KCRag Forum

Posted: **Fri Nov 16, 2018 10:46 pm**

I didn't realize that not all the retail buildings on the Plaza weren't owned by Country Club KC Partners LLC (Taubman Centers and the Macerich Company,).

The Jack Henry Building on the Country Club Plaza is under new ownership after being owned by the same family for years, The Kansas City Star reports.

Brothers Spiro, Jerry and George Arvanitakis sold the three-story, 80,000-square-foot building at 612 W. 47th St., which also housed their British-style menswear shop Byron on the Plaza. They're launching Byron's closing sale Wednesday. Other building tenants include Tomfooleries Restaurant & Bar and a FedEx office.
...

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... j=85066571

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2018 12:17 pm**

Originally was not a retail building but an office bldng. Something about farm property.

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2018 1:27 pm**

The Skelly building is also owned by another company, I think.

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2018 2:58 pm**

FangKC wrote: ↑Thu Nov 15, 2018 3:15 am I'm actually surprised St. Lukes is building single family houses. I would have expected that the parcels they owned would have been redeveloped as multi-family buildings.

For an area that sits between the Plaza and Wesport, the housing stock is pretty dismal and the homes being replaced fall into that category. This is probably the premier area in KC for gentrification - I've wondered why it has taken this long for this to happen. KC may be the least gentrified major city in the US. Look at Denver or Houston where the former city is entirely gentrified and the latter has wide swaths of gentrification while KC has a few pockets where a few new homes are being rebuilt or undergoing rehab at a very slow pace. I've been looking for a home in KC for the last year and the pickings are very slim. The nicer homes that are new built or recently refurbished have 250-350$ per sq ft price tags. That's considerably more than I paid in my current very high cost of living city. I think this is large due to the extremely small supply way more so than huge demand.

Posted: **Sat Nov 17, 2018 4:15 pm**

I think we are due for a housing construction boom in this city similar to the post-WWII era where builders focused on mass construction with limited variability. This is why there were/are so many split level homes with a very similar style. Prefab might be the way it happens. There are so many empty lots, you could find a developer buying any available lots in a designated area and make money on mass build with set finishes and materials. This area might be a good option for this.

Posted: **Tue Nov 20, 2018 11:44 am**

moderne wrote: ↑Fri Oct 19, 2018 10:11 am According to a Business Journal article on endangered buildings the Christian Scientist church is to be torn down and replaced with a 13 story office tower. Would be a loss for the human scale along 47th and create a blocky wall on the north side.

I noticed HKC had applied for historic designation for this church recently, and now the plans for this development have been submitted.

12 Story building with:
7,500 sq ft church
9,000 sq ft retail
6,000 sq ft restaurant
28,000 sq ft office
48 apartment units

No parking on site - 174 spots through a shared parking agreement.

Projected start date of June 2019 with completion August 2020.

Designed by BNIM, but I'm not sure who the developer is.

https://compasskc.kcmo.org/EnerGov_Prod ... fcc0b3b35f

Posted: **Tue Nov 20, 2018 12:54 pm**

Did the Hufft-designed hotel/mixed use project on 46th Street die? Haven't heard anything in some time but I thought they got some sort of CID sales tax approved.

Did the 4600 Madison (triangular block) and the 4711 Belleview multifamily projects die? No activity and those projects are no longer found on NSPJ's website.

Posted: **Tue Nov 20, 2018 1:24 pm**

The existing church is a nice structure, but this looks pretty neat too. I am conflicted.

Posted: **Tue Nov 20, 2018 3:16 pm**

There are so many blah buildings that could replace besides a nice historic church. Disappointing

Posted: **Tue Nov 20, 2018 5:36 pm**

If we are going to lose the church, they might as well build higher -- at least to the height of the building behind it.

Posted: **Tue Nov 20, 2018 5:44 pm**

but but the bowl

Posted: **Wed Nov 21, 2018 10:10 am**

The church is old but what’s its significance?

Posted: **Wed Nov 21, 2018 1:24 pm**

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Nov 21, 2018 10:10 am The church is old but what’s its significance?

It is the house of the Lord.

Posted: **Wed Nov 21, 2018 1:41 pm**

chaglang wrote: ↑Wed Nov 21, 2018 10:10 am The church is old but what’s its significance?

I think the church is aesthetically pleasing. A nice break in the otherwise somewhat bland wall of office buildings on 47th.

Posted: **Wed Nov 21, 2018 2:08 pm**

We must protect this house!

Posted: **Wed Nov 21, 2018 3:14 pm**

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Wed Nov 21, 2018 2:08 pm We must protect this house!

of worship

Posted: **Wed Nov 21, 2018 3:18 pm**

It's not that it's significant exactly, it's just nice architecture, and seems to be in good condition. Just a shame to lose it. I always balk when someone suggests tearing down perfectly good, decently-maintained buildings. If the church population has dropped too low to maintain it, then why not sell it to a church seeking a larger facility, and in turn, move to a smaller church building? The other alternative is to share the church building with other denominations, and just have staggered times for services. Not every denomination needs to have their service at 9 am on Sunday. There are probably other struggling denominations that also have difficulty maintain buildings on their own--and their church is not as nice. Some meet in former retail spaces.

There is just so much crap architecture in our cities these days that it's nice to have some handsome buildings to look at.

Losing it also takes away one more thing that makes the Plaza a neighborhood, and not just a shopping mall.

And being on the Plaza, with so many hotels nearby, it would seem to me that someone could operate the church as a wedding and banquet facility, and make enough money to maintain the structure. The operator could also rent out the sanctuary to church denominations for services. There is often a need for places to have funerals when the deceased is not an active member of a church. There are some who don't like to have services in funeral homes.

Posted: **Wed Nov 21, 2018 8:28 pm**

Cool, just wondering. For me it’s not even the most architecturally interesting house of worship on that block - that would be Unity across the street. I also hate to see well maintained buildings torn down, but the statement that there are a lot of crap buildings being built has always been true. Those ideas conflict at some point.

Posted: **Thu Nov 22, 2018 7:32 pm**

I'm starting a new thread for the Plaza Heights development (Westport Today Foundation / St. Luke's)

http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=2 ... 90#p585987

Posted: **Mon Nov 26, 2018 3:02 pm**

FangKC wrote: ↑Wed Nov 21, 2018 3:18 pm It's not that it's significant exactly, it's just nice architecture, and seems to be in good condition. Just a shame to lose it. I always balk when someone suggests tearing down perfectly good, decently-maintained buildings. If the church population has dropped too low to maintain it, then why not sell it to a church seeking a larger facility, and in turn, move to a smaller church building? The other alternative is to share the church building with other denominations, and just have staggered times for services. Not every denomination needs to have their service at 9 am on Sunday. There are probably other struggling denominations that also have difficulty maintain buildings on their own--and their church is not as nice. Some meet in former retail spaces.

There is just so much crap architecture in our cities these days that it's nice to have some handsome buildings to look at.

Losing it also takes away one more thing that makes the Plaza a neighborhood, and not just a shopping mall.

And being on the Plaza, with so many hotels nearby, it would seem to me that someone could operate the church as a wedding and banquet facility, and make enough money to maintain the structure. The operator could also rent out the sanctuary to church denominations for services. There is often a need for places to have funerals when the deceased is not an active member of a church. There are some who don't like to have services in funeral homes.

Not that anything you are saying isn't true, but wouldn't it be more accurate to consider The Church of Scientology as a large real estate holding company? I feel like they are much closer to that than a church when it comes to issues like this.

KCRag Forum

Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)

Re: Plaza move-ins (ongoing)