I'm not a fan of eminent domain, just saying there's mechanisms in place if the government thinks a landowner is land banking and holding up development or to be used for a purpose that better serves the community. Artificially inflating the taxes and forcing a sale is immoral as hell. This is America, if you want something, pau up! Now if we want to talk about developers land banking, let's do it. That's more of a shit or get off the pot situation where as these guys see a use for a property as is, purchase it and try to generate revenue. They often have no plans to develop and that's known when they purchase.

[FlippantCitizen]

How is that fair? You wouldn't tax someone's home as if it's a 12 bedroom, 10,000 Sqf home when it's really a 3 bedroom, 2,500 sqf home. Even IF you were a bully at city hall and wanted that property for development. There's eminent domain, the city can use it.

Understand the frustration but don't see the point in calling smart business people lowlifes for taking advantage of a situation. That's literally capitalism!

Using eminent domain so private companies can do development seems way more thuggish than adjusting tax policy to get the right incentives in place for city priorities. Not to mention very uncommon for eminent domain to be used in such a way.

I'm not a fan of eminent domain, just saying there's mechanisms in place if the government thinks a landowner is land banking and holding up development or to be used for a purpose that better serves the community. Artificially inflating the taxes and forcing a sale is immoral as hell. This is America, if you want something, pau up! Now if we want to talk about developers land banking, let's do it. That's more of a shit or get off the pot situation where as these guys see a use for a property as is, purchase it and try to generate revenue. They often have no plans to develop and that's known when they purchase.

I don't know. Not an expert of tax policy of any kind but it just seems like an easier strategy to increase taxes if not on parking lots then maybe on parking revenue... or find some other way to define high value lots in the tax code that are the target of land banking than to rely on eminent domain which is by definition piece meal and case by case. Also inevitably would end up in court which would cost money to push over the finish line. Trying to use eminent domain for private development might not rise to the public good threshold a court would require to uphold it. Then there's the issue of if the city even wins such a battle issuing an RFP and getting a developer on board for a specific parcel and actually getting follow through. Just seems to me like reforming the underlying incentives through the tax code to discourages land banking of high value lots is a much more comprehensive strategy. I can understand hating the tax man but eminent domain seems like a much more odious and unwieldy tool.