Kansas City considers selling pricey River Market land to apartment developers for $1
After years of reinvestment and the development of a starter streetcar line, Kansas City’s River Market neighborhood has seen a flood of new residents as developers clamor to put up apartment buildings.
And yet, the city may part with two valuable lots across from City Market and a block from the streetcar stop.
The price? $1.
According to Jackson County property records, the two pieces of land, currently surface parking lots, on the southeast and southwest corners of Fifth and Main streets could fetch nearly $1.9 million on the open market. But the City Council is considering selling them for a buck to developers hoping to build apartments there. In exchange, the developers would set aside some spaces in the apartments’ parking garage for the public to use — about half the number of spaces available to the public now.
Developers said the cost to build those parking spaces is about $3 million, so they’re giving the city value back in exchange for the pricey land.
But to some officials, that price point is far too low.
“I think it is questionable business for us as a city to essentially give very valuable property away to developers, especially being a block away from a streetcar stop,” Councilman Eric Bunch, 4th District, said in an interview.
Mayor Quinton Lucas said he had not studied the project in depth, but “at first blush” that seemed like a low price for the land.
“I think there are a number of questions with it — the $1 for what appears to be a valuable piece of land being a significant part of it,” Lucas said.
The proposed agreement also says the city will “work in good faith” with the developer regarding its application for tax incentives. The agreement does not spell out what those might be, and staff at the Economic Development Corp. of Kansas City, which administers most tax incentive programs, had not received an application for the project.
Jon Stephens, who leads PortKC, another major incentive-granting agency, said his organization is not involved.
Brendon O’Leary, vice president of development for EPC Real Estate Group, said the team was not yet sure what type or level of incentives it might ask for. It’s possible, he said, they won’t ask for any.
Bunch said he wasn’t opposed to giving a developer a good price on a piece of city-owned property.
“But then, that’s an incentive on its own,” he said.
“I don’t know if that’s a tenable situation for us to give away a valuable piece of land and then also forego property taxes on the development.”
The Neighborhood Planning and Development Committee briefly discussed the proposal last week before tabling it until January over concerns about parking.
According to the proposed agreement between the city and developers, the two-building complex will include 190 apartments, nearly 10,000 square feet of retail space and a 370-space parking garage. The two buildings will be connected by a bridge over Main Street.
Early drawings show plans for a third-floor terrace overlooking downtown, a pool, dog wash, coffee bar and gym.
Those designs are preliminary and could change. Getting the land is a key step before developers move forward.
O’Leary said the number of parking spaces for residents was likely to shrink. The only thing concrete, he said, is the number of public parking spaces.
The apartments, he said, will be market rate, but beyond that, there’s a lot to figure out.
“Once we get this city agreement signed, that’s going to allow us to move forward in earnest to fully design the project,” he said.
The project came as the result of a request for proposals the city issued in 2014 in the hopes developers would transform the site. From the three proposals submitted, city staff chose a partnership that includes EPC Real Estate Group. Staff then presented the sale arrangement to the City Council.
Right now, the two city lots include a total 145 parking spaces. To offset the loss of those, the developers will set aside 85 spaces in the garage for public parking.
“So we’re losing 60 spaces and giving them the land,” Councilwoman Teresa Loar, 2nd District at-large, said in last week’s committee meeting.
Loar, who represents the Northland, and fellow committee members criticized the partial replacement of the city-owned parking spots, especially considering the low price of the land. She did not return requests for comment Friday and Monday.
Lucas said the city should “disfavor” any deal that doesn’t get as much value as possible for the city.
“The thing that I think would be valuable for the city’s benefit, perhaps, is if there is provision of public parking — but that fits neighborhood standards,” Lucas said. “At this point, I’m not catching that, so I would think that there likely needs to be either much more explanation or a much better value discussion proposition as to why this exchange is being made right now.”
The Downtown Neighborhood Association opposed the deal in written testimony, raising several issues with the design and the proposed $1 land deal.
The group, like Bunch, said the project included too much parking, especially considering other proposed apartment projects with plentiful planned parking. In its letter, the group also opposed the suggested garage entrances on Independence Avenue, noting it hopes that corridor will be transformed through the removal of Interstate 70 from downtown.
Downtown boosters and transportation officials have for years envisioned reconnecting the downtown loop to River Market by relocating that section of highway.
A lot has changed since the city issued the request for proposals in 2014 calling for developers to transform the site. The streetcar has opened, with an extension to the north on the way, and numerous other surface lots have been redeveloped, creating a more dense, walkable neighborhood.
“The city-owned properties at 5th and Main are so much more valuable than they were in 2014,” the letter says. “In this context, giving away this valuable site seems particularly short-sighted.”
This story was originally published December 22, 2020 at 5:00 AM.
