KCRag Forum

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 7:24 am I’d just not negotiate with this developer at all. Your reputation as a developer has to have something to do with the response from the city and this one doesn’t have a good track record. Steps toward them just get you closer to demolition with almost zero chance of actual development.

This. I’m all for infill, usually very pro-development and would love to see this rendering come to life. But I don’t trust this developer at all.

Smells fishy.

Agreed. They can’t demolish the whole buildings until they’re ready to do the project. That way they have to keep the facade too, and need to make sure they couldn’t just leave it up unfinished in perpetuity.

Kevin Collison says that this tower is 350-units. HistoricKC people are fully against the tear down plan and support historic designation. A few others are too. Can’t say I don’t blame them since I’m fond of the corner structure, but the atrium is tacky and needs to be demolished anyways. Serves no real purpose.

Anyways, Doug claimed this would be done without public incentive and gave 20% of units set aside as affordable. They apartments would also be geared towards Gen Z (based on the years he gave) because “the streetcar is the amenity” and “cars are for 55 year olds”. There would be no parking. The no incentive, affordable units, all with no parking idea would set a new precedent if it’s actually real.

But Doug saying that bit, and it being on record, means the City now has leverage to put that talk into a stipulation. If a true statement, then Doug should be ok with such a stipulation being made on top of what I previously said. If not, then it’s all talk. But again, no real plan till 2025 but that’s 27 months away. This time can be used engaging the public on a project here, designing it, and going through the approval process. For something this big, all 27 months would likely be used up.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 9:09 am
Anyways, Doug claimed this would be done without public incentive and gave 20% of units set aside as affordable. They apartments would also be geared towards Gen Z (based on the years he gave) because “the streetcar is the amenity” and “cars are for 55 year olds”. There would be no parking. The no incentive, affordable units, all with no parking idea would set a new precedent if it’s actually real.

Doug can say whatever he wants. He doesn't plan to do a thing for 3 years. If anyone comes back to try to hold him to these comments, he can say, "Well a lot changed over the years so we had to change our plans."

if it’s actually real.

Exactly.

Seems like a reasonable compromise is to preserve the facades.

smh wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 11:50 am Seems like a reasonable compromise is to preserve the facades.

I wouldn’t even trust him to do this as a stipulation. There would be a, “The facades we’re in worse shape then we realized and had to come down.” switch. The answer just needs to be, “no.”

Say in a scenario where after the buildings are declared historic, he does come back with a proposal to build a high-rise (not 30 floors but maybe more like 12 or so) that requires demolition of most structures except for the corner building (where the facade would be preserved). The Lufti's building would have a facade rebuilt. Would people be in support then and could such a project happen, or is it dead on arrival because of the designation?

I don't know how these sorts of things work, but I think if the designation flat out denies any sort of demolition, particularly partial, then that limits what can be done here in the end. You can't build to the corner of 31st and Walnut because off an underground utility easement, so you're pushed back a bit on that front.

On another note, but related, I want to know if the Lufti's building and Jeserich building's floors would line up if the atrium piece was removed. I had to walk down 3 or 4 stairs each from the atrium floor levels. If the floors line up, then I could see this becoming a little bit easier to integrate them (but the slanted floors in Jeserich concern me). Either way, the atrium shouldn't be deemed historic and should be torn down one day.

I'm just trying to think of different scenarios.

Lastly, what has Doug Price done that angered people and makes them feel like he can't get anything done? I know he's doing West Plaza Flats now, but that's one project. I guess the demolition of Colonial Courts north of the Plaza is the answer to my question, but that was done, and still owned, by Price Brothers, which Doug is no longer part of.

This developer is crazy.

First, Price says he won't start it till he can see and hear the streetcars. What? It's getting built right now. It's happening. I see him saying this before it broke ground, but come on.

Second, he is promising a bunch of nonsense. He won't seek incentives yet still plans to set aside 20% for affordable housing and plans no parking for a 30 story 350 unit building? I'm all for no parking, but you have to be realistic, that thing will need a garage.

Finally, he wants to duplicate the historic buildings. That would look TERRIBLE. Like the inside of a casino or something. If you are going to tear the buildings down, then just move on and build whatever new there and do not try to put up some fake "historic" facade there.

I also don't think the city or neighborhood is going to allow a 30 story building there. It will just become an empty lot for a decade and eventually sold off if they tear down those buildings.

Price should propose this 30 story building for the empty lot that is now across from the American Century Towers. It would work fine there.

GRID wrote: ↑Fri Sep 16, 2022 1:03 pm This developer is crazy.

First, Price says he won't start it till he can see and hear the streetcars. What? It's getting built right now. It's happening. I see him saying this before it broke ground, but come on.

I agree that this was an odd comment to make. We all know it's coming and he should know especially. But maybe he wants to see how other projects fill up along the line first. That would be a more logical reason in my view.

Second, he is promising a bunch of nonsense. He won't seek incentives yet still plans to set aside 20% for affordable housing and plans no parking for a 30 story 350 unit building? I'm all for no parking, but you have to be realistic, that thing will need a garage.

The affordable housing side of It sounds like nonsense. Parking would have to be included as well, but I guess figuring things out quickly on that end revealed that if no parking was done, then savings from that mean no need for incentives? I dont know.

Finally, he wants to duplicate the historic buildings. That would look TERRIBLE. Like the inside of a casino or something. If you are going to tear the buildings down, then just move on and build whatever new there and do not try to put up some fake "historic" facade there.

I agree but sometimes this can be done well without looking ridiculous. It really depends on the materials and execution of the recreation.

I also don't think the city or neighborhood is going to allow a 30 story building there. It will just become an empty lot for a decade and eventually sold off if they tear down those buildings.

I agree fully with the bolded part. The neighborhood would never allow this. They probably wouldn't even allow anything over 5 floors on this site because of the Overlay. But I think this is where leverage can be had if one was serious. You won't do a 30 floor building, but a previously "too tall" 12-16 floor proposal would then feel more "sane" and not as outrageous to some people. The second part of this is why a formal development plan would need to be submitted, approved, financing secured, and permits in hand before any demolition could happen here which brings me back to my original point that if a legit plan went through the process that involved demolition, would that be off the table now?

Price should propose this 30 story building for the empty lot that is now across from the American Century Towers. It would work fine there.

Too bad American Century doesn't develop their lot at 44th and Main into something while the old Holiday Inn site becomes something else. Such prime land right there. Although I doubt people around there would be ok with a 30 floor tower their either.

^ I generally agree with all your comments, but I have never seen KCMO force a developer to have a financed, permitted project in hand before tearing down structures and is that even legally enforceable?

^ I’m unsure of the legality of it here in Kansas City, but in St. Louis, a couple of years ago, a development team from Chicago wanted to tear down a warehouse in downtown for a high-rise. One of the stipulations for the project to get approved, and demolition to get underway, was to enforce that the developer had financing and permits For the new tower in hand before the old building could come down. The development team ultimately dropped that project, in the building has been re-developed into Ballpark flats.

More recently, when the city was reviewing the proposal by Lux, living to demolish most of the Optimist International Building at Lindell and Taylor in the Central West End, they were going to put a stipulation there, that if the façade fell down, Lux would be responsible to rebuild the façade as it was originally and pay a pretty hefty fee for the walls collapsing. That was something the developer signed and it would’ve been able to be enforced if the walls fell down. I imagine Kansas City can do something similar.

Or just put this at the spot next to T-Mobile Center

It should be illegal to have a surface lot fronting our extremely expensive streetcar line, much less creating new surface lots

Per Collison, City Plan Commission endorses landmark designation on 5-1 vote

Not surprised at that move. I read the letters submitted to the planning commission and every single one, except one, was for the historic designation.

I sent my drone up here today and wanted to see what the view North would be like from a hypothetical 8 floor building @ 90ft up (not allowed due to the Main Overlay). Pretty spectacular. I didn't even send it up to 300ft to see what it would be like from the rendered tower we've seen, but I imagine it's even better.

The height limitation here really is a dud in my view. I know it was made with public feedback, but sometimes the public is wrong and this is one of those instances. It's away from houses by about a block, next to the streetcar, and at the corner of two busy streets. More so, you're close enough to Federal Reserve Tower and high-rises on 31st west of Baltimore. At the very least, the Overlay should be a adjusted to allow up to 12 floors and/or 135ft in height here by right.

Once the streetcar is open or at least another year closer to fruition, and perhaps the approval process for incentives is remediated, we could start seeing more big proposals. Could lead to some reconsideration of the overlay when it's clear what is possible from willing developers on some of these sites. 10-12 floors at key corners would be great.

^ Of course, this far in to the streetcar being downtown and I would have thought there wouldn’t be any vacant lots along that route. There are still so many. I’m waiting for something that will more rapidly increase these time frames, more competition, more demand. I really thought we’d be further along at this point.

^^^^^ more demand, lower costs and barriers to construct

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:41 pm ^^^^^ more demand, lower costs and barriers to construct

I guess I agree about less costs but renovations compared to new construction is usually SO much cheaper. You would think that renovators for other cities that have used up all stock would start looking to expand. That the old Federal Reserve building is still cold has to say something (though I know there are circumstances there). We got to get booming here some year. Im getting old!