KCRag Forum

Cushman national report. KC vacancy at 18.5% now a bit above US average but many large markets still well over 20% vacancy...
https://www.cushmanwakefield.com/en/uni ... at-reports

JLL national report shows KC vacancy a bit better than US average, so about avg. A lot of markets still with negative absorption in Q4 including KC despite decent office using employment growth.

https://www.us.jll.com/content/dam/jll- ... utlook.pdf

Newmark Zimmer Q4 report... Claims Northland Class A vacancy nearing 40%.
https://nmrkzimmer.com/sites/default/fi ... Market.pdf

Grabbed an HQ from Iowa. 150 jobs by the end of the year and shooting for 500-600 later. 30,000 SQFT lease at Shook Hardy & Bacon building in Crown Center.

By year's end, Dullea said ProMax plans to reach 150 local employees in tech, marketing and sales roles. Eventually, ProMax will relocate its headquarters to the Kansas City metro, where it likely will employ between 500 and 600 people.

Three of the top five automotive software companies are in Kansas City now, and we're going to make it four when we get going."

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... to-kc.html

Maybe our best corporate relocation bet is to grab businesses from Omaha, Des Moines. Wichita, Springfield, Como, OKC, etc.

Union Pacific in Omaha and Koch in Wichita have had issues recruiting due to their locations and have looked or are looking to move. I volunteer to drive the van as we go city to city, grabbing their HQs.

We should be absolutely raiding Iowa, Neb, and non-Joco KS.

Nice. Would’ve been better though if they went into 1400 KC.

Mutual of Omaha expected to announce plans for a 40 floor tower in their downtown tomorrow per Omaha.com. They will have 2 signature corporate HQ towers in their downtown, both taller than One KC Place


THIS IS THE KIND OF CORPORATE INVESTMENT WE NEED

looking at you Garmin, Burns & Mac, Creative Planning

I'd rather have more spread out infill than taller towers tbh

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:08 am I'd rather have more spread out infill than taller towers tbh

Large users tend to want a single building. The point is more about our need for downtown hqs

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:41 am Mutual of Omaha expected to announce plans for a 40 floor tower in their downtown tomorrow per Omaha.com. They will have 2 signature corporate HQ towers in their downtown, both taller than One KC Place


THIS IS THE KIND OF CORPORATE INVESTMENT WE NEED

looking at you Garmin, Burns & Mac, Creative Planning

wow

Lanoha will develop. HOK, Kendall/Heaton and Picard Chilton doing architecture work Alvine doing engineering.

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:08 am I'd rather have more spread out infill than taller towers tbh

lol. You can't tell me you would not be thrilled to have a tower like the one that Omaha will get. If a local company announced a tower like that for downtown KC, everybody on this forum would go nuts. With that tower, Omaha's downtown will rival KC's inside the loop.

Omaha will now have at least three major office buildings downtown filled with a local company HQ. KC has nothing like that. The only thing that even comes close is Hallmark's HQ which is slowly being subleased.

While I agree, that a few midrise infill buildings is generally better than a single tower. KC is not getting those either. Sure there are so few renderings out there, but who knows if any of them will happen and how long it will take. Regardless, projects like those tend to be independent of large single use HQ towers.

KC's corporate community is 100% in the suburbs, which means Downtown KC will continue to become less and less relevant despite all the new residents there.

like 90% suburbs hehe

why would a place become less relevant with more residents? that doesn't make any sense.

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:22 pm

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:08 am I'd rather have more spread out infill than taller towers tbh

lol. You can't tell me you would not be thrilled to have a tower like the one that Omaha will get.

It would be cool, but no honestly I don't think it's what we need right now. I'll tell you why I think that:

1. If we could fill 15 surface lots with active ground floor retail and office I'd rather have that. A tower is just a tower. It looks cool, and I don't dislike them, but we need infill with ground floor activation much more. If you look at growing downtowns, they're popular because everywhere you walk there's a store or some amenity around you on the ground. It's not about how high they go. That's what we're lacking, the ability to walk around almost anywhere in downtown and have shops and stores you can just walk in anytime (like the Plaza). That will get more traffic for us than a 60 floor tower.

2. A new super tall tower only looks good if you have other tall towers in that range to go with it. If you look at OKC, it looks weird how all the buildings are like 15 floors, and then you have this one monster 50 floor tower sticking out. It's just displeasing to the eye. Omaha will have this issue. Now it's true, KC could make it fit because we have a bunch of tall towers, right? Yes, but it would mess up how perfectly symmetrical looking our downtown skyline is. So, again, I'd rather 15-20 infill projects with good activation.

Hope this helped.

^ again two very different and independent developments. The small multi tenant, often mostly spec, office buildings that KC is "trying" to get built vs a large single use HQ tower really have nothing to do with each other. It's not an either or scenario. KC doesn't have any companies that have a desire to be in a signature downtown tower so its only option is to try to develop the smaller buildings.

However, KC barely has any companies that want to lease 100,000 sq ft downtown either. It's just KC. It's been that way since JoCo began to develop office parks and it has only gotten worse since downtown has been revived. KC has since lost its most civic minded downtown companies like DST, AMC etc.

KC's corporate community and most of the white collar people that run them are culturally engraved in Johnson County now. It could change, but it will take a very long time.

Accept it. It's just fact.

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 1:55 pm ^ again two very different and independent developments. The small multi tenant, often mostly spec, office buildings that KC is "trying" to get built vs a large single use HQ tower really have nothing to do with each other. It's not an either or scenario. KC doesn't have any companies that have a desire to be in a signature downtown tower so its only option is to try to develop the smaller buildings. However, KC barely has any companies that want to lease 100,000 sq ft downtown either. It's just KC. It's been that way since JoCo began to develop office parks and it has only gotten worse since downtown has been revived. KC's corporate community and most of the white collar people that run them are culturally engraved in Johnson County now. It could change, but it will take a very long time.

Accept it. It's just fact.

I think the problem with trying to convince me on this is that I'm one of the people on here who doesn't take an issue with JoCo growing conjointly with KCMO or downtown.

^ and that's the problem. JoCo killed urban KCMO. Every metro in the country dealt with white flight and suburban sprawl, but few have been hammered as bad as KCMO has with Kansas.

For the size of metro kc, there is nothing in the country comparable to what JoCo has done and how much it has taken from the core city.

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:02 pm ^ and that's the problem. JoCo killed urban KCMO. Every metro in the country dealt with white flight and suburban sprawl, but few have been hammered as bad as KCMO has with Kansas.

For the size of metro kc, there is nothing in the country comparable to what JoCo has done and how much it has taken from the core city.

Agree Grid. JoCo is also outpacing downtown on residential growth as well. Cerner in Village West and Garmin in Olathe just boosted growth in the fringes, further moving people and money away from downtown. Retail follows the population with spending money. In the past, philanthropists poured their money into the core. Illig is going big on Village West. Creative Planning's owners are at least investing a small amount in baseball.

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:02 pm JoCo killed urban KCMO.

Or KCMO killed KCMO and JoCo benefited. Spin it as you wish but you imply that KCMO made no mistakes. KCMO made many massive mistakes over many decades once the golden years ended. Jeff City was too focused on STL and Topeka and KS side was ready to exploit it.

KC is not a notable corporate town (what there has been is slipping away with buyouts) and doesn't have high risk taking developers so needs to make the most of it, whether downtown or elsewhere in metro. Downtown needs to focus on adding more residents that will help spur more incremental office to follow. It will be fine (and is fine) with that approach. Getting large boosts for new towers would be a plus but not getting them doesn't define failure at all. Mid-size infill over time is not a bad approach given there isn't likely to be anything to drive towers moving forward.

What matters is creating a lively work/life environment and the core is improving. Streetcar to Plaza/UMKC will create a really nice stretch that will tie together with more infill, tall towers or not. Would much rather live/work in KCs consistently improving but not booming urban core than in a boomtown like Austin or Nashville.

yeah a lot of this should be laid at the feet of KCMO leaders back then. Sucks.

earthling wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:34 pm

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Jan 26, 2022 2:02 pm JoCo killed urban KCMO.

Or KCMO killed KCMO and JoCo benefited. Spin it as you wish but you imply that KCMO made no mistakes. KCMO made many massive mistakes over many decades once the golden years ended. Jeff City was too focused on STL and Topeka and KS side was ready to exploit it.

KC is not a notable corporate town (what there has been is slipping away with buyouts) and doesn't have high risk taking developers so needs to make the most of it, whether downtown or elsewhere in metro. Downtown needs to focus on adding more residents that will help spur more incremental office to follow. It will be fine (and is fine) with that approach. Getting large boosts for new towers would be a plus but not getting them doesn't define failure at all. Mid-size infill over time is not a bad approach given there isn't likely to be anything to drive towers moving forward.

What matters is creating a lively work/life environment and the core is improving. Streetcar to Plaza/UMKC will create a really nice stretch that will tie together with more infill, tall towers or not. Would much rather live/work in KCs consistently improving but not booming urban core than in a boomtown like Austin or Nashville.

Land Values are starting to demand highrise construction and structured garages but rents aren't keeping up to support it. Many of the large and easily developable lots have been snapped up. Incentives grease those gears and without them the gears are grinding to a halt.