Bannister Mall/Cerner

Jackson/Cass Suburbs, including South KC
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10209
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by Highlander »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: I sincerely hope this project gets off the ground and becomes a success.  But I think the odds are stacked against it.  Portions of it might work (such as the office part).  The retail, though, is misdirected.
When Bannister Mall was first opened the residential area to the east was, for the most part, middle class.  Not professional middle class but solid, blue color working class.  It was a regional mall that for years during the Christmas shopping season it was difficult to find a parking spot and the food court was packed throughout the year.  But within a few years three of the big anchors had financial problems, two anchor spots became vacant, and the livings areas around it turned for the worse (one kid who grew up in the area called it a ghetto).
The area will never become a regional shopping draw again and the only retail that has a chance to survive will have to rely on the workers in the office areas.  If area light rail does come into existence (IMO very low chance) and a station is built here it will help somewhat but not enough to survive on.  Yes, a residential part will help but what kind of residential?  Apartments?  Row housing? Detached?  Senior?
This project doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell.  What's changed from the last go around?  The area has gotten poorer if anything.  Downtown with a hell of a lot more workers than this project will ever have struggles to support retail and it only exists there now because of the return, in part, of middle to upper class incomes to the area.  I went to HS with the kids of the working class people who lived in the area and they are now all in Lees Summit which is replete with retail and I doubt if anyone is going to make the effort to shop at a walmart at 87th and I-435.  I also remember reading that shoplifting was a huge issue with stores at Bannister and the surrounding big boxes and I cannot see that problem going away either. 

  For me, I think Cerner is making a huge mistake on an area that will not really reap any benefits from their presence save that they may hire some their non skilled workforce from the area.  Professionals will go to Lees Summit (at least KC had a chance of housing them while Cerner was in KC north or even if they went downtown).

From a Kansas City and metro point of view, it's just a terrible decision on all the participants part.  We don't have enough corporate jobs in this city to spread them around like seed in a field and hope against hope that something grows.  Concentrate them and develop an urban center that is worth something and beneficial to the area as a whole.  This proposal does nothing for the metro, nothing for KC and nothing for SE KC.  Just a waste of money.   
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4572
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by grovester »

Why is this moving forward?  Is the SEKC vote that important to someone's re-election?  I agree with highlander, it's doomed and frankly will come back to haunt folks, ie another example of KC failure.  They really should think outside the box, pardon the pun.
ignatius
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4633
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:42 pm
Location: Midtown/Downtown
Contact:

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by ignatius »

Highlander wrote:  This proposal does nothing for the metro, nothing for KC and nothing for SE KC.  Just a waste of money.   
Not that I think this project will work, but if you wanted to make S and E KC a better place and stop the shrinking, how else would you do it?  KCK's PV/Legends seems to be working after all.
mgsports
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3428
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 7:00 pm

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by mgsports »

Outlet Mall?
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10209
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by Highlander »

ignatius wrote: Not that I think this project will work, but if you wanted to make S and E KC a better place and stop the shrinking, how else would you do it?  KCK's PV/Legends seems to be working after all.
The difference is that KCK is greenfield with easy access to the wallets down in Johnson County.  Various pieces of that infrastructure fell into place pretty quickly like the NASCAR track, Cabellas, the T-bones stadium, and NFM so that critical mass was created directly.  This seems like a clumsy attempt to recreate that effort without any of the key peices of infrastructure necassary for success and in a poor neighborhood rather than a greenfield development.  Too many strikes going against it.

How do you fix that area?  I don't know with KC's current resources.  This isn't going to fix it.  I think KC needs to worry about it's urban core first and foremost.  Make it a desirable place to work and live and as companies locate there, the inner burbs become more desirable places to live out of proximity, particularly if public transportation can serve them.  That's the long term solution but it's the only viable solution.  To fix the city, the city needs to pretty much quit investing in far flung adventures because there no way the city has the resources to support suburban nodes all over the place, particularly those that need to be subsidized. 
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18231
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by FangKC »

I think I've come up with a solution for this site: truck stop and motel.  :lol:
There is no fifth destination.
User avatar
bbqboy
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2920
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 10:25 am

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by bbqboy »

Indian casino. Just gotta find a tribe to cede the land to. :lol:
ignatius
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4633
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 2:42 pm
Location: Midtown/Downtown
Contact:

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by ignatius »

The urban core is already forward moving for the most part, except for inner E Side.  Northland is solid.  Ignoring S and E KC won't stop the bleeding.  This probably isn't a good solution and puts too much risk with the City, but I do think it is the right timing to start focus on getting S and E KC out of the doldrums - the fastest shrinking parts of the metro.

If the planned project moves forward, I would hope they have solid tenants lined up before any building starts with each phase.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17184
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by GRID »

ignatius wrote: The urban core is already forward moving for the most part, except for inner E Side.  Northland is solid.  Ignoring S and E KC won't stop the bleeding.  This probably isn't a good solution and puts too much risk with the City, but I do think it is the right timing to start focus on getting S and E KC out of the doldrums - the fastest shrinking parts of the metro.

If the planned project moves forward, I would hope they have solid tenants lined up before any building starts with each phase.
I agree with this.  It?s time, past time to put some effort into at least stabilizing SKC.

There are a lot of people in SKC.  The area around the Mall may not be dense, but that is a huge under retailed market now.  People try to compare SKC to North County St Louis.  Are you kidding me?  North County at least has retail centers, some are pretty new.

SKC could support some basic local retail big boxes like target,petsmart, walmart etc in a smaller development than what was there before.  Something like what was done with Blue Ridge Mall.

But that is such a large track of land and retail should only be a small part of the overall project and public incentives should be used to build a mixed use development there, not just big boxes and parking lots.

Retail, office, residential and even flex industrial.  But residential has to be a large component.

If the city/state is only going to throw up a 500k sq ft standard big box strip mall there, then that is a total waste of money and time.

But retail is needed despite the history of retail failure there.  The area can support retail.  Retail is also needed to subsidize the rest of a more mixed use project via sales tax tifs etc.
aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12647
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

grovester wrote: Why is this moving forward?  Is the SEKC vote that important to someone's re-election?  I agree with highlander, it's doomed and frankly will come back to haunt folks, ie another example of KC failure.  They really should think outside the box, pardon the pun.
With an attitude like that is it any wonder why people living outside the core don't support the core more.  Whether you like it or not that area is part of KCMO and it needs a boost.  Not all of KCMO's development and redevelopment efforts need to be between the River Market and the Plaza.
What has me worried about this project is the concept of big box retail. This area cannot support regional retail at this moment - it not like the area around the Ward Parkway Shopping Center.  Build medium and small, something the new development needs and can support along with the neighborhood.

And, to add to my previous post this project should tear down the hotels that are located in the area.  That should help to get some of the undesirables out of the vicinity.
I may be right.  I may be wrong.  But there is a lot of gray area in-between.
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4572
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by grovester »

My problem is not the location, but the idea.  A failure will help no one.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by KCMax »

Redevelopment plan for former Bannister Mall property is endorsed by KC Council committee
The Trails calls for 1.3 million square feet of retail space and 1.57 million square feet of office and light industrial space to be developed over roughly eight years with a tentative start next year. Lane4 Property Group is helping with the project.

The redevelopment plan would be boosted by $191 million in city and state tax incentives. Of that amount, $103.8 million would come from local taxing jurisdictions.

Developers say $40 million in private funds have been invested in acquiring property and site preparation work. The former Bannister Mall already has been demolished.
SAVE THE PLAZA - FROM ZOMBIES! Find out how at:

http://twitter.com/TheKCRag
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by KCMax »

SAVE THE PLAZA - FROM ZOMBIES! Find out how at:

http://twitter.com/TheKCRag
longviewmo
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2009 12:58 am
Location: Manhattan, Kansas
Contact:

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by longviewmo »

http://thetrailskc.files.wordpress.com/ ... ressed.pdf

They want to tear down nearly everything there. It looks like the only thing left will be the Montgomery Ward and possibly something like McDonalds. They're tearing down roughly 500k square feet (just a guess) of failed retail strip mall that's less than 30-35 years old to build it a bit closer to 435? I'm trying to find a better word for it than stupid, but I just can't.

Oh, and it looks like something will be done to the KMart. The building in the plan is about the same size as KMart, but that is definitely not the shape of the KMart.
pash
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3800
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 2:47 am

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by pash »

.
Last edited by pash on Mon Jan 30, 2017 1:33 am, edited 1 time in total.
pstokely
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:22 pm

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by pstokely »

Where is that guy who wanted to Save Bannister Mall now? How about save Benjamin Plaza instead of Save the Plaza?
User avatar
smh
Supporter
Posts: 4312
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:40 pm
Location: Central Loop

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by smh »

The whole development is like 60% parking lots. Awful.
"It's only when you leave Kansas City do you realize truly how great a city it is. ... If you have to go away, go away for a while. You'll be back. And when you come back, bring your ideas and willingness to make Kansas City the best."- Sly James
studentper
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 246
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 2:53 pm
Location: brookside

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by studentper »

Was the purpose to see how far apart each store/house/office could be from another? 

Oh well.  I suppose if you use a cute hand-drawn line and put enough little green dots in the parking lots anything looks like a good idea.  It does sort of leaves the impression that the most intrusive part of the plan is the bike path.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17184
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by GRID »

Good fucking lord.  What a joke this project has become.

Should have kept the mall.
pstokely
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 790
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 5:22 pm

Re: Cerner still committed to Bannister site

Post by pstokely »

GRID wrote: Good fucking lord.  What a joke this project has become.

Should have kept the mall.
What could have even done with the mall?
Post Reply