It looks to me like hard negotiating tactics. And good for them. The resolution says retroactively put 15% affordable housing in 1 and 2 light and require 15% in three and four light OR redevelop Midland as affordable and include 15% set aside in 4 light.
I think pretty much everyone (on the forum) is on board with the latter.
The other requirements then look to limit the city's exposure in future projects.
Seems worth negotiating to me.
● Not less than fifteen percent (15%) of all existing units in One Light and Two Light, and proposed future units in Three Light and any Four Light, shall be reserved for rent by persons making not more than one hundred percent (100%) of HUD’s Median Income calculations for Jackson County, Missouri, or the Midland Office Building shall be developed as affordable housing prior to any Four Light, which Four Light shall also include 15% affordable housing. Any future affordable housing in the District will be developed in accordance with the City’s affordable housing policies.
● A cap of four (4) residential buildings for which the City would provide parking, i.e., incentives would terminate with what is anticipated to be known as “Four Light.”
● A date certain by which Four Light is to commence construction, with an expiration of any City obligation if such date is not achieved for any reason.
● Kansas City Live, LLC, will be responsible for, at its expense, all future maintenance and capital repairs. City will retain responsibility only for structural repairs to the walls, roof, foundations and floors as is necessary to the essential stability of the Block 110 and Block 126 Garages.
● The creation of a profit sharing mechanism that would provide for a percentage of net parking garage revenues to be made available to the City for debt service of existing and any future debt obligations with respect to the District.
● The reduction of the proposed Parking Subsidy to an amount consistent with the Parking Cost Cap as it presently exists in Section 6.9(a) of the MDA or such amount as the City’s Director of Finance reasonably determines would result in a financial commitment that can be serviced by the City without negatively impacting the City’s General Fund, whichever is less.