City Place (College and US 69)

[KCMax]

Block Real Estate Services proposes $350M project in OP

Representatives of Block Real Estate Services LLC have been talking to Overland Park officials about a proposed $350 million development on the so-called Galleria site southwest of College Boulevard and U.S. Highway 69....

It calls for 1,356 apartment units in four-story apartment buildings, an additional 392 units constructed around structured parking, 585,500 square feet of office space in four buildings ranging from three to six stories, and 32,000 square feet zoned for mixed use, which generally means retail. Plans also call for a nursing home and continuing-care community.

Big plans for development project in OP met with objections

"I don't want them to build the project I want them to go somewhere else with it," Houser said.

"It would create too much extra traffic in the area and that would be a danger and a safety threat to school children and other kids in the area," he said.

[smh]

Come to downtown. I'll take 1,356 apartment units in four-story buildings.

[slimwhitman]

"Mixed use" is an overused term. Does this look "mixed use" to anyone here? Looks like 5 single uses to me. BORING!....next.

[mistervinix]

[quote="slimwhitman"]"Mixed use" is an overused term. Does this look "mixed use" to anyone here? Looks like 5 single uses to me. BORING!....next.

It's better than half of it being retail that the area definitely does not need; although some kind of grocery would be nice. When I moved to the KC area in 1985 I remember the Galleria sign on that corner, and it was already beginning to fall over. Kind of stunned it took so long to come up with a new plan for the area.

[chrizow]

i don't understand the neighborhood opposition to this. College Blvd has been full of apartment buildings, hotels, and office parks for 30 years. if you bought a house in that area, you kind of need to accept that.

[DaveKCMO]

the business journal and star are both guilty of misusing the phrase "mixed use". IF YOU DON'T MIX USES IN A STRUCTURE IT IS NOT MIXED USE.

i actually understand this opposition. it's a major addition with no alternative transportation options, although i'm sure that's not the reason they're opposed.

if overland park wants density, they should put it where they're hollowing out and investing in transit (northeast along metcalf).

[chrizow]

i think it's a bad project and have plenty of reasons to "oppose" it in terms of its design and segregated uses...but i'm just saying it's ironic that someone moves to a subdivision off college blvd and 69 and opposes a project based on traffic concerns. college blvd is the main business artery in JoCo and has about as many (if not more) jobs than downtown KC. office buildings and traffic kinda come along with that. sorry folks!

[flyingember]

to complain about traffic on college blvd is about 20 years too late.

traffic is less annoying downtown than that corridor

the only thing good about college blvd is it's reasonably suburban dense. could be better but there's towers that would add good density if they were built downtown

[KCMax]

I would think the major expansions of 69 Highway would be more of a nuisance than this. flyingember is right though, that ship has sailed. Gotta love suburbanites who move to the suburbs to get away from people, then get surprised when everyone else wants to do the same.

To Gardner! And DeSoto! And Oak Grove!

[mistervinix]

[quote="DaveKCMO"]the business journal and star are both guilty of misusing the phrase "mixed use". IF YOU DON'T MIX USES IN A STRUCTURE IT IS NOT MIXED USE.

Not according to Wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-use_development

I agree it would be better for mixed use in one building, but one step at a time. Sooner or later the march across the wilderness will come to an end and density won't be an ugly word in the 'burbs.

[chaglang]

the business journal and star are both guilty of misusing the phrase "mixed use". IF YOU DON'T MIX USES IN A STRUCTURE IT IS NOT MIXED USE.

Not according to Wikipedia...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-use_development

I agree it would be better for mixed use in one building, but one step at a time. Sooner or later the march across the wilderness will come to an end and density won't be an ugly word in the 'burbs.

That's my understanding of it, too. Mixed use buildings are multiple uses in the same structure, separated by fire walls. Mixed use developments are pretty much what that graphic shows, though they can easily be done with more sophistication than what's being proposed.

[GRID]

This might be a mixed use project in 19freaking80. Seriously? This is an exact continuation of what is already built in the College Bvd corridor. The residents that oppose this better start drinking the koolaid and get on board with this before somebody actually proposed a real mixed use project there. (not that it's likely).

[Highlander]

This might be a mixed use project in 19freaking80. Seriously? This is an exact continuation of what is already built in the College Bvd corridor. The residents that oppose this better start drinking the koolaid and get on board with this before somebody actually proposed a real mixed use project there. (not that it's likely).

I think it IS the project that was proposed back in 1980. It isn't the first time this piece of land was the location for a large project - the last one fell through as south KC became overbuilt during the 80's boom. That project was opposed by the surrounding residents as well. This project looks pretty poorly designed, it's not even close to being dense and much of the land looks to be devoted to surface lots. But, does JoCo really have the market to absorb a higher density project on that large of a parcel of land? I really doubt it.

[GRID]

This might be a mixed use project in 19freaking80. Seriously? This is an exact continuation of what is already built in the College Bvd corridor. The residents that oppose this better start drinking the koolaid and get on board with this before somebody actually proposed a real mixed use project there. (not that it's likely).

I think it IS the project that was proposed back in 1980. It isn't the first time this piece of land was the location for a large project - the last one fell through as south KC became overbuilt during the 80's boom. That project was opposed by the surrounding residents as well. This project looks pretty poorly designed, it's not even close to being dense and much of the land looks to be devoted to surface lots. But, does JoCo really have the market to absorb a higher density project on that large of a parcel of land? I really doubt it.

The project in the 80's was based more on retail, but it was far denser than this one and still had more office space. Think Houston Galleria on a smaller scale. I don't care. Hell, I would rather it stay farms because like metro KC needs another million sq ft of office space in JoCo...

I just find it hilarious that the residents are screaming about it being too dense or built up. You have to be kidding me.

[KCMax]

Big Overland Park project moves forward

The $350 million development proposed by BK Properties covers two tracts, a 93-acre parcel southwest of College Boulevard and U.S. 69, and a 44-acre section northeast of College and Nieman.

The planning commission approved the 93-acre portion of the development, and delayed consideration of the 44-acre parcel the request of BK Properties, an entity sponsored by Block Real Estate Services. The developer is proposing a 335-unit apartment development for the smaller tract.

BK Properties wants to build a 1,382-unit apartment complex; 140-unit senior housing complex, four office buildings totaling 600,250 square-feet and 40,000 square-feet of retail on the larger parcel southwest of College and U.S. 69 backed by the planning commission.

[slimwhitman]

Thread is here:
http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=19269

[KCMax]

Thread is here:
http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=19269

Thanks, couldn't find it, forgot I named it "Galleria." "City Place" is a laughably bad name. Almost as funny as "Urban Table" in Prairie Village.

[kboish]

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... tml?page=2

This project gets the go ahead. First phase to built by 2016- last phase by 2021.

The council approved creation of a transportation development district that will allow retailers in the project to charge an added 1 percent sales tax in the project for 22 years. It is expected to generate about $7.2 million for construction of a parking garage serving a 600-foot-long mixed-use structure near College Boulevard and Switzer Road.

Where is the outrage? Who got to vote on this TDD? SAVE OUR SOY BEAN FIELDS!

BK Properties will pay $6 million for construction of stretches of 113th Street and Indian Creek Parkway through the project. The council on Monday approved a community improvement district, which calls for that cost to be covered by special assessments against the developer and any subsequent City Place land owners.

outrage! these big government loving reds are just piling on the special taxes! Future land owners have no say in this tax! Won't that be such a disincentive for future investors?

The development agreement approved Monday calls for the city to pay the estimated $7 million to $8 million cost of extending Switzer Road through the development.

This new road better be self supporting in the future...otherwise, whats the point? We're just tying ourselves to years of repaving, snow plowing, curb repair, traffic light, and street light maintenance.


Obviously I'm being facetious, but i think it goes to show how ridiculous these same arguments sound against any type of development- urban or suburban. They lack any substance

[KCMax]

[chingon]

How come I didn't get to vote on the TDD? I have been Bowling at the AMF lanes on College BLVD and am thus and Overland Park taxpayer.