Condo Demand in Downtown

Issues concerning Downtown as described by the Downtown Council. River to 31st Street, I-35 to Bruce R. Watkins.

What is the maximum you are willing to spend on a new construction downtown condo? (ex. 1200 sqft)

$250,000 - $208 sqft
11
31%
$350,000 - $291 sqft
16
46%
$500,000 - $416 sqft
4
11%
$650,000 - $541 sqft
1
3%
$750,000 - $625 sqft
2
6%
$1,000,000+ - $833+ sqft
1
3%
 
Total votes: 35

User avatar
wahoowa
Ambassador
Posts: 535
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 2:57 pm
Location: CBD

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by wahoowa »

im2kull wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:53 amHence the problems and lawsuits many KC area condos are caught up in.. IE: Western Auto, and another major one you'll be hearing about shortly.
WST?
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by im2kull »

wahoowa wrote: Mon Mar 20, 2023 2:27 pm
im2kull wrote: Mon Mar 13, 2023 10:53 amHence the problems and lawsuits many KC area condos are caught up in.. IE: Western Auto, and another major one you'll be hearing about shortly.
WST?
Yes
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FangKC »

What about the View?
moderne
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5496
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Mount Hope

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by moderne »

Now the developer is at a place beyond any earthly punishment.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FangKC »

Amended Western Auto Lofts lawsuits add to claims that condo association knew about costly repairs
Western Auto Lofts residents embroiled in litigation about the disclosure of costly special assessments have fleshed out their case that the complex's condo association has known for years that it would have to charge to fix serious — and dangerous — building issues.
...
"For years before the sale transaction, defendant HOA and Copaken Brooks, the management company, knew that the common areas had experienced substantial deterioration which needed immediate and costly repairs, that such deterioration in many instances involved 'life/safety issues,' that such deterioration would result in astronomically large assessments to remedy, and if not remedied, would continue to deteriorate and cause even more significant 'life/safety issues,'" attorneys for condo buyers wrote in the revised petitions.
...
Additional spots where terra cotta had fallen were observed during a site visit in May 2019. The building's roof membrane was recommended for repair that year, as portions had been "at the point of failure" since 2015.
...
That 2019 report also gave the condo association an initial $8 million estimate for the facade and roof repairs — a figure that now could run between $9 million and $13 million, according to a bid range shared with owners in the fall.

Other materials excerpted in the lawsuits suggest that the condo association "had dug itself into a financial hole" as far back as 2013, further underscoring that it eventually would need to levy special assessments.

A July 2013 report by Reserve Data Analysts Inc. stated that the association was starting fiscal year 2014 "with virtually no savings" and recommended an assessment because "extensive repairs are further deterred due to the client's current poor financial condition."
...
In August 2020, the same firm reported that the condo association could cover only 12% of its accrued asset deterioration from its reserves, with its current rate of savings "grossly insufficient" to fund an additional $8 million to $10 million in expected repairs.

Although those building issues and costs were discussed during condo association meetings, resale certificates received by buyers involved in the lawsuits noted only that roof and facade repairs were needed in an amount "TBD."

The condo association previously had received guidance from a Sandberg Phoenix & von Gontard PC attorney who recommended disclosure of the potential repair costs.
...
"If you wish to advise buyers that we are lying, that's your choice," Billy told the agent, according to court filings. "We're not going to do that because that would amount to fraud and negligent misrepresentation."
...
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... E9Oaz8Mi4I
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by im2kull »

FangKC wrote: Thu Mar 23, 2023 9:45 pm Amended Western Auto Lofts lawsuits add to claims that condo association knew about costly repairs
Western Auto Lofts residents embroiled in litigation about the disclosure of costly special assessments have fleshed out their case that the complex's condo association has known for years that it would have to charge to fix serious — and dangerous — building issues.
...
"For years before the sale transaction, defendant HOA and Copaken Brooks, the management company, knew that the common areas had experienced substantial deterioration which needed immediate and costly repairs, that such deterioration in many instances involved 'life/safety issues,' that such deterioration would result in astronomically large assessments to remedy, and if not remedied, would continue to deteriorate and cause even more significant 'life/safety issues,'" attorneys for condo buyers wrote in the revised petitions.
...
Additional spots where terra cotta had fallen were observed during a site visit in May 2019. The building's roof membrane was recommended for repair that year, as portions had been "at the point of failure" since 2015.
...
That 2019 report also gave the condo association an initial $8 million estimate for the facade and roof repairs — a figure that now could run between $9 million and $13 million, according to a bid range shared with owners in the fall.

Other materials excerpted in the lawsuits suggest that the condo association "had dug itself into a financial hole" as far back as 2013, further underscoring that it eventually would need to levy special assessments.

A July 2013 report by Reserve Data Analysts Inc. stated that the association was starting fiscal year 2014 "with virtually no savings" and recommended an assessment because "extensive repairs are further deterred due to the client's current poor financial condition."
...
In August 2020, the same firm reported that the condo association could cover only 12% of its accrued asset deterioration from its reserves, with its current rate of savings "grossly insufficient" to fund an additional $8 million to $10 million in expected repairs.

Although those building issues and costs were discussed during condo association meetings, resale certificates received by buyers involved in the lawsuits noted only that roof and facade repairs were needed in an amount "TBD."

The condo association previously had received guidance from a Sandberg Phoenix & von Gontard PC attorney who recommended disclosure of the potential repair costs.
...
"If you wish to advise buyers that we are lying, that's your choice," Billy told the agent, according to court filings. "We're not going to do that because that would amount to fraud and negligent misrepresentation."
...
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... E9Oaz8Mi4I
Great follow up piece by the KCBJ. The parallels between this and the Wallstreet Tower situation are astounding. Same property management company for much of the same stretch of time. Same HOA board issues. Same resale certificate issues. This is what happens when your third party (the lawyer and property management company) fair to do what's right and do their job of informing/enforcing the law each time an empty nested Karen who's number one concern is optics and resale ability, gets appointed to the board. None of this would happen with competent management.
dnweava
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 401
Joined: Mon Nov 25, 2013 7:03 pm

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by dnweava »

I looked into buying a condo like a decade ago (obviously prices are drastically higher now) and back then most buildings were a horrible deal and I can only imagine it's worse now. Most condos are in old buildings that need tons of maintenance so the monthly HOA fees are essentially like paying a 2nd rent on top of your mortgage. I rented a loft for $700/month but buying a similar unit would have been someone like a $600/month mortgage and $500/month hoa for close to double what i was paying in rent. Im glad i lived downtown for over a decade and wouldn't change it but financially I would have been much better off if I would have bought a house 5 years sooner as houses were cheaper and I'd be 5 years closer to having my mortgage payoff off.

If i move back downtown (which won't happen for at least a decade as i need to live in a good school district because of a special needs kid), I would only consider a townhouse, which would probably put me in Columbus park or the westside.
User avatar
taxi
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2081
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:32 am
Location: North End
Contact:

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by taxi »

Old houses have the same maintenance issues as old buildings, no matter what renovations have occurred in the past. Some people would rather live in an old, historic structure. For what it's worth, I have been in many newer construction domiciles (built within last 20 years) that will never last as long as most 100 year old buildings regardless of how much maintenance you put into them. Even new construction condos can have issues. Take a look at City Homes and 16th and Summit.

Buying into a condo development does not mean that you don't have to spend money on building maintenance, it just means that someone else takes care of it. When you get a condo board and/or members who are too cheap to take care of issues as they arise, problems can escalate quickly. Some items, like pools, elevators, roofs and multi-level parking garages can quickly become big ticket maintenance concerns.

Don't be quick to throw blame at any one group. There aren't many condo management companies around, so it may just be a coincidence that Copaken Brooks manages more than one condo development that has issues. The management company, when doing their job, only advises the board and members. It is not their decision what to fix and what to defer. Same deal with legal advice and disclosure and condo resale certificates. Those decisions are made by the board, members and sellers. Of course the management company is named in the lawsuit, because that's the way our legal system works – name everyone possible in the suit. Or, in a suit.

@dnweava, you could make a good argument that a smart condo purchase a decade ago would have been as good or better an investment as a house and I'd say same things goes for today. A lot has to do with location and due diligence. Deferred maintenance overlooked in an old house might cause you bankruptcy, whereas the same problem in an old condo building might be a temporary financial hardship. I'm certain that anyone who owns a hundred year old house will agree.

All real estate purchase have pros and cons. I think there will always be a market for condos downtown. Problem buildings aside, there is not enough product on the market right now to meet demand.
User avatar
FlippantCitizen
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:29 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FlippantCitizen »

https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4524 ... 361_zpid/?

This is the kind of family oriented "for sale" housing that is sorely lacking in urban KC. Why are there not some condo conversions of colonnades? Why so few new construction townhouses for sale? Chicago seems to have an abundance of old stock townhomes and small buildings that have been converted. 90% of the housing supply we are adding are 1 bedroom rentals geared towards yuppie singles and dinks.
User avatar
taxi
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2081
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:32 am
Location: North End
Contact:

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by taxi »

Those are cool. I think they tore down some old colonnades to build those! This is exactly what we need, x 100, in Columbus Park.
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by DaveKCMO »

LOL blaming the hired-gun property manager. They are literally hired after all the decisions are made.

Blame the developer who cut corners and the city inspections that didn't flag or enforce things like a minimum reserve or a reserve study that would determine long-term needs. Also, blame the HOA that is too terrified of an assessment instead of doing the right thing.

Also, Copaken is the Cadillac of property managers. They could have saved a lot of money by hiring FSR or Hunter and plowing that savings into their reserve.

[I was on my HOA board for years -- first-hand experience, including hiring/firing property managers and funding reserve studies]

Houses have the same risks, just on a smaller scale. Your roof is 20K for one owner, ours is 100K spread across 23 owners.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FangKC »

I would guess it also depends on who is on the HOA board. If a majority of people loathe spending money on anything, then you might be in trouble. If they are retired people on fixed incomes, they are going to put things off and not spend money (probably hoping they will die before the big assessment will need to be made).

All sorts of things can happen with a condo, I have a friend in Florida who had a buyer for her condo. She was packing up her apartment and had put furniture in storage for her eventual move to North Carolina. The sale fell through because the bank would not give a loan to the buyer seeing that there was an unsettled lawsuit against the HOA. A former rental tenant was suing her former apartment owner, the HOA, and the management company because she lost sight in one of her eyes due to exposure to bat droppings (according to her physician). Apparently, the bats were hanging under the eaves of the building. In Florida, there are laws restricting bat relocation during maternity periods.

So, my friend is screwed unless she can find a cash buyer. Otherwise, she waits until there is a settlement or resolution in court.

If she was selling a SFH, she would have more control because she'd be the one making the decisions about settlement. With a condo board making that decision, she has no control.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FangKC »

Double post deleted.
Last edited by FangKC on Tue Mar 28, 2023 12:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FangKC »

FlippantCitizen wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 12:38 pm https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4524 ... 361_zpid/?

This is the kind of family oriented "for sale" housing that is sorely lacking in urban KC. Why are there not some condo conversions of colonnades? Why so few new construction townhouses for sale? Chicago seems to have an abundance of old stock townhomes and small buildings that have been converted. 90% of the housing supply we are adding are 1 bedroom rentals geared towards yuppie singles and dinks.
I would have made the entire Beacon Hill redevelopment restricted to only apartment buildings and townhouses. SFHs would only be allowed in those cases where existing houses could be renovated. Apartment buildings are allowed along Troost and 27th Street, on Mt. Hope along Tracy and 23rd Street, and on the parcels adjacent to Western Bible College.

Kansas City has plenty of SFHs, and not enough missing middle type of housing. The City utterly failed to build more of it there. City leaders could have created it just with zoning. It was mostly a blank slate. Don't make the same mistake with the HAKC parcel (6 acres) in Columbus Park.

I wouldn't have banned condo townhouse situations, but I would certainly have allowed townhouses on their own lots with zero setbacks and firewalls--and alley houses. Each townhouse could be separately owned and maintained. Townhouses would have fronted directly on the sidewalk. Some blocks would have been these single-owned townhouses with no shared amenities. No HOA fee for maintenance, security, swimming pools, gyms, elevators, landscaping services, party kitchens, and game rooms. No worries about bank financing rules for 50 percent sold owner/occupied units, etc., dealing with boards, etc. Thousands of city blocks in this city have housing without these amenities, and people actually survive.

People who want those things could have them on some parcels, but the variety of choices would provide more freedom for occupants and less expense.

Cities all over the world have blocks and blocks with rows of townhouses and there are thriving neighborhoods around them.

I'd do the same with several blocks in the south part of the Westside along 31st Street.
User avatar
FlippantCitizen
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 5:29 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FlippantCitizen »

FangKC wrote: Mon Mar 27, 2023 12:28 am
FlippantCitizen wrote: Sun Mar 26, 2023 12:38 pm https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/4524 ... 361_zpid/?

This is the kind of family oriented "for sale" housing that is sorely lacking in urban KC. Why are there not some condo conversions of colonnades? Why so few new construction townhouses for sale? Chicago seems to have an abundance of old stock townhomes and small buildings that have been converted. 90% of the housing supply we are adding are 1 bedroom rentals geared towards yuppie singles and dinks.
I would have made the entire Beacon Hill redevelopment restricted to only apartment buildings and townhouses. SFHs would only be allowed in those cases where existing houses could be renovated. Apartment buildings are allowed along Troost and 27th Street, on Mt. Hope along Tracy and 23rd Street, and on the parcels adjacent to Western Bible College.

Kansas City has plenty of SFHs, and not enough missing middle type of housing. The City utterly failed to build more of it there. City leaders could have created it just with zoning. It was mostly a blank slate. Don't make the same mistake with the HAKC parcel (6 acres) in Columbus Park.

I wouldn't have banned condo townhouse situations, but I would certainly have allowed townhouses on their own lots with zero setbacks and firewalls--and alley houses. Each townhouse could be separately owned and maintained. Townhouses would have fronted directly on the sidewalk. Some blocks would have been these single-owned townhouses with no shared amenities. No HOA fee for maintenance, security, swimming pools, gyms, elevators, landscaping services, party kitchens, and game rooms. No worries about bank financing rules for 50 percent sold owner/occupied units, etc., dealing with boards, etc. Thousands of city blocks in this city have housing without these amenities, and people actually survive.

People who want those things could have them on some parcels, but the variety of choices would provide more freedom for occupants and less expense.

Cities all over the world have blocks and blocks with rows of townhouses and there are thriving neighborhoods around them.

I'd do the same with several blocks in the south part of the Westside along 31st Street.
Could not agree more, Fang. That is the kind of housing that, personally, I would desperately like to have available to me in KC. I have dreamed up similar visions for those large empty blocks on the Westside.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Condo Demand in Downtown

Post by FangKC »

I agree. I'm in a SFH with a yard. My dream situation would be living in a townhouse without an HOA, no yard to mow, front door right on the street, a front porch, and maybe a little courtyard in the back of the house--about a block from a bus stop. Kansas City doesn't have blocks and blocks of independent, older townhouses that banks see as SFH, and no 50 percent ownership rules for mortgages like one has to contend with in HOA situations. The few blocks where KCMO did have them were demolished for urban renewal or highway construction.
Post Reply