Church of the Resurrection Downtown Campus

[shinatoo]

Churches like this one are 7 day a week operations. You will see activity there every morning, day and evening. Not full Sunday morning levels of activity, but plenty of activity.

[flyingember]

pash-
You mean this collaboration with their neighbors? We've known it's not going to be an exclusive lot used once a week for three months now. Do you think I brought up a hypothetical?

The first paragraph was left off in the original post. Here you are.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/ar ... 97300.html

Terms of the agreement in principle were not disclosed. The sale is expected to be completed early next year. Star employees will continue to use the 2-acre lot that sits directly west of the newspaper’s green-glass press plant at 17th and McGee streets.

[flyingember]

Churches like this one are 7 day a week operations. You will see activity there every morning, day and evening. Not full Sunday morning levels of activity, but plenty of activity.

most 7 day churches have 90% of the activity after 5pm. Yes, there's daytime activity but it will be 5% parking load compared to any evening.

[pash]

.

[FangKC]

Churches are clearly a benchmark of an area like a grocery store.
There should be a minimum of 16-20 different religions and denominations downtown at a minimum. When you add the walkable aspect to it I would expect to see 30-40 churches. Right now most of them are on the long-standing residential areas.

There aren't anywhere near that many existing church buildings downtown.

My guess, the number of churches downtown should double in the coming years.
The River Market looks to have one. Add a couple thousand people and that could go to 3-4

One of the concerns with locating that many churches in the downtown area is that it is mostly zoned as a commercial district. We are not talking about a strip mall, but the City's primary commercial district. There are several issues here--especially when one considers having that many churches downtown:

1) A church displaces that parcel's use for commerce, which provides potential jobs (near transit) for our citizens.

2) Churches require a lot of surface parking to serve their flock.

3) Every building owned by a church is taken off the tax rolls. That includes surface parking lots. While that is not usually a problem in less dense parts of the city, this is our primary business district.

4) Bars and restaurants. You cannot serve alcohol within so many feet of a church or school (100-300 feet). It doesn't matter if it's a building designed as a church, or a church that meets in a former retail storefront. Yes, there is grandfathering of liquor licenses that allow bars and restaurants to serve alcohol if they existed before the church opened nearby. However, it does affect future bars and restaurants opening downtown. Not only does it affect liquor sales, but it affects whether a bar or restaurant is allowed to stay open, and/or serve liquor, past normal serving hours (past 1:30 am)--even if they had their original liquor license before the church came.

Now look at where COR is. It's a block from the Sprint Center, and a few blocks from the Performing Arts Center and hotels, and in a prominent place in the Crossroads. This is prime entertainment-oriented real estate.

Now, flyingember, multiply the churches to 16-20, or 40-30 times spread all over downtown, and one sees the effect. And add in two or three schools. Having that many churches and schools will limit where bars and restaurants (that serve alcohol) can open, as well as new convenience, drug, grocery stores, and hotels that want to sell or serve liquor.

[FangKC]

I am really disappointed that the City--through the EDC's land redevelopment authority--didn't get out in front of this and buy that block of surface parking from the KC Star before the church did. It's really stupid if you think about it. This is an entire city block of surface parking in a good location. The City should have targeted it for new residential, commercial, and structured parking development.

[zonk]

Fang, you nailed it....but it's not really the EDC/City's fault. This drops squarely on the KCStar! And surprisingly it came immediately after they got their tax abatement extended. I know directly of a developer who approached the Star on 2 separate occasions to purchase the lot and construct a $40m-$50m project. Dense, structured parking + mixed use + residential. But no response from the Star at the time....this was months before the COR purchase was announced. While it would have likely been an incentivized project, it would have still paid PILOTS and e-tax. But that's not the case now. A total wasted opportunity! Shame on the Star!

[DaveKCMO]

Fang, you nailed it....but it's not really the EDC/City's fault. This drops squarely on the KCStar! And surprisingly it came immediately after they got their tax abatement extended. I know directly of a developer who approached the Star on 2 separate occasions to purchase the lot and construct a $40m-$50m project. Dense, structured parking + mixed use + residential. But no response from the Star at the time....this was months before the COR purchase was announced. While it would have likely been an incentivized project, it would have still paid PILOTS and e-tax. But that's not the case now. A total wasted opportunity! Shame on the Star!

at least they'll continue to pay the streetcar special assessment!

[beautyfromashes]

We are not talking about a strip mall, but the City's primary commercial district.

But, this shouldn't be a commercial district only. It should be a neighborhood, which includes churches.

[bobbyhawks]

We are not talking about a strip mall, but the City's primary commercial district.

But, this shouldn't be a commercial district only. It should be a neighborhood, which includes churches.

Maybe this is a difficult question, but how many neighborhoods begin with a church first, rather than have a church come along after the neighborhood is established? This isn't the wild west, with entire congregations flocking to establish a community in a vacant territory so they can be left alone. This is a congregation of mostly suburban people planting a flag downtown, and I haven't seen a ton of evidence that they plan to do anything more than drive back and forth from the burbs to the church and back. I may be way overgeneralizing, but I'd love to hear from someone who is a part of the organization. I believe there was an Up-To-Date or Central Standard about this topic a few months ago, and that was the impression that I got. The church means well, but they may be blinded by their own view of themselves.

[mgh7676]

Maybe this is a difficult question, but how many neighborhoods begin with a church first, rather than have a church come along after the neighborhood is established? This isn't the wild west, with entire congregations flocking to establish a community in a vacant territory so they can be left alone. This is a congregation of mostly suburban people planting a flag downtown, and I haven't seen a ton of evidence that they plan to do anything more than drive back and forth from the burbs to the church and back. I may be way overgeneralizing, but I'd love to hear from someone who is a part of the organization. I believe there was an Up-To-Date or Central Standard about this topic a few months ago, and that was the impression that I got. The church means well, but they may be blinded by their own view of themselves.

I have no problem with a church that wants to be downtown because it is the cool/trendy place to be. Hopefully they convey that attitude to their congregation and some of these people eventually move downtown. There are worse things for a neighborhood.

To me, the building itself looks fine. I'll wait to pass judgment until I see their plans for the block. Maybe they plan on developing half of the block for residential and putting a garage behind the church? Doubtful, I know...but it could happen.

[FangKC]

We are not talking about a strip mall, but the City's primary commercial district.

But, this shouldn't be a commercial district only. It should be a neighborhood, which includes churches.

Beautyfromashes, you have to remember that while this is a neighborhood, it's also the City's primary commercial district. Thus, it should be the densest area. It's fine to have neighborhood churches in 99 percent of the City. Downtown is a relatively small area within the City's total land mass. You can have downtown churches, but it would be better if they are on the periphery of downtown, and not sitting on one of the prime development parcels along a major traffic artery. Especially one so close to transit, Sprint Center, the Performing Arts Center, and the P&L District. Downtown needs more retail, and there aren't that many choice locations to build new retail in a mixed development there. Retail wants to be near other retail, and on a major City street.

To put it in better terms, we are rebuilding the financial health of downtown, economic activity, and the tax base, which has suffered there for decades. For downtown to be self-sustaining, we need a residential population base of around 40,000. Right now, we are at around 21,000 according to Bill Dietrich, CEO of the Downtown Council. Thus, the City needs to be building a lot more residential in a compact area to rebuild vitality. That is the priority that has been stated by the current mayor, and past mayor (Barnes).

https://twitter.com/KCDowntowners/statu ... 1174736896

At the same time, the City needs to rebuild the job base and lure businesses back. We have lost a large number of workers downtown over past decades, and we need to rebuild that at the same time. Putting the residential in first helps do that because companies locate near where a lot of current and potential workers are living. Even now, downtown continues a significant portion of revenue to the City's budget--especially when you consider the proportions of it's relatively small land mass in the whole city. However, that revenue base has dropped dramatically over past decades from what it was. The City is essentially trying to make up for years of loss of the tax base there.

Dedicated parking is always an issue downtown, so entire, cleared city blocks are valuable in that they can have structured parking garages set in the center of the city block, and underground, with housing, offices, and retail wrapped around them or above them. There is less need to demolish other existing buildings to accomplish that. We don't yet have the robust transit in place to build without some dedicated parking for at least a portion of the workers/residents of that development.

Finally, churches that take up entire city blocks for their building and parking, on choice downtown parcels, tend to create dead zones that interrupt the continuity of street-life, and economic activity.

There is a place for churches downtown, but it's preferable that they locate on the edges so not to hinder economic vitality.

When you see a developer to a very large retail project, or commercial node, in the suburbs, you don't see them plopping down a couple of churches in the middle of it. There is a reason for that. Choice retail land is valuable. You don't give it up for a non-revenue entity.

[FangKC]

But, this shouldn't be a commercial district only. It should be a neighborhood, which includes churches.

Maybe this is a difficult question, but how many neighborhoods begin with a church first, rather than have a church come along after the neighborhood is established? [/quote]

The answer to your question is almost never does this happen.

In fact, if you go to the suburbs and look at the majority of new residential developments, you almost never see a church included in the original development. They tend to come later by buying a single, still undeveloped parcel near the residential.

[FangKC]

Maybe this is a difficult question, but how many neighborhoods begin with a church first, rather than have a church come along after the neighborhood is established?

The answer to your question is almost never does this happen.

In fact, if you go to the suburbs and look at the majority of new residential developments, you almost never see a church included in the original development. They tend to come later by buying a single, still undeveloped parcel near the residential.

[FangKC]

The other thing I would like to point out is that in the history of downtown, there were actually many churches built in what we now call the primary business district. The vast majority of them were demolished and replaced with retail and commercial buildings. The congregations eventually sold out and moved their churches further out. This happened because the higher purpose of the neighborhood was focused on commercial and government activity. Demand for land for those purposes pushed them out.

[flyingember]

The answer to your question is almost never does this happen.

The closest I can think of is when a Jewish population tends to move in coordination with founding a Synagogue. The need to be within walking distance produces this result. But it's the same, where the proven population need produces the need to build the building

[flyingember]

Beautyfromashes, you have to remember that while this is a neighborhood, it's also the City's primary commercial district. Thus, it should be the densest area. It's fine to have neighborhood churches in 99 percent of the City. Downtown is a relatively small area within the City's total land mass. You can have downtown churches, but it would be better if they are on the periphery of downtown, and not sitting on one of the prime development parcels along a major traffic artery. Especially one so close to transit, Sprint Center, the Performing Arts Center, and the P&L District. Downtown needs more retail, and there aren't that many choice locations to build new retail in a mixed development there. Retail wants to be near other retail, and on a major City street.

A church would fit well into this hypothetical project
Floor 1: mixed parking and retail
2-?: the church
Above the church: residential or commercial

They could run the leased space as a non-profit to bring in funds for their mission or contract with a developer to build the bigger project and they buy their floors and the developer can sell or lease the rest

Clearly they don't intend to but it's not that a church can't work on a prime parcel.

[FangKC]

Fang, you nailed it....but it's not really the EDC/City's fault. This drops squarely on the KCStar! And surprisingly it came immediately after they got their tax abatement extended. I know directly of a developer who approached the Star on 2 separate occasions to purchase the lot and construct a $40m-$50m project. Dense, structured parking + mixed use + residential. But no response from the Star at the time....this was months before the COR purchase was announced. While it would have likely been an incentivized project, it would have still paid PILOTS and e-tax. But that's not the case now. A total wasted opportunity! Shame on the Star!

What I'm guessing is that the KC Star already had a done with the church when the developer approached them, and was ironing out details. It was just not announced. They might have had to wait months before announcing it to get approval from corporate management at McClatchy. The other motivation is that the Star wanted to retain access to a certain number of cheap parking spaces during the week, while pocketing some cash. They could have done a deal with the developer to rent parking spaces in the development's structured parking garage, but the rent per space would have been higher than surface parking.

What is sad is that with the continuing layoffs at the Star, they probably won't need the surface parking spaces in a few years anyway.

[Midtownkid]

I had a friend who attended that church (before moving to Chicago). He lived in the RM. He had lots of young friends who also attended that church who lived all over the urban core. I went to a party in Westport once with him and his church friends...not my kind of people, but still they didn't all live in the burbs. I believe they do things for the city and try to do things for the city's poor...ya know like a lot of churches do.

[JBmidtown]

I had a friend who attended that church (before moving to Chicago). He lived in the RM. He had lots of young friends who also attended that church who lived all over the urban core. I went to a party in Westport once with him and his church friends...not my kind of people, but still they didn't all live in the burbs. I believe they do things for the city and try to do things for the city's poor...ya know like a lot of churches do.

Yeah but what can the poor do to develop walkable neighborhoods with retail?!