Wonderful Waldo

[chaglang]

This is fascinating because it sounds like the 3rd District reps are also opposed to incentives for the MAC project at Armour and Troost, which makes me wonder where precisely it's ok to use incentives.

....inside the 3rd district??

Except that 1/2 of that project is in the 3rd.

[FangKC]

Did anyone read my post in "Next Mayor 2019"? Q isn't working for the city. He is currently on a power trip as evidenced by his antagonism toward the Port Authority. He has one goal: his election to congress. If he has his way, you won't see him run for a second term as mayor. That would be a blessing.

Is he hoping to take over for Emanuel Cleaver?

[missingkc]

Of course, I don't know the exact path he sees for his career. What I was trying to say is that I think his personal vision is not for Kansas City, it's for his own future. Sly was a gem in this regard. He had a successful career behind him, and seemed focused on doing what he thought was best for KC, even when he didn't have political winds at his back. Lucas has already shown that his commitment to programs important to KC is piecemeal. His actions on the Berkeley and Waldo projects including affordable housing are perfect examples.

I'm very troubled by his antagonism toward Jon Stevens and PortKC. This is a bad situation. PortKC is a legitimate agency with legitimate development assistance powers that, under Stephens leadership, have been used to forward good projects in KC over the last few years. Lucas is willing to stop those projects and to hamstring the agency. KC needs every bit of assistance with development it can get. Lucas attitude and actions may be good for him, but they're bad for KC.

[chaglang]

I also think he’s waiting on Cleaver’s seat. But the arbitrariness and pettiness I’ve seen from him so far definitely makes him presidential material... so who knows. Ha.

[grovester]

Exactly, the politics of aggrievement.

It's more important that he be seen saying no, than the decision itself.

[kboish]

This project was discussed at length on Twitter the other day between Q, probably people from this board, and I think even the developer chimed in.

For those that are interested, the initiating comment is here, but the conversation spirals in a number of directions between the respondents.

[chaglang]

Using the blight designation seems intentionally narrow, in a way that lets Waddell & Reed avoid the same scrutiny. I think we're in for 4-8 years of shifting rationales with no defined development strategy.

[smh]

I just don't know how we can expect development anywhere in the city if by-the-book small projects like this, supported by City Planning and EDC, are stunned at full council with a denial.

I can say with certainty that these developers were blindsided by this decision. Over a year spent on this project by them.

[kboish]

And honestly, this is where Lucas' slipperyness comes in to play. On Twitter he said, that they did not reject incentives for the project, they only rejected the blight designation (he again said this on Twitter today). While technically true, this is a meaningless point since they no longer qualify for incentives if there is no blight designation, yet, he will go around saying they didn't reject the project. I feel like I've seen him thread that needle several times- where he is technically accurate, but his statements are misleading on the broader point.

Additionally, he spent so much time stating that the city will support projects that include affordable housing and is now cheer leading tranist, and yet this move undermines both of those positions.

The other weird thing about this situation is Waldo isn't like some super nice place. And in fact it fades out quick depending on the direction you go. So its not like this is some super wealthy and well developed area. South of 75th street is one of the worst strips in KC. And there are areas around 75th that are just as car-oriented, tired strip mallish spots (kind of like this one).

The developer stated the EDC's analysis shows this project doesn't work without this incentive. Thats the process. How do you reject that without people completely losing faith in what you have set up?

I don't see how this particular project doesn't put a chill on development going forward. Unless it now just comes down to the Mayor picking and choosing projects that have buttered him up. If thats so, that is not a good place for us to be.

[missingkc]

Well said. Question to someone better versed in the history and status of planning than I am: what is the origin of the blight:incentives connection? How widespread is it? Is it in use pretty much everyplace? Can the city provide incentives without a blight designation?

[chaglang]

Back in 2016 he had the chance to vote against the Intercontinental blight designation at committee level in 2016 and didn't, voting instead to pass it on to council without a recommendation.

[CrossroadsUrbanApts]

Hey all, thanks for the support of our project and I can confirm that we were blindsided by this. In part because the EDC repeatedly assured us that all was going to plan and no surprises were to be expected. Obviously we fell down not gathering broader support on the Council but that has never been an issue for us before when we had the support of the LCRA, EDC and in-district councilpersons. Clearly elections have consequences. Lesson learned.

There is one opportunity tomorrow (Thursday 12/19) to have the ordinance reconsidered by the Council. If anyone has any relationships with Councilpersons who voted "no" - such as Northland councilpersons O'Neill, Hall and Loar, I would't object to you putting in a good word for our project. I can't imagine a Northland councilperson would enjoy the precedent being set that whole neighborhoods by definition cannot be blighted, no matter the particularities of the individual site.

The financial gap for our project in large part arises from two sources: (1) we need to tear down a concrete bunker-like structure (old Ice House) that is quite expensive. This isn't a vacant lot ready for redevelopment. (2) Rents are not where they need to be relative to construction costs, especially for a small (under 40 units) project without any economies of scale. Hard costs were about $115/SF when we built in the Crossroads in 2016-2017, now costs are closer to $155/SF and up. Even with a large commercial tenant on the first floor we are still struggling to make the numbers work with a 75% abatement. No abatements means you'll only see very large projects (150+) that can achieve the necessary economies of scale. I don't think that is particularly healthy for the city to only depend on large developments (and large developers).

[beautyfromashes]

My understanding is that this development had an affordable housing component. What credits did you get for providing affordable housing? Can you drop that piece and sell at market rate to make the project viable without getting the blight designation?

[kboish]

So all of the Northland voted against this (minus Fowler). If Waldo can't have blight, then the Northland certainly can't. Prepare for hypocrisy.

[CrossroadsUrbanApts]

Good question on affordable housing. Because it is an important issue to Diane and me, we set aside a certain number of studios to rent for approx. $850/mo., which as I understand it qualifies as "Affordable Housing" under the KCMO definition. We didn't do it in order to get any special credits or subsidies (LCRA abatement does not require it, and we had sufficient onsite parking). But in hindsight I think mentioning this publicly was a mistake because our little project got caught up in the heated debate over affordable housing. We never intended to try and solve that problem on our own, just wanted to make our own small contribution. Because this was to be done voluntarily, we can just rent those apartments at market rate (~$1,000/month). But that additional revenue doesn't come anywhere near to offsetting the property tax abatement we applied for.

[beautyfromashes]

What a mess! Really sorry for you guys. Makes sense about the affordable housing not covering the property tax abatement. Sure seems that should have swayed some councilpeople to vote for it. We have a partially affordable housing project that the city just voted against when that was supposed to be one of our largest goals. I’m not sure how other small developers wouldn’t read the message that setting up affordability doesn’t help push a project through and to just stick market rate.

[kboish]

So Lucas just voted to approve the Romanelli Shops IN WALDO as blighted so that they could form a CID.

[nickyrosstheboss]

[grovester]

JFC

[alejandro46]

Its like Quinton Lucas just says shit to get political points and really doesn't care or something, right? Just over here waiting for all those millions of $$$ in affordable housing to get planned East of Troost right, or would that be GENTRIFICATION? Don't forget to make all those developers buy acres of lots to meet our city's 1980s era parking minimums and appease the NIMBYS! (Looking at you HPNA, Armour Corners).