MCRE, LLC - Henry McClure - 762-291-2765

Tonganoxie, Kansas: A Small City with Real Momentum

2026-08-06T15:42:10.402-07:00

Tonganoxie sits in Leavenworth County along US-24/US-40, roughly between Lawrence and the Leavenworth/Kansas City corridor. It is no longer just a quiet bedroom community. The city is in an active, deliberate growth phase powered by industrial investment in the Animal Health Corridor, steady residential demand, targeted infrastructure, and coordinated planning. The result is a layered set of opportunities across industrial, residential, commercial, and mixed-use development that few Kansas towns of this size currently offer.

Steady Population Growth and a Changing Profile

Recent certified figures place Tonganoxie’s population in the 6,195–6,208 range, with projections near 6,350 for 2026. That represents roughly 11–13% growth since the 2020 Census (about 5,570–5,590) and more than a doubling since 2000, when the city hovered around 2,700–2,800. Median age sits in the mid-to-late 30s and median household income runs in the $80,000 range. Many residents still commute into the broader Kansas City metro (typical drive times near 30 minutes), yet local employment options are expanding. The city functions as both a residential destination and an increasingly self-contained economic node.

The Industrial Engine: Tonganoxie Business Park

The clearest near-term driver is the Tonganoxie Business Park at 222nd Street and Business Park Drive. Three anchors define it:

Hill’s Pet Nutrition operates a major “smart factory” wet pet food plant that opened in 2023. The facility (roughly 365,000 square feet on 80-plus acres) represents a capital investment commonly reported in the $250–450 million range. It created 80–100+ jobs, carries an appraisal near $86–89 million, and operates under a 10-year fixed Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT) agreement. As a significant water user, it also generates meaningful utility revenue for the city. Community benefits include the Hill’s Bark Park.
DSM-Firmenich (now operating its NextGen Tonganoxie facility) built a nutritional premix plant serving the pet food industry. The roughly $48 million project (approximately 57,000–70,000 square feet) delivered about 28 jobs at an average wage near $71,000. The company used Industrial Revenue Bonds and has the facility completed and operational. Recent reporting notes roughly 20–30 jobs as production ramps toward full capacity.
Unilock, an earlier tenant, established a regional sales office and outdoor yard for concrete pavers. Its planned manufacturing phase did not proceed; a 2024 amendment released performance obligations after Unilock paid a premium based on updated land values, while the city retained a 10-year right of first refusal.

The park benefits from shovel-ready lots with utilities in place, proximity (2.5 miles north of I-70), access to multiple interstates, a roughly 40-minute drive to KCI, and a labor basin cited around 925,000. It sits squarely in the Kansas City Animal Health Corridor. The city annexed approximately 82 acres nearby to support expansion, and a new Evergy electrical substation on about 14 acres has been approved to strengthen power capacity. Leavenworth County Development Corporation (LCDC) and the Port Authority actively market the park with streamlined permitting and customized incentives.

Opportunity remains for suppliers, logistics operators, light manufacturers, or related processors that can plug into the Hill’s/DSM ecosystem. Additional large tracts near the park and the I-70 corridor continue to be marketed for commercial and industrial use.

Residential Demand Keeps Pace

Housing activity has been robust. Stone Creek (associated with Rausch Coleman Homes and Lennar activity) brought roughly 142–145 homes in two phases on the east side, visible from US-24/40. Prices generally fall in the $250,000–$330,000 range. Permit activity has been strong—nearly 100 permits generating more than $800,000 in fees for building permits, excise tax, and utility taps. Newer multi-family projects have performed well with limited availability.

The city has made housing variety a priority. The Downtown Regulating Plan, advanced through a multi-year process and adopted in late 2025, explicitly supports more residential investment in and around the core. Updated districts (R-DT-1 for lower-scale residential and R-DT-2 for moderate-scale residential plus limited mixed use) encourage walkable housing that reinforces downtown. Additional single-family, townhome, or multi-family opportunities exist on land that infrastructure improvements will unlock, particularly along the southern corridor.

Commercial and Downtown Evolution

Retail remains typical of a Kansas town of this size—convenience-oriented with some specialty and local flavor. Dollar General, gas stations and convenience stores (including a new Casey’s under construction at 24/40 and South Park Drive), fast food, independent eateries, thrift options, hardware, and pharmacies form the base. Cedar Hills Mall, opened around 2025 in a former city maintenance shop on Main Street, added a multi-vendor boutique space. There is no major big-box presence; residents travel to Lawrence, Basehor, or the Kansas City metro for broader shopping.

Highway commercial pads along US-24/40 and sites near the Business Park, Honey Creek Road, and Chieftain Road continue to attract interest, with private listings often priced in the $35,000–$70,000+ per acre range depending on size, corner status, and utility readiness. Downtown itself is the focus of longer-term transformation under the Regulating Plan. Updates strengthen the Historic Business District standards, convert nearby industrial zones to more context-appropriate categories, and emphasize public-space improvements, pedestrian connections, and mixed-use potential.

Infrastructure as the Unlock

The city is investing deliberately to open capacity. The 14th Street / East Street corridor ranks high in the Capital Maintenance and Improvement Plan. Design work is underway (BG Consultants), with surveying progressing in 2026. The project will improve school access and traffic flow while opening hundreds of acres for development through a planned signalized intersection with US-24/40. Utilities have already been extended south toward the Business Park. Additional work includes wastewater treatment improvements, street and sewer maintenance, park upgrades, and Front Street / Ridge Street stormwater, curb, and sidewalk projects. These investments lower barriers for private capital on the southern and eastern edges of town.

Policy Tools and Partnerships

Tonganoxie maintains a formal Tax Abatement Policy (adopted 2017) that typically targets around 45% real property tax abatement for qualifying projects, with possible bonuses and a practical ceiling near 70% for up to 10 years. Industrial Revenue Bonds paired with PILOT agreements have been used effectively (Hill’s fixed 10-year PILOT; DSM IRBs). LCDC and the Leavenworth County Port Authority provide site marketing, incentive packaging, and project facilitation. The city has reduced its mill levy in recent years even as assessed valuation has grown—an indicator of fiscal capacity to support further investment.

Traffic and Market Position

US-24/US-40 carries the bulk of through traffic. Earlier bridge inspection data showed average daily traffic near 8,755 vehicles (with roughly 5% trucks) and projected growth toward 15,000 by the early 2040s. That volume supports highway-oriented commercial uses. Combined with the city’s location—lower-cost housing relative to closer-in suburbs, quality-of-life amenities, and expanding local jobs—Tonganoxie occupies a practical niche on the edge of the Kansas City metro.

Putting It Together

Growth here is intentional rather than uncontrolled. The community previously rejected a large poultry processing proposal and continues to emphasize quality, schools, and compatible development. Leadership—city management, the council, and economic development partners—has aligned infrastructure, zoning, and incentives with private investment.

The highest-potential opportunities right now include additional industrial users or suppliers near the Business Park, residential development as the 14th Street corridor advances, highway commercial pads along 24/40, and downtown mixed-use or housing projects under the new Regulating Plan. For developers and investors, the combination of shovel-ready industrial sites, expanding residential land, active retail pads, and a cooperative local government creates a relatively rare “small-city-with-momentum” profile.

Anyone exploring specific sites or projects would do well to start with City Manager George Brajkovic, LCDC, current land listings near the Business Park and 24/40 corridor, and the city’s published planning documents. Tonganoxie is no longer waiting for growth—it is actively shaping it.

Topeka and Shawnee County’s multifamily apartment market

2026-08-06T13:52:40.309-07:00

Topeka and Shawnee County’s multifamily apartment market (focusing on larger complexes of roughly 50+ units, not duplexes or fourplexes) is characterized by modest overall stock quality, moderate vacancy in the mid-to-high single digits, limited new construction until recently, and a clear shortage of modern/higher-quality product. The market is slightly tight by local standards, with demand supported by stable employment (government, healthcare/education, and related sectors) outpacing deliveries of new units.

Overall Stock and Inventory

Older city housing analyses (around 2020 data) put Topeka’s market-rate multifamily inventory at roughly 10,300–10,400 units, predominantly traditional garden-style complexes. Structures with five or more units account for a substantial share of renter-occupied housing (around 42% in recent ACS-related figures). Affordable/subsidized stock adds several thousand more units (LIHTC, public housing around 700+, project-based Section 8, etc.), for a combined multifamily total that is meaningful relative to the metro’s size but not expansive by national standards.

The bulk of the stock dates to the 1970s–1990s. Large complexes are concentrated especially in southwest Topeka (e.g., 66614 area) with good highway access. Examples of sizable properties include:

Residences of Auburn Hills — ~320 units (1970s vintage, renovated in places; 1–3 bedrooms).
Raintree Apartments — ~344 units (1970s; studios to 2 bedrooms, more affordable positioning).
Southbrook Apartments & Townhomes — ~242 units (1990s).
Others in managed portfolios or notable size: Brookfield Village (~160), Crown Colony (~220), Sherwood (~300), Villa West (~308), Misty Glen (~216), Fleming Court (~116), and Mariposa Townhomes (smaller at ~54 but part of the larger managed set).

Newer additions are limited. Wheatfield Village (opened 2023) added 173 units of higher-end product in a mixed-use setting on Fairlawn with resort-style amenities; it commands significantly higher rents and represents one of the few true Class A-leaning options.

Shawnee County dominates local multifamily activity. Outlying parts of the Topeka metro have thinner apartment stock.

Occupancy, Vacancy, and Availability

HUD’s Comprehensive Housing Market Analysis (data as of April 1, 2025, drawing heavily on CoStar) described the apartment market as slightly tight, with a 7.2% vacancy rate in Q1 2025 (down from 7.8% a year earlier). Overall rental vacancy (all types) was 7.4%. A separate Valbridge Property Advisors analysis (around the same period) put overall multifamily vacancy near 8.3% (modestly improved year-over-year), with positive net absorption of about 41 units in the prior year and flat net deliveries. Newer buildings ran ~7.2% vacant; older buildings ~7.1%; Class C higher at ~9.9% with some negative absorption.

This translates to occupancy in the low-to-mid 90s overall. Class A/newer product tends to perform better; older Class C faces more softness. Current listing activity (mid-2026) shows availability at major complexes—multiple units open at places like Auburn Hills, Raintree, and Wheatfield Village—but not an oversupply. Units turn at varying speeds depending on condition, price, and location; well-maintained or renovated product leases more readily.

National multifamily vacancy has been higher in many reports (often mid-to-high single digits or above in some methodologies for 2025–2026), with Sun Belt markets facing more oversupply pressure. Topeka’s Midwest secondary-market position has been more balanced and less volatile.

Quality: Modest Overall, with a Clear Gap at the Top

The stock is predominantly modest (Class B/C garden-style). Many properties have seen partial renovations (updated appliances, flooring, common areas), but the majority lack the finishes, amenities, and scale of modern product. Higher vacancy and weaker absorption in Class C reflect deferred maintenance or functional obsolescence in older buildings.

True Class A is limited. Wheatfield Village is the standout recent delivery (vaulted ceilings, designer kitchens, resort pool, fitness, etc.; studios starting well over $1,300 and 2-bedrooms often $2,000+). Average rents overall have been in the $910–$941 range recently, with Class A closer to $1,290, Class B ~$990, and Class C ~$730 (Valbridge figures; Shawnee County averages higher than outlying counties). Recent rent growth has been solid (5–6% in some periods), stronger than the long-term historical average of ~2%.

The market has long been recognized as short on quality/modern housing. City and state processes for projects like The Hutch explicitly noted a shortage of quality product.

Need, Demand, and Pipeline

Demand is steady rather than explosive—supported by government employment, healthcare/education, and limited household formation/migration pressures—but it has consistently outpaced the thin new-supply pipeline. Rental permits have been low: only ~40 units in the 12 months ending March 2025 (down sharply from prior periods), after a brief 2020–2021 uptick. Historical averages were often in the teens to low dozens annually outside that window.

Key needs include:

Modern market-rate product (especially downtown and lifestyle-oriented) to attract/retain younger professionals and empty-nesters and support revitalization.
Quality workforce and affordable units (ongoing LIHTC and related activity addresses part of this).
Better overall condition and amenities in the aging garden-style inventory.

Notable pipeline (as of 2026):

The Hutch (Project View) — 192-unit mixed-use “best-in-class”/luxury complex downtown near the Statehouse (studios, 1- and 2-bedrooms; high-end amenities including resort-style heated pool, rooftop lounge with views, fitness, dog facilities, ground-floor retail). Flaherty & Collins; RHID approvals secured; construction targeted for late 2026 with phased delivery over ~20–24 months. Expected to bring meaningful new quality inventory and foot traffic downtown.
Affordable-focused projects: Union Tower / Union at Tower area (~250 units in SE Topeka, targeting lower AMI levels); additional smaller LIHTC or similar deals (e.g., ~42 units near 37th & Gage; larger ~176-unit efforts); senior-oriented product.
Other modest activity (e.g., Connect 55+ senior housing).

These will incrementally improve the quality mix but will take time to deliver and lease. Absorption of the new higher-end units will be a key test of depth of demand for premium product.

Bottom Line

Topeka/Shawnee County’s large-apartment stock is functional and occupies reasonably well (mid-to-high 90s occupancy / ~7–8% vacancy range in recent data), with solid rent growth, but it is modest in quality and age profile. Availability exists without being excessive. The clearest need is for more modern Class A/B product and continued attention to affordable/workforce housing. Limited historical construction has left a gap that recent and planned projects (especially The Hutch and Wheatfield Village as benchmarks) are beginning to address. The market remains secondary and relatively stable compared with oversupplied Sun Belt metros, with fundamentals driven more by local employment anchors than rapid population growth.

Data draws primarily from HUD’s 2025 Topeka HMA (CoStar-sourced apartment metrics), Valbridge multifamily analysis, city housing studies, permit data, and current project reporting. Vacancy and rent figures can shift quarter to quarter; local brokers or CoStar/Yardi-level access provide the most granular real-time views on specific complexes.

Broader Context - Here’s everything available on the Tonganoxie Business Park (222nd Street & Business Park Drive, Tonganoxie, KS).

2026-08-04T19:50:50.538-07:00

Official Marketing Materials

The primary current marketing piece is an LCDC one-pager (dated mid-2024, still referenced as the active package):

Key claims from the package:

Home to Unilock, Hill’s Pet Nutrition, and DSM-Firmenich
Two shovel-ready lots available: 2.18 acres and 10.40 acres
All utilities in place
2.5 miles north of I-70
Minutes from six interstates
~40 minutes from KCI Airport
925,000 labor basin
Located in the heart of the global supply chain and Animal Health Corridor
Positioned for manufacturing and light industrial companies
Streamlined permitting + customized incentives available through LCDC

It includes a virtual reality (VR) tour link (referenced as “CLICK HERE” on the PDF). Direct PDF link (publicly available): LCDC Tonganoxie Business Park marketing sheet

An older (2020) YouTube video from Leavenworth County EDC shows early renderings and drone footage of the park when it was still largely available (originally marketed as ~135 acres total with significant acreage open).

Who to Contact (Primary Points of Contact)

These are the two people listed on the official marketing materials and consistently referenced for park inquiries:

Lisa Haack Executive Director, Leavenworth County Development Corporation (LCDC) Phone: 913-727-6111 Email: LHaack@LVcountyED.org (also shown as lhaack@LVCountyED.org) LCDC is the lead marketer and first point of contact for site inquiries, RFIs, incentives packaging, and coordination.
George Brajkovic City Manager, City of Tonganoxie Phone: 913-845-2620 Email: gbrajkovic@tonganoxie.org Handles city-side issues: land ownership (city owns the park), incentives (tax abatement/IRBs/PILOTs), utilities, annexation, and development agreements.

Recommended approach: Start with Lisa Haack / LCDC for marketing, available inventory confirmation, and incentive discussions. Loop in George Brajkovic early for city-specific details and negotiations. Both appear together on the marketing materials.

Current Anchors / Tenants

Hill’s Pet Nutrition — Large “smart factory” wet pet food plant (opened 2023). Major capital investment (commonly cited in the $250–450 million range). Created 80–100+ jobs. Appraised around $86 million. Operates under a 10-year fixed PILOT agreement. Significant water user for the city. Community benefit includes the Hill’s Bark Park.
DSM-Firmenich — Nutritional premix plant serving the pet food industry. ~$48 million investment, roughly 57k–70k sq ft facility, ~28 jobs (average wage cited around $71k). Issued Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRBs). Facility completed and operational.
Unilock (concrete pavers / hardscape products) — Earlier tenant. Address listed as 22035 Business Park Drive. Operates a regional sales office / outdoor sales yard and related operations. The original development agreement had a manufacturing plant component on the southern portion of their site; later amendments (including a 2024 fourth amendment) addressed performance criteria, with Unilock paying a premium and the city retaining a right of first refusal for a period.

Park Characteristics & Status

Owned by the City of Tonganoxie.
Focused on manufacturing and light industrial uses.
Utilities extended and in place (supported in part by earlier EDA funding for water infrastructure).
Recent city annexation of roughly 82 acres nearby to support further expansion.
New Evergy electrical substation approved on a nearby ~14-acre site to improve power capacity.
Zoning: Business Park District (BP) and related industrial designations appear on the city zoning map.

Available inventory note: The 2024 marketing sheet lists two specific shovel-ready lots (2.18 and 10.40 acres). Availability can change quickly, so confirmation with Lisa Haack is essential. Nearby privately owned commercial/industrial tracts along 222nd Street, Honey Creek Road, and Chieftain Road / US-24-40 are also actively marketed as being adjacent or near the Business Park (various sizes, often $35k–$70k+ per acre depending on location and attributes). These are separate from the city-owned park lots.

Broader Context

The park is the city’s primary industrial economic engine and is repeatedly cited by LCDC and the city as a success story of coordinated economic development (city + LCDC + Port Authority). It sits in the Animal Health Corridor, which has helped attract the Hill’s and DSM projects. The city uses tax abatement policy, IRBs, and PILOT agreements as key tools.

Tonganoxie, Kansas is a growing small city in Leavenworth County, part of the Kansas City metropolitan area. It sits along US-24/US-40, roughly between Lawrence and the Leavenworth/Kansas City area.

2026-08-04T19:31:50.050-07:00

Tonganoxie is in an active growth phase, driven by industrial anchors in the Animal Health Corridor, residential demand, targeted infrastructure, and proactive city planning. The combination creates layered opportunities across industrial, residential, commercial, and mixed-use development.

1. Industrial & Manufacturing Momentum (Strongest Near-Term Driver)

The Tonganoxie Business Park (222nd Street & Business Park Drive) is the clear economic engine. Key anchors:

Hill’s Pet Nutrition — Major “smart factory” wet pet food plant (opened 2023). Investment reported in the $250–450M range; created 80–100+ jobs. Appraised at ~$86M, delivering significant new assessed valuation (and utility revenue as a major water user). Includes a 10-year fixed PILOT agreement and community benefits such as the Hill’s Bark Park.
DSM-Firmenich — Nutritional premix plant for the pet food industry (~$48M investment, 57k–70k sq ft, ~28 jobs at ~$71k average wage). Issued IRBs; facility completed and operational.
Unilock (concrete pavers) as an earlier tenant.

Available inventory (as of recent marketing): Shovel-ready lots with utilities in place (examples historically listed at ~2.18 and 10.40 acres). The city annexed roughly 82 acres near the park (between US-24/40 and 222nd Street) to support expansion. A new Evergy electrical substation on ~14 acres nearby has been approved, strengthening power capacity.

Positioning advantages: 2.5 miles north of I-70, access to multiple interstates, ~40 minutes to KCI, and location in the Kansas City Animal Health Corridor / global supply chain. Labor basin cited around 925,000. LCDC (Leavenworth County Development Corporation) and the Port Authority actively market the park with streamlined permitting and customized incentives.

Opportunity: Speculative or build-to-suit light industrial, manufacturing, or distribution that can leverage the Hill’s/DSM ecosystem (suppliers, logistics, related processing). Additional large tracts near the park and I-70 corridor are marketed for commercial/industrial development.

2. Residential Growth — Strong Demand and Expanding Supply

Residential activity is robust and is a stated city priority for attracting/retaining residents across income levels and life stages.

Stone Creek (Rausch Coleman Homes / associated with Lennar activity): ~142–145 homes in two phases on the east side (visible from US-24/40). Grand opening in late 2024. Prices roughly $250k–$330k range depending on plan and upgrades. Significant permit activity (98 permits generating over $800k in fees for permits, excise tax, and utility taps).
Newer multi-family projects are performing strongly with limited availability.
City focus on housing variety (single-family, multi-family, and downtown-compatible options).

The Downtown Regulating Plan (adopted late 2025 after a multi-year process) explicitly supports more residential investment in and around downtown. It updates zoning to R-DT-1 (lower-scale residential) and R-DT-2 (moderate-scale residential + limited mixed-use), enabling walkable housing that strengthens the core.

Opportunity: Additional single-family subdivisions, townhomes, or multi-family on land unlocked by infrastructure (especially the southern corridor). Infill and adaptive projects near downtown under the new regulating standards.

3. Commercial / Retail / Highway Corridor

US-24/40 corridor: New Casey’s convenience store (~$1.2M) approved and under construction at 24/40 & South Park Drive. Adjacent pad sites (including ~3.5 acres) positioned for fast-casual or similar.
Multiple commercial land parcels marketed near the Business Park, 24/40, and Honey Creek / Chieftain Road areas (various sizes from ~8–45+ acres; pricing often in the $35k–$70k+ per acre range depending on location, utilities, and corner status).
Downtown: The Regulating Plan aims to make it a vibrant, walkable mixed-use heart of the community. Zoning updates improve standards for the Historic Business District (HBD), convert adjacent industrial to more compatible “downtown-adjacent industrial” (HBD-I / I-DT), and support better connections to neighborhoods. Public-space improvements (streetscape, pedestrian, parking) are part of the vision.

Opportunity: Highway-oriented commercial pads, service retail, restaurants, and specialty uses. Downtown mixed-use, boutique retail, or residential-over-commercial leveraging the new form-based/regulating approach.

4. Infrastructure That Unlocks Land

The city is deliberately investing to open capacity:

14th Street / East Street corridor — High priority in the Capital Maintenance and Improvement Plan (CMIP). Design work authorized (BG Consultants); surveying underway in 2026. Extends from near the elementary school area south to a planned signalized intersection with US-24/40. Expected to improve school access/traffic flow and open hundreds of acres for development. Utilities (water/sewer) already extended south toward the Business Park. KDOT coordination required.
Ongoing wastewater treatment plant improvements, street/sewer maintenance, and park upgrades (Gallagher Park stage, Stone Creek neighborhood park, etc.).
Front Street / Ridge Street improvements (stormwater, curb, sidewalk).

These projects reduce barriers for private investment on the southern and eastern edges.

5. Incentives and Local Support Environment

City has a formal Tax Abatement Policy (adopted 2017): Typically targets ~45% real property tax abatement for qualifying projects (manufacturing, etc.), with potential bonuses for capital investment and municipal water use. Maximum generally capped (policy language around 70% for up to 10 years).
Active use of Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRBs) paired with PILOT agreements (Hill’s fixed 10-year PILOT; DSM IRBs).
Strong partnership with LCDC and the Leavenworth County Port Authority for site marketing, incentives packaging, and project facilitation.
City has reduced its mill levy over recent years while growing assessed valuation — a sign of fiscal health supporting further investment.

Overall Trajectory and Strategic Fit

Population has grown roughly 10%+ over five years and continues climbing (estimates in the 6,200–6,350 range). The city benefits from being a lower-cost, high-quality bedroom community within commuting distance of Kansas City, Lawrence, and Topeka, while industrial jobs are increasingly available locally.

Growth is deliberate rather than uncontrolled: the community previously rejected a large poultry plant and emphasizes quality-of-life amenities, schools, and compatible development. Leadership (city manager, council, and economic development partners) is actively aligning infrastructure, zoning, and incentives with private investment.

Highest-potential opportunity areas right now:

Additional industrial users or suppliers in/near the Business Park.
Residential (especially once 14th Street advances).
Highway commercial pads along 24/40.
Downtown mixed-use and housing under the new Regulating Plan.

For a real estate or development perspective, the combination of shovel-ready industrial sites, entitled or soon-to-be-accessible residential land, active retail pads, and a cooperative local government creates a relatively rare “small-city-with-momentum” profile on the edge of the Kansas City metro. Contacting City Manager George Brajkovic, LCDC, or reviewing current land listings near the Business Park and 24/40 corridor would be logical next steps for specific site or project exploration.

Population

Recent figures show steady growth:

Kansas certified estimates put the city population at approximately 6,195–6,208 (mid-2020s data, with slight variations by source and exact date).
World Population Review projects around 6,350 for 2026.
2020 Census: roughly 5,573–5,591.
It has more than doubled since 2000 (when it was around 2,700–2,800) and grown substantially since 2010 (~5,000).

Median age is in the mid-to-late 30s (around 36.8). Median household income is roughly $80,000 range (higher than some earlier ACS figures). It functions as a bedroom community with many residents commuting into the broader Kansas City metro (average commute often cited around 30 minutes).

Economy and Industry

Tonganoxie combines local employment with commuting to the Kansas City area. Key sectors for residents include educational services, retail trade, and health care & social assistance. Manufacturing has grown in importance with recent industrial investment.

It has a business/industrial park presence (including the Urban Hess Business Center / UHBC area) that hosts light manufacturing and related firms providing over 100 jobs combined in some reports, plus tax base benefits.

Major recent industrial development: Hill’s Pet Nutrition (a Colgate-Palmolive division) opened a large “smart factory” wet pet food plant in 2023. The facility is approximately 365,000 square feet on 80+ acres, produces 170+ varieties of canned pet food (including Science Diet and Prescription Diet lines), uses advanced automation/AI/robotics, and achieved LEED Gold certification. It created roughly 80–100+ jobs and represented a major capital investment (reported in the hundreds of millions). A supplier (DSM-Firmenich) has also been linked to the site.

Peruvian Connection (high-end artisan apparel, knitwear, accessories, and home décor sold primarily via catalog, online, and limited stores) is headquartered on a family farm property in/near Tonganoxie. It is a significant local employer with operations in design, warehouse/fulfillment, customer service, and administration (employee counts commonly cited in the 100–140+ range for the local operation; company-wide larger).

Other noted employers include the City of Tonganoxie, First State Bank & Trust, Legend Healthcare, construction firms, and various smaller manufacturers and service businesses.

Biggest employer: Tonganoxie USD 464 (the public school district) is consistently listed as the largest with around 310 employees.

Note: A proposed large Tyson Foods chicken processing plant was canceled around 2017 after local opposition.

Retail

Retail is typical of a small Kansas town of this size — oriented toward convenience, local needs, and some specialty rather than large regional shopping:

Dollar General.
Convenience stores/gas stations and small grocery/country mart operations (e.g., Casey’s, B&J Country Mart / similar, Cenex/Phillips 66-type sites).
Fast food and local eateries (Sonic, Subway, Domino’s, and independent spots).
Thrift/consignment (Good Shepherd Thrift Shop & Food Bank and others).
Boutiques, specialty, and multi-vendor spaces. A notable recent addition is Cedar Hills Mall (opened around 2025 on Main Street in the former city maintenance shop area) — a boutique-style multi-vendor mall with dozens of vendor spaces for gifts, clothing, decor, food items, and more.
Hardware, flooring/carpet, pharmacies/drugstores, and other local service-retail.
Peruvian Connection’s presence is significant economically but functions primarily as a headquarters/fulfillment/online/catalog operation rather than a traditional public storefront retail destination.

Downtown has an active revitalization focus (see future section). There is no major big-box retail or large shopping center; residents often travel to Lawrence, Basehor, or the Kansas City metro for broader options.

Traffic / Drive-By Volume

US-24/US-40 is the primary highway corridor running through/near the city and carries the bulk of through traffic. One specific data point from a US-24 bridge inspection report near Tonganoxie showed an Average Daily Traffic (AADT) of 8,755 vehicles (2020 data, with ~5% trucks) and a projected future AADT of about 15,210 by 2042.

This represents meaningful regional through-traffic (connecting the Lawrence/Topeka side toward Leavenworth and the northern Kansas City metro), supporting highway-oriented commercial potential. Local streets and arterials add additional volume from residents and nearby rural areas. Exact current KDOT flow-map numbers for the precise segments through town can vary by year and location, but the corridor is solid for a community of this size.

Future Outlook

The trajectory is positive and growth-oriented:

Continued residential expansion (examples include subdivisions such as Stone Creek with significant building permit activity from builders like Lennar/Rausch Coleman).
Industrial and business-park development (Hill’s plant as an anchor, ongoing activity in the business park, utility/infrastructure support including a new electrical substation nearby).
Downtown Regulating Plan (process started ~2024, adopted/advanced in 2025) focused on strengthening the historic business district as a walkable, mixed-use heart of the community. It includes zoning updates (Historic Business District refinements and conversion of nearby industrial areas to more context-appropriate standards), public-realm improvements, better connections to surrounding neighborhoods, and strategies for incremental-to-long-term investment.
Broader planning via the city’s comprehensive plan framework (Vision 2020 roots with updates), capital improvement priorities (streets, utilities, etc.), and partnerships with the Leavenworth County Development Corporation (LCDC) and Leavenworth County Port Authority for economic development.
Population growth, rising home values, school district presence, and relative affordability/quality of life compared with core Kansas City suburbs position it well for continued in-migration of families and selective business attraction.

Challenges typical of growing small towns (infrastructure keeping pace, balancing growth with community character) exist, but local government and economic development partners are actively managing them. The community has shown selectivity (e.g., rejecting the large poultry plant) in favor of higher-quality or more compatible development.

Other Key Facts

Government: Modified council-manager form (mayor + council).
Education: Tonganoxie USD 464 (elementary, middle, and high school; Chieftains/Warriors/Braves mascots; roughly 1,900–2,000 students in recent data).
History: Platted 1866 and named after a Delaware Tribe chief (the name relates to “shorty”); incorporated 1871.
Active local business association and chamber-type efforts supporting networking and promotion.

Tonganoxie is evolving from a quieter rural/small-town community into a more dynamic edge community of the Kansas City metro while trying to retain local character. The combination of highway access, recent industrial investment (especially Hill’s), residential growth, and downtown planning efforts points to continued expansion in population, employment base, and commercial activity over the next decade. For the absolute latest traffic counts, building permits, or development pipeline details, checking the City of Tonganoxie website, Leavenworth County resources, or KDOT traffic maps is recommended, as these update periodically.

Tonganoxie operates under a modified council-manager form of government.

Structure

The Governing Body consists of:

One Mayor
Five City Council members

All are elected at-large (citywide, not by district) to staggered four-year terms. Terms officially expire on the second Monday in January.

This is described by the city as a “modified” version of the classic council-manager system common in many U.S. municipalities. The elected officials set policy; a professional City Manager runs day-to-day operations.

Roles

Mayor

Chairs all public City Council meetings and guides the agenda.
Makes recommendations for key appointments (Municipal Court Judge, City Attorney, and members of boards/commissions such as the Planning Commission and Library Board), which require City Council confirmation.
Does not typically vote on agenda items except to break a tie.
Serves as the ceremonial and meeting-leadership head of the city.

City Council

Provides policy direction through ordinances and resolutions.
Approves the annual budget, major contracts, and appointments.
Engages the community via committees, advisory boards, and commissions.
Members serve part-time/volunteer-style; they are not full-time administrators.

City Manager

Full-time professional chief executive/administrative officer.
Appointed by the Mayor with the advice and consent of the City Council; serves at the pleasure of the Council.
Responsible for day-to-day operations of all city departments and services (police, fire, public works, utilities, planning, finance, parks, etc.).
Prepares the annual budget for Council consideration and approval.
Hires, supervises, and can remove most department heads and staff (with limited exceptions such as the Municipal Judge and City Attorney).

There is also an Assistant City Manager who supports the City Manager.

Current Officials (as of early 2026)

Mayor: David Frese (term expires January 2028)
City Council:
- Jacob (Jake) Dale — term expires January 2028
- Jennifer McCutchen — term expires January 2028
- Loralee Stevens — term expires January 2030 (re-elected in 2025)
- Rebecca (Becca / Skeet) Grube — term expires January 2030
- Rev. Matthew (Matt) Wilke — term expires January 2030

(Chris Donnelly and Matt Partridge’s terms ended in early 2026 following the November 2025 election.)

City Manager: George Brajkovic (in the role since March 2017; previously Director of Economic Development for the Unified Government of Wyandotte County / Kansas City, KS).
Assistant City Manager: Dan Porter.

Meetings and Process

Regular City Council meetings are held on the 1st and 3rd Monday of each month at 7:00 p.m. Agendas and packets are posted in advance on the city website; meetings are often live-streamed on the City of Tonganoxie’s YouTube channel.

Background Note

In 2013, after the population exceeded 5,000, Tonganoxie transitioned from a City of the Third Class to a City of the Second Class under Kansas law (Governor Sam Brownback signed a proclamation recognizing this). The current modified council-manager structure has been in place and is documented in city materials and the municipal code.

This setup is designed so elected officials focus on policy and representation while a trained professional administrator handles operational management and continuity. For the absolute latest roster or meeting details, the official city website (tonganoxie.org) is the best source, as elections can change membership.

Tonganoxie Economic Development Efforts – Investigation Summary

Tonganoxie does not run a large standalone economic development department. Instead, it uses a collaborative, multi-partner model that pairs local city leadership with county and regional organizations. This structure has produced measurable results, particularly in industrial development.

Primary Players

Organization	Role in Tonganoxie	Key Contact / Notes
City of Tonganoxie	Local policy, incentives, infrastructure, annexations, and project negotiations	City Manager George Brajkovic (913) 845-2620
Leavenworth County Development Corporation (LCDC)	Lead point of contact for business attraction, retention, and expansion in Tonganoxie and Leavenworth County	(913) 727-6111 lvcountyed.org
Leavenworth County Port Authority (LCPA)	Owns/develops industrial property; markets parks; issues or facilitates incentives; staffed by LCDC	Supports Tonganoxie Business Park and Urban Hess Business Center
Regional partners	Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) and Kansas City Area Development Council (KCADC)	Broader marketing and regional site selection support

The city’s official economic development page directs businesses seeking incentives or expansion assistance to call either City Hall or LCDC.

Core Strategies and Tools

Business Park Development
- Tonganoxie Business Park (222nd St & Business Park Drive) is the flagship industrial site. It is marketed as shovel-ready with utilities in place, located 2.5 miles north of I-70, within the Animal Health Corridor, and with access to a large labor basin.
- Anchors: Hill’s Pet Nutrition (major wet pet food “smart factory”), DSM-Firmenich (premix plant), and Unilock.
- Additional land has been annexed near the park to support further growth. A new electrical substation nearby strengthens infrastructure capacity.
Urban Hess Business Center (UHBC)
- Port Authority-owned multi-building complex (~92,000 sq ft).
- Serves as a lower-cost, flexible space for growing small and mid-sized businesses (examples: HMC Performance Coatings, Mid Star Lab, County Road Brewing, and others).
- Generates meaningful property tax revenue and supports more than 100 jobs.
Incentives
- City Tax Abatement Policy (adopted 2017): Typically targets ~45% real property tax abatement for qualifying projects, with possible bonuses up to a policy maximum (generally capped around 70% for up to 10 years).
- Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRBs) paired with Payment-in-Lieu-of-Taxes (PILOT) agreements are actively used (Hill’s received a 10-year fixed PILOT; DSM received IRBs).
- Sales tax exemptions on construction materials are commonly available through IRBs.
- Customized packages are negotiated project-by-project with city and LCDC/LCPA involvement.
Infrastructure Investment to Enable Growth
- Past federal EDA funding helped build water infrastructure supporting the Business Park.
- Ongoing city investments (utility extensions south to the park, wastewater improvements, the planned 14th Street / East Street corridor) aim to open additional developable land.
Business Retention & Small Business Support
- LCDC works with existing employers.
- UHBC functions as an entrepreneurial/incubator-style space.
- Local business association and chamber-type groups participate in networking and advocacy.

Documented Results

Hill’s Pet Nutrition plant: Major capital investment (reported in the hundreds of millions), 80–100+ jobs, significant new assessed valuation (~$86M appraisal cited), and long-term PILOT payments to local taxing jurisdictions.
DSM-Firmenich: ~$48M investment, ~28 jobs.
Population growth and residential development (e.g., Stone Creek) are cited by economic development partners as downstream benefits of industrial investment.
County-level data (LCDC/LCPA) show hundreds of jobs and hundreds of millions in announced capital investment facilitated across Leavenworth County in recent years, with Tonganoxie as a prominent success story.

Positioning and Messaging

LCDC markets Leavenworth County (including Tonganoxie) around:

Proximity to six interstates and KCI
Animal Health Corridor location
Right-to-work state
Available shovel-ready sites
Streamlined permitting and customized incentives

The city emphasizes quality growth and partnership rather than pure volume. It has previously declined large projects that did not fit community preferences (e.g., the earlier Tyson proposal).

Current Status & Observations

Economic development is active and results-oriented, especially on the industrial side.
Success depends heavily on the city–LCDC–Port Authority partnership. City Manager Brajkovic sits on the LCDC board, ensuring direct coordination.
Recent activity includes ongoing marketing of remaining Business Park lots, infrastructure planning to unlock more land, and a county-level education campaign about the value of sustained economic development investment.
Challenges include funding stability for LCDC/LCPA (cities contribute annually; county support has faced discussion) and competition from other Kansas City-edge communities.

Bottom line: Tonganoxie’s economic development efforts are pragmatic, partnership-driven, and focused on industrial/manufacturing attraction (particularly Animal Health Corridor opportunities) supported by targeted infrastructure and incentives. The model has delivered high-profile wins (Hill’s and DSM) and supporting small-business space while helping drive broader residential and commercial growth.

Key next steps for deeper investigation or engagement:

Contact LCDC (Lisa Haack or main line) or City Manager George Brajkovic for current site availability, incentive guidelines, or project discussions.
Review the Tonganoxie Business Park marketing materials and the city’s Tax Abatement Policy.
Check recent City Council packets and LCDC annual reports for the latest project pipeline.

Would you like this formatted as blog-ready notes, expanded with specific incentive policy details, or focused on a particular aspect (e.g., available sites, incentive structure, or comparison to other Leavenworth County cities)?

Average age of 1st time home buyer.........

2026-08-04T18:17:20.992-07:00

Around the mid-30s, according to most transaction- and credit-based data sources (typically median 32–35), though the widely cited National Association of Realtors (NAR) survey puts it higher at 40.

Key recent figures:

Redfin (using U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Survey data): Median age of first-time buyers was 35 in 2025 (down slightly from 36 in 2024; it had peaked near 38 around 2018).
AEI / New York Fed Consumer Credit Panel (based on credit reports and mortgage data): Median around 33–34 recently (e.g., 33 in Q1 2026, down from 34 earlier; average/mean closer to 36). Full-year 2025 median was about 34, little changed from prior years and similar to levels seen in the 2000s.
National Mortgage Database / Cotality and similar loan-based sources: Often around 32–33.
NAR 2025 Profile of Home Buyers and Sellers (survey of recent buyers, covering roughly mid-2024 to mid-2025): Median age 40 (an all-time high in their series), with first-time buyers making up a record-low 21% of the market.

The gap mainly comes from methodology. NAR relies on a voluntary survey with a low response rate (~3.5%), which analysts say underrepresents younger buyers. Data drawn from actual closed loans, credit files, or broader Census samples consistently show younger medians and less dramatic aging over time.

In short, while homeownership is delayed relative to past decades (when first-time buyers were more often in their late 20s), the typical age today is most reliably placed in the mid-30s rather than 40, with some modest improvement in the most recent data as rates and inventory conditions eased slightly. Figures can vary by metro (higher in high-cost coastal markets, lower in more affordable areas).

Fw: topeka

2026-06-29T13:11:51.654-07:00

Let me know if you want to showing (see it)

From: Shawn Krisher <shawn.krisher@legacypro.com>
Sent: Monday, June 29, 2026 10:25 AM
To: Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: topeka

Henry,

This is what the current tenant is paying. What would you like to pay?

Shawn

	QUICK SEND
6,710	Per SQFT	Total Monthly
Net Rent	$ 15.67	$ 8,762.14
Common Area Maintenance	$ 2.50	$ 1,397.92
Property Tax	$ 4.30	$ 2,402.36
Insurance	$ 0.47	$ 262.81
Management Fee	$ 0.69	$ 384.76
Total	$ 23.62	$ 13,209.98

Shawn Krisher

Regional Vice-President | Leasing and Acquisitions

Legacy Commercial Property

shawn.krisher@legacypro.com

(847) 400-7320

www.legacypro.com

On Jun 28, 2026, at 7:52 PM, Henry McClure <mcre13@gmail.com> wrote:

You don't often get email from mcre13@gmail.com. Learn why this is important

Can we do a deal with a church

Retail | 1 space available | 6,710 SqFt

We have money - make a fair deal

Henry McClure

Time Kills Deals

785.383.9994

444

Bottom line: Kansas isn’t a disaster

2026-05-23T17:12:27.361-07:00

Kansas faces real challenges in population dynamics, economic growth, and some quality-of-life metrics, though it also shows strengths like low unemployment, solid fiscal recovery under current leadership, and middling-to-decent national rankings overall.

Here’s a data-driven deep dive with roughly ten key points highlighting struggles (sourced from Census, BEA, rankings, etc.). These are framed around your request for “stats that make Kansas look bad” and reasons tied to leadership critiques, but context matters—many issues are long-term structural (rural decline, agriculture dependence) rather than solely gubernatorial. Current Governor Laura Kelly (D, in office since 2019, re-elected 2022) has presided over post-Brownback recovery, budget surpluses, and economic development wins, but critics point to persistent out-migration and middling growth.

1. Slow Population Growth and Rural Decline

Kansas population is ~2.94–2.97 million (34th in U.S.). It grew only 0.4% from 2024–2025 (+12k residents, mostly via international immigration), and saw a slight dip earlier (e.g., -932 in 2022). Over the longer term (2015–2025), growth was just 1.9%. Many rural counties lost population—78 of 105 counties declined 2020–2022. Urban areas like Johnson County grow, but Topeka, Wichita, and others have seen losses.

This fuels arguments for better economic/leadership strategies to retain residents.

2. Persistent Net Domestic Out-Migration

Kansas has experienced net domestic migration losses for years: ~ -23,923 (2020–2024 period, ranked 36th). Over 30 years, significant AGI (adjusted gross income) loss—nearly $8 billion cumulatively, with ongoing annual losses (e.g., $361 million in one recent year). People leave for lower-tax or higher-opportunity states like Texas, Florida, Arizona; gains often come from high-tax states but don’t offset.

This is a classic “voting with feet” critique often leveled at state policy.

3. Lagging Economic Growth and GDP

Kansas GDP growth has been modest. Annualized ~1.0% over recent five years (ranked ~36th). Real GDP growth has trailed national averages and peers in some periods. Per capita personal income ~$68k (27th, below national ~$72k). Median household income ranks ~34th.

Economy ranks around 34th in some U.S. News assessments.

4. Middling Overall State Rankings

U.S. News Best States: ~25th overall. Economy #34, Health Care #33, Crime & Corrections #35, Fiscal Stability #32. Stronger in Education (#18) and Infrastructure.
WalletHub Best States to Live In: ~23rd (affordability 26th, economy 27th, education/health 27th).
Economic Outlook (Rich States, Poor States): Around 27–30th range.

Not “worst,” but not competitive with top growth states.

5. Education Mixed but with Historical/Outcome Concerns

Kansas often ranks decently in attainment/graduation, but NAEP/test scores have lagged in some areas historically (e.g., mid-teens to low 30s in older data). K-12 achievement has been graded D in past Quality Counts reports. Rural school funding and outcomes remain pressure points.

Critics tie this to long-term policy fights (e.g., post-Brownback funding battles).

6. Health and Demographic Challenges

Life expectancy ~76.5 years (below top states). Infant mortality and premature death metrics vary but contribute to middling health rankings (#33 in some). Obesity and rural healthcare access issues persist. Poverty rate ~11.3–11.7% (better than national but still affects hundreds of thousands).

7. Brain Drain and Talent Retention

Out-migration of younger, higher-earning residents exacerbates aging population and skills gaps. While manufacturing/agriculture are strong, diversification lags in high-growth tech/innovation sectors.

8. Tax Competitiveness and Business Climate

Kansas ranks ~23rd–26th in tax competitiveness (improving with recent changes like food tax phase-out). Critics argue higher effective burdens or policy instability (Brownback era scars + current spending) drive out-migration. Business friendliness middling (CNBC ~29th overall in one report).

9. Rural-Urban Divide and Infrastructure Strain

While infrastructure ranks well in spots (e.g., top 5–10 in some), vast rural areas face depopulation, hospital closures risks (pre-Medicaid expansion debates), and broadband gaps. 105 counties create governance challenges.

10. Long-Term Fiscal and Growth Trajectory

Despite surpluses under Kelly, per capita growth trails national in income/GDP over decades. Reliance on agriculture/manufacturing exposes to commodity cycles. Projections show modest growth (to ~3.4M by 2070s), but below dynamic Sun Belt peers.

Bottom line: Kansas isn’t a disaster—low unemployment (~2.7–3.7%), budget balancing, and economic development wins (billions invested, jobs announced) are positives under current leadership. But slow growth, net out-migration of talent/income, and middling national standings provide ammunition for “new leadership” arguments, especially from those prioritizing aggressive tax cuts, deregulation, or rural revitalization. Many issues predate any one governor and tie to broader Midwest/rural America trends. For a full picture, compare to high-growth states like Texas or Florida on migration and GDP per capita

RHG is an experienced, midsized nonprofit affordable housing developer with a 30+ year track record.

2026-05-08T11:41:00.000-07:00

Resource Housing Group, Inc. (RHG) is a legitimate Atlanta-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that specializes in developing, owning, and operating affordable housing properties (primarily using Low-Income Housing Tax Credits/LIHTC and other public incentives). It also develops some market-rate, senior/memory care, build-to-rent, and single-family projects.

History and Founding

RHG was incorporated in 1994 as a Georgia corporation and received 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status in March 1995 (EIN: 58-2131548). It grew out of an affiliated multistate nonprofit healthcare system founded in 1987 by Bryant G. Coats. That larger organization (collectively referred to as RHA) expanded into housing alongside healthcare facilities. In October 2015, the healthcare division was sold to a private equity firm (at the time it served over 10,000 people daily, generated >$260 million in annual revenue, and employed >5,000 people across 9 states). After the sale, RHG focused even more intensely on affordable housing development.

Mission

RHG’s stated mission is “to provide low to moderate-income individuals and families with quality, secure, and affordable housing in underserved areas.” The organization emphasizes that affordable housing supports social stability, economic value, community well-being, and family advancement. It notes the severe national shortage (only ~30 affordable units available per 100 extremely low-income Americans) and aims to expand supply in new markets.

Portfolio and Operations

Track record: Developed 50+ properties totaling over 6,000 residential units historically. Another 500+ units are currently in planning or construction.
Current portfolio: Owns/operates ~50+ properties with over 4,200 units under active asset management (across 8–11 states).
Markets: Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Arizona.
Project types: Primarily affordable multifamily (income-restricted), but also memory care/assisted living, build-to-rent, market-rate multifamily, and single-family communities. They emphasize data-driven site selection, tailored design, creative financing (LIHTC, bonds, grants), and long-term performance/value retention.

RHG works closely with state housing finance agencies, local governments, lenders, equity investors, and partners on tax-credit applications and incentives (exactly as seen in the Topeka and Lawrence, KS projects).

Leadership Team (Key Members)

Bryant G. Coats — Founder, Chairman & Co-Chief Executive Officer. Long-time leader in nonprofit housing and healthcare development; serves on boards of Shepherd Center Hospital (Atlanta) and the Georgia Affordable Housing Coalition; University of Alabama President’s Cabinet member.
Chase Northcutt — Co-Chief Executive Officer & President. Joined in 1995; oversees multifamily development, financing, LIHTC applications, construction, and operations. Auburn University graduate (B.S. Hospital Administration); Atlanta resident.
Nathan Farmer — Chief Financial Officer (since 2021). MBA from University of Georgia; previously CFO of Routematch Software (sold to Uber).
Samit Patel — Vice President of Asset Management. Oversees day-to-day operations of the entire ~4,200-unit portfolio. East Carolina University accounting graduate.
Sam Coats — Vice President of Development (the representative who presented the Topeka 37th & Gage project to Shawnee County commissioners). Handles new project origination, government/agency coordination, and construction stabilization. University of Alabama graduate; joined RHG in 2019.
Mike Douglass — Vice President of Construction (joined 2024). Leads design/entitlement/construction; LEED Accredited Professional; Auburn University graduate; prior experience with large-scale multifamily and military housing redevelopment (>$1B in projects).

Financial Snapshot (from ProPublica/IRS Form 990 data)

As a development-focused nonprofit, RHG’s revenue fluctuates with project closings, tax-credit syndications, and contributions. Recent years show strong net-asset growth:

2024: Revenue ~$7.2M; Net assets ~$69.4M; Total assets ~$76.7M.
2023: Revenue ~$20.4M; Net assets ~$63.8M.
2022: Revenue ~$2.7M; Net assets ~$44.0M.

Key officers (Coats and Northcutt) receive compensation through related organizations/affiliates (common structure in this sector), but the core nonprofit reports low direct overhead. No major red flags or controversies appear in public records.

Connection to Topeka / Kansas

RHG is actively expanding into Kansas. The 37th & Gage (Peaks of Topeka / Peaks of Gage) 42-unit project is one of their current LIHTC deals (~$12M total, with Shawnee County revenue bonds approved in April 2026). They are also advancing a senior housing project in Lawrence (“The Peaks of Lawrence”). Sam Coats (VP Development) has been the primary point person in local presentations.

Headquarters/Contact: 3350 Riverwood Parkway SE, Suite 800, Atlanta, GA 30339 | Website: rhgroup.org (clean, professional site focused on development expertise).

In short, RHG is an experienced, midsized nonprofit affordable housing developer with a 30+ year track record, multi-state footprint, and a clear focus on LIHTC-driven projects—just like the one proposed for Topeka. If you want specifics on their other Kansas projects, financial filings, or a particular leader/property, let me know!

SDG Architecture + Interiors Portfolio Overview

2026-05-06T13:33:00.000-07:00

SDG Architecture + Interiors maintains a diverse portfolio organized into categories like K-12 + Higher Education, Housing + Senior Living, Sports + Entertainment, Corporate + Healthcare, Commercial + Civic, and Religious + Faith. Their projects blend functionality, community focus, and thoughtful design.

Housing + Senior Living

Wheatfield Village Apartments (Topeka, KS): Upscale 174-unit community with studio, 1-, and 2-bedroom options featuring vaulted ceilings and balconies. Amenities include a resort-style pool, clubroom, and fitness center.
Avenue 81 Senior and Independent Living (Overland Park, KS): Vibrant mixed senior living with modern exteriors (brick, stucco, stone) and warm interiors. Outdoor features include a putting green, fire pit, lazy river, and grilling spaces.
Bloom Living (Olathe, KS): New 95-unit senior facility (studios and 1-bedrooms) with multi-purpose areas and a salon.
Arrowhead Senior Living Community (Osage Beach, MO): High-end skilled nursing, assisted living, and memory care with a dramatic Great Room (vaulted heavy timber ceilings), distinct service wings, and innovative wireless nurse call systems.
Additional projects include hotel-to-apartment conversions and Ranch House-inspired designs.

Sports + Entertainment

Canyon Farms Clubhouse and Pool (Lenexa, KS): 22,000 sq ft rustic-modern clubhouse with silo-inspired elements, overlooking a golf course.
Kansas Crossing Casino (Pittsburg, KS): 63,145 sq ft facility including casino, restaurant, and event center.
Washburn University Indoor Athletic Practice Facility (Topeka, KS): Accommodates football/soccer practice field, track, locker rooms, training areas, and facilities offices.
Kansas Children’s Discovery Center (Topeka, KS): Expansive addition with vibrant, hands-on classrooms and exhibits designed for kids.
Other projects include additional casinos, country clubs, and breweries (e.g., Boot Hill Casino, Iron Rail Brewing).

Commercial + Civic

Great Overland Station and Veterans Memorial (Topeka, KS): Historic 1927 depot restoration involving structural repairs, plaster work, and custom elements.
Sharp Honda (Topeka, KS): Full dealership (34,076 sq ft) with service center, following Honda standards.
Kansas Turnpike Authority Administrative Building (Topeka, KS): Winged design housing offices, call center, and event space with semi-enclosed outdoor area.
Wanamaker Hills (Topeka, KS): Adaptive reuse of a former Kmart into multi-tenant retail with master planning.

Corporate + Healthcare

First Home Loan Bank of Topeka (Topeka, KS): Large “prairie modern” headquarters with dining, collaborative areas, and scenic views.
Advisors Excel (Topeka, KS): Renovation of a former furniture store into open offices, studios, fitness, and more with expansive glazing.
Multiple University of Kansas Health System / St. Francis projects: ERs, imaging, sports medicine, clinics, and interiors/furniture across KS/MO.
Prairie Band Health Services (Mayetta, KS): Multi-service tribal facility with natural materials tying into prairie and cultural heritage.

Their work often involves adaptive reuse (e.g., old stores/hotels), historic restorations, and mixed-use developments. Many projects are concentrated in the Topeka/Kansas City area but extend regionally.

NO more "Stick Building" see the future....be the future

2026-04-21T11:42:00.000-07:00

Construction Process & Speed

Deep Dive: Steel Engineered Panelized Wall Systems (Buildforce Modz “Pallet Panels”) vs. Traditional Stick-Built Construction

Buildforce Modz’s “pallet panels” (engineered panelized wall systems) are factory-prefabricated, hybrid cold-formed steel (CFS) + structural steel wall panels, trusses, and related components. They are built upright in a controlled factory environment using precision machinery, finished with sheathing, wrap, blocking, weatherproofing, or even pre-installed windows as needed, then custom-stacked (“palletized”) on trailers for direct crane setting in exact installation sequence. This is advanced panelized prefabrication—not full volumetric modular construction—optimized for restaurants, hotels, multifamily, condominiums, industrial, and commercial projects.

Traditional stick-built construction (whether wood or loose CFS/metal studs) involves cutting, framing, and assembling every piece on-site, fully exposed to weather and variable labor conditions.

Here is a detailed side-by-side comparison based on Buildforce Modz’s own Panelized Wall System Guide and their Restaurant Engineered Pre-Fabricated Systems brochure.

1. Construction Process & Speed

Stick-Built: Framing, sheathing, and detailing happen sequentially on-site. The process is highly weather-dependent, with each trade waiting for the previous one. Framing a typical structure can take weeks.
Buildforce Modz Pallet Panels: 80–90% of the framing, sheathing, and finishing shifts off-site. Panels arrive pre-finished, pre-sequenced, and ready to set. The restaurant brochure shows a complete exterior wall + roof system can be set and dried-in in 4–5 days:
- Day 1 – Unload and set exterior wall panels.
- Day 2 – Set trusses and detail structural wall systems.
- Days 3 & 4 – Set roof decking and perform cleanup.
- Days 4 & 5 – Complete exterior seams.

Site prep and underground utilities can continue uninterrupted even after the structure is dried-in.

Result: Panelized systems dramatically compress critical-path duration and allow interior trades to mobilize sooner.

2. Quality Control & Precision

Stick-Built: Subject to rain, dust, temperature swings, and variable crew skill, leading to more defects, uneven fits, and potential moisture issues.
Modz Pallet Panels: Factory-controlled environment with laser-guided tools, custom upright framing fixtures (panels are built and inspected exactly as they will stand on-site), and consistent panel-to-panel layout. This eliminates the industry-standard practice of creating a new layout for each panel, which reduces cuts and waste for follow-on trades such as drywall contractors. Hybrid CFS + structural steel components are drilled and marked to 0.4 mm (1/64") accuracy using advanced equipment.

Result: Tighter tolerances, fewer defects, and a cleaner, more professional finished product.

3. Durability, Longevity & Performance

Stick-Built: More susceptible to on-site inconsistencies that can affect long-term performance.
Modz Steel Panelized: Engineered hybrid steel (sourced only from top SSMA/SFIA/CSSA and AISC/AISI/SMA-certified manufacturers) is inherently resistant to fire, pests, mold, and extreme weather. Stronger factory-made connections and precision detailing enhance overall structural integrity.

Bonus: Excellent seismic and wind resistance plus superior thermal performance when paired with Modz’s full sheathing, building wrap, and weatherproofing options.

4. Cost (Initial vs. Lifecycle)

Stick-Built: Often appears lower in upfront material cost for simple projects, but higher overall due to labor, weather delays, waste, and potential long-term repairs.
Modz Pallet Panels: Upfront investment in engineering and prefabrication is offset by significant lifecycle savings: reduced labor hours, faster occupancy, lower energy costs from a tighter envelope, and greater predictability.

5. Waste, Sustainability & Site Impact

Stick-Built: Higher on-site waste from cut-to-fit materials and weather exposure; longer, more congested job sites.
Modz Pallet Panels: Factory precision combined with consistent layouts delivers substantially less material waste. Cleaner, safer, shorter-duration sites with reduced congestion allow parallel trades to work more efficiently. Steel’s high recyclability further supports sustainability goals.

6. Labor, Safety & Weather Dependency

Stick-Built: Relies on large on-site framing crews exposed to the elements for extended periods, increasing safety risks and weather-related delays.
Modz Pallet Panels: Employs “Lean” and “On-Demand” manufacturing methods adapted to the field. Specialized, dedicated crews (led by foremen) focus on single repetitive tasks—wall/panel install, header/shear components, floor/decking, or roof systems—maximizing efficiency and quality. Buildforce owns and rents self-erecting tower cranes (such as Potain Igo models) with their own NCCCO-certified operators for optimal lifting speed and safety. Most of the heavy work happens indoors at the factory, minimizing weather impact.

7. Design Flexibility & Scalability

Stick-Built: Allows easier last-minute field changes.
Modz Pallet Panels: Requires strong upfront collaboration (Modz works with the project’s structural engineer or designs a custom hybrid system). Once engineered, the system delivers open-concept flexibility with fewer load-bearing walls and nationwide shipping scalability.

Bottom line: Buildforce Modz’s hybrid panelized steel systems combine factory precision, advanced manufacturing technology (Ocean Avenger drill line, robotic plasma cutters, CNC plasma tables), and lean field installation to deliver faster, higher-quality, more durable structures than traditional stick-built methods. The 4–5 day structure timeline and palletized delivery sequence give restaurant, hotel, multifamily, and commercial owners a powerful competitive edge—quicker openings, lower risk, reduced waste, and better long-term performance. This vertically integrated approach is exactly what powers the Buildforce portfolio’s most complex and time-sensitive projects.

What RHID actually is under state law = What changed with SB 17

2026-04-21T08:44:00.000-07:00

Executive Summary

Kansas cities and counties have significant discretion under the Reinvestment Housing Incentive District (RHID) Act (K.S.A. 12-5241 et seq.) when administering this state-authorized tool for financing public infrastructure that supports new housing. While the statute requires a housing needs analysis, a redevelopment plan with a comprehensive feasibility study, public hearings, and specific findings by the governing body, it does not mandate a formal local "but-for" test (i.e., rigorous proof that the project would not proceed without the RHID incentive, often via detailed gap analysis or internal rate of return modeling).

Some jurisdictions, such as Topeka, Overland Park, Derby, Ottawa, and certain counties like Leavenworth, have adopted explicit local policies or incentive guidelines that incorporate a but-for analysis as an additional layer of scrutiny. These "stricter" approaches typically require developers to demonstrate economic necessity, often with review by city staff or external financial advisors, to ensure incentives target projects that truly address unmet housing needs without over-subsidizing market-driven development.

Many other cities and counties—particularly smaller or rural ones—adhere more closely to the statutory minimum. In these cases, developers submit the required feasibility data and assurances as part of the plan; the local government reviews it, makes the statutorily required findings, and approves via resolution without a formalized but-for policy or mandatory independent gap analysis. Examples include Gardner, Emporia, Hays, Lansing, and various rural jurisdictions handling subdivision infrastructure projects.

No centralized statewide tracking exists for which of Kansas's 105 counties and 627 cities have added but-for requirements versus those following baseline procedures, making comprehensive statistical analysis challenging. Available population and economic data from U.S. Census sources (2010–2024 estimates) reveal no clear correlation between adoption of a local but-for test and stronger outcomes in population growth or financial prosperity.

Growth patterns are overwhelmingly driven by broader factors: proximity to major employment centers (e.g., Johnson County suburbs like Overland Park and Gardner both show robust gains regardless of policy nuance), university presence, major employers, and regional migration trends. Johnson County metros continue rapid expansion, while many non-metro areas remain flat or declining. Cities with but-for policies do not systematically outperform those without; some stricter-review communities grow, while others stagnate, and vice versa for minimal-review jurisdictions.

In short, the presence or absence of an extra local but-for layer appears to function primarily as a local governance choice for taxpayer protection and deal quality rather than a decisive driver of city-wide demographic or economic success. RHID's effectiveness hinges more on underlying market demand, housing needs, and overall economic conditions than on this particular administrative detail. Local officials and residents can adjust policies through council or commission action to best fit community priorities.

No, there is no reliable, data-driven way to create a clear statistical correlation between Kansas cities/counties that adopt a local “but-for” test for RHID projects and those that stick to the statutory minimum (developer-submitted feasibility study + required findings). Kansas does not track or publish a centralized list of which jurisdictions have added a formal but-for policy versus those that follow only the baseline Reinvestment Housing Incentive District Act requirements (K.S.A. 12-5241 et seq.). Policies are set locally via resolutions or economic-development handbooks, often on a case-by-case or ad-hoc basis, and only a fraction of the 105 counties and 627 cities actively use RHID.

Why a clean correlation is impossible

Sparse and incomplete policy data: Only a handful of cities have publicly documented explicit “but-for” language for RHID (e.g., Overland Park, Topeka, Ottawa, Derby, Newton, Pottawatomie County). Many others use general incentive policies that mention but-for for TIF/CID/etc. but not always for RHID specifically. Smaller/rural jurisdictions rarely publish detailed policies and simply approve projects via resolution after the statutory feasibility analysis.
Confounding variables dominate outcomes: Population growth and financial prosperity in Kansas are overwhelmingly driven by proximity to major job centers (Kansas City or Wichita metro areas), universities, major employers, and broader economic trends—not by one layer of RHID review. Metro-suburb growth has been explosive for decades regardless of RHID policy.
No studies exist: There are no academic, state, or Commerce Department analyses linking but-for adoption to growth metrics. RHID itself is a relatively new/expanded tool in many places, and local policies are too recent and varied for meaningful long-term comparison.

What the examples actually show (2010–2024 population data)

Here is a side-by-side look at representative cities from earlier examples, using U.S. Census Bureau decennial and annual estimates:

Cities with explicit/local but-for policies (stricter review)

Overland Park (Johnson County/KC metro): Strong but-for policy. 2010 ≈ 173k → 2020 ≈ 197k (+13.6%) → 2024 est. ≈ 203k. Very prosperous, high-income suburb.
Derby (Sedgwick County/Wichita metro): But-for in incentive policy. 2010 ≈ 22k → 2020 ≈ 25.6k (+15.6%) → 2024 est. ≈ 26.6k. Solid growth.
Topeka: Explicit but-for test. 2010 ≈ 127k → 2020 ≈ 126.6k (–0.7%) → 2024 est. ≈ 125k. Slight decline/stagnant.
Ottawa: But-for analysis required. 2010 ≈ 12.6k → 2020 ≈ 12.6k (flat) → 2024 est. ≈ 12.7k. Stable.

Cities following closer to statutory minimum (or no explicit but-for policy documented for RHID)

Gardner (Johnson County/KC metro): Earlier example of minimal review. 2010 ≈ 19.1k → 2020 ≈ 23.3k (+21.9%) → 2024 est. ≈ 25.8k. Explosive growth (one of the fastest in the state).
Emporia: Feasibility-focused policy, no but-for language in RHID docs. 2010 ≈ 24.9k → 2020 ≈ 24.1k (–3.3%) → 2024 est. ≈ 24.3k. Decline then flat.
Lansing (Leavenworth County/KC metro area): Focuses on unit size/rent/duration criteria. 2010 ≈ 11.3k → 2020 ≈ 11.2k (flat) → 2024 est. ≈ 11.3k. Stable.
Hays (college town): General incentives mention but-for, but RHID approvals appear minimal. 2010 ≈ 20.5k → 2020 ≈ 21.1k (+3%) → 2024 est. ≈ 21.2k. Modest growth.
Pittsburg (southeast KS): RHID program exists with no documented but-for requirement. 2010 ≈ 20.2k → 2020 ≈ 20.6k (+1.8%) → 2024 est. ≈ 20.5k. Flat/slight decline.

Takeaway from the numbers: Growth is strongly tied to location (Johnson County suburbs like Overland Park and Gardner both boom; rural or non-metro places like Emporia and Pittsburg struggle). But-for cities are not systematically “more prosperous.” Some with the test grow fast; some decline. Some without the test grow fast; some decline. The test appears more common in larger or development-active places that already have staff/consultants, but it does not appear to cause better outcomes.

Bottom line on prosperity

Population growth is driven by jobs, housing supply/demand, migration to metros, and regional economics—not by whether a city adds a but-for gap analysis to RHID applications.
Financial prosperity (tax base, median income, etc.) follows the same pattern: KC/Wichita suburbs thrive; many rural counties lose population and struggle with declining tax bases. Using but-for is simply a prudent local safeguard to ensure public incentives deliver actual new housing rather than subsidizing projects that would happen anyway. It may improve return-on-investment for taxpayers in any given deal, but it is not a magic driver of city-wide growth or wealth.
If anything, the reverse dynamic sometimes appears: faster-growing places (with more development pressure) are the ones most likely to adopt extra guardrails like but-for to protect against over-subsidization.

Local policies can (and do) evolve through city council action. If you’re looking at a specific project or jurisdiction, the best evidence is still the public resolutions, applications, and Census data for that exact place rather than any broad “but-for vs. no but-for” rule of thumb.

who what where?

There is no publicly available, comprehensive count of how many Kansas cities or counties "avoid" the but-for test for RHID (Reinvestment Housing Incentive District) projects and instead follow only the minimum state-law process (developer-submitted feasibility study + statutory findings). Kansas does not maintain or publish a centralized database tracking every locality's internal RHID administrative policies or review procedures. The state has 105 counties and 627 incorporated cities/towns, but only a subset (dozens, based on news reports, resolutions, and project approvals since the program's expansion) actively use RHID. Policies vary widely by jurisdiction and are often handled case-by-case rather than through a uniform statewide standard.

What state law actually requires (the baseline that "just following state law" means)

Under the Kansas Reinvestment Housing Incentive District Act (K.S.A. 12-5241 et seq.):

The city or county must prepare or rely on a Housing Needs Analysis.
It adopts a redevelopment/development plan that includes a comprehensive feasibility analysis (evaluating project costs, public benefits, revenues from tax increments, and whether benefits exceed costs).
The developer typically supplies the underlying data, pro formas, cost estimates, and supporting information for that feasibility analysis and contractual assurances.
The governing body makes specific statutory findings (e.g., the plan is in the best interests of the community, addresses documented housing needs, etc.), holds public hearings, passes resolutions/ordinances, and submits to the Kansas Secretary of Commerce for approval.
No explicit "but-for" test (proof that the project would not proceed without the RHID incentive) is mandated by statute. The feasibility analysis is the core required study, and the developer can (and often does) prepare or heavily contribute to it.

This is the "minimal" process many smaller or rural jurisdictions follow for one-off projects.

What many cities/counties actually do in practice

Some add a local "but-for" test or enhanced review (explicit local policy requiring the developer to prove the project wouldn't be economically feasible without the incentive, often with pro formas showing IRR/gap analysis both with and without RHID, plus city financial advisor review). Examples with documented policies or practices requiring this:
- Overland Park
- Arkansas City
- Ottawa
- Derby
- Topeka
- Pottawatomie County
- Leavenworth County
- Others like Riley County (policy exists) and similar incentive-heavy cities.
These localities treat RHID as a "need-based" tool and often cap returns, limit terms, or require extra documentation beyond the statute.
Many others stick closer to the statutory minimum (developer submits feasibility study/data as part of the plan; city reviews and makes the required findings without a formal local but-for policy or mandatory gap analysis). This is common in smaller cities and counties handling individual projects via resolution. Examples from public records/resolutions include:
- Emporia
- Gardner
- Hays
- Columbus
- Eldorado
- Lansing (focuses on unit-size/rent/duration criteria rather than explicit but-for)
- Various rural counties and towns approving subdivision infrastructure RHIDs.
Resolutions in these cases typically just reference the statute, attach a summary of the developer's assurances and feasibility analysis, and proceed.

Because most RHID activity occurs in smaller/rural eligible communities (population limits apply in the original Rural Housing Incentive District framework, later expanded), the majority of approvals likely follow the state-law minimum rather than layered local policies. Larger or more development-active cities are the ones most likely to adopt formal "but-for" guardrails for taxpayer protection.

Bottom line

Exact number? Unknown and not tracked centrally — probably most of the active smaller jurisdictions handle it with developer-submitted feasibility studies per statute only, while a smaller but visible group (10–20+ with published policies) add the but-for test and extra scrutiny.
This flexibility is intentional under state law: cities/counties have discretion on how strictly to apply the tool.
If you're asking about a specific city or county (e.g., one near Topeka or a particular project), public records like recent city/county commission agendas, resolutions, or the locality's economic development page will show exactly how they handle applications. You can also check the Kansas Department of Commerce RHID program page or request records directly from the jurisdiction.

Local policies can change via city/county action if residents want stricter or looser standards.

Stop micro-managing our lives.

Topeka’s use of RHID (Reinvestment Housing Incentive District) follows Kansas state law (K.S.A. 12-5241 et seq.), but the city layers on its own stricter local policies and hires outside financial experts like Columbia Capital Management (Jeff White’s firm) for due diligence. This is standard practice for municipal incentive programs across Kansas and the U.S.—it’s not a refusal to follow state law, but an attempt to use the tool responsibly while protecting taxpayers. Here’s the breakdown based on the statutes, Topeka’s own policies, and how these programs work.

What RHID actually is under state law

The Kansas Reinvestment Housing Incentive District Act lets cities and counties create special districts for new or renovated housing. The key mechanism: the city captures the incremental increase in property taxes generated by the new development (above the pre-project “baseline”) for up to 25 years. That increment can reimburse developers for eligible public-improvement costs (infrastructure like streets, sewers, sidewalks, etc.) or pay debt service on bonds issued to fund those costs upfront.

State law requires:

A Housing Needs Assessment (showing a shortage that private development alone isn’t fixing).
A redevelopment plan with a comprehensive feasibility analysis.
Approval by the city governing body and submission to the Kansas Secretary of Commerce.
Contractual assurances from the developer, public hearings, etc.

The law does not automatically hand out incentives or prohibit cities from adding extra review steps. Cities have discretion on how strictly they apply it and what additional criteria they impose.

Why Topeka adds the “but-for” test

Topeka explicitly treats RHID as a need-based program in its own RHID policy and informational packet (adopted via city resolutions). Every application gets a “but-for” analysis: the city asks whether the project would proceed but for the RHID incentive (or whether it could meet the city’s housing goals without it).

From Topeka’s official RHID packet:

“RHID is a need-based incentive program. For every application received, the City of Topeka will include a ‘but-for’ test in our financial analysis to ensure that incentives are only awarded to projects that would not proceed without them.”

Applicants must submit evidence supporting the but-for claim, plus details on how the project addresses the city’s Housing Needs Analysis/Study (e.g., affordable/workforce units, location in high-need neighborhoods). The city also caps returns (e.g., 7.5% capitalization rate in some cases) and can adjust the incentive amount or duration.

This is not required word-for-word by the state statute, but it is a common local policy (used in many Kansas cities for TIF, CID, RHID, etc.). The reason: state law’s feasibility study is a baseline requirement, but the but-for test operationalizes it into a concrete financial gap analysis (internal rate of return, pro forma modeling, comparable projects). It prevents over-subsidizing projects that would happen anyway and ensures public dollars deliver actual new housing that the market isn’t providing on its own. Without it, critics (including some residents and council candidates) argue incentives become giveaways.

Topeka’s policy also prioritizes equity, downtown/missing-middle housing, and reserving some increment for public infrastructure—again, local choices on top of the state framework.

Why hire Jeff White / Columbia Capital Management?

Columbia Capital (with Jeff White as Managing Member/Principal) is Topeka’s contracted municipal financial advisor. The city uses them for bond issuances, incentive structuring, financial modeling, and due diligence on deals like RHID, TIF, and general-obligation bonds.

They perform or review:

The detailed but-for/gap analysis (IRR modeling, developer pro formas, market comparables).
Feasibility studies required by state law and city policy.
Bond sizing, structuring, and sales (if the city issues debt to front the infrastructure costs).
Compliance and risk assessment.

Why not just use city staff? These are complex public-finance transactions involving tax-increment capture, potential bond issuance, long-term reimbursement agreements, and legal/fiscal risks. Most cities (including Topeka) do not have full-time in-house experts with the depth of experience in municipal bond markets, developer modeling, and incentive structuring. Columbia Capital has decades of Kansas-specific experience (they’ve advised Topeka on utility bonds, water/wastewater systems, and other financings for years).

The “extra layer” and fees:

The city pays Columbia Capital under a financial-advisory contract (budgeted line item; small annual increases noted in recent Topeka budgets). Fees are standard transaction costs in municipal finance.
Developers sometimes bear part of the study/application costs indirectly (via the $5,000 non-refundable RHID application fee or project soft costs), but the advisor’s work protects the public side.
This is not unique to Topeka—virtually every Kansas city using TIF/RHID/CID hires a financial advisor for exactly these reasons. It adds a professional check against bad deals.

Critics (including local voices like yourself) see it as unnecessary bureaucracy or profiteering by consultants. Proponents see it as prudent oversight: better to pay experts upfront than approve incentives that don’t deliver new housing or create fiscal problems later.

Bottom line

Topeka is not ignoring state law—it is using the authority the legislature gave cities under the RHID Act and then applying tighter local guardrails (but-for test + expert review) that many cities adopt for accountability. The but-for test and Columbia Capital engagement exist to make sure the incentives actually work as intended: spurring housing that wouldn’t otherwise get built, without over-subsidizing developers or shortchanging taxpayers.

If a specific project or council vote is the source of frustration, the public records (agendas, resolutions, and the RHID applications themselves) spell out exactly what analysis was done. You can find Topeka’s RHID info and applications on the city’s Finance page (topeka.org/finance/rhid). Local policy can always be changed by the City Council if enough residents push for it.

She signed this and Thank YOU!!

Governor Laura Kelly did not personally "approve bringing RHID inside the city limits of Topeka" as a one-off decision for Topeka alone. Instead, she signed Senate Bill 17 (SB 17) into law in 2023, which took effect July 1, 2023. This bipartisan legislation renamed the old Rural Housing Incentive District (RHID) program to the Reinvestment Housing Incentive District and expanded its eligibility statewide.

What changed with SB 17

Before 2023: The program was strictly for rural areas. It applied mainly to smaller cities (generally under 60,000 population) and counties with lower populations. The goal was to spur housing in places where private developers struggled to build due to high infrastructure costs and limited market demand.
After SB 17 (effective July 1, 2023):
- The word "Rural" was removed from the name and purpose.
- Cities with more than 60,000 people (like Topeka, population ~125,000) became eligible for the first time.
- Larger cities face some limits (e.g., caps on units per year or per project, and restrictions on average home size in certain cases) to prevent overuse in big urban areas.
- The focus shifted to addressing housing shortages anywhere in Kansas through public infrastructure financing (streets, sewers, sidewalks, etc.), paid for by the incremental property taxes the new housing generates.

Topeka’s City Council and staff began using the updated RHID tool shortly after the law changed, with resolutions and project approvals appearing in 2024–2025 (e.g., for downtown and other infill projects). The Kansas Secretary of Commerce still reviews and approves individual district applications, as required by statute.

Why expand it beyond rural areas?

The original program (enacted in 1998) targeted rural Kansas because many small towns and counties faced severe housing shortages, declining populations, and high costs to extend infrastructure for new subdivisions. Private builders often couldn’t make the numbers work without help capturing future tax growth to reimburse those upfront costs.

By 2023, Kansas lawmakers (and Governor Kelly) recognized that housing shortages had become a statewide problem, not just a rural one:

Rapid growth in some suburbs and job centers created demand for more units.
Many mid-sized and larger cities (including Topeka) had aging housing stock, downtown redevelopment opportunities, and "missing middle" housing gaps.
Post-COVID economic shifts, inflation in construction costs, and migration patterns made it harder everywhere to build affordable or workforce housing without incentives.
The bill expanded allowable uses (e.g., more flexibility for bond proceeds and certain project types) to encourage reinvestment in existing communities, not just greenfield rural development.

Supporters argued this would help revitalize downtowns, add multi-family and infill housing, and support economic growth without new general tax dollars—using only the "but-for" incremental taxes from the project itself. Critics worried it could subsidize projects that might happen anyway or shift too much burden to other taxing entities (schools, counties).

Simple explanation for the crowd

"RHID used to be a 'rural-only' tool to help small towns build houses when developers couldn’t afford the roads and pipes. In 2023, the Legislature and Governor Kelly updated the law so bigger cities like Topeka could use it too. The reason? Kansas has a housing crunch pretty much everywhere now—not just in the country. Topeka has needs for more apartments and homes downtown and in neighborhoods, and this lets the city help pay for the public improvements by capturing the extra property taxes the new housing will create. It’s no longer just for farmland subdivisions; it’s for reinvesting in our cities to build more housing where people actually want to live."

Topeka still applies its own local policies (including a but-for test and financial review) on top of the state rules when approving specific projects. If residents want changes to how Topeka uses it, that’s a conversation for City Council.

For the exact text of the changes, see the Kansas Legislature’s summary of SB 17 and the current RHID page on the Kansas Department of Commerce website.

Construction Process & Speed

2026-04-11T16:54:00.000-07:00

Deep Dive: Steel Engineered Panelized Wall Systems (Buildforce Modz “Pallet Panels”) vs. Traditional Stick-Built Construction

Traditional stick-built construction (whether wood or loose CFS/metal studs) involves cutting, framing, and assembling every piece on-site, fully exposed to weather and variable labor conditions.

Here is a detailed side-by-side comparison based on Buildforce Modz’s own Panelized Wall System Guide and their Restaurant Engineered Pre-Fabricated Systems brochure.

1. Construction Process & Speed

Stick-Built: Framing, sheathing, and detailing happen sequentially on-site. The process is highly weather-dependent, with each trade waiting for the previous one. Framing a typical structure can take weeks.
Buildforce Modz Pallet Panels: 80–90% of the framing, sheathing, and finishing shifts off-site. Panels arrive pre-finished, pre-sequenced, and ready to set. The restaurant brochure shows a complete exterior wall + roof system can be set and dried-in in 4–5 days:
- Day 1 – Unload and set exterior wall panels.
- Day 2 – Set trusses and detail structural wall systems.
- Days 3 & 4 – Set roof decking and perform cleanup.
- Days 4 & 5 – Complete exterior seams.

Site prep and underground utilities can continue uninterrupted even after the structure is dried-in.

Result: Panelized systems dramatically compress critical-path duration and allow interior trades to mobilize sooner.

2. Quality Control & Precision

Stick-Built: Subject to rain, dust, temperature swings, and variable crew skill, leading to more defects, uneven fits, and potential moisture issues.
Modz Pallet Panels: Factory-controlled environment with laser-guided tools, custom upright framing fixtures (panels are built and inspected exactly as they will stand on-site), and consistent panel-to-panel layout. This eliminates the industry-standard practice of creating a new layout for each panel, which reduces cuts and waste for follow-on trades such as drywall contractors. Hybrid CFS + structural steel components are drilled and marked to 0.4 mm (1/64") accuracy using advanced equipment.

Result: Tighter tolerances, fewer defects, and a cleaner, more professional finished product.

3. Durability, Longevity & Performance

Stick-Built: More susceptible to on-site inconsistencies that can affect long-term performance.
Modz Steel Panelized: Engineered hybrid steel (sourced only from top SSMA/SFIA/CSSA and AISC/AISI/SMA-certified manufacturers) is inherently resistant to fire, pests, mold, and extreme weather. Stronger factory-made connections and precision detailing enhance overall structural integrity.

Bonus: Excellent seismic and wind resistance plus superior thermal performance when paired with Modz’s full sheathing, building wrap, and weatherproofing options.

4. Cost (Initial vs. Lifecycle)

Stick-Built: Often appears lower in upfront material cost for simple projects, but higher overall due to labor, weather delays, waste, and potential long-term repairs.
Modz Pallet Panels: Upfront investment in engineering and prefabrication is offset by significant lifecycle savings: reduced labor hours, faster occupancy, lower energy costs from a tighter envelope, and greater predictability.

5. Waste, Sustainability & Site Impact

Stick-Built: Higher on-site waste from cut-to-fit materials and weather exposure; longer, more congested job sites.
Modz Pallet Panels: Factory precision combined with consistent layouts delivers substantially less material waste. Cleaner, safer, shorter-duration sites with reduced congestion allow parallel trades to work more efficiently. Steel’s high recyclability further supports sustainability goals.

6. Labor, Safety & Weather Dependency

Stick-Built: Relies on large on-site framing crews exposed to the elements for extended periods, increasing safety risks and weather-related delays.
Modz Pallet Panels: Employs “Lean” and “On-Demand” manufacturing methods adapted to the field. Specialized, dedicated crews (led by foremen) focus on single repetitive tasks—wall/panel install, header/shear components, floor/decking, or roof systems—maximizing efficiency and quality. Buildforce owns and rents self-erecting tower cranes (such as Potain Igo models) with their own NCCCO-certified operators for optimal lifting speed and safety. Most of the heavy work happens indoors at the factory, minimizing weather impact.

7. Design Flexibility & Scalability

Stick-Built: Allows easier last-minute field changes.
Modz Pallet Panels: Requires strong upfront collaboration (Modz works with the project’s structural engineer or designs a custom hybrid system). Once engineered, the system delivers open-concept flexibility with fewer load-bearing walls and nationwide shipping scalability.

Kansas City is betting that focusing on people, not mandated parking stalls, will yield long-term dividends in growth and quality of life.

2026-04-11T10:02:00.000-07:00

Topeka Should Follow Kansas City's Lead: Prioritize People, Not Parking Minimums

Kansas City just took a bold step toward smarter growth, and Topeka ought to pay attention. On Thursday, KC's City Council approved an ordinance scrapping parking minimums for new developments in much of its urban core. No longer will builders be forced to provide a set number of parking spaces that drive up costs and eat up valuable land with seas of asphalt. Instead, the focus shifts to walkability, housing, and economic opportunity—putting residents and businesses first.

Mayor Quinton Lucas put it plainly: parking minimums have made housing more expensive and hindered the creation of vibrant, connected neighborhoods. Councilmember Eric Bunch echoed that sentiment, noting how the old rules blocked redevelopment of smaller commercial buildings into restaurants and shops. This isn't radical experimentation; it's practical urban planning that recognizes cars don't need to dominate every square foot of a growing city.

Topeka faces parallel realities. Our downtown and surrounding neighborhoods have potential for more housing, small businesses, and foot traffic, yet outdated zoning often mandates excessive parking that inflates project costs and leaves underused lots. With Topeka's 2025 crime trends showing encouraging declines in both violent and property offenses compared to the five-year average, now is a smart time to build on that momentum by making our city more livable and economically dynamic.

Reducing or eliminating parking minimums in targeted areas—like downtown Topeka, the historic districts, or corridors near key amenities—could lower barriers for developers. That means more attainable housing units, which indirectly supports efforts to address homelessness (our point-in-time counts show a modest decline but persistent needs). It could also spur small business growth in older buildings that currently sit underutilized because adding mandated parking isn't feasible.

Critics in Kansas City raised fair points about neighborhoods lacking sufficient off-street options, and Topeka leaders should heed similar concerns. Any reform here shouldn't be a blanket citywide change but a thoughtful, phased approach: start with the urban core, pair it with better enforcement of illegal parking, improved public transit options (or shuttles), and incentives for shared parking or transit-oriented amenities. Neighborhood associations deserve a strong voice in the process to avoid unintended strain on residential streets.

This isn't about being anti-car—Topeka is a practical Midwestern city where driving will remain essential for many. It's about balance. Excessive parking requirements are a holdover from mid-20th-century planning that no longer fits 2026 realities of housing shortages, rising construction costs, and a desire for more vibrant public spaces.

Topeka's City Council and planning department should study KC's ordinance closely and adapt it. Hold public hearings that include developers, residents, business owners, and traffic engineers. Explore parking maximums with bonuses for pedestrian-friendly features, just as KC did. The goal: unlock redevelopment that creates jobs, adds housing supply, and makes our capital city feel more connected and welcoming.

Kansas City is betting that focusing on people, not mandated parking stalls, will yield long-term dividends in growth and quality of life. Topeka, with its own proud history and forward-looking police department already delivering crime reductions, has every reason to make a similar smart bet. Our residents deserve neighborhoods designed for living, working, and thriving—not just storing vehicles.

In short, these toiletries aren’t random perks—they solve real pain points (forgotten items, post-sweat freshness), reinforce a culture of cleanliness and care, and turn functional spaces into competitive advantages. For facilities charging for access or membership, they’re an easy, high-impact way to make users feel valued and keep them coming back. If a club skimps here, it risks feeling second-rate; when done right, it becomes part of the memorable “club experience.”

2026-04-09T05:28:00.000-07:00

Country clubs, gymnasiums, upscale health clubs, and spas provide complimentary toiletries like toothbrushes, mouthwash, deodorant, and shaving supplies (razors and cream) in shared locker rooms primarily for member/guest convenience, to promote hygiene in communal spaces, and to deliver a premium, luxurious experience that drives satisfaction, retention, and repeat business. These amenities are a long-standing feature of high-end fitness and social facilities, reflecting both practical needs and strategic business decisions. They turn a basic post-workout or post-activity refresh into something effortless and upscale.

Historical and Cultural Context

The emphasis on excellent locker and shower facilities dates back decades in country and golf clubs. A 1938 industry article noted that “good shower and locker-room facilities” are a hallmark of a Class-A club (alongside a strong course and food), directly boosting member pleasure, clubhouse patronage, and new memberships while preventing dissatisfaction that could drive people away. Inferior setups could “destroy all the enjoyment” of a round of golf. Modern lockers were designed to meet “every need” and promote “locker-room happiness.” While specific single-use toiletries weren’t detailed then (focus was more on showers, towels, and layout), the principle of providing everything needed for comfort and grooming has roots in that era—and even earlier in ancient Greek gymnasia, where athletes oiled, scraped, and washed post-exercise in dedicated spaces.

Today, this tradition has evolved with disposable, travel-sized, or dispenser-style items to fit modern hygiene standards and busy lifestyles.

1. Convenience for Busy Members and Guests

People frequently forget toiletries or prefer not to haul a full kit (especially for lunch-hour workouts, golf/tennis rounds, or spa visits). Locker rooms serve as a “one-stop refresh station” so users can shower, groom, and head straight to work, meetings, dining, or social events without stopping home.

Post-activity timing: After sweating during exercise, golf, or a steam session, quick access to deodorant prevents feeling (or smelling) unkempt. Mouthwash and a toothbrush freshen breath before lunch or a business interaction. Shaving cream and disposable razors allow a fast touch-up shave after a shower for those who want to look polished.
Real-world examples: Country club locker rooms often stock these near sinks or vanities so members can “refresh after your golf round.” Upscale gyms and spas cater to professionals who exercise midday and return to the office feeling (and smelling) clean.

This mirrors hotel practices—providing forgotten basics so guests don’t have to buy or pack extras—scaled to shared athletic/social environments.

2. Promoting Hygiene and a Pleasant Shared Environment

Shared locker rooms are moist, high-traffic spaces where odors or poor personal care can quickly affect everyone. Stocking individual or sealed toiletries encourages proactive hygiene without forcing members to share (which raises germ concerns).

Deodorant: Directly addresses post-workout body odor, making the space more comfortable for all.
Oral care (toothbrush, mouthwash): Maintains fresh breath; part of overall cleanliness.
Shaving supplies: Sealed razors and cream in travel sizes reduce infection risks from sharing while letting users feel “prepared, fresh, and confident.”

Facilities often use dispensers, single-use packs, or secure displays to maintain hygiene standards and minimize waste/theft. Cleanliness in locker rooms is repeatedly cited as a top factor in member satisfaction and retention—dirty or understocked facilities raise germ worries and drive churn.

3. Luxury, Member Experience, and Perceived Value

In upscale venues, these items signal “we’ve thought of everything” and elevate the visit to a spa-like ritual. High-end country clubs (with $30k–$120k+ initiation fees) are expected to stock brand-name or premium toiletries; members pay for that level of service.

Amenities like these, alongside towels, hair dryers, lotions, and grooming stations, create a “well-rounded experience” of comfort, cleanliness, and luxury.
They boost perceived value: one less thing to pack in your gym bag, plus the feeling of being pampered. Private-label or high-quality products (e.g., some clubs use Kiehl’s-style lines) reinforce branding and exclusivity.
Result: Higher member retention, more frequent visits, positive reviews, and word-of-mouth. Locker rooms influence 10–20% of a member’s time in the facility and heavily sway join/renew decisions.

Semi-private or budget clubs offer fewer or basic items (and fight more theft), while true private clubs go all-out.

4. Business and Operational Strategy

Providing these is inexpensive in bulk (travel sizes or dispensers) relative to the ROI in loyalty and differentiation. It’s cheaper than major renovations yet delivers outsized impact on satisfaction. Clubs and gyms use them to:

Compete in a crowded market.
Justify premium pricing.
Support their wellness/“healthy lifestyle” mission.

Industry suppliers (e.g., Fore Supply) explicitly market these as tools for “guest satisfaction” and repeat business.

Theft occurs (especially in public-access venues), but clubs mitigate with displays or seasonal cheaper stock rather than removing items—demand and expectations are that high.

Variations by Facility Type

Country clubs/golf clubs: Heavily focused on post-round refresh (golfers often socialize or dine afterward). Full grooming stations common.
Gyms/health clubs: Target lunch-break or pre-work users; emphasize quick hygiene (deodorant, oral care) to return to daily life.
Upscale spas/health clubs: More luxurious (robes, high-end brands, feminine hygiene add-ons) to create a holistic pampering vibe.
Shared locker rooms generally: Items are displayed accessibly near sinks/vanities but not taken out of the room to keep them available for everyone.

In short, these toiletries aren’t random perks—they solve real pain points (forgotten items, post-sweat freshness), reinforce a culture of cleanliness and care, and turn functional spaces into competitive advantages. For facilities charging for access or membership, they’re an easy, high-impact way to make users feel valued and keep them coming back. If a club skimps here, it risks feeling second-rate; when done right, it becomes part of the memorable “club experience.”

Many have Topeka roots and overlapping networks! *****understatement (444)

2026-04-09T05:01:00.000-07:00

MaceRich (now The Macerich Company) was a pioneering shopping center developer and operator whose leasing team in the poster represents a snapshot of the company during its rapid growth phase in the 1980s (likely mid-to-late 1980s, based on the team’s roles, properties like Lakewood Center—which Macerich acquired early—and the era’s hairstyles/phone numbers).

The company originated as MaceRich Real Estate Company, founded in New York in 1964 by Mace Siegel and Richard Cohen (they combined their first names for the company name). It started with strip centers and shifted to regional malls, acquiring its first one in 1972 and entering development with Lakewood Center in 1975. It rebranded/evolved into The Macerich Company, went public via IPO in 1994, and grew aggressively through major acquisitions (e.g., Westcor in 2002 for Phoenix-area dominance and Wilmorite in 2005, adding Tysons Corner Center). It became one of the largest owners/operators of regional malls in the U.S. (third-largest as of recent data).

Today, Macerich (NYSE: MAC) remains a fully integrated, self-administered REIT focused on premium retail destinations in high-barrier coastal and Sun Belt markets. It owns interests in ~43 properties totaling tens of millions of square feet. The company has adapted to retail disruption through redevelopment into mixed-use/experiential centers, strong leasing momentum (e.g., millions of square feet in new deals recently, including Dick’s House of Sport anchors), and selective asset sales/deleveraging. It continues to emphasize high-quality malls with resilient tenants. Some older assets (e.g., certain California properties) have been sold or transitioned, but the core business of leasing, redevelopment, and community-focused retail persists. Dana Anderson (on the poster as Exec. VP) remains a link to the founding era as Vice Chairman Emeritus, major shareholder, and consultant.

The leasing team members were responsible for a national portfolio of regional and community malls (numbered on the map, with many still recognizable Macerich or former Macerich properties like Lakewood, Fresno Fashion Fair, Broadway Plaza, etc.). Many had ties to Topeka, KS (early company connections via Dana Anderson and others). Over 35–40+ years, most pursued long careers in retail real estate leasing, redevelopment, and property management—some staying with Macerich, others founding firms or joining competitors. Public records are limited for a few (common for mid-level executives of that era), but here’s a deep dive on where identifiable individuals are now, based on professional profiles, company records, and public mentions. Many are retired or semi-retired given the time elapsed; several stayed in commercial real estate.

Key Team Members (in roughly poster order):

Jeff Probasco (Sr. Leasing Mgr., CA malls like County East, Country Club Plaza, North Valley): Extensive mall redevelopment/leasing experience with Macerich (Asst. VP level). Later handled leasing for malls in Arkansas/Oklahoma (e.g., post-Macerich sale of Fayetteville/Northwest Arkansas Mall). Now Principal at Take 2 Properties, LLC (Oklahoma City area), focusing on repositioning/re-tenanting Class B/C malls and retail properties.
Steve Rausch (VP-Western Regional Leasing Mgr.): Limited recent public info; was a senior Western U.S. leasing executive in the MaceRich era. Likely retired or low-profile after the company’s growth.
Dana Anderson (Exec. VP): One of the longest-tenured; joined ~1965–1966 (brought a Topeka shopping center to the young company). Rose to Exec. VP/COO-level, then Vice Chairman of the Board (now Emeritus). Remains a major shareholder/consultant. KU alum and prominent Kansas philanthropist (lives in Lawrence, KS; involved in university causes and deals like Country Club Plaza).
Dane Smith (VP-Dir. of Leasing): Long-time senior leasing executive; retired as Partner/Senior VP. Based in Dallas, TX; involved in philanthropy (e.g., I Have a Dream Dallas).
Carey Webb (VP-Eastern Regional Leasing Mgr.): Later associated with retail leasing services in the Dallas area (e.g., Prime Meridian or similar). Limited other public updates—likely retired after regional leadership role.
Rick Britt (Sr. Leasing Mgr., KS/MO malls like White Lakes, Green Tree, Walnut): Limited recent public footprints; typical for specialized leasing roles of the era—likely pursued independent retail RE or retired.
Bruce Johnston (Fresno Fashion Fair, Broadway Plaza; later VP Western/NW Leasing): 22+ years at Macerich, rising to VP Leasing (oversaw 15+ properties from Fresno northward, including redevelopment). Left and founded Johnston Real Estate Services (advising on leasing, merchandising, adaptive reuse). Now specializes in leasing/merchandising for malls, lifestyle centers, mixed-use, etc., at Meritage Retail (Danville, CA area).
Steve Yeager (Sr. Leasing Mgr., Rocky Mtn. Region): Macerich leasing career ~1979–2005 (started in Topeka ties). Now Broker/Owner of GroupG Real Estate, LLC (Denver/Boulder, CO metro area), active in commercial real estate since 1975.
Bob Sherman (Dover Mall): Long career in retail leasing/sales/acquisitions; associated with Ross Realty Investments (Florida) since ~1988 onward.
Mark Strain (Northgate): Frequent leasing contact in Macerich SEC filings/leases (1990s–2000s, e.g., Broadway Plaza, Santa Monica Place). Likely retired after senior leasing tenure.
Vann Wilson (Bristol, Panorama, Inland): iRetail leasing consultant with Macerich experience (Beverly Hills area). Remains active in retail leasing consulting.
Ray Bewley (Inland Center, Lakewood): Long tenure; listed as AVP/Leasing at Macerich (Lakewood, CA area). One of the team members who stayed deep into the modern era.
Tom Murrin (Buenaventura, Northridge): Ran Retail Leasing Services in SoCal post-Macerich (limited other public details—likely consulting/retired).
Tim Gibbons (Huntington Center, Panorama): VP Leasing at Macerich (Phoenix area); mentioned in property listings into the 2010s. Long-term role in leasing.
Henry McClure (Lakewood, Park Lane)—that's you! After MaceRich/Macerich, founded MCRE LLC in Topeka, KS (2000). 44–45+ years in real estate, specializing in shopping mall redevelopment, commercial leasing/sales, mixed-use/TIF projects, and advisory. Active locally (community involvement, real estate videos/YouTube reminiscing about MaceRich days and Crossroads Mall, and even ran for local office like county commissioner/mayor). Still operating MCRE LLC as a broker.
Ron Bondy (Greeley): Post-Macerich, leasing roles (e.g., Westfield); now EVP Leasing at Midwood Investment & Development (New York).
Wendell Nault (Holiday Village, Crossroads; Community Centers): ~32 years at Macerich (VP Leasing, 1985–2018). Now Director of Leasing–Houston Region at Whitestone REIT (Houston, TX).
Mark Klein (Community Centers): Long Macerich tenure; likely the current or recent SVP National Leasing (Dallas area).
Lantz Powell (Columbus Square): Limited recent public info—specialized leasing role; likely retired or private practice.
Russ Graybeal (Eastgate Mall): Limited recent footprints; typical retail leasing career path post-Macerich.

Overall, the team exemplified the hands-on, relationship-driven leasing culture that helped MaceRich scale into a national powerhouse. Many leveraged their expertise into independent firms, competitor REITs (e.g., Whitestone), or ongoing roles at Macerich itself. The retail real estate world has changed dramatically (e-commerce, experiential retail, mixed-use), but this group’s work laid foundations for enduring properties. If you have more details on any specific person or the exact poster date, I can dig deeper—many have Topeka roots and overlapping networks!

Real Estate Broker • Developer • Deal Maker • Awake • Early Internet Pioneer

2026-04-09T04:55:00.000-07:00

Meet Henry McClure – Real Estate Broker, Developer, Deal Maker, and 4th-Generation Topekan

Hey there — I’m Henry McClure (@mcre1 on X), licensed Kansas real estate broker, developer, and proud 4th-generation Topekan. I’ve lived in 11 different towns across the country — from Florida to Colorado, California, Nevada, Missouri, and beyond. Those experiences gave me a boots-on-the-ground understanding of what makes communities succeed (or struggle), and they’re a big reason I’m so committed to making Shawnee County and Topeka a place where families want to stay and grow.

My Professional Journey Right after Washburn Rural High School and the University of Kansas, I joined MaceRich Company (now Macerich) in February 1983 as the third person accepted into their national management training program. Founder Mace Siegel looked me in the eye and said, “Some boys have the Army to see the country; you have MaceRich.” Over the next 13+ years I handled tenant leasing, major mall redevelopments, and award-winning renovations that generated millions in new income across the country.

In April 1996 to January 1997, I stepped into entrepreneurship as President of Shopwave.com in Ventura, California. Long before online shopping was mainstream, I built one of the earliest secure internet shopping channels from scratch — developing CGI shopping carts, dynamic web pages, encryption, fax fulfillment, and order verification in the days of 33-speed dial-up modems. We became the first internet company to join the ICSC (International Council of Shopping Centers). It was an exciting time of invention and foresight.

From there, I continued in large-scale mall leasing and operations:

1997 – Leasing Manager for MD Management in Overland Park, KS (Sherman W. Dreiseszun’s company). I managed leasing and operations for four shopping centers totaling 3.3 million sq ft across Missouri, Kansas, and Ohio, delivering 55,000 sq ft of executed leases with another 31,000 sq ft in process.
December 1997 – April 1998 – Leasing Manager / General Manager for Excel Realty Trust at Clearwater Mall (950,000 sq ft) in Florida. I closed eight permanent deals (6,744 sq ft total) plus 15 temporary deals, increased temporary income by 11%, and cut operating expenses by $98,000 annually while coordinating redevelopment with the city.
May 1998 – February 2000 – Senior Associate at Divaris Real Estate in Tampa, where I led leasing for the 1-million-sq-ft netp@rk Tamp Bay redevelopment (a former mall transformed into a corporate supercenter). Key deals included New Horizons (16,217 sq ft + expansion), Creative World School (17,750 sq ft children’s facility), The Temple Gym, and WFS Financial.

In 2000, I returned home to Topeka and founded McClure Real Estate, LLC (now MCRE, LLC), where I’ve built more than 25 years of focused experience in commercial leasing and sales, shopping mall and strip center redevelopment, mixed-use/TIF projects, triple-net sale-leasebacks, zoning/platting advisory, and investment sales. I’ve worked with over 150 client entities, including national and local retailers.

One of my signature local projects was the College Hill TIF Development — a $36 million public-private partnership directly across from Washburn University. We assembled 9 acres by closing on 40 separate properties and delivered 183 apartment units, 33 townhomes, and 24,000 sq ft of retail space, helping revitalize an inner-city neighborhood.

Today, I continue actively brokering deals, including the current Grandma Hoerner’s Foods $6 million triple-net (absolute NNN) sale-leaseback opportunity in Alma, KS — a strong 40-year lease with solid growth numbers behind a well-established Kansas manufacturer.

Who I Am I’m a father of a wonderful daughter, which is one of the main reasons I ran for Mayor of Topeka in 2025 — I want Shawnee County to be a community she’d be proud to raise her own children in. I stay involved in local government meetings, share insights through live YouTube streams, and speak my mind on X.

Come Visit Me in Topeka Topeka has more going for it than most people realize — wide-open skies, real community, and real opportunities. If you’re ever passing through Kansas, thinking about a visit, or just want to connect, reach out. Whether it’s coffee, a property tour, or a good conversation about real estate, life, or local development — I’m easy to find and always enjoy meeting new people.

📍 Topeka, Kansas 📧 mcre13@gmail.com 📱 785-383-9994

Explore More on My Blog (mcrekansas.blogspot.com):

Full career chapters from MaceRich through Divaris
Current deals and property details (including Grandma Hoerner’s)
Sale-leaseback education and local economic insights

I look forward to connecting — online or in person.

— Henry McClure

Real Estate Broker • Developer • Deal Maker • Awake • Early Internet Pioneer

If you're the buyer/developer/owner of Lot 3 (or the adjoining parcel), this covenant limits what you (or your tenants) can put on the property to maintain compatibility with the neighboring development.

2026-04-06T13:36:23.828-07:00

Full List of Prohibited Uses

The covenant prohibits a long list of uses on the Adjoining Property (again, subject to the "notwithstanding existing..." grandfathering). Here's the complete list for reference:

Theater of any kind
Bowling alley, skating rink, amusement park, carnival, or circus
Meeting hall, sporting event or other sports facility, auditorium, or any other like place of public assembly
Gym or fitness center (exception: one with less than 4,000 rsf — rentable square feet — is allowed)
Mortuary or funeral parlor
Establishment selling cars or other motor vehicles, motor vehicle maintenance/repair shop, or gas station (excluding car washes)
Any establishment selling trailers
Billiard parlor
Tavern, pub, bar, or liquor store (with the 50%+ food sales exception noted above)
Pawn shop
Amusement center
Flea market
Massage parlor
"Disco" or other dance hall
Tattoo or body piercing parlor
Casino, gaming room, or "off-track betting" operation (exception: gambling that is ancillary to an otherwise permitted use)
Sale of paraphernalia for use with illicit drugs or for the sale of marijuana
Vape shop
Sale, rental, or display of pornographic materials

Grandfathering Clause

The restrictions do not apply to:

Existing leases already in effect
Existing buildings already constructed on the Adjoining Property
Businesses already operating prior to Closing

Anything new or changed after closing would need to comply.

What This Likely Means in Practice

If you're the buyer/developer/owner of Lot 3 (or the adjoining parcel), this covenant limits what you (or your tenants) can put on the property to maintain compatibility with the neighboring development.

If you're reviewing this as part of due diligence, key questions to ask:

What is the exact definition of "Adjoining Property" vs. "Lot 3"?
Who enforces this (is there a declarant/HOA/adjacent owner with approval rights)?
Are there reciprocal restrictions on the other parcel?
How is "gross sales from the sale of food" measured and verified (e.g., audit rights)?
Does local zoning or alcohol licensing add further layers?

Would you like me to help rephrase this into plain-language tenant guidelines, suggest negotiation points if you're trying to modify it, or analyze how it interacts with a specific proposed use (e.g., a brewery, convenience store with beer/wine, or restaurant)? Just share more context if needed.

Can't do a liquor store. @ LOT 3

2026-04-06T13:32:00.000-07:00

Restrictions: Notwithstanding existing leases in effect, existing buildings already constructed on the Adjoining Property, and businesses already operating prior to Closing, the Adjoining Owners will not lease, rent, sell or occupy, or permit to be leased, rented, sold or occupied, any portion of the Adjoining Property for any of the following: a theater of any kind; bowling alley, skating rink, amusement park, carnival or circus; meeting hall, sporting event or other sports facility, auditorium or any other like place of public assembly; a gym or fitness center (except that a gym or fitness center with less than 4,000 rsf is allowed); mortuary or funeral parlor; establishment selling cars or other motor vehicles, motor vehicle maintenance or repair shop or gas station (excluding car washes), or any establishment selling trailers; billiard parlor; tavern, pub, bar or liquor store (excluding establishments that derive fifty percent (50%) or more of their gross sales from the sale of food); pawn shop; amusement center; flea market; massage parlor; "disco" or other dance hall; tattoo or body piercing parlor; casino, gaming room, or "off track betting" operation (excluding establishments with gambling ancillary to an otherwise permitted use for the Adjoining Property); for the sale of paraphernalia for use with illicit drugs or for the sale of marijuana; vape shop; or for the sale, rental or display of pornographic materials.

My Real Estate Journey (The Short Version)

2026-04-06T13:12:00.000-07:00

Meet Henry McClure – Deal Maker, 4th-Generation Topekan, and the Guy Who’s Seen 11 Towns and Still Calls Topeka Home

Hey there — I’m Henry McClure (@mcre1 on X), real estate broker, developer, and proud Topeka, Kansas native. If you’ve been following me on X, you already know I keep it real: no filters, no fluff, just straight talk about life, deals, and what actually works.

I’ve lived in 11 different towns across the country — from sunny Florida to the mountains of Colorado, the malls of California, and back again. Those moves taught me how communities thrive (or don’t), and they’re exactly why I’m so passionate about making Shawnee County the kind of place people want to stay and raise families in. After all that traveling, I’m happy to be home.

My Real Estate Journey (The Short Version)

I started young — right out of Washburn Rural High School and the University of Kansas — and jumped straight into the big leagues.

February 1983 – August 1996: MaceRich Company (now Macerich) I was the third person ever accepted into their national management training program. On day one, founder Mace Siegel looked me in the eye and said, “Some boys have the Army to see the country; you have MaceRich.” He wasn’t kidding.

Over the next 13+ years I lived and worked in:

Winter Park, Florida
Boulder & Greeley, Colorado
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Lakewood & Ventura, California
Reno, Nevada …and a few more stops along the way (that’s how you hit 11 towns before you’re 40).

I went from Tenant Construction Coordinator on a $40 million mall expansion to Leasing Manager, closing hundreds of deals, spearheading award-winning renovations (two of them won Building Magazine’s Modernization Award), and generating millions in new income. I leased everything from kiosks to anchor tenants across millions of square feet of prime retail space. Those early years with Mace, Dana, Art, and Ed changed my life forever.

2000 – Present: MCRE, LLC I founded my own firm right here in Topeka. For the last 25+ years I’ve been brokering commercial deals, shopping mall redevelopments, triple-net sale-leasebacks, mixed-use/TIF projects, and helping investors and business owners unlock equity. I still represent national and local tenants, and I’m always working on the next big opportunity (right now I’m excited about the Grandma Hoerner’s Foods sale-leaseback in Alma, KS — a killer 40-year triple-net deal with strong growth numbers).

Who I Am Outside the Office

4th-generation Topekan with deep family roots here
Father of a wonderful daughter (she’s why I ran for Mayor in 2025 — I want Shawnee County to be a place she’d be proud to raise her own kids)
45+ years licensed in Kansas
Still the same guy who shows up at City Council meetings, live-streams on YouTube, and calls things like he sees them on X

I’m awake, direct, and I love a good conversation — whether it’s about real estate, local politics, travel stories, or what makes a town feel like home.

Come Say Hi in Topeka

Topeka’s got a lot more going for it than most people realize: wide-open skies, real community, and someone who knows how to show you the best spots. If you’re ever passing through Kansas (or thinking about a visit), reach out. Coffee, a property tour, or just a chat — I’m easy to find.

📍 Based in Topeka, Kansas 📧 mcre13@gmail.com 📱 785-383-9994

You can read the full story of my MaceRich years here: Henry McClure @ MaceRich – February 1983 to August 1996

Or check my latest deals on the blog: mcrekansas.blogspot.com

Looking forward to meeting you in person.

— Henry McClure Real Estate Broker • Developer • Deal Maker • Awake

Enduring Legacy and Kansas Ties

2026-04-05T22:10:00.000-07:00

Mace Siegel, Dana K. Anderson, and the MaceRich Company (later Macerich) have a fascinating origin story deeply tied to Topeka, Kansas, even though the company itself was founded in New York City. What began as a small strip-center developer in the mid-1960s exploded into one of the nation’s largest owners and operators of regional shopping malls through smart partnerships, a pivotal local deal, and aggressive growth via acquisitions and redevelopment. The Topeka connection—via a chance 1965 encounter and the 1972 acquisition of White Lakes Mall—was the spark that helped transform the company from a regional builder into a national REIT powerhouse.

The Founders and Early Days (1964–1965)

Mace Siegel (a real estate veteran who started in the business in 1952 after working for a brokerage focused on post-WWII shopping centers) partnered with his friend Richard Cohen, an experienced builder and developer. In October 1964, they combined their first names to create MaceRich Real Estate Company in New York City. Their initial focus was building strip shopping centers anchored by big discount stores (many with Arlan’s Department Stores as the anchor tenant). They developed about 18 of these early on, starting with one in Ames, Iowa. This model proved successful but was vulnerable when anchor chains like Arlan’s struggled.

The Topeka Connection: Dana K. Anderson Joins the Picture (1965–1966)

Here’s where Topeka enters the story in a big way. In 1965, Siegel and Cohen (along with Leonard Cohen) traveled to Topeka scouting properties for new shopping centers. Dana K. Anderson—a local Kansas real estate professional, KU School of Business alumnus from the Lawrence/Topeka area—was driving by and noticed them. He literally knocked on their car window to offer help (directions, local insights, or assistance with properties). Unbeknownst to him at the time, these were the founders of MaceRich.

Anderson brokered a deal for them on a stand-alone discount store in Topeka (which still operates today, most recently as Gordman’s). Impressed, he joined the company full-time in 1966. Anderson went on to have a 50+ year career with the firm, eventually becoming executive vice president, chief operating officer, and Vice Chairman Emeritus of the Board. His Kansas roots and hustle were instrumental in the company’s early Midwest expansion—he helped build 17 centers in the region and Annapolis, MD.

The Turning Point: White Lakes Mall and the Shift to Regional Malls (1972)

The real “blossom” moment came in September 1972 with MaceRich’s acquisition of White Lakes Mall in Topeka—the company’s first full regional shopping mall. (White Lakes had opened in 1964 as Topeka’s original enclosed mall.) Lacking the capital on their own, they formed a joint venture with Provident Life & Accident and Assurance Company to finance it. This deal was a game-changer: it marked the company’s pivot from building small strip centers to acquiring, owning, and redeveloping larger regional malls. It proved the model for future growth and established their reputation as the “Mall Doctor” for turning around underperforming properties.

Explosive Growth into a National REIT (1970s–Present)

From that Topeka foundation, the company expanded rapidly:

Mid-1970s onward: They moved into Southern California (e.g., redeveloping the outdated Lakewood Center in 1975 into a thriving regional mall) and became experts at enclosing, expanding, and modernizing older malls. Headquarters eventually relocated to Santa Monica, CA.
1994: Went public as a REIT (real estate investment trust) on the NYSE under the ticker MAC on its 30th anniversary. This gave them access to massive capital for acquisitions without needing constant joint-venture partners. At IPO, they owned 15 properties (~10 million sq ft).
Key later acquisitions that scaled them nationally: Westcor (2002, adding major Arizona and Colorado properties for $1.475 billion); Wilmorite Properties (2005, adding 11 centers including Tysons Corner for $2.333 billion); and many others. By the early 2000s they controlled dozens of regional malls (over 50 million+ sq ft at peaks).
2006: Officially rebranded from MaceRich to Macerich.

Today, Macerich remains a major publicly traded REIT (third-largest owner/operator of shopping centers in the U.S. at various points), focused on high-quality regional malls in strong markets, with ongoing redevelopment into experiential destinations. It owns interests in dozens of properties totaling tens of millions of square feet.

Enduring Legacy and Kansas Ties

The Topeka start—rooted in that 1965 car-window knock and the 1972 White Lakes deal—literally launched the modern Macerich empire. Anderson’s long tenure and local philanthropy (he’s a major KU supporter and has ties back to Lawrence/Topeka) kept the Kansas connection alive. Siegel remained a principal until later in life (he passed in 2011). The company’s story is a classic example of how a chance local opportunity in a Midwestern city like Topeka could fuel nationwide success in the retail real estate boom.

Your linked blog post (“Mace, Dana K., and the Enduring Legacy of Macerich: A Retail REIT Story”) seems to dive into exactly this narrative—celebrating the human element and Kansas roots behind the big REIT. If there are specific details from it you want me to expand on or cross-reference, just share! This Topeka-origin tale is a great piece of local business history.

Building & Structure Details

2026-04-05T21:15:19.478-07:00

✅ Property Listing Statistics

Grandma Hoerner’s Foods Facility 31862 Thompson Road, Alma, KS 66401 Parcel ID: 099-079-30-0-00-00-004.00-0

Prime I-70 Highway-Service Industrial Property Total Land: 18.64 Acres Developed Commercial / Manufacturing Site

Land & Site Highlights

Total Gross Acres: 18.64
Market / Commercial Acres: 7.02
Agricultural / Native Grass Acres: 11.51 (separate use valuation)
Zoning: CP-3 – Planned Highway Service (allows commercial, manufacturing, and retail activity directly along Interstate-70)
Location: Direct proximity to I-70 with semi-improved road access
Topography: Rolling terrain, above street grade
Parking: Off-street, on-site, adequate quantity
Utilities: Rural water + lagoon septic system
Ownership: Private fee-simple
Site Classification: Developed site with buildings – primarily goods storage, handling, and light manufacturing

Building & Structure Details

Total Approximate Building Area: ~38,682 sq ft (across five integrated sections)

Main Structures (all metal-on-wood-frame construction):

Storage Warehouse (Built 1997): 33,450 sq ft
- Includes walk-in cooler (150 units) and walk-in freezer (150 units)
- 18 ft height, single-story
Mixed Retail / Office (Built 1997): 2,496 sq ft
- Warmed & cooled air, mezzanine office space
Light Manufacturing / Industrial (Built 1997): 2,496 sq ft
- Warmed & cooled air
Light Manufacturing Addition (Built 2008): 104 sq ft
Storage Warehouse Addition (Built 2019): 136 sq ft

Key Site Improvements:

Concrete paving with base (installed 1997 & 2000 – heavy-duty)
Raised slab porch (2012) – 837 ft²
Prefabricated storage shed (2012) – 82' × 91'
Space heaters and canopy structures throughout

Property Use: Light industrial / miscellaneous manufacturing with significant storage, handling, and production capacity. Currently used for hot-fill food processing (jams, preserves, sauces, pie fillings).

Appraised Value (Wabaunsee County – Tax Year 2026):

Commercial & Industrial: $481,020 ($97,850 land + $383,170 improvements)

This is a rare combination of size, location, and specialized food-grade infrastructure on Interstate-70 in Kansas — ideal for continued manufacturing, expansion, or owner-user occupancy.

In short, a sale-leaseback is often the cleanest way to turn your building equity into growth capital while making your life simpler, your costs more predictable, and your tax picture potentially more favorable over the long run.

2026-04-05T20:32:00.000-07:00

Here’s a clear list of the key advantages of doing a sale-leaseback when you own both the building and the business operating inside it (you sell the property to an investor and lease it back so your business stays put with no move). This strategy is popular for small-to-mid-sized businesses because it turns illiquid real estate equity into cash while letting you keep operating exactly where you are.

I’ll focus especially on the points you asked about—making things simpler and easier on yourself, potentially lower (or more manageable) lease payments, and capital-gains/tax implications—while including the bigger-picture benefits.

1. Immediate cash / liquidity without disrupting your business

You get 100% of the property’s current fair-market value in cash (often far more than a bank would lend you at 60–80% loan-to-value on a mortgage).
Use the proceeds for anything: expand the business, buy equipment, pay down debt, hire staff, or invest elsewhere for higher returns.
Your business stays in the exact same location—no moving costs, no lost customers, no downtime.

2. Simpler and easier day-to-day operations (big win for “make it simpler on yourself”)

You shed the headaches of property ownership: major repairs, roof/HVAC replacements, insurance claims, property-tax appeals, finding contractors, etc. Even in a typical triple-net (NNN) lease where you still pay most operating expenses, the new landlord now owns the asset and bears the ultimate long-term ownership risks and responsibilities.
No more tying up your (or your staff’s) time on real-estate management—you can focus 100% on running and growing the business.
Predictable budgeting: lease payments are usually fixed (or have modest, known escalations), versus the unpredictable spikes from ownership (sudden big repairs, fluctuating insurance/taxes). This makes cash-flow planning much easier.

3. Potentially lower or more manageable “effective” occupancy cost / lease payments

Lease payments can often be structured lower than your current mortgage/debt service, especially if the buyer is an investor who benefits from depreciation and can offer “below-market” initial rents or favorable terms. Some deals even subsidize the early years because the buyer gets their own tax advantages.
Full rent deduction: you deduct 100% of the lease payments as a straight business expense. When you owned the building you could only deduct mortgage interest + depreciation (not principal). For older buildings this often means bigger annual tax deductions.
No debt covenants or refinancing risk: traditional loans usually have 5–10 year terms and restrictive rules; a sale-leaseback can lock in 10–20+ year terms with renewal options, giving you long-term stability without bank oversight.

4. Capital-gains and overall tax advantages (the “maybe less capital gains” angle)

You do trigger capital-gains tax on the sale (sale price minus your adjusted basis), including depreciation recapture taxed as ordinary income. That is the main upfront tax hit.
However, many owners end up with a net tax benefit over time because:
- The larger, immediate rent deductions often exceed the old interest + depreciation deductions, lowering your taxable income year after year.
- You can time the transaction to use net-operating losses, credits, or other offsets to reduce or eliminate the capital-gains bill in the year of sale.
- Structuring options exist to soften the blow: installment-sale treatment (spread the gain over years), pairing with a 1031 exchange (if you simultaneously buy another investment property), or Qualified Opportunity Zone investments to defer gains. These aren’t automatic, but they are commonly used in sale-leasebacks.
Bottom line: while the sale itself realizes the gain, the ongoing full deductibility of rent + removal of ownership costs frequently makes the overall tax picture better than continuing to own (especially for fully depreciated or low-basis buildings).

5. Balance-sheet and financing perks (makes future borrowing or selling the business easier)

The property and associated debt come off your books → cleaner financial statements, better debt-to-equity ratios, and stronger appearance to banks or buyers.
You improve creditworthiness and free up borrowing capacity for the business itself.

Quick reality check / things to watch

You give up future appreciation and residual value of the building (though long-term renewal options can mitigate this).
Lease terms are negotiable—strong credit and a desirable location help you get better rents, longer terms, and expansion rights.
Always run the exact numbers with a tax advisor and commercial real-estate attorney (Kansas-specific state taxes and any local rules apply on top of federal). A good broker who specializes in sale-leasebacks can shop multiple investors to get the best price and lease terms.

In short, a sale-leaseback is often the cleanest way to turn your building equity into growth capital while making your life simpler, your costs more predictable, and your tax picture potentially more favorable over the long run. If you share rough numbers on your building value, basis, current mortgage, or what you want to do with the cash, I can help you think through whether it pencils out specifically for your situation.

5. What Topeka Specifically Missed (The Recent Maverik Proposal) #mcre1

2026-03-30T18:44:00.000-07:00

A truck stop like a Maverik Adventure’s First Stop on a prime I-70 on/off-ramp site is a legitimate economic engine for a community — especially in a logistics-heavy state like Kansas. These facilities don’t just sell gas and snacks; they generate direct jobs, steady tax revenue, supply-chain spending, and multiplier effects that ripple through local businesses. Below is a data-driven deep dive based on industry reports, comparable examples, and Maverik’s own scale. I’ll also tie it directly to Topeka’s recent experience with the proposed Maverik project.

1. Direct Economic Contributions (Jobs + Local Spending)

Modern truck stops/travel centers typically employ 50–100+ people per location in full-time roles (cashiers, food prep, maintenance, managers, security).

A single Love’s Travel Stop in Dickinson County, KS (I-70 corridor) created 60 new jobs when it opened.
Construction phase adds another 50–100 temporary jobs and millions in local contractor spending.

Ongoing operations drive driver and traveler spending: Long-haul truckers (who stop for fuel, food, showers, and rest) spend $50–200+ per visit on non-fuel items. With thousands of daily vehicles on I-70, this adds up fast.

2. Tax Revenue and Fiscal Impact

Truck stops generate significant sales tax, property tax, and fuel-tax collections that flow to cities, counties, and the state.

Nationally, the truck-stop/travel-center industry contributes over $22.5 billion in taxes annually (NATSO data). A single high-traffic site can produce $500,000–$2 million+ per year in combined local/state taxes, depending on volume.
Fuel sales alone (diesel + gasoline) trigger excise taxes that fund roads and infrastructure — Kansas benefits directly from I-70 traffic.
Property taxes on a 10-acre developed site rise dramatically once built (from farmland/agricultural rates to commercial). One Maverik project document referenced a total economic impact of $403.3 million tied to its operations (likely company-wide or for a cluster of sites, but illustrative of scale).

For a freeway-adjacent site like your parcel, the location maximizes capture of interstate traffic. I-70 is a major freight corridor; sites right at exits see 10,000–50,000+ vehicles daily, turning into reliable revenue even in slower economic periods.

3. Multiplier Effects and Broader Community Benefits

The “multiplier” (every $1 spent at the truck stop generates $1.50–$3+ elsewhere) comes from:

Supply chain: Food suppliers, fuel distributors, maintenance vendors, and laundry services buy locally.
Nearby businesses: Hotels/motels, restaurants, and retail see overflow from drivers needing overnight stays or extended breaks.
Tourism & local traffic: Clean, modern stops (Maverik’s BonFire fresh-food model + adventure branding) attract families and RVs too, boosting weekend and leisure spending.
Freight economy support: Reliable truck parking/fueling keeps Kansas’s logistics sector competitive (Topeka sits at the crossroads of I-70 and other routes).

Studies from NATSO and state economic development offices consistently show travel centers as net-positive for rural or suburban exits — they revitalize underused land, increase surrounding property values modestly, and rarely displace existing retail when properly zoned.

4. Maverik-Specific Numbers and Performance

Maverik (Adventure’s First Stop) is privately held under FJ Management, so exact per-store sales aren’t broken out publicly. Here’s what reliable sources show:

Company scale: 800+ locations across 20 states (post-2023 Kum & Go acquisition that doubled its footprint for ~$2.25 billion).
Parent revenue: FJ Management (Maverik’s owner) reported $7 billion in recent annual revenue.
Industry benchmarks for similar stores: High-performing modern travel centers average $2.4 million+ in non-fuel (“inside”) sales per year, plus millions more in fuel volume. Maverik’s focus on fresh BonFire food, clean facilities, and rewards programs drives higher dwell time and spend than traditional gas stations.

A well-placed Maverik on an I-70 ramp (like the one proposed for Topeka) would sit in the upper tier of that range because of steady interstate traffic + Kansas’s freight volume. Comparable sites often hit $10–20 million+ total annual revenue (fuel + inside sales).

5. What Topeka Specifically Missed (The Recent Maverik Proposal)

In 2025, a Maverik project near I-70 and Fairlawn (6th Street area) went before Topeka’s planning commission. Neighborhood concerns about traffic led to recommendations that eliminated diesel pumps and a weigh station — effectively turning a full truck stop into a limited car/RV fuel site. The rezoning was sent back to city council with those restrictions.

That decision removed the high-margin diesel/truck component that drives the biggest economic returns.

Lost opportunity: 50–60+ direct jobs, hundreds of thousands in annual tax revenue, and the multiplier spending from truckers who would have supported nearby hotels, restaurants, and services.
The parcel you’ve been visualizing (right off I-70 with easy on/off access) is exactly the type of “shovel-ready” highway site economic developers chase. Kansas already benefits from Love’s and other stops along I-70; adding a Maverik-style facility would have layered on modern food/service amenities that attract even more traffic.

Communities that embrace these projects (with proper traffic mitigation) see measurable gains: more local employment, stronger sales-tax collections without raising rates, and a boost to the logistics sector that keeps Kansas competitive for distribution/warehousing jobs.

Bottom line: Canceling or heavily restricting a Maverik truck stop on a perfect I-70 site isn’t just missing a gas station — it’s forgoing a multi-million-dollar annual economic contributor that pays for itself many times over in jobs and taxes. Other Kansas towns have welcomed similar developments and seen the upside. If the city revisits the idea with data-driven zoning (e.g., separate truck routing), the parcel you highlighted could still deliver exactly that value.

Maverik Adventure's First Stop stores follow a modern, customer-focused prototype design that emphasizes an open, airy interior, strong sightlines for security (from the point-of-sale counter), and a strong "Adventure's First Stop" theme with immersive outdoor-inspired murals, wood accents, and vibrant graphics. Newer stores typically range from about 4,400–6,000 sq ft for the convenience store building itself, with total site development often on 3–10+ acres depending on truck/RV amenities.

2026-03-30T15:38:00.000-07:00

Typical Store Interior Layout

Entry and Customer Service: The point-of-sale counter is positioned near the main entrance for quick greetings by staff ("Adventure Guides") and excellent visibility across the store to deter theft.
BonFire Grill (Food Service): This is front-and-center upon entry — an open kitchen/prep area where customers can see fresh food being made daily (burritos, sandwiches, wraps, pizzas, salads, mac & cheese bowls, smoked meats, etc.). It creates an immediate "fresh food" impression rather than hidden back-of-house prep.
Beverage and Cold Sections: Large beverage coolers, extensive soft drink and coffee fountains, and nitro/bean-to-cup options are prominent.
Merchandise and Essentials: Well-stocked shelves for snacks, travel items, camping gear, beer/wine (where allowed), and convenience goods. The layout flows logically from food → drinks → general merchandise.
Seating: Indoor seating areas (tables/chairs) plus outdoor picnic/seating zones adjacent to entrances.
Back-of-House: Employee hallways provide efficient access to kitchen, storage, restrooms, and restocking without disrupting the customer experience. Restrooms are known for being exceptionally clean and well-maintained.
Theming: Murals and wallpaper feature adventure/outdoor scenes (local landscapes, wildlife with fun twists, maps, etc.) to bring the "outdoors in." Timber/wood looks are standard, creating a warm, rugged lodge-like feel rather than sterile c-store vibes.

The overall flow is designed to be spacious and intuitive, encouraging longer dwell time for food and drinks while keeping quick-grab items accessible.

Site Layout and Exterior (Especially Truck-Friendly Versions)

For locations with truck/RV capabilities (like the larger ones in your area of Kansas or similar highway sites):

Fueling: Multiple canopies with 20–30+ pumps total. Separate or dedicated diesel lanes/truck islands for semis, plus standard gas pumps. Some include high-speed commercial islands.
Parking and Circulation: Ample paved parking (often 50+ spaces), organized truck parking rows for 18-wheelers, car/RV areas, and good internal loops for easy in/out flow. RV dump stations and water fill are common on truck-oriented sites.
Building Placement: The store is usually positioned for strong highway visibility, with the BonFire signage and large windows prominent. Entrances often face the fuel forecourt or parking.
Additional Amenities: Landscaping, outdoor seating/picnic areas, and sometimes dedicated truck scales or bays. Sites are designed with right-in/right-out or full-access driveways depending on local roads, prioritizing safe truck maneuvers.
Example Sizes: A typical truck-friendly build might include a ~5,982 sq ft store + canopies on ~9–10 acres (very close to your parcel size), with 31+ fuel positions and 50+ parking spaces.

Your current rendering already captures the spirit well — a compact, highway-visible Maverik with prominent red/black branding, fuel canopies, BonFire elements, and truck/car parking. It aligns nicely with their real prototypes: open site flow, visible food service, and adventure-themed appeal that stands out to travelers on I-70.

Cost to you: Listed in FDDs as $12,000–$50,000 (varies by brand, market, and study depth). Wyndham's development team can sometimes provide their own market insights or assist with site selection to supplement or reduce the need for a full independent study.

2026-03-27T12:36:13.625-07:00

A hotel feasibility study (often called a market feasibility study or market study) is a core document that Wyndham's franchise sales and real estate teams review as part of evaluating potential new-build or conversion franchise opportunities. These studies help them determine if a proposed hotel site or property makes sense for one of their brands (e.g., Days Inn, Super 8, Ramada, La Quinta, Microtel, Wingate, etc.), whether it will perform well enough to support franchise fees, and if it qualifies for any development incentives.

Wyndham (the world's largest hotel franchisor by number of properties) doesn't publicly list a rigid "must-have" feasibility study requirement on its development site, but industry practice, FDDs, and their own processes show it's a standard expectation or strong factor in approvals. The real estate guys you spoke with in franchise sales are typically the ones who evaluate these studies during site approval, franchise applications, or incentive reviews. They use them to assess risk, brand fit, market viability, and long-term revenue potential for Wyndham Rewards and system-wide performance.

Why Wyndham Cares About Feasibility Studies

Site/franchise approval: Site selection for new construction or conversions often requires (or benefits from) a positive third-party study. It confirms the location won't oversaturate the market and aligns with Wyndham's portfolio (they generally don't grant exclusive territories, but they consider "Areas of Protection" on a case-by-case basis).
Development incentives: For new builds or conversions, Wyndham may offer incentives (e.g., reduced fees, loans, or support—sometimes up to thousands per room for qualifying owners). A key factor they explicitly weigh is a feasibility study, along with market overview, surrounding hotels, demand drivers, location, and room count.
Lender and internal risk management: Banks, SBA lenders, and Wyndham's team want proof the project will generate enough revenue to cover construction/renovation, operations, and the 4–5% royalty + 3–5% marketing/reservation fees.
Cost to you: Listed in FDDs as $12,000–$50,000 (varies by brand, market, and study depth). Wyndham's development team can sometimes provide their own market insights or assist with site selection to supplement or reduce the need for a full independent study.

Studies are usually prepared by reputable independent firms (e.g., HVS, PKF, or similar hospitality consultants) using nationally recognized methodologies. Wyndham may review or even recommend firms.

What the Real Estate/Franchise Sales Team Is Looking For: Key Components of a Strong Study

A typical hotel feasibility study for Wyndham follows a standard industry methodology (e.g., as outlined by firms like Hotel & Leisure Advisors). It's not just a "yes/no" report—it's data-driven with projections over 5–10+ years. The team scrutinizes it for realism, brand alignment, and red flags like oversupply or weak demand generators.

Here's a breakdown of the main sections and what Wyndham's team specifically evaluates:

Area, Demographic, and Economic Overview
- Population trends, household income, employment (major employers, offices, tourism drivers), transportation access, and growth projections.
- What they want: Strong, diversified demand drivers (business travel, leisure/tourism, groups, extended-stay, or contract). For Wyndham's economy/midscale focus, they like stable corporate or roadside locations with limited high-end competition. Weak or declining markets are a deal-breaker.
Site Evaluation
- Size, visibility, access (highway/interstate, airports), topography, utilities, zoning, environmental issues (Phase I reports often tie in), and proximity to demand generators (attractions, universities, hospitals, etc.).
- What they want: Site suitability for their prototypes (e.g., cost-efficient designs like La Quinta's Del Sol or dual-brand options). They check for easy brand compliance in design/construction.
Competitive Supply and Market Analysis
- Detailed comp set (existing and pipeline hotels within the primary/secondary market). Performance data on occupancy, ADR (average daily rate), RevPAR (revenue per available room), and market segmentation (transient vs. group, etc.).
- Historical trends and future supply risks.
- What they want: Evidence your project fills a gap (e.g., limited service in an underserved segment) without cannibalizing other Wyndham properties. They look at penetration rates and how your hotel would capture market share.
Demand Analysis and Projections
- Room-night demand forecasts by segment, projected occupancy, ADR, and RevPAR for the proposed hotel (often 3–5 years stabilized).
- What they want: Conservative, realistic numbers that support Wyndham's fees and your debt service. They cross-check against their internal data and brand performance reports (in the FDD). For conversions, they also review the property's current performance history.
Financial Pro Forma and Feasibility Conclusion
- Detailed income/expense projections: revenues (rooms + ancillary), departmental expenses, undistributed operating expenses, fixed costs, net operating income (NOI), cash flow, ROI, break-even analysis, and discounted cash flow valuation.
- Comparison of projected property value vs. total development costs (construction, land, FF&E, etc.).
- Sensitivity analysis (best/worst-case scenarios).
- What they want: Positive feasibility—i.e., the hotel creates value exceeding costs, with strong enough margins to thrive under Wyndham branding. This directly ties into incentive decisions and overall approval.
Recommendations and Brand Fit
- Suggested room count, amenities, prototype alignment, and sometimes even brand recommendations (many studies are brand-agnostic but can be tailored).
- What they want: Clear alignment with a specific Wyndham brand's standards, prototypes, and guest experience. For example, cost-effective designs that prioritize rentable square footage.

The Process in Practice (From Application to Approval)

You submit a franchise application (background, financials, business plan, site details).
Real estate/franchise sales reviews the package—including any feasibility study you provide.
Wyndham's Design & Construction team may get involved for prototype compliance (new builds) or PIP (Property Improvement Plan) for conversions.
If it looks promising, they may offer incentives or proceed to Franchise Agreement.
Timeline: Conversions can open in <90 days in many cases; new builds take longer.

Bottom line: The real estate team wants proof the project is viable, low-risk, and a good fit for Wyndham's system—not just today, but for the 15–20-year franchise term. A strong, independent study from a credible firm goes a long way toward getting a "yes," especially if it shows solid demand and financials that support their royalties.

If you're preparing one or have a specific site/brand in mind, I recommend reaching out to Wyndham's development team directly (via their site) for guidance—they often help with market insights. Let me know if you want help finding sample studies, recommended firms, or digging into a specific brand's FDD!