KCRag Forum

KCtoBrooklyn wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 10:30 pm I don't think the Dorset has that steep of an elevation change. Where did you find this rendering?

KCtoBrooklyn wrote: ↑Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:40 pm That may be for the lot to the south of the Dorset. I seem to recall a proposal with that name several years ago, but don't remember seeing any renderings.

alejandro46 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:34 pm Plot S. of Dorset has had water excavation and traffic control permits applied for recently. Would make sense it's that parcel. The grade lines up with the steep drop off along 46th from Summit to Jefferson. If would be nice if the city would add stop signs at that Jefferson & 46th intersection, traffic flows through pretty quick and with the street parking it's kind of hard to cross or make a turn.


I also recall Dorset being a 55+ community originally and the signs on google streetview confirm that. However, it now looks like all mention of that has been scrubbed from their website and they have replaced with some millennial types on their homepage. Perhaps they weren't as successful as they were hoping with that target demo.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Apr 15, 2021 4:04 pm The Dylan is under contract with a new developer.

normalthings wrote: ↑Sat Dec 12, 2020 12:58 pm

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Dec 09, 2020 1:17 am This project died right? So why would any of these others have legs? Also it sounds like 3 Light will end up being smaller than2 Light if it ever goes up. Just wondering the chances of these actually happening.

47 Madison isn’t dead but just paused. The large redevelopment project at the Holiday Inn has legs because it’s owner, Americo, is a financial institution. Americo and B&M can use their retirement and insurance funds to develop real estate. Northwestern Mutual has done the same in Milwaukee.

David Copperfield Apartments, Inc. owns the property at 804 W. 48th Street, KCMo ("Applicant"). Applicant appeals the decision made in code case ZDC-2021-0055, communicated by the city's investigator to applicant's attorney on April 5, 2021, that an off leash dog park being operated at the adjacent property at 4734-36 Summit, 4730-32 Summit and 4728 Summit, in District R-0.5, is a permitted use in that District and does not violate the city's zoning and development code (or, to the extent necessary, appeals the contents of the email communication dated December 11, 2020 from Nathan Kline to Bruce Hawkinson.) Prior to the April 5th communication, and on March 8th, the city opened code case no. ZDC-2021-0055. On March 9th, the city inspector assigned to that code case did a zoning inspection of the subject property. On March 22, 2021 the City's investigator, Jim Duddy, called the attorney for applicant and said that it was his opinion that the dog park use was not allowed at the subject property but that he would have to check with a couple of other people before making a determination like that. Between that March 22nd telephone conversation and April 1st, case no. ZDC-2021-0055 showed the status as "In-violation". On April 5, 2021 the city's investigator, Jim Duddy, said that a dog park use is allowed in District R-0.5 under the "Other" use category of 88-110-03, Table 88-110-01, Agriculture, Animal which use group is defined in pertinent part in 88-805-06-B as "The feeding, breeding, raising or holding of cattle, swine, poultry or other livestock, whether held in a confinement area or open pasture. Also includes the killing, butchering or dressing of livestock, fowl, fish or other animals raised on the premises." "Cattle, swine, poultry or other livestock" is not inclusive of dogs, particularly dogs not kept or raised at the subject property, i.e. dogs belonging to an owner who doesn't own the subject property who leave with their owner after using the dog park. Dogs at the dog park are not being fed, bred or held at the subject property. Code case no. ZDC-2021-0055 was closed on April 5th and at the time it was closed showed the status as "in-compliance". Therefore, this is an appeal of the decision that an off leash dog park is a permitted use at the subject property in District R-0.5. Applicant appeals to the Board of Zoning Adjustment and alleges there has been an error in a decision or determination of the city in the administration, interpretation or enforcement of the zoning and development code and applicant is aggrieved by the decision described above.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Mon Jun 07, 2021 6:14 pm You really have to be a sour person to complain about a dog park.