P&L district, Cordish, Retail discussion (from 14th/Main thread)

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 1:48 pm

Does every thread have to divert to this one issue? Let's use this to celebrate a 24x7 diner and other great restaurants on this block

LenexatoKCMO · Post by **LenexatoKCMO** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:00 pm

KC-wildcat wrote: so what's your point? Are you saying that it was unwise to subsidize P&L? Are you saying that had you known the retail portion was going to sit empty, you would not have supported an initiative to replace surface lots with infrastructure?

No - I am saying the contract should have been given to a developer that actually had the retail juice to pull of what was promissed - because clearly Cordish didn't and was all talk.

KC-wildcat · Post by **KC-wildcat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:06 pm

LenexatoKCMO wrote: No - I am saying the contract should have been given to a developer that actually had the retail juice to pull of what was promissed - because clearly Cordish didn't and was all talk.

Given the risk associated with the DTKC marketplace, do you think another developer would have filled the entire retail block in the one year window before the economy went to shit?

I don't.

KCTigerFan · Post by **KCTigerFan** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:07 pm

So which developer was jumping at the prospect of investing in downtown?

LenexatoKCMO wrote: No - I am saying the contract should have been given to a developer that actually had the retail juice to pull of what was promissed - because clearly Cordish didn't and was all talk.

Post by **dangerboy** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:14 pm

LenexatoKCMO wrote: No - I am saying the contract should have been given to a developer that actually had the retail juice to pull of what was promissed - because clearly Cordish didn't and was all talk.

Let's not forget that Kansas City had to practically beg Cordish to take on this project. No one else was interested in it. If you had a list of willing developers I'm sure Kay Barnes would have love to have seen it six years ago.

LenexatoKCMO · Post by **LenexatoKCMO** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:18 pm

KC-wildcat wrote: Given the risk associated with the DTKC marketplace, do you think another developer would have filled the entire retail block in the one year window before the economy went to shit?

Filled the entire block? Shit we have one lhalf-sized JABanks and zero prospect for improvement anywhere on the horizon.

KCTigerFan wrote: So which developer was jumping at the prospect of investing in downtown?

So you are conceding that Cordish didn't have the juice to pull it off? This gets trotted out everytime anyone questions Cordish's performance - "no one else would have done it". We the public have zero idea of just what other options were on the table and whether or not anyone else would have been interested. So it would absolutely be a fallacy to assume that Cordish was the only viable option. Besides, is "we were the only viable option" really a credible defense when your company shits the bed?

KC-wildcat · Post by **KC-wildcat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:28 pm

LenexatoKCMO wrote: Filled the entire block? Shit we have one lhalf-sized JABanks and zero prospect for improvement anywhere on the horizon.

Yeah, filled the entire block. i mean, if another developer came in and gave us 3-4 tenants instead of 1, given the marketplace, I'd say it would be a wash. Both developments would be equally dissapointing. But, if there is some developer out there that would have filled the entire block with $$$-generating tenants, than I agree, we should have gone with that developer.

But you know as well as I do, that such developer is a figment of your imagination.

KC-wildcat · Post by **KC-wildcat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:40 pm

LenexatoKCMO wrote:
We the public have zero idea of just what other options were on the table and whether or not anyone else would have been interested. So it would absolutely be a fallacy to assume that Cordish was the only viable option.

Point taken. But, employing your very logic, it would also be a fallacy to assume that Cordish was NOT the only viable option.

The only difference between our stance and your stance is that we have a history of development to back our argument that Cordish was alone in the pursuit of this project. Since the white flight of the 60-70s, DTKC had turned into a blighted shithole. Not a single developer has ever surfaced with any real intention of revitalizing DTKC. No project of this magnitude has ever been proposed by anyone. fact. Fastforward to the early 2000s. Cordish appears on the radar.

People can draw their own conclusions. But, history clearly supports the theory that Cordish was NOT in competition with other developers to develop the blighted, shithole that was the southern end of the CBD.

bobbyhawks · Post by **bobbyhawks** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:42 pm

KCPowercat wrote: Does every thread have to divert to this one issue? Let's use this to celebrate a 24x7 diner and other great restaurants on this block

On that note, it looks like they are starting hot and heavy on the Genghis Grill or whatever it is called. Looks like it will be a two floor space? next to Bice along Main. Sign claims that it will open in June.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:45 pm

Well that's 13th and main block but I applaud the try

LenexatoKCMO · Post by **LenexatoKCMO** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:54 pm

KC-wildcat wrote: People can draw their own conclusions. But, history clearly supports the theory that Cordish was NOT in competition with other developers to develop the blighted, shithole that was the southern end of the CBD.

You leave out the "trivial" detail that there were hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer assistance available to sweaten the pot. All of this suggestion that Cordish was the only viable option seems to miraculously only come from Cordish. Bottom line, we have no idea. Regardless, it is a pretty sad excuse.

Cordish has made their intentions crystal clear on this; any and all underperformance in the district, for any reason, shall be the fault of the city and/or the economy. Their own performance is never to be called into question, lest we be reminded that they were the only one interested in taking our hundreds of millions of dollars and blessing us with their assistance. Nevermind the fact that the failure to get the retail lease committments actually went down YEARS AGO - clearly that is all the fault of the economy and the city. How dare we question their pull with retailers - their failure to lease that space years ago is clearly traceable to today's economy. &&& Cordish has done a hell of a good job of pointing fingers around this town but god forbid one comes pointing back.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:58 pm

Lenexa...I can feel where you are coming from but I think you just described the attitude of every developer in the US.

KC-wildcat · Post by **KC-wildcat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 2:59 pm

LenexatoKCMO wrote:
Cordish has done a hell of a good job of pointing fingers around this town but god forbid one comes pointing back.

Then bring it. Let's hear it. I'm all ears.

Who are the other devlopers? What were their plans? If you want to start pointing fingers, I'm with you. But until and unless you have some ammunition, maybe you shouldn't be pointing fingers.

LenexatoKCMO · Post by **LenexatoKCMO** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:04 pm

KC-wildcat wrote: Then bring it. Let's hear it. I'm all ears.

Who are the other devlopers? What were their plans?

That's just it - we have NO idea.

KC-wildcat wrote: If you want to start pointing fingers, I'm with you. But until and unless you have some ammunition, maybe you shouldn't be pointing fingers.

You are missing the bigger point - even if Cordish truly was the only developer in the world interested in our money/project, is that a legitimate excuse for accepting half-ass performance from them? If you only have one job applicant show up and interview for a job and then turn out to be incompetent after you hire them, does that excuse their incompetence and make them a good employee? When that shitty employee turns around and blaims his performance failure on you and his work environment, do you say "oh well, he was the only one that interviewed so he must be right"?

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:06 pm

Incompotent is a pretty heavy word. One block is really lagging, the rest are doing quite well.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:07 pm

LenexatoKCMO wrote: You leave out the "trivial" detail that there were hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer assistance available to sweaten the pot. All of this suggestion that Cordish was the only viable option seems to miraculously only come from Cordish. Bottom line, we have no idea. Regardless, it is a pretty sad excuse.

Cordish has made their intentions crystal clear on this; any and all underperformance in the district, for any reason, shall be the fault of the city and/or the economy. Their own performance is never to be called into question, lest we be reminded that they were the only one interested in taking our hundreds of millions of dollars and blessing us with their assistance. Nevermind the fact that the failure to get the retail lease committments actually went down YEARS AGO - clearly that is all the fault of the economy and the city. How dare we question their pull with retailers - their failure to lease that space years ago is clearly traceable to today's economy. &&& Cordish has done a hell of a good job of pointing fingers around this town but god forbid one comes pointing back.

What I really don't understand about your frustration and vitriol is the fact that Cordish IS STILL ACTIVELY WORKING ON THE DISTRICT. Your comments would be more appropriate if Cordish left town with the money or just closed some concepts giving up, but someone just mentioned there are some "big and unexpected" announcements still to come. Overall, I'm happy with the tenants that Cordish brought downtown and I think they've exceeded expectations. That area is still somewhere of an island and needs a lot more public investment around it to truly take off like Crown Center or the Plaza. The fact that the district didn't meet sales expectations is related to bad consulting in addition to the snail's pace that Cordish seems to work. Blame can be spread, but having the project built is a huge success.

What retailers would you like to see beyond H+M? I will put money on the fact that Cordish secures better tenants within the next year than your suggestions. Maybe they're being too picky?

LenexatoKCMO · Post by **LenexatoKCMO** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:25 pm

trailerkid wrote:
What retailers would you like to see beyond H+M? I will put money on the fact that Cordish secures better tenants within the next year than your suggestions. Maybe they're being too picky?

More than one would be a good start. I could give a fig about H+M - never been in one. However, at this point I suspect we are likely to see t-shirt shops and dorothy trinkits long before we see a legit retailer - the ship has passed. Clearly Cordish has little pull with retailers and by the time conditions improve the buildings will have been sitting vacant for years. Perhaps they should have sub contracted that part of the project over to RED or someone else more competent with retail back when they first realized they were in over their heads.

ComandanteCero · Post by **ComandanteCero** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:26 pm

I think there's a good amount of anger because the city is on the hook for the bonds that were supposed to be covered by revenues from the retail. The prospect of having to dig into other parts of the budget to continue covering multi-million dollar shortfalls doesn't make for happy citizens.

Post by **KCMax** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:30 pm

trailerkid wrote: What I really don't understand about your frustration and vitriol is the fact that Cordish IS STILL ACTIVELY WORKING ON THE DISTRICT.

At an agonizingly slow pace. I don't think any of us would have predicted that by spring of 2009, there would be this little retail. Cordish has been tardy with most every one of their projected deadlines, and I think that has contributed to much of the frustration.

As Commandante says, this does matter too, because the city is on the hook. Tax revenue is just 25% of projections - granted, largely due to the economy - but the fact that many bars opened later than projected and the retail still hasn't come to fruition bears a large part of that too.

KC-wildcat · Post by **KC-wildcat** » Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:36 pm

LenexatoKCMO wrote:
Even if Cordish truly was the only developer in the world interested in our money/project, is that a legitimate excuse for accepting half-ass performance from them?

Look, I see where you are coming from, but I think you are making two huge assumptions. (1) a different developer could have filled the retail block or done a much better job than Cordish of contracting with tenants; (2) a different developer was willing and able to step to the plate.

I'm unwilling to make these assumptions. I'm also unwilling to accept, wholesale, a lot of the BS that Cordish spews. But, in the end, I think the DTKC market is a tough sell. Cordish may have been overly optimistic, but I'm not sure they completely failed by not securing tenants in this market and in this economic downturn. You see it as a giant failure that didn't have to happen, i.e, other developers could have done better. I simply disagree.