OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

[earthling]

If VisitKC is concerned about too many rooms opening at once that raises eyebrows. Investors might want to wait until occupancy numbers flush out over the next year or so with so many rooms coming online.

BTW, will open up and disclose... I've been invested in a Marriott independent operations group (none in KC) for a couple years as a private equity accredited investor (recently left IT, get into a 401K plan and max out while young kids) and it's interesting to see how finances work to startup a new hotel with an independent operator. A new one with about 70 rooms started to show profit at about 65% occupancy, though if services can depend more on outsiders (such as a hotel/residential combo) it can potentially profit with below 60% occupancy and help offset down periods (is why I mention this often). If downtown adds more hotels, as an investor I'd want hotel/residential combo and as citizen would insist on that if city is offering any more incentives (they shouldn't at this point).

[flyingember]

65% is as good a number

Let's assume all planned rooms are built and are added to the recent rooms.

That's ~3410 rooms + 1000 more, 65% is 2865 rooms filled every night.

To reach 65% occupancy that's 1.04 million room nights per year. This number validates the idea that while there's tons of event capacity the key thing needed right now is to book events.

The city dramatically over built convention space downtown.

[earthling]

But most every city is now a convention city and it's not particularly a growing industry. At least it goes in cycles too. KCI also has few nonstop destinations and not guaranteed to increase much with new airport.

[earthling]

BTW, if an investor in the physical building would also insist hotel portion of project be designed in a way that it could be easily converted to residential if hotel fails. Especially in markets that may be overbuilt.

I've also been invested in some storage units (construction) in markets with no basements and they are actually designed in a way to convert to office space or residential if storage unit market overbuilt someday. They look like office or apt buildings, though also because high end neighborhoods won't allow storage units unless they look like the neighborhood, one even has a corner coffee shop (in Santa Barbara). Would typically invest in something that can as Plan B, morph into something else or adapt as conditions change - with a plan already in place to easily adapt before construction or operations even begin.

Also, for anyone who has built up 401K and interested in getting into private investments... Can move 401K to Rollover IRA when leaving/moving to another job, then move into a "Self-Directed" IRA, which allows getting into sophisticated private investments and allows pulling out of the emotional/manipulated market (or partially), which I've done.

[ToDactivist]

BTW, if an investor in the physical building would also insist hotel portion of project be designed in a way that it could be easily converted to residential if hotel fails. Especially in markets that may be overbuilt.

I've also been invested in some storage units (construction) in markets with no basements and they are actually designed in a way to convert to office space or residential if storage unit market overbuilt someday. They look like office or apt buildings, though also because high end neighborhoods won't allow storage units unless they look like the neighborhood, one even has a corner coffee shop (in Santa Barbara). Would typically invest in something that can as Plan B, morph into something else or adapt as conditions change - with a plan already in place to easily adapt before construction or operations even begin.

Also, for anyone who has built up 401K and interested in getting into private investments... Can move 401K to Rollover IRA when leaving/moving to another job, then move into a "Self-Directed" IRA, which allows getting into sophisticated private investments and allows pulling out of the emotional/manipulated market (or partially), which I've done.

transformers...smart. thus why parking garages should also look at this eventuality too.

[earthling]

^Yeah, Fang and I have brought that up in past.

The hotel element of your project is at least mixed use but is there opportunity for the residents to use hotel services to reduce risk of hotel operations? You'd also be only hotel in River Market so may not be as high of a risk and directly at streetcar stop reduces risk. Might compete more with AirBnB than rest of downtown hotels? And of course designing hotel to convert to residential if necessary would reduce risk for investors. The private investment group I'm fortunate to be involved with (a bunch of Harvard MBAs) would want to see details of Plan B with a realistic path to transform. I'm not involved deeply enough to know criteria they use to vet it out.

[flyingember]

There's also lots of markets that aren't being served for new and conversions. I've seen mention of need for hostels downtown.

There's nothing wrong with a hotel that's entirely a standard layout be converted into one.

Same room size with a bathroom but put in four twin beds or two bunk beds. No tv, phone, lamps, desks etc. Can have lockers for storage and those can go in a public area that's monitored.

Usually per room maxes at 4 with hotels so you're not needing special occupancy allowance. This would be quite popular with people who are ok sharing a room to save money but want to be able to be in a room with women only. Or you could rent out the whole space for friends and you each get a bed for less. If you're going to Big 12 and then P&L and getting back at 3am it's a place to sleep. saving money and everyone pays $50 for the room would be popular.

Here's a good example in a high end style. Scroll down to shared
https://freehandhotels.com/los-angeles/

[FangKC]

Neighbors say they were blindsided by Riverfront parking restrictions

https://fox4kc.com/news/neighbors-say-t ... trictions/

[flyingember]

Neighbors say they were blindsided by Riverfront parking restrictions

https://fox4kc.com/news/neighbors-say-t ... trictions/

They're referring to on street parking. No one should be blind sided that a street might be this way given how many blocks downtown are already.

They should also have a guest parking option within the complex. If someone's guests are reliant on public parking to be available they might not find a spot nearly

[dukuboy1]

It's seems very excessive to have a 2 hr limit 24 hrs a day every day. Street parking downtown is free in most spots after 5 or 6 pm, no limit. There are a few 2 hr limits as well. But typically those 2hr restrictions only run during a set time period. I think there is a compromise that can be found.

as for the park itself, they should add additional parking areas for visitors who do not live close in. They have plenty of space for it, and with development that is on the way perhaps add a garage and manage it to collect revenue, like Union Station.

Plus the park will most have usage from those who live close to the area. I don't anticipate a huge influx of people from the suburbs come to the park unless there is an event or something to draw them there. Not knocking on these people as they normally have access to parks, trails, etc. closer to them

[flyingember]

It's seems very excessive to have a 2 hr limit 24 hrs a day every day. Street parking downtown is free in most spots after 5 or 6 pm, no limit. There are a few 2 hr limits as well. But typically those 2hr restrictions only run during a set time period. I think there is a compromise that can be found.

as for the park itself, they should add additional parking areas for visitors who do not live close in. They have plenty of space for it, and with development that is on the way perhaps add a garage and manage it to collect revenue, like Union Station.

The park is open 24 hours. Some parks close at like 11pm on purpose, this one doesn't.

They already added parking areas for visitors. It's the very spots we're talking about. Some residents of the apartments use them instead of paying for parking in their resident garage.

The Crossroads had the same problem. Demand grew for on street parking. Companies didn't want to pay for parking for employees. The employees didn't want to pay for parking. So the employees took all the free on street parking spots customers could use. The neighborhood got parking limited to 4 hours in more places to open it up for customers and workers actually were quoted complaining they would need to move their car during the day.

You can't compromise with people so cheap that free (for them) is the only thing they'll accept.

They don't need to add a garage at great expense when all they need to do is stop their own residents from taking the spots.

[dukuboy1]

I'm fairly certain that if the park is open 24hrs very few people who would need to drive to access are doing so at say 3am. Point being the area is mainly used by those who do not need to drive to access it. As for the free parking it will always be an issue no matter what. I think the developers should have made it more clear to residents & provided better solutions for parking. $80 a month for a garage is the going rate for downtown, and that's a huge ripoff. You would think they could bake the cost to park into the rents. But compromising on the times & duration of free street parking is the easiest. Look at it smartly and understand that 99% of the people using those spaces will be residents or guests or residents.

As for the parking garage idea that was just an idea based on what kind of development they have planned for the area. If you have hotels, office buildings, retail, entertainment & dining, you'll need to plan for how people from outside the area will access. It's nice to say "they'll ride the street car" or "ride bike & scooters" to the Riverfront but that's not practical. Those type of developments will need people outside of their immediate community to help support & sustain them. I'm bullish on the development of the Riverfront and like that PortAuth is as well. That area has the opportunity to be the front door of downtown and can be a huge catalyst to spur development as you travel South up the hill into those RiverMarket/Columbus Park areas.

[flyingember]

Past a certain point the difference between 4pm and 3am is neglible. The spots need to turn over after 4pm when people will use the park after work. And who are we to say someone couldn't come by at 4am and go on a walk before they start work at 6am?

There is a compromise. Give people visitor codes for the existing garage.

The area is absolutely mainly used by people who drive there. Have you see the number of cars at BarK? They're parking in the grass in numbers that impressed me with how much demand there is for a dog park and bar. They need to stop this to start building apartments in that same area

$80 per months is NOT the going rate for downtown. Back in 2012 the median was $90 for unreserved and $120 for reserved. It should be higher today. The streetcar wasn't operating in 2012 and parking demand is way up. $80 is a great deal for parking downtown.
https://www.kcmo.gov/home/showdocument?id=1889
page 64, 65

Buildings downtown should *never* bake the cost of parking into rent. It means someone who doesn't own a car pays the same as someone who does. Unbundling, if someone rides the bus and doesn't own a car it makes the lease more affordable for them. The place also knows if 75% of spots are leased they can open their extra spots up at higher hourly rates and make more money.

They are planning for how people will access the area. They are looking at a streetcar expansion. The stop would be right about where their residents are parking and could replace the spots. So they need residents not relying on them. It's one of the most used light rail systems in the country per mile and they can expect dramatic increases in people using the park not by car.

The streetcar opens up access for 100,000 people downtown who can choose to go there without them building hundreds of parking spots in a garage at ~$10,000 per spot. At 150 people per vehicle every 15 minutes the train can offload 6000 people in ten hours. 6000 people worth of parking spots at 2.5 people per car is $24 million. The streetcar will cost around $35 million. 2400 parking spots replaces an actual building in the project. Any smaller a garage and the streetcar can bring more customers to their project

[KCtoBrooklyn]

Port KC works to fill a gap in its offerings at Berkley Riverfront

...
The Port Authority of Kansas City has requested rezoning that would allow for a hotel, even though the agency has no specific project in mind, spokeswoman Mariah Shields told the Kansas City Business Journal on Wednesday.

A hotel was always part of the Berkley Riverfront vision — there are none there or in the nearby River Market — but the use wasn't included in the original master plan. This action would correct that.
...
The action to rezone was on the docket for Tuesday's City Plan Commission meeting, but action was continued to March because of delays in required public meetings about the project.

https://tinyurl.com/v2sllqd

This was on the agenda for the CPC meeting today. Here is a little more info from there:

The applicant is requesting the following modifications to the current approved MPD Plan:
1. Amend the existing uses to allow for hotel.
2. Modify the street layout to remove the roundabout at the intersection of Berkley Parkway and E.
Riverfront drive. This is as a result of the street car line extension.
3. Increase the overall density for the development.
4. Increase the building height to unlimited for the development.

There also seems to be some confirmation that Parcel 3 (to the east of of Union) will be 10 stories mixed use/residential with 560 units and a 5 story garage.

The hotel (which I guess is still theoretical) is listed as 7 stories.

[normalthings]

From the updated master plan:



The proposed Hotel looks like it will be 7 floors.

Parcel 13 has gone from surface parking to proposed 5 floor, 65', 60K SQFT mixed use space.





More Details: A representative from Linden Street Partners was the only person to attend the Master Plan Update community meeting.

Phase 2: Spring 2020 - Spring 2023

• DEVELOPMENT OF PARCELS 12A, 12B, AND 12C

• CONSTRUCTION OF RIVERFRONT DRIVE AND BERKLEY PARKWAY INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS

• PLATTING PARCELS 12A, 12B, AND 12C

• CONSTRUCTION OF PRIVATE WATER MAINS, PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER MAINS AND STORM SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE TO SERVICE PARCELS 12A, 12B, AND 12C

• CONSTRUCTION OF WATER, SANITARY SEWER, AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LINES TO SERVICE PARCELS 12A, 12B, AND 12C

Phase 3: Fall 2020-Fall 2030

• DEVELOPMENT OF PARCELS 3 THROUGH 11 AND 13

• RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION FOR TROOST AVENUE, FOREST AVENUE, TRACY AVENUE, AND LYDIA AVENUE NORTH OF BERKLEY PARKWAY

• PLATTING PARCELS 3 THROUGH 11 AND 13

• CONSTRUCTION OF TROOST AVENUE, FOREST AVENUE, TRACY AVENUE, AND LYDIA AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS TO RIVERFRONT ROAD ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF PARCELS 3, 4, 5, AND 6 CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARALLEL PARKING LANE ON BERKLEY PARKWAY ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARCELS 3, 4, AND 5

• CONSTRUCTION OF INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS AT THE INTERSECTION OF BERKLEY PARKWAY AND LYDIA AVENUE

• CONSTRUCTION OF A MEDIAN BREAK AND LEFT TURN LANE ON BERKLEY PARKWAY TO ALLOW VEHICULAR ACCESS BETWEEN FOREST AVENUE AND EASTBOUND BERKLEY PARKWAY

• CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC WATER MAINS, SANITARY SEWER MAINS, AND STORM SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE TO SERVICE PARCELS 3 THROUGH 11 AND 13

• CONSTRUCTION OF WATER, SANITARY SEWER, AND STORM SEWER SERVICE LINES TO SERVICE PARCELS 3 THROUGH 11 AND 13

[Chris Stritzel]

This is an idea for the North Riverfront in St. Louis. Something like this should be considered for the Berkeley Riverfront area. There's far more demand in KC than in STL and the guys here are serious about getting this built in some form. Even Lumiere Place is signing on to the deal. If the "Founders District" were dropped in KC, this would become a very vibrant and busy area but it would be like building a second downtown. Just an idea though. What I'm sort of trying to say is build up and not spread out. Build taller buildings to get more residents down there.



On another note, that streetcar extension needs to happen. I know it will but all of these new developments will benefit greatly from the extended streetcar.

[GRID]

^ that makes so much more sense than what KC is doing. I mean, I still don't see how it makes sense to extend the streetcar to the riverfront if it's just going to be a handful of 4-5 story apartments with a lot of parking. While KC is at it, tear down the casino and build a new one with a proper hotel. This could be an area that would compete with northland and joco office parks a bit more than the core of downtown would.

[flyingember]

^ that makes so much more sense than what KC is doing. I mean, I still don't see how it makes sense to extend the streetcar to the riverfront if it's just going to be a handful of 4-5 story apartments with a lot of parking. While KC is at it, tear down the casino and build a new one with a proper hotel. This could be an area that would compete with northland and joco office parks a bit more than the core of downtown would.

There's a difference between "doing" and "this is a concept we came up with that has no basis in reality"

Did you notice this would require tearing out historic buildings and breaks up the grid of the neighborhood?The buildings drawn don't even always match existing buildings

That image isn't even an active project on their website of the architect. At best this is a "if we get enough in incentives" concept image

[kboish]

Ala KC's East Village renderings from a decade ago. Awesome, but never gonna happen.

[shinatoo]

About as likely as the football stadium that was going to go on that site. North St. Louis is now as bad, or worse, than East St. Louis.