trexel94 wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 11:18 pm
Well its about time KCRag organizes and shows up in support. It could have an impact.
Agreed. I think its time we bombard them with emails. There's a huge contingency out there who wants development just as much as KC Tenants is against it. I know daGoat will be on board.
Just tell me when and where
LCRA, PIEA meet monthly. Agendas are posted around 1 week before the meeting.
EXACT's main street project is at LCRA on May 24. This needs a lot of community support.
I just read the KC Tenants thread on twitter for shutting down Lux's proposal.
The Tenants had several speakers come up & give speeches at the meeting. I'm guessing not a single pro-development person said a word the whole time. And the vote still only failed 6-4.
I'd be willing to be if pro-development people *at all* started going to these meetings and just saying a few words, the voting members would feel good enough to pass it. I really think that's all it would take. There's just too much pressure coming from one side & not a single bit coming from the pro-development side. Just a slight nudge and that 6-4 turns into a win. One of the voters even switched his vote away from a yes. The votes are there, just have to show up.
trexel94 wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 11:12 pm
Anyway we could get in contact with these people and give them hell? We have a voice too.
LCRA, PIEA, Port KC, etc are faced with a room filled with KC Tenants screaming against projects every time something comes up. No one comes and screams in support of projects.
The KC Tenants Twitter retweeted someone who said, "We will NOT continue paying for our own displacement!" Who is being displaced from vacant land? I'm not understanding that. I actively *want* vacant unused land "displaced" when it's in the middle of the city! Personally, I have lived for many years near the empty parking lot crater in the North Loop. I want it turned into new homes, greater urban activity and density.
I also don't understand who they believe is "paying" for a TIF. The only way a TIF costs us the general public anything is if the new development has such an outsize impact on the local infrastructure and public services that it never offsets those expenses once the TIF expires. That's exceedingly unlikely. I have trouble picturing what it would look like. Perhaps a single apartment building whose residents make so little in salary that they contribute negligibly to earnings tax, but are so fertile they flood the local school district with kids? Meanwhile they all drive big heavy trucks that tear up the city's pavement, but the trucks are all old, junky, or have expired tags so the personal property tax on them never amounts to much. Also there's a high percentage of habitual criminals in residence resulting in many calls to the police. Oh and they all happen to cook with lots of grease and asparagus stalks that they put down the drains and continually plug up the local sewer main.
This forum is for discussion of development, not the promotion of false and dangerous stereotypes. The Lux development wasn't a TIF request. Asparagus stalks?
it's a shame some of those with a vote are so scared of this group. If they are confident in their decision then move forward. The general public is not aware of these ass hats. And if so have enough confidence in yourself and your abilities to support your opinion and why you are voting the way you are.
Says as much about the complete lack of leadership as it does a misguided organization with a vindictive nature.
HalcyonKC wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 8:17 am
The KC Tenants Twitter retweeted someone who said, "We will NOT continue paying for our own displacement!" Who is being displaced from vacant land? I'm not understanding that. I actively *want* vacant unused land "displaced" when it's in the middle of the city! Personally, I have lived for many years near the empty parking lot crater in the North Loop. I want it turned into new homes, greater urban activity and density.
Almost responded to this on Twitter - then realized I’d be arguing with a Meme account w/ the profile picture of a Rat.
HalcyonKC wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 8:17 am
Who is being displaced from vacant land? I'm not understanding that.
I have never understood KC Tenants' vitriol w/r/t empty lots. Wouldn't you want vacant land developed no matter what? Wouldn't that increase supply and lower rent?
earthling wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 8:36 am
Where is Mayor Q?
Like many other city officials, scared of the blowback from speaking out even slightly against KC Tenants and their methods.
Yeah Q wants to be Gov/Senator of MO. Optics of pushing back against KCT probably wouldn't play well
Probably would play well to be honest, there is zero chance they make a meaningful difference in the race for MO gov. A pro business and development Democrat like Sly would be way more likely in my opinion.
Pastense wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 8:24 am
This forum is for discussion of development, not the promotion of false and dangerous stereotypes. The Lux development wasn't a TIF request. Asparagus stalks?
I'm not aware of anyone that fits the false stereotypes I mentioned, I was hoping it was clear I was being absurd to the point of humorous.
Fair enough on the TIF statement, I did conflate property tax abatement and TIF. Broadly I'm OK with either incentive structure to get a development off the ground. Both expire later, and the end result is a greater tax base, more people, and a more vibrant and interesting city. When the land involved is vacant or a parking lot, it's almost invariably a no-brainer. And even with a parcel of land paying a reduced property tax rate for a period of time after being developed, the public coffers still receive greater income from earnings tax, personal property tax on any new residents' vehicles, and sales tax from the increased resident population supporting local business. We are spread too thin and have to find ways to retrofit density into our existing infrastructure.
What they need to be fighting is these sprawling greenfield developments that while they don't necessarily get the initial tax abatement that everybody can point to and get enraged about, the long term maintenance costs to the city for those developments is significant and never stops
KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 11:20 am
What they need to be fighting is these sprawling greenfield developments that while they don't necessarily get the initial tax abatement that everybody can point to and get enraged about, the long term maintenance costs to the city for those developments is significant and never stops
Please say this publicly. If the pro development crowd was active and supported each other like the anti development crowd does it would make a difference. Who knows KC Tenants might just be too aggressive if they feel challenged, make the wrong move and lose credibility.
KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 11:20 am
What they need to be fighting is these sprawling greenfield developments that while they don't necessarily get the initial tax abatement that everybody can point to and get enraged about, the long term maintenance costs to the city for those developments is significant and never stops
I don't understand why more people don't understand this. Especially people running a city.
This development is taking a dead piece of property that produces no economic revenue and turns into something that will bring millions of dollars to the city even with incentives. The roads are already there. The sewers are there. The police and fire protection are there. Developing the property will make the already existing riverfront park more utilized. It will help the city subsidized city market by providing more customers. It will bring hundreds of Etax paying citizens to the city. The footprint of the residents will use a fraction of the infrastructure that a single family subdivision would use or even a suburban apartment complex would use.
Even with incentives, projects like this are FAR better long term for the city than anything in the Northland. And most of the commercial development and apartment complexes in the Northland have some incentives. If the city only allowed projects like this with incentives and stopped allowing development in the Northland without incentives, the city would be much better off in 20 years.
I still can't believe they're killing all these projects. It's just mind boggling. The whole point in investing in a new airport, streetcar, downtown stadiums is to GET spinoff development. That's literally the entire point.
So..if you kill all the spinoff development then why even invest in the airport, streetcar etc. anyway if you don't want to grow???
walked past on the way to Bar K. Exterior is beyond boring. The only non-suburban element are the walk up units. South side has stand alone garages and garages on floor 1 of the apartments. Complete with garage doors. Parking lots did not look as big as the plans made them out to be.
Hopefully this gets blocked from most views by LuxLiving's project.
