Power & Light residential tower (next to P&L Building, not Cordish related)
- GRID
- City Hall
- Posts: 17288
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
- Contact:
Power & Light residential tower (next to P&L Building, not Cordish related)
Not sure where this should go, there are about six threads that it could go in, so I started a new one.
This condo is part of the P&L Tower development (residential) "and" part of the P&L Entertainment District (retail), but is being developed by Steve Brettell of Alsation Land Co. who is also developing the 15 floor office tower next to the P&L Building rather than Cordish, who is building a 22 floor tower a block away. I really like this development and its design. OK, now that I have cleard that up a bit, here are some renderings and a link to the Star article...
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 202987.htm
office tower annex plans, residential tower goes in the colored area to the north.
finally driven insane by the spelling - b
This condo is part of the P&L Tower development (residential) "and" part of the P&L Entertainment District (retail), but is being developed by Steve Brettell of Alsation Land Co. who is also developing the 15 floor office tower next to the P&L Building rather than Cordish, who is building a 22 floor tower a block away. I really like this development and its design. OK, now that I have cleard that up a bit, here are some renderings and a link to the Star article...
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 202987.htm
office tower annex plans, residential tower goes in the colored area to the north.
finally driven insane by the spelling - b
Last edited by bahua on Thu Nov 29, 2007 4:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- ComandanteCero
- One Park Place
- Posts: 6222
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:40 am
- Location: OP
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
It's not horrible, but honestly, looks like they took a 60's/70's era project, did some retinkering of the design, put more glass, and let it fly. I don't know what i'm expecting from today's architecture, but this doesn't quite cut it for me. Vaguely reminds me of the Metropolitan:
KC Region is all part of the same animal regardless of state and county lines.
Think on the Regional scale.
Think on the Regional scale.
- GRID
- City Hall
- Posts: 17288
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
- Contact:
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
Other than they are both highrises, I don't see the similarities.
This is a good project, the scale of it fits in the area without taking from the P&L tower, the parking is behind the structure (it will also hide that hideous Doubletree garage), it's a slender structure, yet it will add a ton of density and update the area tremendously. The architecture of the building looks ok too and frankly I don't see how people can complain, especially since we have not seen a new res tower built downtown in decades. Maybe once we get to the point where these are going in on every block, like a lot of towns, we can get super critical, but even then, I think I would like the project.
This is a good project, the scale of it fits in the area without taking from the P&L tower, the parking is behind the structure (it will also hide that hideous Doubletree garage), it's a slender structure, yet it will add a ton of density and update the area tremendously. The architecture of the building looks ok too and frankly I don't see how people can complain, especially since we have not seen a new res tower built downtown in decades. Maybe once we get to the point where these are going in on every block, like a lot of towns, we can get super critical, but even then, I think I would like the project.
-
- Oak Tower
- Posts: 5571
- Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2004 2:50 pm
- Location: Mount Hope
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
Hope they use real limestone and it matches in color the Indiana limestone of the P&L. From the narrowness of the floor plates, it appears that there are only units on the street sides of the bldng? Would make sense, wouldnt care for a view of the back of the hotel, but I think a view looking up at the P&L, even across a courtyard or light well would be worth something. Retail in base is plus, maybe unique for KC. There have been some res hi rise in town with a cafe and maybe hair salon, but cannot think of much else.
- tat2kc
- Bryant Building
- Posts: 4196
- Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 6:32 pm
- Location: freighthouse district
- Contact:
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
How close to the P&L building will it be on Baltimore? From the renderings, it looks like it would be right up against it.
Are you sure we're talking about the same God here, because yours sounds kind of like a dick.
-
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1094
- Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 11:09 pm
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
When does the 15 floor office tower break ground?
Calling a spade a spade.
- Tosspot
- Mark Twain Tower
- Posts: 8041
- Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 10:00 pm
- Location: live: West Plaza; work: South Plaza
- Contact:
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
That's the Tesla Building, and nothing's going to happen with that until the developers land a confirmed tenant.ShowME wrote: When does the 15 floor office tower break ground?
photoblog.
until further notice i will routinely point out spelling errors committed by any here whom i frequently do battle wit
-
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1450
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
I think matching the limestone of the P&L building would be a mistake. The P&L building needs to have its own exterior finish so that it stands apart from whatever new thing is built right next to it.
And I don't really see how this looks like the Metropolitan, except they are both "modern" designs, no ornament. . . but the P&L condo looks like it has more glass area, and balconies and other shapes that project out from the wall of the building, the facade has more depth and isn't so flat and monolithic.
And I don't really see how this looks like the Metropolitan, except they are both "modern" designs, no ornament. . . but the P&L condo looks like it has more glass area, and balconies and other shapes that project out from the wall of the building, the facade has more depth and isn't so flat and monolithic.
-
- City Center Square
- Posts: 14667
- Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 3:34 pm
- Location: Valentine
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
As long as it hides the Raddison/Doubletree it can't be bad.
-
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1450
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
Yeah. . . they could build a 15-story solid brick wall on Baltimore and it would look better than the Doubletree.LenexatoKCMO wrote: As long as it hides the Raddison/Doubletree it can't be bad.
- ComandanteCero
- One Park Place
- Posts: 6222
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:40 am
- Location: OP
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
i'll explain the vague resemblance i see (which has nothing to do with materials, but much to do with the arrangement of lines and massing). Both act and look like large rectangular slabs. They both try to go for some neat facade tricks to avoid looking too monolithic, but can't hide the fact that they are these massive repetitious and continous surfaces (to be honest this new project does a much better job in that it tries to vary spacing and shapes, but in essence they are just lines that mean jack shit in terms of real texture or surface variation. That's just my gut impressions. Again, i said the resemblance was "vague".
Pros of this project: a large 700 space garage is in the block's interior (which will hopefully make the P+L building and the future coupled office building more salabe for office tenants, thus bringing money, and people downtown), has street level retail, has a rooftop garden (<that alone counts for double kudos).Â
Cons of this project are mostly aesthetic: it may do a good job of complementing vertical scale of its surroundings, but completely kills and disregards the horizontal scale. Here's a broadly similar situation in Paris (as elucidated on SSP by ablarc):
This building’s exactly the height of its neighbors, but it drastically disrupts the scale of this street. Here you can see that being out of scale is not for one tiny microsecond a question of height. It’s instead a function of too big a footprint and too little articulation of surface; there isn’t enough detail to break down the utterly banal gigantism of the overall form and the undifferentiated surfaces. Why doesn’t zoning address itself to these two very genuine issues instead of obsessing about building height, which is usually a red herring?
This building’s form would be ok at about the size of a toaster. The Art Nouveau building just beyond may be overdone but it offers reproof; maybe the sheer glass banality of the new building’s a reaction to all that sculpted cream. Skyscraper at end of street: Maine-Montparnasse Tower, one of two unclustered skyscrapers inside the city limits. It looks ok compositionally at the end of this street, but it ruins countless views in this city. Well, it’s ironic that this street is ruined anyway—and by its little brother! It’s the skyscraper that’s not out of scale.
Again, i'm not saying this is the exact situation with the KC building, but it is a situation that is akin. Even taking it purely from a streetlevel point of view, how do you go from a richly decorated and textured P+L Building directly adjacent to the sidewalk, to this arcaded, bland, and recessed passage way?Â
The building, doesn't directly engage the sidewalk, it pulls away from it. Not to mention, the facade as a whole takes up a huge chunk of visual real estate there. Walking around Chicago, you'll see plenty of street level retail that doesn't attract your eye as much as what's above purely because the streetlevel context of the windows is so monotonous and sterile (i.e 100 feet of continous repeating windows are much less interesting than distinct visual pauses and intervals between the windows, as created by different buildings' window sizes and shapes).
Anyway, I agree beggars can't be choosers, but they can certainly grumble. Like I said before, it's not horrible and the economic and real world benefits this project would bring to that block probably outweigh the aesthetic problems, but it's most definitely groan worthy in terms of aesthetics.
Pros of this project: a large 700 space garage is in the block's interior (which will hopefully make the P+L building and the future coupled office building more salabe for office tenants, thus bringing money, and people downtown), has street level retail, has a rooftop garden (<that alone counts for double kudos).Â
Cons of this project are mostly aesthetic: it may do a good job of complementing vertical scale of its surroundings, but completely kills and disregards the horizontal scale. Here's a broadly similar situation in Paris (as elucidated on SSP by ablarc):
This building’s exactly the height of its neighbors, but it drastically disrupts the scale of this street. Here you can see that being out of scale is not for one tiny microsecond a question of height. It’s instead a function of too big a footprint and too little articulation of surface; there isn’t enough detail to break down the utterly banal gigantism of the overall form and the undifferentiated surfaces. Why doesn’t zoning address itself to these two very genuine issues instead of obsessing about building height, which is usually a red herring?
This building’s form would be ok at about the size of a toaster. The Art Nouveau building just beyond may be overdone but it offers reproof; maybe the sheer glass banality of the new building’s a reaction to all that sculpted cream. Skyscraper at end of street: Maine-Montparnasse Tower, one of two unclustered skyscrapers inside the city limits. It looks ok compositionally at the end of this street, but it ruins countless views in this city. Well, it’s ironic that this street is ruined anyway—and by its little brother! It’s the skyscraper that’s not out of scale.
Again, i'm not saying this is the exact situation with the KC building, but it is a situation that is akin. Even taking it purely from a streetlevel point of view, how do you go from a richly decorated and textured P+L Building directly adjacent to the sidewalk, to this arcaded, bland, and recessed passage way?Â
The building, doesn't directly engage the sidewalk, it pulls away from it. Not to mention, the facade as a whole takes up a huge chunk of visual real estate there. Walking around Chicago, you'll see plenty of street level retail that doesn't attract your eye as much as what's above purely because the streetlevel context of the windows is so monotonous and sterile (i.e 100 feet of continous repeating windows are much less interesting than distinct visual pauses and intervals between the windows, as created by different buildings' window sizes and shapes).
Anyway, I agree beggars can't be choosers, but they can certainly grumble. Like I said before, it's not horrible and the economic and real world benefits this project would bring to that block probably outweigh the aesthetic problems, but it's most definitely groan worthy in terms of aesthetics.
KC Region is all part of the same animal regardless of state and county lines.
Think on the Regional scale.
Think on the Regional scale.
-
- Colonnade
- Posts: 950
- Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2002 9:27 pm
- Location: Portland
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
Why do we have to be so discriminating for all projects? Architecture has different appeals to different people. That is why there is generally very little consensus. Buildings evoke different "gut" feelings for everyone. Again. I'll say the positive(s) of this building definitely outweigh any aethetic issues. GO KC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1450
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
I honestly don't see your point-- one could argue that pretty much any large building is a large rectangular slab that uses neat facade tricks. Most buildings are more repetitive, because their window pattern is an equally spaced grid. The P&L building uses a couple of setbacks as you go up, I could argue that is a "facade trick." We just like it better because of the art deco elements glued on to it-- the spire on the top is completely a trick, because it otherwise serves no actual function.ComandanteCero wrote: i'll explain the vague resemblance i see (which has nothing to do with materials, but much to do with the arrangement of lines and massing). Both act and look like large rectangular slabs. They both try to go for some neat facade tricks to avoid looking too monolithic, but can't hide the fact that they are these massive repetitious and continous surfaces (to be honest this new project does a much better job in that it tries to vary spacing and shapes, but in essence they are just lines that mean jack shit in terms of real texture or surface variation. That's just my gut impressions. Again, i said the resemblance was "vague".
First off, the Paris building is completely monolithic, smooth, no texture at all, not even any of the "facade tricks". The analysis of that building to its neighbors is correct, but there is no analogy. . . The Paris building has a continuous band of glass above a continuous band of metal. The rendering of the proposed building shows variations in material and plane changes. Oh, I forgot, those are just facade tricks. . . I guess I don't understand what you're looking for. Any variation in the facade is just a trick, but if there aren't any variations, it's bland. . . As a sidenote, it looks like those facade tricks are mostly balconies for the apartments. And who knows-- maybe the apartments behind the solid wall w/ punched openings are different (larger, smaller, etc.) than the apartments behind the continuous curtain wall. It could be a way of expressing that different things are happening within a single large building.Here's a broadly similar situation in Paris (as elucidated on SSP by ablarc):
Again, i'm not saying this is the exact situation with the KC building, but it is a situation that is akin. Even taking it purely from a streetlevel point of view, how do you go from a richly decorated and textured P+L Building directly adjacent to the sidewalk, to this arcaded, bland, and recessed passage way?
I see it pulling away from the sidewalk, but it has nothing to do with bland, repeating windows. It looks like the arcade on the east side ramps up and you have to access it from the corner of 13th and Baltimore, you can't just walk into a storefront halfway down the block. This is a legitimate concern. Back to your comparison-- again, the P&L building's windows are all the same size (or relatively close)-- big storefront windows on the lower levels, small windows above. And if you don't look up when you walk past P&L, I'd say you still aren't going to see much except BNIM's nifty window displays.The building, doesn't directly engage the sidewalk, it pulls away from it. Not to mention, the facade as a whole takes up a huge chunk of visual real estate there. Walking around Chicago, you'll see plenty of street level retail that doesn't attract your eye as much as what's above purely because the streetlevel context of the windows is so monotonous and sterile (i.e 100 feet of continous repeating windows are much less interesting than distinct visual pauses and intervals between the windows, as created by different buildings' window sizes and shapes).
I think you're reaching-- you're looking way too critically at a rendering that doesn't even show materials and details, but you're ignoring how most of your concerns can be applied to just about any large building, including buildings that you like.Anyway, I agree beggars can't be choosers, but they can certainly grumble. Like I said before, it's not horrible and the economic and real world benefits this project would bring to that block probably outweigh the aesthetic problems, but it's most definitely groan worthy in terms of aesthetics.
- Gladstoner
- Penntower
- Posts: 2036
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 6:38 pm
- Location: Far from the middle of nowhere
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
I second that it is a vast improvement to the complete crap that is there now. I feel like I'm moving through a prison yard when I look to the left while driving up Baltimore.
Judging by the renderings, the building visually could be divided up into three sections. It'd be nice if they could make the section on the corner a few stories higher in comparision to the others and then mix up the detailing a little more. Then, it would look like three separate, slender buildings. It is likely, though, that they will at least make modifications to the detailing.
Judging by the renderings, the building visually could be divided up into three sections. It'd be nice if they could make the section on the corner a few stories higher in comparision to the others and then mix up the detailing a little more. Then, it would look like three separate, slender buildings. It is likely, though, that they will at least make modifications to the detailing.
A fool and your money are soon united.
- GRID
- City Hall
- Posts: 17288
- Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
- Contact:
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
I still think it's a great project, one of the better to come downtown yet. Walk down Baltimore, this will be an awesome upgrade to a street that looks like it was deserted 30 years ago.
It just too bad that TWA building is not still across the street...
It just too bad that TWA building is not still across the street...
- ComandanteCero
- One Park Place
- Posts: 6222
- Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:40 am
- Location: OP
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
long, look at my post. I'm basically saying i don't like the horizontal scale of this building, which is monolithic, in that it takes up 2/3 of a block and then some, and tries to minimize this impact through facade tricks. My point isn't that facade tricks aren't valid, it is that they don't succeed in minimizing the fact that this is a huge horizontal building with a very large footprint (when taken in with the garage). MOST importantly, from a streetlevel pedestrian's point of view. The best and most interesting streetscapes are created by the rythms and patterns of different buildings as you walk by. Perhaps showing the Paris examples (with quoted captions) were more harmful in terms of understanding my point, but the broad parallel i saw in those situations were how horizontal scale is just as important as vertical scale (as represented in the second picture and caption) and how that scale relates to footprint and visual surface patterns. I think the surface variations parallel doesn't stand up in terms of the broader facade of the new building (since it has variations, and like you point out, is probably as varied as the P+L Building), but at a streetlevel the argument holds true. I wasn't saying the P+L buildings windows vary, i was saying that the STREETSCAPE's (created by different buildings) windows need to vary if they are to create a pleasant streetlevel experience (vary in terms of shape, size, or just context (I.e, you can have same size/shape windows, but atleast have different colors of frames, or different borders).
I suppose, my argument isn't that this building is bad architecture, it's just average urbanism. And as seen in the Paris picture, even the most celebrated urban experiences have their blips, and this doesn't seem to detract from the whole. So even if the variation slows down in this block i'm sure surrounding blocks can balance that. We'll only run into trouble if too many of these wraparound buildings emerge.....
I suppose, my argument isn't that this building is bad architecture, it's just average urbanism. And as seen in the Paris picture, even the most celebrated urban experiences have their blips, and this doesn't seem to detract from the whole. So even if the variation slows down in this block i'm sure surrounding blocks can balance that. We'll only run into trouble if too many of these wraparound buildings emerge.....
KC Region is all part of the same animal regardless of state and county lines.
Think on the Regional scale.
Think on the Regional scale.
- KCPowercat
- Ambassador
- Posts: 34123
- Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
- Location: Quality Hill
- Contact:
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
Great project. Glad to see the block being filled in. Love how the parking garage is hidden and the building is tall and slender to help with density and massing along Baltimore.
This will put together the high end retail row that Cordish has planned for this block. Let's get this baby started...any idea on finish date? 2007?
Ho hum, another 15 story condo tower....downtown KC is dead no more.
This will put together the high end retail row that Cordish has planned for this block. Let's get this baby started...any idea on finish date? 2007?
Ho hum, another 15 story condo tower....downtown KC is dead no more.
- Big Red Storm
- New York Life
- Posts: 376
- Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 3:48 pm
- Location: Kansas City
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
This is an awesome project! The whole area is going to look so entirely different in a couple years. We always complain about the P&L building being alone on that block, well not anymore. I can't wait!
-
- Alameda Tower
- Posts: 1450
- Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
ComandanteCero wrote: long, look at my post. I'm basically saying i don't like the horizontal scale of this building, which is monolithic, in that it takes up 2/3 of a block and then some, and tries to minimize this impact through facade tricks. My point isn't that facade tricks aren't valid, it is that they don't succeed in minimizing the fact that this is a huge horizontal building with a very large footprint (when taken in with the garage).Â
Well, I didn't get that from your first post, but your argument now makes a lot more sense.
I would tend to agree that a collection of 25-foot-wide vertically oriented buildings is better than one 150-foot building, but I think the only way for that to really be successful is to have 6 different buildings designed by 6 different architects, otherwise its just another trick, you get people saying it looks fake (which it would be if it were one project trying to look like 6)
-
- Valencia Place
- Posts: 1552
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2004 3:53 pm
- Location: Atlanta, GA - Buckhead
Re: Power & Light residetial tower (new 18 floor tower)
Exactly. Stories like this are popping up so rapidly that for the Loop, it is becoming sort of "ho-hum" like the River Market or Plaza. Even though we jokingly say ho-hum, I think we know that it needs to happen and we do not take these things lightly.KCPowercat wrote: This will put together the high end retail row that Cordish has planned for this block. Let's get this baby started...any idea on finish date? 2007?
Ho hum, another 15 story condo tower....downtown KC is dead no more.
Timeline question for me as well, 2007? Maybe... Unless I missed it, the article did not say.