KCRag Forum

In any digital signage application, the biggest challenge is keeping eyes on the board when content gets stale. I think mixing in some appropriate art from local artist is a good idea.

Would have been a way to get a bigger board approved....maybe?

Didn't think you could have moving content in highway adjacent billboards in Missouri. I'm sure you covered that though.

Those buildings are real pretty. I love all that glass and it makes them look good. I think if they put some lights on there they would look better at night. I was in Miami and thought it was real neat how they put the different color lights on the buildings and bridges. Something like that would be nice here in KC.

Can someone post a picture for us out of towners (ex KC residents)?

I have never had a problem with the "wall" and glass. But after seeing this photo I'm not so sure. I kind of can see the problem. Hopefully, Cordish does more to differentiate the next buildings.

Keep in mind that I eyeballed the height by just looking at the renderings, so don't take this image as gospel or anything. That being said, we'll definitely be losing some interesting stuff, such as H&R block as well as the president hotel. I'm sorry, but combined with the glassy convention hotel, this is just an overwhelming amount of glass and banal architecture. Variation in cladding between each building would go a long way

I'd also take the fact that there isn't an official rendering of the towers from this angle (the most photographed angle in the city!) as suspicious.

TheLastGentleman wrote:I'd also take the fact that there isn't an official rendering of the towers from this angle (the most photographed angle in the city!) as suspicious.

I agree with the general sentiment as well. While I understand they have a particular architect/style they would like to stick to, if they could be more conscientious of the "wall of glass" aspect to the projects overall in the 3-4 light buildings and include increased variation in height, sloping roofs, different cladding, etc. I think that would do a good deal to help alleviate that issue. I haven't really thought about it at length with including the Convention hotel, but after looking at the images you posted it has changed my mind that this is a pretty important thing to get right.

alejandro46 wrote:

TheLastGentleman wrote:I'd also take the fact that there isn't an official rendering of the towers from this angle (the most photographed angle in the city!) as suspicious.

I agree with the general sentiment as well. While I understand they have a particular architect/style they would like to stick to, if they could be more conscientious of the "wall of glass" aspect to the projects overall in the 3-4 light buildings and include increased variation in height, sloping roofs, different cladding, etc. I think that would do a good deal to help alleviate that issue. I haven't really thought about it at length with including the Convention hotel, but after looking at the images you posted it has changed my mind that this is a pretty important thing to get right.

Cordish should look Magellen’s Lakeshore East development for inspiration on how to build a bunch of unique glass towers next to each other

TheLastGentleman wrote:I'd also take the fact that there isn't an official rendering of the towers from this angle (the most photographed angle in the city!) as suspicious.

Yep, I have always said that. They avoid releasing renderings of the Truman road towers from the most photographed view of the city. Probably because they have them and they look terrible and the second they release them, they know they will have some push back.

It think the skyline is improved with one and two lights, but three and four lights plus the hotel are going to really screw up the skyline if they don't trying to do do something much more different with the other towers.

Does it matter? Probably not. I mean lots of cities have ugly skylines or skylines that are difficult to photograph.

But the downtown kc skyline from the south will go from being a very interesting, photogenic and attractive skyline with layers of density and contrasting architecture to basically a wall of glass with the tops of the taller buildings above them. Especially since there is almost no chance a skyline changing skyscraper will go up in the next 20 years to help offset the wall of glass. This won't just effect the view of the skyline from Liberty Memorial, but even more so from ground level. When driving north toward downtown, the impressive view of the downtown buildings will nearly go away. The wall of glass will pretty much hide most of the downtown from view. All you will see it a bunch of blue glass and huge LIGHT signs. I mean, they could at least make the south sides of the towers less plain. The north sides at least have some contrasting facades and are not as flat.

Personally, I think the city should be doing more to get more attractive and contrasting towers since Cordish is getting so many incentives for them.

Again, I like the first two towers, but it kind of sucks that I think downtown KC will actually be far less attractive after the new buildings are built. KC doesn't get a lot of new high rise construction and these new towers are just gong to cover up better looking buildings than they are putting up.

Part of a growing city I guess, but I hope it can be improved.

ughhh I know. These art deco towers are soooo disgusting.

Criticism isn't always fun but being super defensivie (comparing to art deco) is bad form.

Also, let's put aside the defense that cordish just loves this architecture. They're doing it because it's cheap and we all know it.

StrangerThings wrote:You know what happens when a mid-sized city goes decades in between building high rise buildings? Massive changes in popular design. This “glass wall” argument is exhausting and frutile.

Is it Cordish’s responsibility and financial burden to go out of their way to build drastically different buildings to maintain how it looks from a certain vantage point? Shouldn’t we be looking at the fact that this city’s most iconic high rise buildings have all been built in clusters during certain decades?

The early 1900’s,commerce and others. The 30’s, 909 walnut, PNL and others. The 80’s, OKCP, Town pavilion, AT&T. Now, 1-4 Light, 30 years after the most recent serious high rise downtown construction. So is it shocking that designs and preferred finishes have changed in the last 30 years? You’ll notice all those iconic buildings are very similar in style if built within the same decade. I’m sure shit was talked in the 80’s when ground was broke on one KC place and Town Pavilion about how they were going to ruin the beautiful skyline with all that glass which would block the Art Deco decor of the buildings constructed 50 years prior. :/

I generally agree with you, but how hard or expensive would it be to change up the colors or sizes of the glass panel?

It looks to me like there isn't a silver flashing or whatever between the glass on 2 Light. How hard would it be to use black or blue colored metal next time?

it's a lack of desire. there are plenty of options in a similar price range for cladding and glazing.

To ST's point. cordish does have a responsibility to the city to deliver an aesthetically pleasing product that integrates with the cities aesthetic. The city and its residents are your partners, customers and, to some degree, financers.

To the point of the skyline view from Liberty Memorial: it is going to continue to evolve in ways that we make not like. If the city continues to grow it is going to be to the south toward the Crossroads. We ensured that when we put in the streetcar. The Light towers will probably be mostly obscured from Liberty memorial in the next 20 years.

IMO the light towers are O.K. There nothing to put on a city tour, but they aren't "flashcube" buildings either. Hopefully one if the future towers, maybe the Hotel/Office/Residential one, will make more financial sense to have more "iconic" design. Priority one should still be to make them work at the street level.

shinatoo wrote:... Priority one should still be to make them work at the street level.

Agreed. No one moves to a city just for the skyline at a specific angle. Someone might care about the skyline from their condo/apartment, but no one lives at liberty memorial. People do move to a city based off of how it feels at ground level.

StrangerThings wrote:Is it Cordish’s responsibility and financial burden to go out of their way to build drastically different buildings to maintain how it looks from a certain vantage point? Shouldn’t we be looking at the fact that this city’s most iconic high rise buildings have all been built in clusters during certain decades?

The early 1900’s,commerce and others. The 30’s, 909 walnut, PNL and others. The 80’s, OKCP, Town pavilion, AT&T. Now, 1-4 Light, 30 years after the most recent serious high rise downtown construction. So is it shocking that designs and preferred finishes have changed in the last 30 years? You’ll notice all those iconic buildings are very similar in style if built within the same decade. I’m sure shit was talked in the 80’s when ground was broke on one KC place and Town Pavilion about how they were going to ruin the beautiful skyline with all that glass which would block the Art Deco decor of the buildings constructed 50 years prior. :/

The difference between the older buildings you listed and the Light towers is that the former, while built in clusters of similar styles, are nowhere near as repetitive as latter. Even the postmodern towers have major differences in massing and cladding. The issue I have with the current plan is that it feels like a missed opportunity to add quality architecture and variety to a prominent location, especially since other great buildings will be getting totally or partially obscured. We're not asking for starchitecture here, just something doesn't look copy-pasted

tower wrote:

shinatoo wrote:... Priority one should still be to make them work at the street level.

Agreed. No one moves to a city just for the skyline at a specific angle. Someone might care about the skyline from their condo/apartment, but no one lives at liberty memorial. People do move to a city based off of how it feels at ground level.

That view is so popular and used in so much promotional material that it's likely many people's first image of the city, at least the first impressive image and should be considered as such. Also, the "wall" effect won't be exclusive to that view since they're all lined up in a perfect row. In the crossroads, for instance, there will be places where the only thing you'll be able to see are the towers, so they could at least have the courtesy to be interesting

it was a joke.

1-3 light is not like the modern day art deco towers....so drawing that comparison is silly.