New City Hall at Civic Mall?

KCgridlock · Post by **KCgridlock** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:56 am

Here is an idea.

KCMO needs more space for it city government operations. Why don't they build another tower where the Fed reserve was to go? Or at least start the plannig process. If something else goes there, where would they expand too?

KCMO already leases a lot of space in the Oak Tower and other buildings across the urban core. Consolidate much of that and build another large city hall building.

I have heard this it already being discussed very conceptually over the past few years. I am sure the voters would aprove bonds for a remodel and expansion of city hall within this decade.

Also, KCMO is getting bigger and with the explosion of the Northland and the imenent explosion of the far east and south sides of KCMO, a city that will eventially reach 3/4 of a million will need more space for city hall.

Just an idea.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 12:13 pm

hoo yea
hey we could make it the 2nd tallest thing in kansas city, but at the least it would have to be 183m to be the tallest city hall in the united states (and 2nd in the world)
the tallest in the world is 242.9m but thats pushing it for us.
I think its a good idea, as long as its downtown. maybe it could replace that crappy surface parking by civic mall

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 1:01 pm

What about keeping our current city hall (I like it!) and building a large municipal office building for certain offices that don't fit in City Hall? Build an art decco meets glass skyscraper.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 1:04 pm

trailer (and others) I like this idea very much.....but isn't the idea of a building housing misc. offices going to be filled with the old federal courthouse which Zimmer is going to turn into an area where things like the EDC, ADC, etc. can be under the same roof?

I do like the idea of some general govt. building going there if we can't find a major gov't. tenant.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 2:26 pm

one of the heighest points in downtown (other than 1KCP and CCS) is by civic mall, near the Charles E. Whittaker Federal Courthouse,

Post by **dangerboy** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 3:04 pm

I doubt voters would approve this any time soon. There is already so much deep-seated mistrust of city hall that it would be surpising if voters wanted a second one. Besides, the Civic Mall already has such a huge government presence it would be nice to mix it up with other uses, especially residential.

Instead, the city needs to disperse some of these services out into the neighborhoods. Regional service centers or city hall satellite offices would provide city services closer to home. For example, the Northland Neighborhoods offices also house some city inspectors, code enforces, etc. Expand this idea with staff from more departments and in more locations. In addition to the Northland, also add sites in Southtown and the East or Southeast Sides.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 3:27 pm

i disagree, i wish people had more faith in city hall, IMO, they should STAY downtown. Downtown is more important right now IMO.

Post by **dangerboy** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:22 pm

I didn't say that city hall should leave Downtown, only that there should be additional access points to some city services. Similar to how the police department has a downtown headquarters and several precincts.

Also, I personally believe that city hall has improved quite a bit in the last 5 years, but most people still associate it with TV scenes of city council members convicted of corruption and bribery charges in the mid-1990s. As wells as many tax proposals where the money was perceived to have spent for other projects than what they were supposed to be. If you look at the ballot measures that get approved, they tend to be for very specific projects where the spending is clearly defined. Citizens still do not trust the city with large sums of general fund money. Look at Union Station, the city had to go to great lengths to ensure suburban voters that they had no formal connection to the project and no control over any of the bistate tax money.

KCDevin · Post by **KCDevin** » Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:55 pm

i know what you meant

i was just messin anyhow

Royals Fan · Post by **Royals Fan** » Fri Jun 20, 2003 8:04 am

City Hall doesn't allow anyone on the observation deck any longer, what a rip-off. That was one of the few things cool about it. Sadly, I didn't find out they closed the observation deck until my daughter and I went down on a spring-break day off and was stopped at the door.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Fri Jun 20, 2003 8:35 am

that does suck and the first I've heard of it....did they give you some 'security' reason?

Royals Fan · Post by **Royals Fan** » Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:33 am

Yup - some mumbo-jumbo about a terrorist threat. Seeing that they check you through a metal detector when you come in the building, I don't understand the logic of shutting down the observation deck. Just one more knumb-skull decision by some pencil-pushing security dork.

SonicBoi · Post by **SonicBoi** » Fri Jun 20, 2003 5:38 pm

I thought I heard it was closed a long time ago. But I'm not surprised. "Terrorist threats" are being used to close anything off from the public. Maybe in a few years thins will calm down (meaning the mass histeria in the government) and it will reopen. They used "security reasons" to disallow the employees of my company from wearing costumes last Halloween. Lets turn this country into a fortress, then we will be secure. Too bad will we have no more liberties.