Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Discuss items in the urban core outside of Downtown as described above. Everything in the core including the east side (18th & Vine area), Northeast, Plaza, Westport, Brookside, Valentine, Waldo, 39th street, & the entire midtown area.
User avatar
Anthony_Hugo98
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1932
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:50 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by Anthony_Hugo98 »

TheLastGentleman wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 7:15 pm Kc tenants is really going to be this board’s scapegoat for everything, isn’t it
Depends on the day. This one had a lot more to do with the local neighbors than it did KCT, but they were definitely opposed to the development
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by FangKC »

earthling wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 5:46 pm
Pastense wrote: Wed Jan 18, 2023 5:23 pm Another victory for KCtenants! No affordable apartments here! Could have had 70.
Could be partly KCtenants but as mentioned the neighborhood cried too about size and not enough parking. Appears that neighborhood feedback had much more to do with it.

Midtown needs to grow past the transition from desiring car-dependent suburbia last 50+ years and accept density, especially tower projects directly on streetcar line. Midtowners who desire car depedency need to move to suburbia as the amount of urban living options in KC is tiny while there are 95% more car lifestyle options for them elsewhere in metro, even most of city proper.

The City shouldn't give in to these types of neighborhood demands, let them move as there will be plenty transit oriented people to buy their homes at a premium once streetcar up and running. That said, Midtown should probably start to adopt permit street parking.
https://twitter.com/khzny/status/161571 ... qsPrCaMPbQ
longtimelistener
Parking Garage
Parking Garage
Posts: 17
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2020 2:07 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by longtimelistener »

Now to write up a form letter that's a rebuttal to the NIMBY-ism expressed in that tweet.
User avatar
Cratedigger
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1814
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2021 3:32 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by Cratedigger »

So I guess this project is using incentives now? Through RideKC?
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 20042
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by DaveKCMO »

Cratedigger wrote: Thu Feb 16, 2023 12:33 pm So I guess this project is using incentives now? Through RideKC?
It was on their agenda yesterday, so probably. It would meet their requirements.
User avatar
Cratedigger
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1814
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2021 3:32 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by Cratedigger »

Project denied RideKC incentives
TheUrbanRoo
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1277
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2022 8:39 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by TheUrbanRoo »

I've been holding my tongue on saying this but 2023 has been an awful year for development so far. Nothing good has happened other than Atlas reviving. All we've seen is projects get killed or stall. 2022 was great though, fantastic year all the way through.
User avatar
Chris Stritzel
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2294
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by Chris Stritzel »

Cratedigger wrote: Wed Feb 22, 2023 4:38 pm Project denied RideKC incentives
Not surprising considering they didn’t select the incentive box on their development application, so that got pushback. I wonder what other reasons for denial were.
Last edited by Chris Stritzel on Wed Feb 22, 2023 5:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
moderne
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5496
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Mount Hope

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by moderne »

Collison says 19 KC Tennants, allies spoke against, no support testimony. 6-2 denial.
TheUrbanRoo
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1277
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2022 8:39 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by TheUrbanRoo »

Is it dead now?
langosta
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1513
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 4:02 am

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by langosta »

How did the climate justice group present rationalize arguing against a minimal parking, TOD project?
dukuboy1
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1031
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 12:02 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by dukuboy1 »

I hope the project moves forward, really was great to be able to do a prominent corner along main nd the Street car route.

It's obvious the City Council is going to cower to any pushback and in all fairness MAC did themselves no favors in their mishandling of an application to get to where we are now.

Developers will need to see that if you want to sniff incentives at all you will need to execute perfectly and set aside some portion as affordable. Perhaps doing multiple projects at one time where one is your "revenue generator" and the other is affordable where you break even. Like a loss leader in marketing. IDK but it's getting stupid and I do not want to turn off developers, which we have already seen.
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by trailerkid »

Why do people think there should be tax breaks and incentives for a private development located on a brand new street car line? There is already a public investment of $351.7 million for the streetcar. Is that not enough of public incentive for private development?
User avatar
Chris Stritzel
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2294
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by Chris Stritzel »

If Mac returns here (no indication they dropped it yet, but say they do), I expect either a shrinking of the scope (again) or doubling down on building a far more premium product that fetches the highest rents in Midtown. They can do it.

A company like Mac has thousands of apartments spread out over Chicago, St. Louis and Kansas City. Many buildings have commercial components. The company is raking in cash from these units and commercial spaces. The revenue from these other buildings should be creating enough of a buffer where an incentive isn't required to build something new on their end. That's the benefit of them having such a large portfolio. And they don't build too many new buildings all at once. But who knows, maybe their debt is at a level where they need an incentive to try and balance things out a little. If so, my recommendation would be to slow down.
dukuboy1
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1031
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2020 12:02 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by dukuboy1 »

No it is not, my guess because it has no direct impact on costs of developing the adjacent properties. If anything I assume that street car investment would drive up costs for developer in terms of property taxes etc. They have to pay to build it and maintain it, and over time taxes continue to increase as property value goes up. The incentives help to offset the start up costs of sorts. MAC is a for profit company looking at any and all ways to accomplish the development and secure as much revenue & profitability as possible for as long as they own the property.

I believe they will profit regardless of incentives but it does make it easier with them and it incentives them to actually want to build and invest in the development. So comes down to what MAC wants to do. It also gives them an appetite to do other developments in the metro.
User avatar
Cratedigger
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1814
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2021 3:32 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by Cratedigger »

At this point, I hope they go full luxury and set a new top to the Midtown market.

Would further demonstration of KC quickly absorbing higher rents lead to more interest in national developers?
TheUrbanRoo
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1277
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2022 8:39 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by TheUrbanRoo »

The only reason I’m not too wound up on this one yet is because it wasn’t gonna break grind until 2024 anyways. They will still have plenty of time to get their shit figured out and solidified and then still break ground by their target 2024 date.
moderne
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5496
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:50 pm
Location: Mount Hope

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by moderne »

MAC keeps saying they cannot get the same rental rates in Midtown as could be gotten DT or Plaza for the same type product.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7189
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by beautyfromashes »

The time spent on all this... I can't wait for the day when the incentive piece is such a small amount compared to the delayed profit that developers just start building.
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: Main & Armour - Mac Properties

Post by trailerkid »

moderne wrote: Thu Feb 23, 2023 2:04 pm MAC keeps saying they cannot get the same rental rates in Midtown as could be gotten DT or Plaza for the same type product.
Is that a problem somehow?
Post Reply