P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Come here for discussion about the new downtown entertainment district.
Post Reply
Long
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Long »

kcdcchef wrote: yeah, because they wont have the music hall, municipal auditorium, the empire, the midland, the prez, the phillips, the old muehlbach, the old kc club, the ny life building, the entire fucken west bottoms, the old holiday inn citi centre, the hotel savoy and savoy grill, that big tall building that lights up at night - - the p& l building, they wont have any of those to look at, silly me, we should save every building, even if it means holding up progress of this district

What the heck are you talking about?
User avatar
voltopt
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2812
Joined: Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:56 pm
Location: Manheim Park
Contact:

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by voltopt »

its the context that's gone, and with it the quality.
the significant older buildings will remain for some time, but the two - three story commercial buildings are what give these buildings a context, a city.  look at clark st, or halstead, in chicago.  many many low buildings, but completely built out. 
where we had this, we now have parking lots, large imposing government buildings, etc.
its nice to have these larger, more important buildings around, but the context is gone, and without the context, the whole notion of urban environment continues to erode.
its the buildings like the ones lining grand from 15-16th that give the city its context, regardless of style.  and its the multiple owners of these buildings which add layers of interest to this context.

i'm somewhat nervous about 7 blocks of similarly constructed buildings and a single owner. someone, please assuage my fears!
"I never quarrel, sir; but I do fight, sir; and when I fight, sir, a funeral follows, sir."   -senator thomas hart benton
User avatar
Midtownkid
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2991
Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 4:27 pm
Location: Roanoke, KCMO

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Midtownkid »

I don;t really like this building or that architectural style...however it could have been a good location for a Nike Town or REI
Long
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Long »

voltopt wrote: its the context that's gone, and with it the quality.
the significant older buildings will remain for some time, but the two - three story commercial buildings are what give these buildings a context, a city.  look at clark st, or halstead, in chicago.  many many low buildings, but completely built out. 
where we had this, we now have parking lots, large imposing government buildings, etc.
its nice to have these larger, more important buildings around, but the context is gone, and without the context, the whole notion of urban environment continues to erode.
its the buildings like the ones lining grand from 15-16th that give the city its context, regardless of style.  and its the multiple owners of these buildings which add layers of interest to this context.

i'm somewhat nervous about 7 blocks of similarly constructed buildings and a single owner. someone, please assuage my fears!
I agree completely. . . I would go farther and say it is EVERY building that is built in a city over a period of time, from the 2-story buildings to the towers, to the multiple owners and uses.  When you slash and burn and rebuild an entire block or district at one time, you can get the density, you can get the scale, you can get the "cavernous" feeling, but getting the diversity, the overlapping layers of different people, different uses, different eras of architecture, etc. etc. is difficult if not impossible to achieve.

On a practical level, it is sort of a waste to get worked up over keeping one building when you're rebuilding the entire block in this fashion.  For me, this is more an argument of principle, that we can't say we want to save historic old buildings for all these great reasons but then tear down a perfectly functional, usable, solid building from the 70s just because we think its ugly.  

In this particular case, it probably does make some sense to tear down the state office building, but we need to understand there is a right reason and a wrong reason for doing it.  The right reason for tearing it down (if there is such a thing), this Cordish-style development is probably the only thing that's going to save the south loop from years of remaining a surface lot.  A truly organic solution just simply isn't going to happen anytime soon, so we shouldn't stand in the way of a development that is in the works.  The wrong reason is to tear it down because it is supposedly "ugly and outdated."  For the reasons voltopt outlined quite well, buildings that are still useful shouldn't be wiped out, because all those buildings taken as a whole, all stacked and layered together (not isolated and nitpicked) are what makes a true diverse urban environment. 
Last edited by Long on Tue Aug 16, 2005 1:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
KCN
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2004
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 8:03 pm
Location: Brookside

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by KCN »

I don't think anyone is saying tear it down because it's ugly.  I would be furious if this were torn down for a surface lot.

My opinion, and probably everyone else in favor of tearing it down, is that an ugly building such as this won't be missed if retail and residential will replace it.  I still don't think it's worth saving to integrate into P&L.  Buildings like TWA can't be built anymore....an exact replica of this one could easily be rebuilt if so desired.  It would look right at home on North Oak.  TWA and Law contributed to urbanity back in the day and had history.  This building has as much history as the Olathe DMV.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by kcdcchef »

well, persay, the long term goal of the p&l is not to have one owner of 7 blocks, they all get sold eventually as pieces, from what i understand.

and from the renderings, it will not be 7 blocks of all the same, there will be a lot of difference

with regards to this eyesore, i agree with KCN, there is no point in saving this if it can get torn down, and something nicer, or equal, yet usable, goes there. it is not worth screwing up the whole plan to save this.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
User avatar
Tosspot
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8041
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:00 pm
Location: live: West Plaza; work: South Plaza
Contact:

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Tosspot »

What Long was insinuating is that we are falling into the same trap that our ancestors did. Buildings and architecture are like fine wines. In the 1960s the powers-that-were viewed the buildings from the turn of the century with the same disdain that we now view buildings from the fifties, sixties, seventies, anything from the era of modernism. We think we are above this, but in truth we are not.

Normally I'm not one to defend modernism and all it's tawdry entrapments, or this building in question in particular, but the point made is a salient one.
Image

photoblog. 

until further notice i will routinely point out spelling errors committed by any here whom i frequently do battle wit
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by kcdcchef »

the powers that be completely fucked downtown in the 60's this is true, thank god they did not wreck everything. however, just due to their decades of errors, is no reason to save this dump from the 70's

hey, i have poured over pictures of this for days now, and see it adding nothing, nay, taking away.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
Long
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Long »

kcdcchef wrote: it is not worth screwing up the whole plan to save this.

This is what I keep hearing, but I can't get anyone to help me understand what it means.  People build new buildings next to existing buildings all the time, and they take existing buildings and re-work them to make them serve a new purpose.

There is also the backwards mentality that the correct approach to design is to pretend you have a clean slate, design some pretty picture, then try to plug back in all the existing pieces and throw away the ones that don't work with your transplanted greenfield design. 
Long
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Long »

kcdcchef wrote:
hey, i have poured over pictures of this for days now, and see it adding nothing, nay, taking away.

Eh. . I'm not a very good photographer. 
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by kcdcchef »

yours grids and some other random ones on line. you did fine .
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
User avatar
Gladstoner
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2036
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:38 pm
Location: Far from the middle of nowhere

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Gladstoner »

If I'm not mistaken, this entire area was destroyed and turned into one giant parking lot before the Missouri building was put into place. So it never was in any kind of context to speak of besides the current one.
A fool and your money are soon united.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by kcdcchef »

all the more reason to say screw it and let it go.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
Long
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Long »

Obviously I don't plan on chaining myself to the building

I just think it is a good opportunity to step back and try to fully understand what is happening and why, and what its effects might be.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by kcdcchef »

hey, chiaining yourself to the building, there is an idea
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
Maitre D
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 14070
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 5:57 pm
Location: Sunny Johnson County

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Maitre D »

Long wrote:
This is what I keep hearing, but I can't get anyone to help me understand what it means.  People build new buildings next to existing buildings all the time, and they take existing buildings and re-work them to make them serve a new purpose.

There is also the backwards mentality that the correct approach to design is to pretend you have a clean slate, design some pretty picture, then try to plug back in all the existing pieces and throw away the ones that don't work with your transplanted greenfield design. 
Confess: have you ever torn up shag carpet?

If you have, then you're thumbing your nose at older tastes.  Have you re-done odd wallpaper or light fixtures?  B/c if they are functional, and you removed it anyway.....
[img width=472 height=40]http://media.kansascity.com/images/champions_blue.gif[/img]

"For 15 years...KU won every time. There was no rivalry" - Frank Martin
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by kcdcchef »

you still have shag carpet in your place, i knew it.
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
User avatar
Gladstoner
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2036
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:38 pm
Location: Far from the middle of nowhere

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by Gladstoner »

pittsburghparoyal wrote: Confess: have you ever torn up shag carpet?
The exact same thought crossed my mind. If you are restoring an arts & crafts bungalow, you can get by with using cheap knockoffs from Home Depot, but the shag carpeting installed in 1966 has to go.
A fool and your money are soon united.
kcdcchef
The Quiet Chair
The Quiet Chair
Posts: 8804
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 10:48 pm
Location: pittsburgh, pennsylvania

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by kcdcchef »

well, according to kc rumors, only if you steal it from home depot
MU FINISHED THE YEAR RANKED HIGHER IN HOOPS AND FOOTBALL THAN THE KAY U JAYDORKS. UP YOURS KAY U JAYDORK FANS!!!! :D :D :D :D :D
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: P&L District: 14th & Main Site Proposal

Post by FangKC »

Long, I understand what you're saying. Even though I don't like that building, I don't want it torn down just so its immediate environment can be made homogenous. It's sort of an ecology issue as well.  Why create rubble out of something that is functional and has use? I agree that contrasts make a truly urban environment. It's individual buildings--built one by one--that make cities interesting; the mixing of styles, heights, and materials. 

An example are the blocks on the south side of W. 9th Street between Main and Wyandotte. That stretch is a perfect expression of a good urban streetscape.  Even though the buildings were built around the same time, they are all different in interesting ways. Yet, there is consistency in mass against the street. Several buildings are of similar height with taller buildings serving as bookends. Other good examples are Broadway from W. 6th to 9th streets; Central from W. 12th to W. 10th; Washington from W. 12th to 7th; W. 11th from Central to Pennsylvania; Baltimore from W. 9th to 14th; W. 8th from Central to Washington; Grand from E. 8th to 10th; W. 18th from Baltimore to Broadway; and Grand from E. 20th to 23rd streets.  In my opinion, these are the best urban blocks in downtown Kansas City.

Two-story and other mid-rise buildings do have a place in downtown landscapes. They work well on side streets and as buffers between taller buildings.  Such gaps allow office towers to have windows on four sides. However, you want your taller buildings along Grand because it's a wide street. It also helps to re-establish Grand as a major corridor.

I'd love to see what would happen in the P&L District if they allowed different builders and architects to build individual buildings on small adjacent parcels.  While it needs to be done, I don't particularly like the idea of several square blocks in a business district being designed and built by the same developer. It's too suburban a concept.   I know it's necessary because of Cordish's ability to attract a good tenant mix.

One of the things that makes Baltimore such an interesting street is the variety of buildings of different styles from different eras.

I'm not opposed to new buildings either as long as they take into account their neighborhood. I like the look of both the newer UMB buildings downtown; the one bounded by E 11th, Walnut and Grand; and the one between E. 10th, McGee and Oak. I think they are neat buildings in their own right.  The one at 11th and Walnut is interesting and bold. The problem for me though with both these buildings is how they sit in their environment. I'm not talking about differences in architecture with neighboring buildings.  I'm talking about mass and scale.  Both buildings are sort of impotent in some respects. They wouldn't be if they were in an office park in Lenexa.  I've always thought they don't fit for that reason. They don't use their locations well. What I would have rather seen UMB do is not to have built two 2 and 3-story buildings, but one 6-story building between Walnut and Grand. It would have been more appropriate.

Town Pavilion works well for me because it has a tower surrounded by a base with a more human scale. It also has retail incorporated into the exterior streetfronts in its base.  It has better interaction with the street than say One Kansas City Place or City Center Square.  The other thing about Town Pavilion is that it respects the neighboring buildings on the same block. While they are of completely different styles, Town Pavilion made allowances for the Boley Building and Harzfeld Building. It demonstrates that completely different styles and eras can co-exist without wanton destruction of older buildings and architecture. All three buildings are different, but they can be enjoyed on their own merits.

There is a long-term economic reason for housing on the upper floors of low-rise retail buildings. If the building owner loses its retail tenant, there is still income coming in from residential tenants. This flexibility with smaller building types makes it more likely that the building won't be torn down in 50 years because it cannot find another retail tenant.  This has been demonstrated in places like New York City. It also makes it more likely that the building owner will maintain the building. Often when the retail tenant leaves a building, and it sits empty for awhile, the deterioration begins. An empty building gets torn down often because its owner doesn't want to pay the property taxes on it.

Another reason slash and burn concerns me is how it affects its immediate neighborhood. Once P&L is finished and a success, will the city and developers start looking to level the existing buildings south of 16th along Main, Walnut, Grand, and Oak? The success of P&L could place those buildings in peril because people and businesses will want to be as close as possible. I'm hoping that Grand south of Truman Road will turn into a retail strip that can exist with P&L and attract funkier, more locally-grown retail business.

The talk of a downtown baseball stadium is another good example. Two of the locations were chosen because of the proximity to the downtown business district. Little attention was paid to how out of context a stadium would be at 16th and Main, or 7th and Wyandotte.  The automatic and underlying suggestion was also that the older buildings in the area would be sacrificed. Nor did anyone consider how the base of the stadium would affect the street life in the area on a daily basis.

This discussion occurred while three or four other potential sites existed close to downtown. Locations where building clearance wouldn't be required, or only one building might be affected.  Those sites are the E. 19th and Locust site; the East Crossroads site near I-670 and Bruce Watkins; Washington Sq. Park; and the PAC site along W. 16th.  No one seemed to take into consideration chosing a site that would be close to downtown, but would also NOT require a lot of demolition of existing building stock or negatively affect the character of the neighborhood.

Stadiums at 7th and Wyandotte and 16th and Main would be disasterous in the long-term. Those locations have much better potential as smaller scale residential, commercial, and retail districts.

Sometimes development and "so called" progress can do more harm than good. Often City leaders don't devote enough time taking into consideration the negative outcomes of their land clearance schemes.

One other thing. Buildings also serve to remind people of what came before. They are reference points and part of communal memory.  One can rarely talk about City Hall, JC Courthouse, Police Headquarters, Power & Light and Municipal Auditorium without mentioning that they were built during the Great Depression; Tom Pendergast and his political machine; the departure in style from previous building designs. They are physical manifestations of Kansas City at its most potent.  The buildings in the River Market remind us of our past as a bustling river town. Pacific House makes us remember Gen. Ewing and Order 11 during the Civil War. The Garment District is testiment to our role in manufacturing and fashion. The West Bottoms reminds us of our past as a meatpacking, industrial, and distribution center. The Folly and Empire remind us of their origins as burlesque theaters and our bawdy past. The Midland shows the height of the grand movie palace, moviegoing, and exuberant and ostentacious excess. The President represents big bands and jazz music. Union Station reminds us of our significant role in rail history; mob massacres, and in American history during WWII. Many of these buildings remind us of grand intentions and aspirations of our ancestors, and what they wanted this city to become.

Even the MODES building reminds us of an era of turmoil and urban crisis expressed in the need to ignore the street, and make government buildings utilitarian fortresses. It's design speaks to an era of war, discontent,  race riots, protests, urban strife, violence, dissent, and a sudden turn away from conventional attitudes. Unlike previous government buildings, it doesn't seem to want the public to know that it's a government building or to draw attention to itself.  It doesn't suggest open government or democracy. It's the Cold War incarnate.

To say buildings are unimportant as cultural artifacts is to ignore all of human history.  Empires rise and fall. Countries change names and borders. Cultures come and go. Languages die. Yet, in many instances, the only enduring thing ancient civilizations have left us are the public buildings.  Buildings tell us how humans lived in their time and what was important to them.  They can tell us if the civilization was affluent and powerful, or not. They can document how advanced a culture it was.  Architecture can represent periods of wealth and excess, or periods of conservatism and the need for practical functionality.

Would we even recognize the names Alexander Majors, John Wornall, Major William Warner, Seth Ward, Kersey Coates, Chick Scarritt, Louis Curtiss, Nelle Peters, J.C. Nichols,William Rockhill Nelson, William Volker, and John F. Long if their homes and buildings didn't remain? The Muehlebachs?
Last edited by FangKC on Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
There is no fifth destination.
Post Reply