KCRag Forum

Proposed River Market Office Project Drops Plan for Separate Garage

The developer of a proposed River Market office project at Third and Grand has scrapped the idea of a separate garage and is now paying the KCATA for the option to develop the site.

Briarcliff Development is pursuing the 200,000 square-foot office project on the 1.8-acre parking lot owned by the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority.

...

“We’re excited,” said Dennis Hays, KCATA senior policy advisor. “The plan now calls for two office buildings atop a garage with 600 spaces.”

The decision to incorporate the parking beneath the office structures marks a shift.

Last year, the redevelopment plan called for building a separate, 900-space garage on property owned near First and Grand by the Veolia energy company. That concept also called for the office space to be 300,000 square feet.

But now Veolia is pursuing a separate development concept for the former coal yard that calls for apartments and/or a commercial project to be located there.

...

Benninghoven is confident the project will land tenants because of its unique design and strategic location. The office building is expected to be built utilizing a timber frame.

...

https://cityscenekc.com/proposed-river- ... te-garage/

The firm is now paying the authority $80,000 per month for the development option.

This will encourage something gets built

That's nearly $1 million per year to do nothing

What will happen to that Oriental market? I like to go there to get kimchi. How will people shop there if they take up that lot?

Darlene wrote:What will happen to that Oriental market? I like to go there to get kimchi. How will people shop there if they take up that lot?

Ignoring the racist term, they have their own parking lot. It wraps around three sides of the building, there's on street parking on 2nd, 3rd and Grand.

"Oriental market"... smh

I'm not sure why we are debating the troll's post, but the term Oriental market is not racist. Referring to an Asian person as "an Oriental" is offensive, but but referring to goods and products from Asia as Oriental is not. One of the stores in the River Market (Huong Que) has Oriental Market in it's name!

KCtoBrooklyn wrote:I'm not sure why we are debating the troll's post, but the term Oriental market is not racist. Referring to an Asian person as "an Oriental" is offensive, but but referring to goods and products from Asia as Oriental is not. One of the stores in the River Market (Huong Que) has Oriental Market in it's name!

Even then, most of us Asians don’t find being called oriental offensive.

Isn't the current vogue to be disproportionately outraged at every real or imagined slight? Or do I spend too much time online, where basically everyone is their worst possible self most of the time?

mean wrote:Isn't the current vogue to be disproportionately outraged at every real or imagined slight? Or do I spend too much time online, where basically everyone is their worst possible self most of the time?

No, the current vogue is to be disproportionately outraged at people who appear disproportionately outraged at every slight. The next stage will be to be disproportionately outraged at those people, and the cycle will continue

"Those people"?

grovester wrote:"Those people"?

It's referring to the people described in the previous sentence of the comment.

mean wrote:Isn't the current vogue to be disproportionately outraged at every real or imagined slight? Or do I spend too much time online, where basically everyone is their worst possible self most of the time?

The key is to be disportionately outraged for “slights against” other groups who they themselves don’t care that much.

TheLastGentleman wrote:

mean wrote:Isn't the current vogue to be disproportionately outraged at every real or imagined slight? Or do I spend too much time online, where basically everyone is their worst possible self most of the time?

No, the current vogue is to be disproportionately outraged at people who appear disproportionately outraged at every slight. The next stage will be to be disproportionately outraged at those people, and the cycle will continue

You must have gone to the in person meeting I went to where people were outraged over a trail expansion further through a park.

First, every possible negative reason that could come up did. My personal favorite is apparently trails bring crime into a neighborhood that somehow can't use the road to get to the same home.

We reached the second stage in the same meeting where people (in nice terms) said that nothing the negative people were saying was remotely true (and they were absolutely correct on most of the things). Like there were complaints about litter and being unsafe for kids and all sort of standard nimby fare and there were people who said that none of those were problems

Then it circled back to the people against saying that was true and one old guy used the infamous "they" to be against certain unnamed people who might enter the neighborhood.

What I found especially funny about this whole situation is there's a sewer easement down the middle of this same park and when they come through and have to replace this line they'll probably create a cut wide enough to put a trail in.

I've noticed it's definitely become more common for people to push back on a nimby approach and it's generational. In my neighborhood nimbys are most likely boomers and the anti-nimbys are more likely older millennials with gen-x split between both.

I kind of think we're going to see a shift towards big projects as the younger boomers move into retirement housing after they can't drive anymore and their priorities shift.

No offense to any of you who are boomers but the values of that generation really need to step aside now.

Also, why do you all still let Darlene derail these threads?

Darlene is not doing anything banworthy.

Don't feed the troll. Unless you think you can bait it into doing something banworthy. If it is who I suspect, that shouldn't be difficult. I guess that would solve the problem.

mean wrote:Darlene is not doing anything banworthy.

Don't feed the troll. Unless you think you can bait it into doing something banworthy. If it is who I suspect, that shouldn't be difficult. I guess that would solve the problem.

Stranger Things got banned?

I'm offended by all of the offensiveness.

ldai_phs wrote:

mean wrote:Darlene is not doing anything banworthy.

Don't feed the troll. Unless you think you can bait it into doing something banworthy. If it is who I suspect, that shouldn't be difficult. I guess that would solve the problem.

Stranger Things got banned?

Huh? No.

Sorry everybody I was out of town. My goodness I did not mean no offense I thought the term oriental was fine for an adjective. Like oriental furniture or oriental food. I shop in that market when I am down there and I enjoy it. I love trying all the different spices and things. I asked for some suggestions on something new and one of those cute little gals working in there told me to try that kim chi. I bought me a big jar of that and took it home and I am telling you I set my mouth on fire. You do NOT even want to know what came out the other end. But I have been trying to eat it and it is not as spicy now.

Anyway I am sorry if anybody got upset about the word oriental. I thought they was going to build that building on that parking lot, so I was worried about that. I am relieved to know it won't be affected.

At 200,000 sq ft, this is a pretty good sized office project. I'm wondering what happened to the building that was formerly occupied by the architectural firm (Populous??). Whoever it was, they moved to the plaza. Is that space vacant or has it been leased since? Very un-Kansas City like for an entity to build a spec building at this scale with a relatively new office building sitting vacant in the same area (if it is indeed vacant).