Columbus Park Redevelopment

kcjak · Post by **kcjak** » Fri Apr 19, 2024 6:47 am

FangKC wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 12:01 am
KC_Ari wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 8:03 am Anyone hear anything about these townhomes going up? Foundations have been poured, ETA for completion?

https://compasskc.kcmo.org/EnerGov_Prod ... 88698fccf3
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1110457 ... ?entry=ttu

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1106839 ... entry=ttu

Did anyone ever see the exterior design for these townhomes?

How do those blend architecturally with Columbus Park homes and shops???

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Fri Apr 19, 2024 8:47 am

Belvidere wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 5:07 pm
Belvidere wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 4:43 pm
langosta wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 4:39 pm What I posted came from either the city or someone on the suit
I will see if I can find the records.
The depressing part is how long we have been having the same conversations. 26 years! It's baffling.

I did not copy and paste the whole thing, only parts.

Making progress Columbus Park on the rebound with projects
December 24, 1998 | Kansas City Star, The (MO)
Author/Byline: LYNN HORSLEY; The Kansas City Star | Page: 10 | Section: ZONE/MIDTOWN
1124 Words | Readability: Lexile: 1210, grade level(s): 11-12

``There is no neighborhood in Kansas City that has the immediate potential for residential development as much as Columbus Park,'' said attorney Michael Burke, who represents the neighborhood in negotiations with city officials and the Kansas City Housing Authority. ``It is so strategically located.''

***

The neighborhood and city have come a long way from two years ago when they were fighting the Housing Authority in federal court over Guinotte Manor, the city's largest housing project.

The city and Housing Authority in January 1997 were at loggerheads over a plan to replace 412 residential units then at Guinotte with 296 units. The neighborhood feared the plan would repeat prior public housing mistakes by concentrating too many units in one place.

But then something unusual happened. The adversaries stopped fighting in court and started working on a compromise. The result was a scaled-down plan to build 219 new public housing units at Guinotte in a design that blends architecturally with Columbus Park homes and shops.

The rest of the public housing units will be scattered throughout the city.

Is this all the land around the skatepark? I simply cannot wrap my head around why this is such a stale mess? Who holds the keys to moving forward as of right now?

Belvidere · Post by **Belvidere** » Fri Apr 19, 2024 9:42 am

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 8:47 am
Belvidere wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 5:07 pm
Belvidere wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 4:43 pm

I will see if I can find the records.
The depressing part is how long we have been having the same conversations. 26 years! It's baffling.

I did not copy and paste the whole thing, only parts.

Making progress Columbus Park on the rebound with projects
December 24, 1998 | Kansas City Star, The (MO)
Author/Byline: LYNN HORSLEY; The Kansas City Star | Page: 10 | Section: ZONE/MIDTOWN
1124 Words | Readability: Lexile: 1210, grade level(s): 11-12

``There is no neighborhood in Kansas City that has the immediate potential for residential development as much as Columbus Park,'' said attorney Michael Burke, who represents the neighborhood in negotiations with city officials and the Kansas City Housing Authority. ``It is so strategically located.''

***

The neighborhood and city have come a long way from two years ago when they were fighting the Housing Authority in federal court over Guinotte Manor, the city's largest housing project.

The city and Housing Authority in January 1997 were at loggerheads over a plan to replace 412 residential units then at Guinotte with 296 units. The neighborhood feared the plan would repeat prior public housing mistakes by concentrating too many units in one place.

But then something unusual happened. The adversaries stopped fighting in court and started working on a compromise. The result was a scaled-down plan to build 219 new public housing units at Guinotte in a design that blends architecturally with Columbus Park homes and shops.

The rest of the public housing units will be scattered throughout the city.
Is this all the land around the skatepark? I simply cannot wrap my head around why this is such a stale mess? Who holds the keys to moving forward as of right now?

Yes, it's that land.

This is my opinion on why it's been so bad. I may be lacking all the pertinent information, however, so please take it as opinion.

We are talking about a 22 acre project as a whole, from Cherry to Gillis.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Fri Apr 19, 2024 9:55 am

wow that is a saga! So it's moving positively forward now or it's still stuck in the mud? I got lost. Selling to UC-B seems good?

Belvidere · Post by **Belvidere** » Fri Apr 19, 2024 10:17 am

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 9:55 am wow that is a saga! So it's moving positively forward now or it's still stuck in the mud? I got lost. Selling to UC-B seems good?

UC-B has been great. Moving along, responsive, open to feedback, the preliminary townhomes look awesome. The cost...we are looking at $650,000 per unit, in that range.

The city and fire department, and new energy codes, are a huge factor in the expense. It's been an education.

That is the cost of delayed development.

FangKC · Post by **FangKC** » Sat Apr 20, 2024 3:50 am

Sadly, that tale is often the case and why it takes so long to redevelop even vacant parcels.

If I were a large developer, I'd create a master plan for the CP acreage with streets, sidewalks, alleys, landscaping, etc. and divide it into smaller parcels. I'd have other small developers build just a few townhouses, row houses, and small apt. buildings. The reason for this is so blocks don't end up too consistent and monolithic in appearance and to avoid using the same architects and the hive mindset. Good neighborhoods have variety. I'd try to have final approval over the designs. I'd do this to keep out bland crap and maintain quality control over the general appearance of the neighborhood.

I would encourage each developer to build some multigenerational houses.

I'd like to do that same with the blocks south fo the Jazz District along Vine and Woodland.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0774394 ... ?entry=ttu

Don't get me started on Paseo West.

Belvidere · Post by **Belvidere** » Sat Apr 20, 2024 8:47 am

FangKC wrote: ↑Sat Apr 20, 2024 3:50 am Sadly, that tale is often the case and why it takes so long to redevelop even vacant parcels.

If I were a large developer, I'd create a master plan for the CP acreage with streets, sidewalks, alleys, landscaping, etc. and divide it into smaller parcels. I'd have other small developers build just a few townhouses, row houses, and small apt. buildings. The reason for this is so blocks don't end up too consistent and monolithic in appearance and to avoid using the same architects and the hive mindset. Good neighborhoods have variety. I'd try to have final approval over the designs. I'd do this to keep out bland crap and maintain quality control over the general appearance of the neighborhood.

I would encourage each developer to build some multigenerational houses.

I'd like to do that same with the blocks south fo the Jazz District along Vine and Woodland.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0774394 ... ?entry=ttu

Don't get me started on Paseo West.

Yup. Asked for that, too. 25 years and change ago. I don't know why they won't take that approach. Maybe it takes a different business model.

We had an architect who lived here, built a house in the 70s, and kept advocating for basically "releasing the swarm" of multiple small lots with infrastructure. Nobody would do it. Now, it's possible few can afford to.

Go look at the massive Land Bank acreage, and weep. It makes our issues pale in comparison.