KCRag Forum

FangKC wrote: ↑Tue Sep 07, 2021 6:02 pm 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.

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:56 am CP offers asset management services.

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 10:49 am

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Sep 08, 2021 9:56 am CP offers asset management services.

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

...
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
...

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 7:37 am 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

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 7:37 am 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

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 10:52 amThere 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.

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 10:52 am

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 7:37 am 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.

Rabble wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 2:53 pm 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 wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 3:22 pm

Rabble wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 2:53 pm 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.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 4:16 pm 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!

FlippantCitizen wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 4:30 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 4:16 pm 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 wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 5:13 pm

FlippantCitizen wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 4:30 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Tue May 10, 2022 4:16 pm 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.