One Light - 13th & Walnut

[rxlexi]

Tried to visit the rooftop park and new public art installation on top of the 13th/Walnut Block yesterday after visiting Cosentino's, and found that the door was locked - at 3pm on Saturday. I really dislike this concept of private "public" space.

How and when are folks "allowed" to enjoy this rather spectacular little greenspace in the heart of the loop? I mean, I understand keeping it closed and locked late at night, or even after dark, but Saturday afternoon was frustrating. Shouldn't we be encouraging the use of this space as an asset for downtown residents?

[flyingember]

Tried to visit the rooftop park and new public art installation on top of the 13th/Walnut Block yesterday after visiting Cosentino's, and found that the door was locked - at 3pm on Saturday. I really dislike this concept of private "public" space.

How and when are folks "allowed" to enjoy this rather spectacular little greenspace in the heart of the loop? I mean, I understand keeping it closed and locked late at night, or even after dark, but Saturday afternoon was frustrating. Shouldn't we be encouraging the use of this space as an asset for downtown residents?

When I went the hours were on the door

And it's not at all a public space

[rxlexi]

When I went the hours were on the door

And it's not at all a public space

No hours on the door in this case.

And while it is not certainly not a true public space, one would like to think that its use would be advertised and encouraged for downtown visitors and residents (i.e. not just weddings, corporate events and the like). It's a neat space, and it would be cool if more folks knew about it and used it.

[Midtownkid]

[LCDSI]

wow that looks really nice. can't wait to see this thing built.

[earthling]

isn't that the original rendering? thought there was a new one.

[DaveKCMO]

isn't that the original rendering? thought there was a new one.

old rendering: http://assets.bizjournals.com/kansascit ... sh.jpg?v=1

[chaglang]

I like the old one better, but I'd be happy to see either happen.

[FangKC]

The new rendering shows balconies for the apartments, and a central mast element on the roof structure at the front of the building. I think I like the second design better. The balconies will make the apartments more marketable, so that is a good addition.

[Midtownkid]

The new one has a more developed roof structure / penthouse level. The angled roof adds interest.

On the old rendering, that huge cantilever jutting out from some of the upper floors is odd.

The corner entrance is much larger and more dramatic on the new rendering as well. I wonder what the end choice will be for that large art piece / light fixture. They should find an amazing, salvaged Deco piece and put it there!

[pash]

.

[Midtownkid]

Yep, I was talking about the cantilever at the 15th floor. WHAT would that be for??

[chaglang]

Yep, I was talking about the cantilever at the 15th floor. WHAT would that be for??

Restaurant seating. Ample outdoor space for high dollar units. Putting green. Bocce. Shuffleboard. Basketball court. Parking.

[pash]

.

[chaglang]

We do need more parking downtown, AMIRIGHT?

[shaffe]

Yep, I was talking about the cantilever at the 15th floor. WHAT would that be for??

High stakes wrestling matches.

[kboish]

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... rward.html

Slowly moving forward.

[pash]

.

[ChilipepKC]

I wonder if they have an equity partner lined up? Typically at this stage the developer (Cordish) is seeking equity financing from a limited partner (in this case it will need to be an opportunistic investor, generally in the form of a private equity real estate fund). In a typical 90/10 JV structure, the developer puts up 10% of the equity requirement with the LP responsible for the balance. In this case, lets assume 70% of the $70m cost will be financed with debt/tax credit etc., leaving $21m of equity required. If Cordish puts up 10% ($2.1m) that leaves approximately $19m yet to be funded. That's a large equity "ticket" for any deal, much less a speculative apartment development in a slow growth Midwestern metro.

I work for one such fund in NYC, and I can tell you the biggest hangups, or drawbacks, will be the lack of comps in the market, reluctance to fund a development that sets the "high water" mark in rents for a sub-market, and the general perception of Kansas City being a slow growth, secondary, or even tertiary market. Also, many investors would be concerned about the "exit" strategy once the asset is operating i.e. what institutional buyer will come into the KC market and buy a $75m high-rise apartment asset? Only a select few in the real estate world have the capacity to invest in those deal sizes.

That said, being from KC, and therefore biased, I would be a huge proponent of investing in this type of product - urban, high-rise, soon to be transit-oriented, etc. The trick is convincing the investment committees! Hopefully that fills you in on what is likely going on behind the scenes. Of course, Cordish could be funding the entire equity themselves. If that's the case then ignore everything I just said! Or take it as a brief lesson in private equity real estate joint venture investing...

[loftguy]

I wonder if they have an equity partner lined up? Typically at this stage the developer (Cordish) is seeking equity financing from a limited partner (in this case it will need to be an opportunistic investor, generally in the form of a private equity real estate fund). In a typical 90/10 JV structure, the developer puts up 10% of the equity requirement with the LP responsible for the balance. In this case, lets assume 70% of the $70m cost will be financed with debt/tax credit etc., leaving $21m of equity required. If Cordish puts up 10% ($2.1m) that leaves approximately $19m yet to be funded. That's a large equity "ticket" for any deal, much less a speculative apartment development in a slow growth Midwestern metro.

I work for one such fund in NYC, and I can tell you the biggest hangups, or drawbacks, will be the lack of comps in the market, reluctance to fund a development that sets the "high water" mark in rents for a sub-market, and the general perception of Kansas City being a slow growth, secondary, or even tertiary market. Also, many investors would be concerned about the "exit" strategy once the asset is operating i.e. what institutional buyer will come into the KC market and buy a $75m high-rise apartment asset? Only a select few in the real estate world have the capacity to invest in those deal sizes.

That said, being from KC, and therefore biased, I would be a huge proponent of investing in this type of product - urban, high-rise, soon to be transit-oriented, etc. The trick is convincing the investment committees! Hopefully that fills you in on what is likely going on behind the scenes. Of course, Cordish could be funding the entire equity themselves. If that's the case then ignore everything I just said! Or take it as a brief lesson in private equity real estate joint venture investing...

Great synopsis, Chilipepkc. Other cities that fit the profile of Kansas City, that are developing residential in a significant way, typically have an institution(s), or a high net worth individual(s) who are partnering their cities way into the future.