Outlets Developers' 188 Acres Worth $73,202 Assessed Value
Collection of lots for high-end outlet mall may be least of investment.
Chesterfield Valley's 55 acres designated for St. Louis Premium Outlets shopping center near the banks of the Missouri River at Highway 40/64 could be the least expensive part of the whole deal.
The total 188 acres bought up for development are assessed at no more than $73,020, according to the developers' application for a special taxing district.
By Chesterfield Patch calculations, dividing the total assessed value by total acreage would mean 55 acres for Premium Outlets at $21,362.
Low?
"It's agricultural right now because it's not developed, and so that's why it seems low," said Libbey Malberg-Tucker, the City of Chesterfield's assistant city administrator for community services & economic development.
Chesterfield Blue Valley LLC, partnered with Simon Properties and Woodland, have proposed some $277 million worth of development at the site for the outlet mall and potentially the surrounding remaining acreage.
"It would be a great benefit to get the property developed. . .and the assessment goes to a commercial assessment at 33 percent. Then that's where the increased tax benefits come to all the jurisdictions that benefit from property taxes," Malberg-Tucker said in a phone message response to a Chesterfield Patch phone message question.
(See developers' application for a taxing district in PDF section accompanying this article here. Exhibit 5.)
Tax revenue benefit
Rockwood School District encouraged the City Council to approve a special tax district for the potential outlet mall, since the schools could see an additional $1.5 million annually in property tax revenue, city officials said.
At the same time, property taxes would rise for the property once developed as commercial property, as Malberg-Tucker described.
The developer has asked for an additional one percent sales tax at outlet mall stores. Consumers would pay 9.3 cents on a dollar. Currently, it's 8.3 percent in Chesterfield Valley.
Some have opposed the notion of an additional sales tax, saying it gives the developer an advantage that perhaps others don't get.
City representatives said there is no risk for the city, and the added sales tax is a user fee. Only those who shop there will pay it.
Developer's parcel list of 188-acre property:
18623 Olive Street Road $1,800 (2011 assessed value)
18623 Olive Street Road $80 (2011 assessed value)
18625 Olive Street Road $1,280 (2011 assessed value)
18625 Olive Street Road $2,680 (2011 assessed value)
18549 Olive Street Road $10,140 (2011 assessed value)
18609 Olive Street Road $1,900 (2011 assessed value)
18621 Olive Street Road $2,060 (2011 assessed value)
18539 Olive Street Road $21,760 (2011 assessed value)
18575 Olive Street Road $30,880 William Brasher parcel (2011 assessed value)
Other names in the property descriptions for locating the 188 acres include "McGrath Plaza" and "the Estate of Conrad Kroenung."
CAROL KRON
7:50 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
I STILL BELIEVE IF THESE FOLKS WANT TO BUILD A MALL, THEY SHOULD BE WILLING TO RISK THEIR OWN CAPITAL. IF THEY MAKE A FORTUNE, LET THEM REAP THE REWARDS. WE THE TAXPAYER SHOULD HAVE NO SKIN IN THE VENTURE.
M.A.
10:35 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Who are the unfortunate property owner(s) that are only going to get $73,202 for 188 acres? It's worth a lot more than that to the developers!
Jean Whitney
11:39 am on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
The developer already owns that collection of property. And that's the assessed value. I'll add a list to the article now, of each property the developer listed. Thank you!
Karen Taylor-Rosner
1:05 pm on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Tell me once again....WHY do we need TWO outlet malls in Chesterfield? This is absolutely ridiculous! Is anyone watching the progress being made on the building of the "first outlet mall" near Boones Crossing? Looks like they are well on their way. How much tax revenue is enough....Chesterfield and Rockwood?
Jean Whitney
1:30 pm on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Karen, Chesterfield's mayor says studies show the city can support only one outlet mall. He pointed it out as recently as a week ago, during a hearing over a potential sales tax increase for outlet stores at Premium Outlets.
Karen Taylor-Rosner
6:12 pm on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
I hope they stick with that wise assessment and DITCH one of these outlet mall plans. We really don't even need one outlet mall because we already have so much shopping available. But two outlet malls.....that's really stretching it. How beautiful will Chesterfield be when all these shopping areas start closing down and all we have left is empty storefronts and buildings to drive by? Is this worth it for tax revenue?
M.A.
4:56 pm on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
Regarding the low assessments of property value, they were probably based on the area being a flood plain. Do you know if that is correct? I wonder if those acres, and acres of property on which other already-developed Chesterfield Valley stores sit, are STILL still classified as "flood plain", since measures were taken to control high water and prevent flooding in the Valley. It would be interesting to know the difference in insurance costs for the new stores in flood plain, versus not in flood plain, and to know if the outlet mall areas will be reclassified as non-flood plain in the foreseeable future. Are there other known reasons assessments would be so low? Just wondering...
Jean Whitney
8:54 pm on Wednesday, May 16, 2012
M.A., you raise some interesting points. Since it was once called Gumbo Flats, for the rich gooey soil from periodic flooding, and good for farming, I'm guessing the "farmland" assessment took into account the flooding. But that's purely a guess. Anyone else? We'll look into the other questions too.
crs
6:52 pm on Thursday, May 17, 2012
The same developer that's asking for an extra 1% tax from the public, has already realized a huge tax break, because the land purchased for the outlet mall is classified Agricultural. (Ag Tax Breaks were originally intended for farmland. The expanded definition of "agricultural land" beyond use for farming, may include land that has not been developed.) The landowners have gotten a huge percent in property tax reduction. I wonder also, if the "wetland status" plays into additional tax breaks.
Agricultural tax breaks were initiated in this country in the 50's as a response to suburban growth and development which was encroaching on farmland and raising agricultural property values to the point farmers couldn't pay the huge tax bills. So agricultural land is assessed at rates well below market value.
Sometimes agricultural tax breaks are used by landowners in 'surprising' ways. The cows that made appearances for one or two days a month on Ladue Road saved oodles of assessed dollars.
Maybe I will get my property classified as a "nature preserve" and provide a home for all the deer that Town and Country detest. The tax break will be great. P.S. There will be no squirrel shooting.