Jump to content

Request for Letters of Interest - 201 Market

GRDadof3

By GRDadof3
in Grand Rapids

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply
GRDadof3 Ecumenopolis

GRDadof3

Posted
  • Author
Posted

35 million seems like alot for a piece of land that size. How do these rates compare to those of other cities?

They don't, and you can't really compare to other cities. You can maybe compare to other properties in the same market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GRDadof3 Ecumenopolis

GRDadof3

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Has the city indicated any willingness to help (tax breaks, brownfield, loans, infrastructure, grants, etc.)?

I wonder if the DDA will loan me the money <g>.

http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.ph...ndpost&p=382790

Yes, Brownfield and Michigan Single Business Tax Credit, or so it says in the documents :thumbsup: They say there may be other tax incentives available.

I've already forwarded this on to some contacts in Chicago. We'll see if they bite :thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
coyote35 Unincorporated Area

coyote35

Posted
Posted

Yes, it says the proposal may be eligible for a Brownfield and Michigan Single Business tax credits..

If I were a Developer, I wouldn't be counting on the SBT Credits. With the State Reps voting to repeal the tax and it sitting on the Gov's desk, the credits have to be used by Dec 31, 07. I don't see how any developer could build fast enough to claim any gain from SBT credits. It's going to make alot of projects harder to build without the ability to use or sell these. . :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
civitas Burg

civitas

Posted
Posted

If I were a Developer, I wouldn't be counting on the SBT Credits. With the State Reps voting to repeal the tax and it sitting on the Gov's desk, the credits have to be used by Dec 31, 07. I don't see how any developer could build fast enough to claim any gain from SBT credits. It's going to make alot of projects harder to build without the ability to use or sell these. . :angry:

There are 2 major problems with most subsidies. First they often promote development that is not sustainable by the marketplace. Financially successful and sustainable developments are always market driven. Without market acceptance, a project will fail. Brownfield credits, etc. may reduce costs enough to allow reasonable success, but they do so by overcoming a weak market. That is not always a stable foundation for real estate development because when the subsidy expires the market problems may remain.

Secondly, the subsidy oftens equates to a higher land value that rewards the seller and not the developer. The developer may receive a tax break, but that benefit is offset by the higher price that he paid for the property. The subsidy that was designed to encourage development ends up rewarding the land speculator and not the risk taker. In this situation there is effectively no benefit from the subsidy.

I understand the motivation for government to encourage certain development, but ideally all development should be market driven and self sustaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.