When may downtown receive a new...

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Mon Dec 09, 2002 5:14 pm

I've just been wondering about when downtown will receive a new skyscraper, and what height should it be? I'd like it over 1 Kansas City Place (632ft) but at least under 1000ft so as to not look too out of sync with the rest of the skyline...

KCgridlock · Post by **KCgridlock** » Mon Dec 09, 2002 10:15 pm

Well, you may be waiting a long time, KC is pretty much ignored in the national development world and we no longer have any local powerfull developers like Frank Morgan or JC Nichols that would want to built something like that, let alone the 25 percent vacancy rate. But I will go with the 600 foot plus. KC is due a new skyline changing tower, just don't think it will happen unless all of this downtown development changes the mindset of our local companies.

DanCa · Post by **DanCa** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 1:35 pm

I'd definitely go with 600+. And something original this time. Not that One KC Place isn't a nice building, but how about something round or triangular or with a tall spire?

How did Omaha manage to get that building built? Maybe once downtown takes off and unemployment goes down (within the next 2 - 3 years?), demand will require more office space.

Also, couldn't they erect a broom closet on top of One KC Place to take away the "tallest in the region" title from Omaha? I think there's only 2 feet difference in the heights.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:49 pm

just add a small 5ft+ dome that is gold

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Tue Dec 10, 2002 3:50 pm

oh! but dont forget that it has an antenna technically making it taller,
isnt the Sears Tower the tallest in the mid-west region? or are we talking about missouri, kansas, iowa, and nebraska

DanCa · Post by **DanCa** » Thu Dec 12, 2002 1:38 pm

I read that the new building in Omaha was the tallest "betwwen Chicago and Denver. But doesn't Minneapolist have buildings taller than that? I think they were just creating bragging rights with that title. Of course the building in Omaha looks very tall because it's so much taller than the other buildings. The same building in KC would look as impressive.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Thu Dec 12, 2002 4:10 pm

First National in Omaha wouldn't really look that impressive in KC. In Omaha..it looks huge, but next to OKCP, the Hyatt, or Transamerica, it would look normal. First National Bank in Omaha put the whole thing up. I think they did it just to make Omaha seem more prominant and cosmopolitan....(ha ha).

By the way, IDS center in Minneapolis is taller than First National. I think Minneapolis might have other buildings too that are taller. Minneapolis really has an awesome skyline. But their downtown seems more condensed and city-like than KC. Minneapolis seems built more on the NY model and KC more on the LA model.

DanCa · Post by **DanCa** » Fri Dec 13, 2002 5:00 pm

I live in the LA area and personally, I think downtown LA is a sorry downtown for such a large city. There's the old, original downtown that has many beautiful, old 5 - 10 story buildings and could pass for part of NYC. But nothing tall was built until, I believe, the 70s. And all the skyscrapers were built on Bunker Hill, sort of overlooking the original downtown. So the part where the skyscrapers are has little character and has the same problem as KC - people work there and leave at 5:00 so it's deserted. There are a few nice skyscrapers from the 80's and one building over 80 stories - the tallest west of Chicago.

The old downtown, which could be a very desireable place with shopping and lofts, is a trashy, scary dump. It's where Skid Row is and thousands of homeless people down there. I went there once to check out a store in the Jewlry District and ended up never getting out of my car because homeless people were waiting at every parking meter demanding money to "watch" my car.

KCgridlock · Post by **KCgridlock** » Sat Dec 14, 2002 2:20 pm

LA is one of the few major cities that I have not been too, but I have always wondered where the big towers are. I'm sure LA has suburban areas that are bigger than our downtown though.

DanCa · Post by **DanCa** » Mon Dec 16, 2002 1:19 pm

L.A. has a decent skyline, but nothing all that unique. It's comparable to Houston's skyline. (It's used a lot in commercials) A lot of tall buildings (40 to 80 story range) but not much below that, so from certain angles downtown can look sort of "hollow". Then Century City has a decent skyline with two twin towers probably around 40 stories. I also heard they're going to put up a 30 somthing tower there next year.

Dowtown Longbeach has a decent skyline with the highest bldg. around 25 stories. But outside these areas, there realy isn't much other than mid-rise buildings on corporate edge-city areas. I think that prior to about 1970, there was only one skyscraper in all the LA basin, which was the 23 story Civic Center downtown. I don't know why no others had been built up to then. Maybe it had something to do with earthquakes and new technology. But than how would you explain all the older skyscrapers in San Francisco?

KCRag Forum