Renovations of apartment buildings along Armour Blvd.

[chrizow]

Could the properties actually be condemned by the city?

this would be the endgame, yes.

[KCMax]

Business
Developer appealing West Armour apartment decision

Mac Property Management is asking the Board of Zoning Adjustment to allow the demolition of several historic, dilapidated buildings at 100-118 W. Armour Blvd. Mac believes it’s not financially viable to renovate the old buildings and instead wants to replace them with a new apartment building without city incentives.
Mac’s proposal to raze the West Armour buildings was rejected by the preservation commission last September. Peter Cassel, an official at Mac Property, said the BZA is being asked to reconsider the matter based on the argument it would not be financial viable to renovate the buildings.

[KCMax]

Developer forgoes incentives for Ambassador Apartments redevelopment

The Tax Increment Financing Commission of Kansas City on Wednesday granted a rare developer's request that public financing for a local project be eliminated.

3560 Broadway LLC, a development partnership associated with Chicago-based MAC Property Management LLC, asked the commission to terminate the Uptown TIF Plan's project area 1D, which includes the nine-story, 1920s Ambassador Apartments building at 3560 Broadway....


When asked why the partnership decided not to take advantage of the subsidy, Cassel had a simple answer: "We didn't need it."

[Demosthenes]

Wow... Do you think they are doing this to help make themselves look good in our community, so that they will get permission to tear down the buildings on Armour? Surprising to see someone turn down money, and I'm curious what their angle is. I think it is that.

Nothing like improving your image before doing something that is controversial.

[KCMax]

Wow... Do you think they are doing this to help make themselves look good in our community, so that they will get permission to tear down the buildings on Armour? Surprising to see someone turn down money, and I'm curious what their angle is. I think it is that.

Nothing like improving your image before doing something that is controversial.

In the case of the Ambassador building renovation, there was one selfish reason for forgoing the incentive, Cassel added. The absence of TIF, he explained, will "give us a relatively simple asset to take to the capital markets."

[heatherkay]

Taking TIF money (or any tax subsidy or other incentive) comes with a lot of strings. "Free money" is never really free (unless you're a Pendergast). If they can make it work financially without the incentives, I think most developers would prefer to do without.

[chaglang]

Good news for East Armour. City attempting to create less crime-prone tenant mix in Eagle Point, llc owned and managed apartment buildings.

http://tinyurl.com/klgdr8b

Eagle Point was granted a 30 day continuance at yesterday's hearing. New hearing is set for February 4. Eagle Point said they thought everything was fine with the properties and were blindsided by the blight study. They also said they first heard about the blight study on an online forum.

[chaglang]

The preservation commission in September denied an economic-hardship judgment sought by the building owners, and the zoning board on Tuesday denied the owners’ appeal on a five-to-one vote.

The board ruling followed a 90-minute hearing and a dramatic pause, as the six members went into executive session to seek legal counsel, board chair Theresa Otto announced. Otto cast the lone dissenting vote.

Peter Cassel, representing the owners and developers of the properties, at 100-118 W. Armour Blvd., appeared stunned by the decision and declined to comment. His attorney, Charles Renner, of Husch Blackwell, was similarly taken aback. Renner expressed surprise and said the developer would have to evaluate its options.

Those options apparently include a further appeal to state court, or a decision to allow the four properties to sit and deteriorate further until late 2017, when the preservation commission’s decisions would expire and the developer could go ahead with plans to demolish the buildings and building new ones.

http://www.kansascity.com/2014/01/28/47 ... ation.html

[Eon Blue]

So now they sit vacant and deteriorate for 5 more years?

[loftguy]

So now they sit vacant and deteriorate for 5 more years?

Sincere suggestion: The energy that the community exhibited in opposing the demolition of these buildings, should now be directed towards creative & cooperative solutions to get these buildings rehabbed. Do something unique to help this situation. Otherwise, the 'victory' is futile.

[taxi]

I met a guy who rehabs housing in midtown and he told me he tried to buy these, with a plan to rehab them, but the Mac folks turned him down.

[heatherkay]

I wondered how much he offered and how much mac would take now that they know they can't demo and build a new building.

[pash]

.

[heatherkay]

Not until 2017. They might not want to sit on them for that long, not making any money and inviting an attractive nuisance lawsuit.

[beautyfromashes]

What did they pay for them?

[chaglang]

I met a guy who rehabs housing in midtown and he told me he tried to buy these, with a plan to rehab them, but the Mac folks turned him down.

If we're thinking of the same guy, he is severely undercapitalized for a project that size. And there has been bad blood between him and MAC for years.

IIRC MAC paid $700k for them.

To Loftguy's point, the neighborhood claimed that they had multiple serious developers lined up to bid on the project. None have ever materialized. Short of finding someone to buy these off MAC, I don't know what else they can do to help the situation. Certainly the buildings are uninhabitable in their current state, so there isn't much possibility for a temporary community use of some kind. I think you won't hear much out of the neighborhood until 2017.

[loftguy]

I met a guy who rehabs housing in midtown and he told me he tried to buy these, with a plan to rehab them, but the Mac folks turned him down.

If we're thinking of the same guy, he is severely undercapitalized for a project that size. And there has been bad blood between him and MAC for years.

IIRC MAC paid $700k for them.

To Loftguy's point, the neighborhood claimed that they had multiple serious developers lined up to bid on the project. None have ever materialized. Short of finding someone to buy these off MAC, I don't know what else they can do to help the situation. Certainly the buildings are uninhabitable in their current state, so there isn't much possibility for a temporary community use of some kind. I think you won't hear much out of the neighborhood until 2017.

Money talks. Help to offset the costs of this redevelopment by community subsidy. Crowd funding. I'll throw in $20 and if a few thousand others do too and then persuade a foundation, or two to make contributions. with the city making an in-district discretionary fund allocation, etc. , then suddenly the complexion changes.... It really is how things get done when a community decides that something is important.

And frankly, if the community does not pursue some such mechanism then stop agonizing and tear the stuff down.

[KCtoBrooklyn]

Money talks. Help to offset the costs of this redevelopment by community subsidy. Crowd funding. I'll throw in $20 and if a few thousand others do too and then persuade a foundation, or two to make contributions. with the city making an in-district discretionary fund allocation, etc. , then suddenly the complexion changes.... It really is how things get done when a community decides that something is important.

And frankly, if the community does not pursue some such mechanism then stop agonizing and tear the stuff down.

I've often thought about crowd funding for projects like this. The problem with a renovation of this size, if people are only giving $20, you would need 185,000 people to reach the estimated $3.7M cost. I think if it could be done like an REIT where people can buy shares in the building, or like kiva loans where the money gets repaid, you could get more people to put in larger amounts.

[Demosthenes]

Shoot I will throw $20 down. Make it $50 even. Crowdfunding is a great idea and a lot of people would no doubt pitch in. Just like how the Tivoli stayed in business. As KctoBrooklyn said, if people were offered something in return for their pitching in, then I think it could really take off.

I also agree with Loftguy though. If the community is not willing to really try to find a solution, then this is all a waste of time and they might as well let MAC tear them down. After all, it isn't like they plan on making them a parking lot. They have an actual plan to build something very reasonable on this property.

I would much prefer us renovate the current buildings, but I feel weird about MAC and the city being at odds over this. The only way to make this situation okay is to get a real plan together for it and the money needed. That or give it to MAC to tear down.

This definitely isn't the time to forget about these buildings until 2017. We were given an amazing opportunity. How many times has this happened in the past here in KC? Telling a developer with a good plan they can't tear down a building? Shit is it the first lol? Have to actually take advantage of this.

[Demosthenes]

The crowdfunding to get $3.7 million is totally doable. A hundred dollars a person would go really far, especially if someone like a Kauffman decide to get involved.