KCRag Forum

Never underestimate resistance to change of any kind.

Great advice always. Never promise what you can't deliver.

Troost Renaissance: Revitalization or Gentrification? Or Can It Be Both? https://www.inkansascity.com/innovators ... QxaG5_-Ukw

KCKev2 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 11:24 pm Developing vacant land and vacant buildings into housing and commercial space which can offer services is a neighborhood benefit.

Yeah, it’s an interesting situation because it’s nice to have the new buildings but developers aren’t doing any of this for altruistic reasons (not do I expect them to be) so maybe the word ‘praise’ is a bit strong for a guy like John who have seen an opportunity and will make a bit of money on the whole thing. Apparently Troost also has a semantics problem, ha.

Related to the article Dave posted: I was wondering today if there is a situation where an area can change socioeconomically without displacement. Likely the answer is no, so then the choice right now seems to be: what’s the balance between displacement and integrating Troost neighborhoods? That’s a pretty unsatisfactory choice, so: how could better, more purposeful economic equity change that equation? Obviously this is an issue that scooter money isn’t going to fix.

From the article, this statement says it all:

Nonetheless, the entire metro is Balkanized. There’s Downtown and Midtown. The Downtown Loop. The Crossroads. Westport. Waldo. North Kansas City and Kansas City, North. In JoCo you have the Shawnee Mission East, West, Northwest, North and South school districts—and Shawnee and Mission.

Should an outsider mix one with another they can almost immediately expect to be corrected by the Kansas City Metro Geography Police.

Yes, Kansas Citians like to identify with the neighborhood they live in and have thoughts on where the boundaries of those neighborhoods are. This is true.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:43 pm Troost Renaissance: Revitalization or Gentrification? Or Can It Be Both? https://www.inkansascity.com/innovators ... QxaG5_-Ukw

Interesting article. "“I’ve lived here 56 years, and I’d know revitalization if I saw it, and this isn’t revitalization,” said Hakima Tafunzi Payne. “I’m seeing the absolute destruction of my community.”

Obviously there are a lot of diverse opinions about the nascent development activity. I hope that through continued community engagement and outreach these types of opinions can be in the minority. Overall this article does present a fair balanced perspective.

chaglang wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 6:25 pm

KCKev2 wrote: ↑Fri Dec 07, 2018 11:24 pm Developing vacant land and vacant buildings into housing and commercial space which can offer services is a neighborhood benefit.

Yeah, it’s an interesting situation because it’s nice to have the new buildings but developers aren’t doing any of this for altruistic reasons (not do I expect them to be) so maybe the word ‘praise’ is a bit strong for a guy like John who have seen an opportunity and will make a bit of money on the whole thing. Apparently Troost also has a semantics problem, ha.

Related to the article Dave posted: I was wondering today if there is a situation where an area can change socioeconomically without displacement. Likely the answer is no, so then the choice right now seems to be: what’s the balance between displacement and integrating Troost neighborhoods? That’s a pretty unsatisfactory choice, so: how could better, more purposeful economic equity change that equation? Obviously this is an issue that scooter money isn’t going to fix.

How about letting the market resolve this "issue"? City regulations attempting to achieve "more purposeful economic equity" will likely scare away developers. After five decades of observation, I have concluded that the combined city government (council, schools, police) does more harm than good to the stabilization of central parts of KC. Mostly as unanticipated negative effects of noble intentions, but harm nonetheless.

Property owners on the east side of Troost will benefit financially from increased valuations just like those who own property on the west side of Troost. Yes, to realize those capital gains, they may need to sell and move. Or they may remain and enjoy their enhanced property values and 'ad valorem' property taxes. Housing inflation and its taxation is a story as old as time. But as Harry Helmsley stated in the dark days of the 1970s, "there are no mistakes in real estate that time will not correct."

This Denver comparison is a tempest in a teapot.

alejandro46 wrote: ↑Sun Dec 09, 2018 11:30 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Sat Dec 08, 2018 5:43 pm Troost Renaissance: Revitalization or Gentrification? Or Can It Be Both? https://www.inkansascity.com/innovators ... QxaG5_-Ukw

Interesting article. "“I’ve lived here 56 years, and I’d know revitalization if I saw it, and this isn’t revitalization,” said Hakima Tafunzi Payne. “I’m seeing the absolute destruction of my community.”

Obviously there are a lot of diverse opinions about the nascent development activity. I hope that through continued community engagement and outreach these types of opinions can be in the minority. Overall this article does present a fair balanced perspective.

From my understanding Hakima seems to be very disagreeable and a NIMBY

herrfrank wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2018 10:51 am
How about letting the market resolve this "issue"? City regulations attempting to achieve "more purposeful economic equity" will likely scare away developers. After five decades of observation, I have concluded that the combined city government (council, schools, police) does more harm than good to the stabilization of central parts of KC. Mostly as unanticipated negative effects of noble intentions, but harm nonetheless.

Property owners on the east side of Troost will benefit financially from increased valuations just like those who own property on the west side of Troost. Yes, to realize those capital gains, they may need to sell and move. Or they may remain and enjoy their enhanced property values and 'ad valorem' property taxes. Housing inflation and its taxation is a story as old as time. But as Harry Helmsley stated in the dark days of the 1970s, "there are no mistakes in real estate that time will not correct."

This Denver comparison is a tempest in a teapot.

Well, I think that market solution is what you are seeing right now, and what you've seen in pricier cities. The result tends not to be beneficial for the people who have lived in areas that were economically depressed or segregated. Given the role that "the market" has had in creating the hypersegregation in Kansas City and other cities, I'm loathe to leave it to them to solve it. There may be unintentional harm in noble intentions, but there's no nobility in harm that the market has done and continues to do to people of color. IMO the question we should be asking is not "will developers be scared off?", it's "what kind of city do we want?" I'm also curious at why developers find the prospect of housing my less affluent neighbors so scary.

(The full extent this is well detailed in The Color of Law. The government bears responsibility, but you will find that realtors and investors were willing and eager instigators and participants.)

Yes, property owners east of Troost would realize a benefit. They would also realize a property tax increase which they may or may not be able to afford. Taxes on the east side of Troost tend to be 1/4 to 1/6 what is immediately to the west. As the Troost line blurs, I'd expect that to rise. Missing of course in the equation are renters, who tend to be the canaries in the coal mine. They are usually the first residents to be displaced and the least likely to realize any benefit brought by redevelopment. And IIRC rentals are more common on the east side than anywhere else in KC and on average make up around 60% of the available residential units. Much of the affordability conversation has focused on those people, which I think is appropriate as they are the most vulnerable to being screwed over.

This is a good answer, and there is a lot to digest within it. The first is about the market. The U.S. is not a free market economy. We decided that after the Great Depression. And Kansas City development is not a free market economy either. Delayed property tax payments is one of them.

Kansas City needs to move forward.

I live next to Troost and have taken the Troost bus enough that everyone who waits at those bus stops and rides those buses wants the neighborhoods around those bus stops to be better.

KCKev2 wrote: ↑Mon Dec 10, 2018 11:31 pm This is a good answer, and there is a lot to digest within it. The first is about the market. The U.S. is not a free market economy. We decided that after the Great Depression. And Kansas City development is not a free market economy either. Delayed property tax payments is one of them.

Perhaps because of the phrase "invisible hand" there's a misconception that a free market is an impartial thing that acts as the expression of the collective will of the people. It's not. It never was. As long as there has been a market, there have been people successfully manipulating it for their personal gain.

There is a quote in the article about large apartment developments as drivers of gentrification. And I've been in some public meetings where people have fought development because of that. But absent a housing policy, any housing unit could be a driver. Squier Park was mentioned in the Star article as having gentrified, and the only new housing there in the last 15 years have been the 100+ affordable units in Faxon and Linda Vista. What gentrification has occurred has come in the SFH segment of the housing market (full disclosure: it me). On the other hand, large developments built as a part of a coherent housing policy have the potential to do the most good in terms of bringing new affordable housing units online. Point being, it's not the kind or quantity of housing we are building, it's the city's lack of a policy that's the major issue.

‘Denverization’ isn’t the problem down on Troost. A lack of people is

Guest column: Gib Kerr

https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/read ... 04590.html

Troost Developers Deserve Support, Not Criticism

John Hoffman. principal and co-founder of UC-B Properties

https://cityscenekc.com/troost-develope ... criticism/

I'm not sure those op-eds are as helpful or convincing as their authors probably think they are.

KCtoBrooklyn wrote: ↑Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:39 pm I just noticed in Compass KC that a replat application has been submitted for 2501 Troost. This is the site where Andrew Brain had proposed the twin towers.

I don't see a lot of info available, but it does say 242 units. The original proposal included 350 units, but it is no surprise that it would be scaled down. I'm not sure if it is still Andrew Brain behind this.j

https://compasskc.kcmo.org/EnerGov_Prod ... 8257405a6d

Edit: I found some more docs on Compass relating to this project.

So it looks like someone else is behind it: GSSW Real Estate Investments out of Texas. This appears to be their first foray into our region:
http://gsswrealestateinvestments.com/

It will be 242 units in 10 buildings on Troost and Forrest, wrapped around a parking lot. It looks like it is just residential, without any mixed-use. That seems like a missed opportunity.

Here is the site plan.

It looks like the ordinance for this development was introduced yesterday and referred to PZED:

Rezoning approximately 5 acres generally located on the block between Troost Avenue and Forest Avenue, 25th and 26th Streets, from District UR to District UR, and approving a major amendment to a previously approved development plan to allow for construction of a 10 building, 248-unit multi-family development. (CD-CPC-2018-00177)

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/LiveWeb/Docum ... gvk6TRbZvH

Is that fourplexes or colonnades on Forest?

25th & Troost.
https://compasskc.kcmo.org/EnerGov_Prod ... 301a509ef5
see 2018-10-25 25th and Troost UR Package.pdf for elevations and civil/landscape plans.

I can't tell if the large multi-family bldg on the corner includes any retail, but it does present a lot of blank wall to Troost.
It appears to be the same architects (DRAW) which are doing the apartments immediately south of this.



Six-story multi-family on the NE corner:





Other residential buildings in the project:

Is the retail element still planned on the SW corner of 27th and Troost? These are nice looking modern buildings but agree lack distinguishing characteristics or retail element.