Katz on Main

[DaveKCMO]

This property will still get redeveloped. Hopefully the Council will proactively entice a new affordable housing developer via the Housing Trust Fund, because no one is going to go that route on their own without incentives. Perhaps those on the Council who incorrectly consider the streetcar an incentive will look at such a deal differently.

And we still haven't heard a peep from the current owner, who isn't paying any taxes at all.

[Highlander]

This property will still get redeveloped. Hopefully the Council will proactively entice a new affordable housing developer via the Housing Trust Fund, because no one is going to go that route on their own without incentives. Perhaps those on the Council who incorrectly consider the streetcar an incentive will look at such a deal differently.

And we still haven't heard a peep from the current owner, who isn't paying any taxes at all.

Wouldn't any developer without incentives already be paying higher property taxes as part of the levy to pay for the streetcar? I'm not sure why anyone would call the street car an incentive under those circumstances.

Plus, affordable housing has become a bit of a dog whistle in KC. One way to ensure there is less affordable housing is to shut down the mechanism that is creating housing.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

This property will still get redeveloped. Hopefully the Council will proactively entice a new affordable housing developer via the Housing Trust Fund, because no one is going to go that route on their own without incentives. Perhaps those on the Council who incorrectly consider the streetcar an incentive will look at such a deal differently.

And we still haven't heard a peep from the current owner, who isn't paying any taxes at all.

Wouldn't any developer without incentives already be paying higher property taxes as part of the levy to pay for the streetcar? I'm not sure why anyone would call the street car an incentive under those circumstances.

Plus, affordable housing has become a bit of a dog whistle in KC. One way to ensure there is less affordable housing is to shut down the mechanism that is creating housing.

Wait. So you’re saying if we don’t build housing it will naturally become less and less affordable..huh, who knew

[Highlander]

This property will still get redeveloped. Hopefully the Council will proactively entice a new affordable housing developer via the Housing Trust Fund, because no one is going to go that route on their own without incentives. Perhaps those on the Council who incorrectly consider the streetcar an incentive will look at such a deal differently.

And we still haven't heard a peep from the current owner, who isn't paying any taxes at all.

Wouldn't any developer without incentives already be paying higher property taxes as part of the levy to pay for the streetcar? I'm not sure why anyone would call the street car an incentive under those circumstances.

Plus, affordable housing has become a bit of a dog whistle in KC. One way to ensure there is less affordable housing is to shut down the mechanism that is creating housing.

Wait. So you’re saying if we don’t build housing it will naturally become less and less affordable..huh, who knew

I'm saying that the more housing that is built, REGARDLESS of the rental cost of the unit, existing housing will become more and more affordable. Increasing the supply, even at the high end, will play its part because there are only a finite number of high renters - and then the dominoes will fall into place. You don't have to build "affordable housing" to make more affordable housing.

[beautyfromashes]

What will become really interesting is when the market conditions are such that good money can be made by developers without incentives. Will future councils demand affordable housing merely for giving a building permit? Will they implement rent control? Or will they let the market run and see construction boom?

[FangKC]

I'm saying that the more housing that is built, REGARDLESS of the rental cost of the unit, existing housing will become more and more affordable. Increasing the supply, even at the high end, will play its part because there are only a finite number of high renters - and then the dominoes will fall into place. You don't have to build "affordable housing" to make more affordable housing.

No one on the council seems to understand this. Older buildings without amenities become more affordable because they can't compete with new buildings with them. They can't raise their rent as high because they don't have central air, off-street parking, dishwashers and in-suite washer and dryers. Some don't even have laundry rooms in the building. These bare-bones apartment buildings are able to charge more currently because their is so much competition for housing due to the lack of enough housing being built going all the way back to the real estate crash in 2008.

It isn't just apartment buildings; it's single family houses too. In the past two days, I've gotten four calls from "investors" who want to buy my house -- likely to flip. The neighborhood Facebook page reflects this is happening to many homeowners here. It's because there is such low inventory for SFHs.

The other thing about building any new buildlings along the streetcar route -- even with incentives -- is that you are likely attracting new residents to KCMO from our own suburbs and outside the metro. New residents will likely provide the City more in sales taxes than any property tax revenues.

If the Council continues to discourage developers, they will just go build in our suburbs and all the new residents will stay in their suburban communities or outsiders will live at Lenexa City Center instead on central KCMO, and our city will lose out on the sales tax revenue.

Secondly, there is no guarantee any other developer will save the Katz building. It's easier to knock it down and create more apartments and revenue for the project. Sixty more apartments actually helps ease the affordable housing problem even if they are high-rent apartments, because those residents won't be competing for older building apartments that lower income residents need.

If Johnson County keeps adding residents, it will soon have more people than Jackson County, MO. When this happens, it will have enough economic weight to suck KCMO dry.

[CrossroadsUrbanApts]

Any ideas on where the last minute requirements for affordable housing, public sharing of parking, and some kind of set aside for minority-owned retail come from? Seems odd to have the in-district council member out of nowhere introducing significant amendments at the council level with no previous discussion in committee or other forums. While the SB Friedman analysis may have said the originally requested abatement was excessive, I'm doubting that it touched on the impact of public provision of parking and minority retail inclusion? Why not just vote to shrink the abatement to a shorter-term or percentage like the SB Friedman report recommended rather than loading on poison-pill requirements? What a crazy process.

[FangKC]

It appears someone wanted this project dead. Stake-through-the-heart dead.

[normalthings]

It appears someone wanted this project dead. Stake-through-the-heart dead.

I think the parking request comes from Bunch’s anti parking stance. Shields hinted at such being the case. In fact, I believe she said this is the second project he has killed over public parking.

[Highlander]

Any ideas on where the last minute requirements for affordable housing, public sharing of parking, and some kind of set aside for minority-owned retail come from? Seems odd to have the in-district council member out of nowhere introducing significant amendments at the council level with no previous discussion in committee or other forums. While the SB Friedman analysis may have said the originally requested abatement was excessive, I'm doubting that it touched on the impact of public provision of parking and minority retail inclusion? Why not just vote to shrink the abatement to a shorter-term or percentage like the SB Friedman report recommended rather than loading on poison-pill requirements? What a crazy process.

I'll never understand the reasoning (or lack of) when it comes to incentives in KC. All kinds of mediocre projects seem to get approved and then when something that will really benefit the city comes along, substantial opposition comes from seemingly nowhere. Another such project was the BNIM HQ when Helzberg had offered a location in the Crossroads requiring incentives (a project that would have kept a large architectural firm's HQ in KCMO). That project had substantial public opposition and the council, to their credit, did try to work out a compromise which ultimately was rejected by the group who started the petition initiative. Fortunately, that worked out OK for KC but it could have gone very differently, JoCo was certainly doing their best to attract BNIM to Kansas.

It's almost as if nobody really cares about incentives until some nebulous and arbitrary incentive threshold is surpassed and people get upset and oppose whatever is being proposed at that time regardless of the quality and benefit of the project (KC would oppose having Microsoft's HQ if it was proposed at the wrong time). The KC Star's prodding doesn't help either.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

I'm saying that the more housing that is built, REGARDLESS of the rental cost of the unit, existing housing will become more and more affordable. Increasing the supply, even at the high end, will play its part because there are only a finite number of high renters - and then the dominoes will fall into place. You don't have to build "affordable housing" to make more affordable housing.

No one on the council seems to understand this. Older buildings without amenities become more affordable because they can't compete with new buildings with them. They can't raise their rent as high because they don't have central air, off-street parking, dishwashers and in-suite washer and dryers. Some don't even have laundry rooms in the building. These bare-bones apartment buildings are able to charge more currently because their is so much competition for housing due to the lack of enough housing being built going all the way back to the real estate crash in 2008.

It isn't just apartment buildings; it's single family houses too. In the past two days, I've gotten four calls from "investors" who want to buy my house -- likely to flip. The neighborhood Facebook page reflects this is happening to many homeowners here. It's because there is such low inventory for SFHs.

The other thing about building any new buildlings along the streetcar route -- even with incentives -- is that you are likely attracting new residents to KCMO from our own suburbs and outside the metro. New residents will likely provide the City more in sales taxes than any property tax revenues.

If the Council continues to discourage developers, they will just go build in our suburbs and all the new residents will stay in their suburban communities or outsiders will live at Lenexa City Center instead on central KCMO, and our city will lose out on the sales tax revenue.

Secondly, there is no guarantee any other developer will save the Katz building. It's easier to knock it down and create more apartments and revenue for the project. Sixty more apartments actually helps ease the affordable housing problem even if they are high-rent apartments, because those residents won't be competing for older building apartments that lower income residents need.

If Johnson County keeps adding residents, it will soon have more people than Jackson County, MO. When this happens, it will have enough economic weight to suck KCMO dry.

Stealing this to prove a point on Facebook, thanks for doing the heavy lifting fang!

[GRID]

Huh? I just got an email from KCBJ that this project was basically killed? WTF?

That was a good project worthy of incentives. Just because KCMO is finally putting in a few miles of streetcar doesn't mean no more incentives for urban projects like this, especially when they save historic buildings. The Streetcar is giving developers a reason to build in midtown "with incentives". Even with the streetcar, you are going to have to hand out some incentives for projects like this.

KCMO and its anti development crowd are once again not understanding that Overland Park, Lenexa, KCK, etc are giving even more incentives to build on open lots in the suburbs and nobody is forcing money losing affordable units on them.

Is KCMO really going to funkhouser things up again? There is a lot happening in KC, but compared to most peer cities, KC is still probably below average when it comes to development. Time to shut it down again!

And enough with the "affordable housing" thing. You don't build new affordable housing. That doesn't even make sense. How does a brand new building have "affordable housing" in it. You create affordable housing by increasing supply and creating more affordable housing with aging buildings. New construction affordable housing is called subsidized housing. And they don't have granite countertops and rooftop party areas.

Why should people making min wage be able to live in a brand new structure with all these amenities in the best locations? Work your way up and increase your income and you can afford nicer places. Till then, rent a cheaper place. They exist. If you are uneducated/unskilled and make 15 an hour, then you probably won't be living in the newest class A apartment buildings in the city.

The people at city hall in KCMO need to go watch some youtube videos. Even with incentives, these urban projects are FAR more feasible and sustainable and better for tax payers in the long term for the city than northland sprawl. It's not even close.

[normalthings]

Good to point out that some members were in support of the project and incentive package. It was the amendment that was narrowly passed that sank the whole thing.

Bunch and O’Neill need to go.

O’Neill is almost completely anti-downtown and urban core at this point. Bunch is unwilling to be realistic with many of his demands.

[im2kull]

I hate the council now. It’s official.

You reap what you sow. Like I said below in another thread.. this shouldn't surprise anyone. The current council is very anti-development. We are in the middle of what could be a transformational building boom, but there's not much building going on because the council is blocking everything.

The Lucas hate has to be one of this board’s strangest quirks

Why? This is a development orientated board and Lucas has shown to be vehemently anti-development with his rhetoric.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

Just found TIF Watch KC Facebook group…and boy could you point me to a group of more ignorant people…

[normalthings]

I thought was this boards boy. He seems pretty anti development and his twitter is well 90% pandering garbage.

I don’t think he ever was.

Pushed Troy Schulte and the head of finance out the door.

Campaign backed by the most well known anti development and transit groups.

Approved free transit but didn’t allocate funding for it.

Cut the EDC budget.

Isn’t really that supportive of streetcar.

Obviously all of this anti-development stuff

[herrfrank]

^ depressing

Katz Drug in Westport is iconic Kansas City. Clarence Kivett was at his post-juvenile upswing, full of the energy that KC exuded in the 1920s-1930s. Is it immature deco? Yes, but it bespeaks a period in time. Later he did adult projects (with Myers) like the Truman Sports Complex and the Mid-Continental Airport (currently being refashioned by this same uptight council).

To throw away the redevelopment of a building like this, well, it recalls the bad days of the 1970s and 1980s -- the demolition of Central HIgh, turning downtown high rises into surface lots, the angry attacks and eventual implosion of Paseo High. KC has flattened a lot of its charm; sad to see that historical vindictiveness repeating itself.

[dukuboy1]

Really a shame this project has been killed. Great overall design that kept the architectural distinctness of Katz & incorporated new design it what would have been a nice “jewel” on the street car line. That’s now all gone and the luster of the midtown route has surely worn off. Going to be a few nice properties bordered by slum lord properties. This could have been a catalyst but the dim witted KCMO Council is focused on grabbing headlines of the latest and greatest and missing out in real opportunities to bring back long forgotten neighbors back to some semblance of past glory

[normalthings]

Must remember there are specific council members who worked to kill this. Unfortunately, they are mostly new members.

[dukuboy1]

Who wanted it killed & why? Obvious Lucas was indifferent to the plan. But what was the issue? Did they feel it was going to be a loser tax wise over the years? Do they just want to shout “affordable housing” from the top of city hall with no plan? New affordable housing, like another poster mentioned is basically subsidized housing. I just don’t get it. This was a great project for an area that could be transformative for neighborhoods to the east, to keep momentum going. No it’s going to be turn down and most likely sit vacant or have a shitty ho-hum development built on it. What a whiff by City Council. No leaders with visions, just bozos with sound bites