Urban Walmart-anchored, mixed-used project at 63rd and Troost (Raytown, Washington: middle-class, hotels)

[MOKAN]

If such a project were to come online to replace The Landing shopping center or in its general vicinity, would you support it?

Here's a perfect example of what could be:

http://www.fuquadevelopment.com/file...ndcolorado.pdf

This actual project and rendering was planned for Denver at 8th and 9th and Colorado BLVD, in a neighborhood fairly similar, and would have replaced a defunct, vacant hospital. Denver raised hell and the project and Walmart pulled out. Personally, I think those folks are morons, but do you think KCMO and Brookside would react the same way?

Here's the Denver thread:

http://www.city-data.com/forum/denve...do-denver.html

[kc chris]

Walmart couldn't make it at 350 and Blue Ridge in Raytown, ended up closing and moving a few miles closer to Lees Summit off the main busline. Would it be any different in Brookside?

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by kc chris

Walmart couldn't make it at 350 and Blue Ridge in Raytown, ended up closing and moving a few miles closer to Lees Summit off the main busline. Would it be any different in Brookside?

That walmart moving had nothing to with it being closer to LS. Why would people in LS shop in Raytown. They moved because they needed more room. That blue ridge walmart was tiny and very few people took the bus there. If you are going to take the bus then most would go to the Walmart that used to be the Blue Ridge Mall which has much better bus service to the east side. I'm sure the new Raytown Walmart still serves the east side (those that drive).

As far the OP's question. I think it's a great idea. But yes, I think it would get a great deal of opposition and it would come more from those on the east side than Brookside.

I do not understand why urban core african americans are so against the idea of projects like this which would bring much needed redevelopment and economic activity and jobs to areas of the city that need it. In DC, Walmart went through hell trying to get the approval of communities to build urban walmarts (all of which are parts of mixed use transit oriented developments). Same deal in Chicago I believe. Some of the reasons I hear are they are just low paying jobs and the deserve better and they would put small business out of business. Both are stupid reasons to oppose such projects in distressed areas with few services or jobs to begin with.

[MOKAN]

Originally Posted by kc chris

Walmart couldn't make it at 350 and Blue Ridge in Raytown, ended up closing and moving a few miles closer to Lees Summit off the main busline. Would it be any different in Brookside?

I don't believe Walmarts change of location had anything to do with the bus line or anything along the lines of what you are insinuating. Proof lies in the fact Walmart built a store to replace Blue Ridge Mall that is served by multiple bus lines that directly connect it to the hood. Brookside has tremendous demographics and two universities are nearby along with two hospitals and a lot of cross-town traffic along 63rd Street. Not to mention, there is a solid middle-class suburban neighborhood just northeast of 63rd and Paseo.

[kc chris]

Hope you guys are right.

I was told the shrinkage of the Walmart on 350/Blue Ridge was massive, and pretty much everything was in a locked case which required an employee to come open it. The newer one closer to Lees Summit doesn't have any of these locked cases. I bet they get plenty of Lees Summit traffic from people heading home on 350, but the point is they moved farther away from the city.

[MOKAN]

Originally Posted by kcmo

That walmart moving had nothing to with it being closer to LS. Why would people in LS shop in Raytown. They moved because they needed more room. That blue ridge walmart was tiny and very few people took the bus there. If you are going to take the bus then most would go to the Walmart that used to be the Blue Ridge Mall which has much better bus service to the east side. I'm sure the new Raytown Walmart still serves the east side (those that drive).

As far the OP's question. I think it's a great idea. But yes, I think it would get a great deal of opposition and it would come more from those on the east side than Brookside.

I do not understand why urban core african americans are so against the idea of projects like this which would bring much needed redevelopment and economic activity and jobs to areas of the city that need it. In DC, Walmart went through hell trying to get the approval of communities to build urban walmarts (all of which are parts of mixed use transit oriented developments). Same deal in Chicago I believe. Some of the reasons I hear are they are just low paying jobs and the deserve better and they would put small business out of business. Both are stupid reasons to oppose such projects in distressed areas with few services or jobs to begin with.

The KCATA has made a lot of changes lately and 31st and Van Brunt has become quite a bus hub, where many routes converge (12th St, 27th St, Blue Ridge, the new Linwood route, and 35 Armour) and now in addition to 28 Blue Ridge, 31st St goes directly to Blue Ridge Crossing, as does the new 47 Broadway. Hopefully all is going well, but access from the east side out to Blue Ridge Crossing has improved and expanded a great deal.

I'm surprised that east of Troost would oppose a major improvement. That seems odd. I wouldn't have thought it. Walmart would = a ton of jobs and suburban retail serving the core, which seems like a good thing, especially east of Troost. Not to mention a development at 63rd and Troost would help bridge the Troost divide. Low-paying but decent and sustainable jobs are better than no jobs. Why the inner city would reject Walmart I don't understand, but as for wealthier areas I think it's largely elitism.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by MOKAN

The KCATA has made a lot of changes lately and 31st and Van Brunt has become quite a bus hub, where many routes converge (12th St, 27th St, Blue Ridge, the new Linwood route, and 35 Armour) and now in addition to 28 Blue Ridge, 31st St goes directly to Blue Ridge Crossing, as does the new 47 Broadway. Hopefully all is going well, but access from the east side out to Blue Ridge Crossing has improved and expanded a great deal.

I'm surprised that east of Troost would oppose a major improvement. That seems odd. I wouldn't have thought it. Walmart would = a ton of jobs and suburban retail serving the core, which seems like a good thing, especially east of Troost. Not to mention a development at 63rd and Troost would help bridge the Troost divide. Low-paying but decent and sustainable jobs are better than no jobs. Why the inner city would reject Walmart I don't understand, but as for wealthier areas I think it's largely elitism.

That's basically what I said. The Blue Ridge Crossing has good bus service. The old Raytown walmart on Blue Ridge was not near as good even though Route 28 and I think 47 went there.

As far as urban walmarts, here is an update on the ones in DC. I think people just think they are very low paying jobs. But I don't see why people wouldn't think they would be better with vs without.

One problem in KC is they will be subsidized so much that that will do little for the city. Metro KC can't even build a walmart in the suburbs without it being in some sort of TIF. A project in the city would have to have ridiculous subsidies and will only reduce overall tax income because it will take away from stores that pay taxes. The ones in DC are not subsidized and would not get approved if they were. DC and most of its suburbs almost never hand out subsidies for any reason and those that do are typically a fraction of what you see in affluent suburbs of KC for greenfield developments. Tifs in the DC area are a no no. You are lucky to get a property tax abatement and thats only for urban redevelopment projects.

DC walmarts update:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine...106_story.html

under construction:


H Street NW Location


Ft Totton Location

[SPonteKC]

Originally Posted by kcmo

DC and most of its suburbs almost never hand out subsidies for any reason and those that do are typically a fraction of what you see in affluent suburbs of KC for greenfield developments. Tifs in the DC area are a no no. You are lucky to get a property tax abatement and thats only for urban redevelopment projects.

As usual, I agree with your larger point, but the idea that DC, NoVa and Maryland don't TIF dvelopment all over is just not correct. And the amounts being TIFed are huge. $80 million for Gallery Place, $42 million for a Target and a mall, $272 million for a convention hotel, $35 million for a Marriot, $693 million to the Nationals, Skyland's TIF in Good Hope, etc., etc....and those are just DC proper. Little of it is greenfield because there are no green fields in DC to develop. NoVa and Maryland, however TIF and PILOT greenfield developments all over.

[kcmo]

And I too agree with just about everything you post on here. However, even though I may have exaggerated them not being used at all, I stand by my view that compared to KC, it’s very minimal. I get both the Baltimore and DC Business Journal as well as the Washington Post and follow business here. The incentives handed out here very much special case situations compared to metro KC.

Gallery Place (similar to P&L District), large convention hotels and the baseball stadium is not what I’m talking about.

In KC you can’t build anything, be it a strip mall in wealthy suburban areas to 100,000 sq ft office buildings without some sort of incentives. I have no problem with incentives being used for things like the P&L district or Gallery Place or even the redevelopment of a mall.

But KC uses not only tifs, but super tifs and star bonds (aggressive state incentives that I have not seen used here) to build walmarts on suburban farm fields.

My point is that so long as a metro subsidizes sprawl like metro KC does, there is almost zero incentives for developers to go into locations like 63rd and Troost and do anything at all. Not when they can typically get even more incentives to go to 119th and Nall or 87th and Renner, 470 and Douglas, Speedway, Adams Dairy Pkwy etc.

I have watched suburban and urban proposals go through the process here and they don’t use incentives like they do in KC. Most of the time, it's the other way around (developers jumping through the hoops to get approvals). So I guess we will have to disagree on that .

Would be great to see a project like this happen in KC though.