KCRag Forum

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Fri Dec 11, 2020 10:11 am

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:14 am

mister816 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 10, 2020 11:26 pm my guess is that this will begin in 2023 if ever

Construction will start in the next few months. Worst case, mid 2021 but I don’t think we will see worst case.

You can imagine the curve ball the pandemic tossed in being before ground was broke. If they had started construction and than the pandemic happened, it would be well out of the ground by now.

Sadly that didn't work for Hyatt House on Broadway

Covid's enduring impact on the hotel market is likely to be much more severe than its anticipated impact on multi-family residential. That's especially true in cities already struggling to fill the current product available in the market. The rationale behind the new Hyatt House was iffy at best from the beginning.

All the interior renderings on the RD Jones Website (https://www.rdjones.com/three-light/uqc ... 307wxgu2as). Some of these have been posted here before, but I decided to just post them with the new ones. Pretty snazzy.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Mon Dec 14, 2020 1:20 am All the interior renderings on the RD Jones Website (https://www.rdjones.com/three-light/uqc ... 307wxgu2as). Some of these have been posted here before, but I decided to just post them with the new ones. Pretty snazzy.

Love the design. Wish they would just start this already.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:14 am

mister816 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 10, 2020 11:26 pm my guess is that this will begin in 2023 if ever

Construction will start in the next few months. Worst case, mid 2021 but I don’t think we will see worst case.

You can imagine the curve ball the pandemic tossed in being before ground was broke. If they had started construction and than the pandemic happened, it would be well out of the ground by now.

Construction just keeps getting pushed back and back and back again. I hope the current wave of announcements doesn't push this back even further. Albeit, if every other developer is suddenly able to land financing I'm not sure why Cordish can't.

* I know you are just the messenger. *

langosta wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 3:52 am

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Dec 11, 2020 8:14 am

mister816 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 10, 2020 11:26 pm my guess is that this will begin in 2023 if ever

Construction will start in the next few months. Worst case, mid 2021 but I don’t think we will see worst case.

You can imagine the curve ball the pandemic tossed in being before ground was broke. If they had started construction and than the pandemic happened, it would be well out of the ground by now.

Construction just keeps getting pushed back and back and back again. I hope the current wave of announcements doesn't push this back even further. Albeit, if every other developer is suddenly able to land financing I'm not sure why Cordish can't.

* I know you are just the messenger. *

I know it's frustrating and honestly, I've been surprised a few times with the delays as well. I'm told from the top somethings going to happen and it ends up getting pushed back.

Just remember who's to actually blame for this structure not being nearly complete at this point. I know some of ya'll suffer from memory loss, so please remember that the politicians inside the city council chambers were to blame for this.

im2kull wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:09 pm Just remember who's to actually blame for this structure not being nearly complete at this point. I know some of ya'll suffer from memory loss, so please remember that the politicians inside the city council chambers were to blame for this.

100%

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:10 pm

im2kull wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:09 pm Just remember who's to actually blame for this structure not being nearly complete at this point. I know some of ya'll suffer from memory loss, so please remember that the politicians inside the city council chambers were to blame for this.

100%

I can't wait to hear the naysayers idiotic comments to the contrary. I know memories on here are often short on recollection and fact.

Cue the "The city shouldn't have honored their agreement!" NIMBYs.

I also forgot to mention...

IF not for all the councils idiotic political posturing, we would also have gotten a 30+ floor landmark residential tower.

Enjoy your 18 floor apartment proposal you're about to get.

im2kull wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:09 pm Just remember who's to actually blame for this structure not being nearly complete at this point. I know some of ya'll suffer from memory loss, so please remember that the politicians inside the city council chambers were to blame for this.

The anti development crowd has only gotten stronger since then. Spoke with another big developer today who told me they want to build but are hands off due to the current city council.

im2kull wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:14 pm I also forgot to mention...

IF not for all the councils idiotic political posturing, we would also have gotten a 30+ floor landmark residential tower.

Enjoy your 18 floor apartment proposal you're about to get.

Alright, now you're reaching. "Landmark" seriously? How many inane pages of this form have been comments about how thoroughly unremarkable the Cordish towers are?

The council wasted time with grandstanding, but Cordish didn't stick to its own stated timelines:

The advisory board approved the incentives request in May 2018. https://cityscenekc.com/three-light-inc ... ory-board/
From the article:

If it wins Council approval, the $124.1 million Three Light project is expected to begin construction later this year at the northeast corner of Truman Road and Main Street.

Then, the council approved the request a month later June 2018: https://www.kcur.org/economy/2018-06-21 ... n#stream/0

In a September 2018 NYT article, Cordish had already shifted it to "early 2019" https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/11/busi ... reaks.html

You get the point.

Even if there had been no delay in approving incentives, there's nothing to say that construction would have started at the proposed time (an insanely common occurance). Or that right after pouring foundations the project went on pause (Hyatt House), only to return with a scaled-back size. It's all counterfactuals.

Shit on the council for grandstanding, sure. But c'mon, it wasn't just their bullshit that made the current clusterfuck.

I do wish they'd spend half the money and creativity they do on the interiors, on the exterior.

Midtownkid wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 11:04 pm I do wish they'd spend half the money and creativity they do on the interiors, on the exterior.

People don’t pay market rate for how a building looks on the side they spend 1% of the time looking at. Out of all the complaints I’ve heard from residents, none have been about the exterior of the building.

horizons82 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 9:00 pm

im2kull wrote: ↑Thu Jan 07, 2021 8:14 pm I also forgot to mention...

IF not for all the councils idiotic political posturing, we would also have gotten a 30+ floor landmark residential tower.

Enjoy your 18 floor apartment proposal you're about to get.

Alright, now you're reaching. "Landmark" seriously? How many inane pages of this form have been comments about how thoroughly unremarkable the Cordish towers are?

The council wasted time with grandstanding, but Cordish didn't stick to its own stated timelines:

The advisory board approved the incentives request in May 2018. https://cityscenekc.com/three-light-inc ... ory-board/
From the article:

If it wins Council approval, the $124.1 million Three Light project is expected to begin construction later this year at the northeast corner of Truman Road and Main Street.

Then, the council approved the request a month later June 2018: https://www.kcur.org/economy/2018-06-21 ... n#stream/0

In a September 2018 NYT article, Cordish had already shifted it to "early 2019" https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/11/busi ... reaks.html

You get the point.

Even if there had been no delay in approving incentives, there's nothing to say that construction would have started at the proposed time (an insanely common occurance). Or that right after pouring foundations the project went on pause (Hyatt House), only to return with a scaled-back size. It's all counterfactuals.

Shit on the council for grandstanding, sure. But c'mon, it wasn't just their bullshit that made the current clusterfuck.

First off, Kansas City isn’t the type of market where it’s financially possible to build “remarkable” residential tower exteriors. The negative comments on this forum about the exterior of the buildings have no real impact on the success of the buildings. More important than impressing development enthusiasts and punters who never intend to live in the buildings is spending the money on things that will positively impact the leasing percentage. At the end of the day, a fully leased tower is far more important than what anyone...... anyone, thinks of the buildings exterior design.

And yes, the city councils surprise pushback jolted Cordish plans and started a tidal wave of delays that ended up colliding with a pandemic. Had it not been for that pushback 3L would be working on interior finishes right now. Plain and simple.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:10 am First off, Kansas City isn’t the type of market where it’s financially possible to build “remarkable” residential tower exteriors. The negative comments on this forum about the exterior of the buildings have no real impact on the success of the buildings. More important than impressing development enthusiasts and punters who never intend to live in the buildings is spending the money on things that will positively impact the leasing percentage. At the end of the day, a fully leased tower is far more important than what anyone...... anyone, thinks of the buildings exterior design.

If you think I’m complaining about the look, I’m not. I get where Cordish is coming from. Its my job to design buildings to meet the market they’re going into. It’s an average tower for an average city. Makes sense to me. I’m saying the histrionics acting like we’re losing out on Habitat 67 or The Plaza hotel are silly. This was never one for coffee table books.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:10 am And yes, the city councils surprise pushback jolted Cordish plans and started a tidal wave of delays that ended up colliding with a pandemic. Had it not been for that pushback 3L would be working on interior finishes right now. Plain and simple.

Again, as someone who’s had to deal with getting a project through the city, I know that the city didn’t help things. As a major national developer though Cordish should have had some idea what was fomenting. They, the most controversial developer in KC, were proposing another tower downtown the year before the mayoral election, and didn’t think there might be populist bs demands to win votes? That’s some Pollyanna spin if I ever heard it.

You get thrown curveballs on every construction project. Every single one. The bigger the project, the bigger they’ll be. If council bloviating about the incentives made them skip the break ground date that they put out when the advisory committee agreement was approved, that’s on Cordish too.

Most "landmark" type buildings have historically been built by large corporations, railroads, utilities, banks, or are civic structures (city halls, courthouses, museums, performing arts centers). Prior to that, it was mostly done by religious organizations. Practically every large European city has a stunning cathedral for example.

As lamented here regularly, Kansas City doesn't have enough large corporations (with money to blow) headquartered here to drive construction of those types of buildings. The ones we do have tend to be very conservative in that regard. Our Metro's biggest corporations aren't evident on our skyline.

I spent part of my career in public relations for a major medical center. One of the functions of our office was community and government relations. That included construction of buildings in a very densely-populated city. Horizons82 is right about how politics can ebb and flow and have a huge impact on the ability to get a structure approved, funded, and started. Any developer needs to anticipate that, and be sensitive to the politics of the moment -- and public sentiment. It does affect when a developer might pull the trigger and start a new project.

Incentives are a hot-button issue for many residents -- especially because of the under-performance of the P&L District itself requiring the City to divert money from the budget to cover bond payments. This pisses people off. Especially those living next to burned out houses that the City doesn't have money to demolish. They are only focused on their immediate complaints. Many residents aren't development nerds who are looking a the greater long-term picture.

Despite the under-performance of the P&L District itself, I believe it jump-started development in greater downtown. This in turn has generated additional tax revenue and business activity. Probably enough to make up for P&L bond payments. But those revenues came from new activity outside the District itself -- but as a result of it being built. It has generated population gains. This had been a net plus for City revenues -- until COVID hit and decimated the City's revenue stream further. The pandemic has placed greater political stress on the City as a result of past decisions.

To be fair, the City has other revenue drains. The Jazz District has also under-performed.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Fri Jan 08, 2021 12:10 am First off, Kansas City isn’t the type of market where it’s financially possible to build “remarkable” residential tower exteriors. The negative comments on this forum about the exterior of the buildings have no real impact on the success of the buildings. More important than impressing development enthusiasts and punters who never intend to live in the buildings is spending the money on things that will positively impact the leasing percentage. At the end of the day, a fully leased tower is far more important than what anyone...... anyone, thinks of the buildings exterior design.

The points about exteriors not needing to be amazing are spot on.

Look at every recent 6 story apartment building downtown. They're honestly usually quite boring and that's what we want. We don't want developers raising rents to get to perfect when there's already demands for lower rents in every project from everyone.

Case in point, people don't complain about the exterior design of Quality Hill Towers and it's a super boring exterior. Go read some reviews going back years, complaints are all about the interior.

https://www.apartmentratings.com/mo/kan ... 731264105/

All good points. I will add that each time the city pushed back it caused Cordish to re-evaluate certain details. They also backed the wrong mayoral candidate but that happens.

Also, being honest there could be some blame on Cordish as they’re still overall a very small company compared to some. This all was happening while they were also in the middle of building a residential tower in STL, two luxury hotels in Texas and Baltimore ,a casino in PA and an expansion to the casino in Baltimore. The same core team of a handful of people oversee many aspects of new construction. Not making excuses but I feel things take a bit longer with Cordish sometimes.

Why are the timelines allowed to be so fluid from approval of incentive to the beginning of construction? There shouldn't be years between. Put a restriction in each incentive package agreed to that if construction doesn't start within a year, the incentive has to be revisited and reapproved. Developers would rush to meet the deadline not wanting to risk the incentive and terms that would be less favorable.

Agreed. There are all kinds of restrictions and clawbacks we should be adding to these incentives.