KCRag Forum

what a shitshow.

Again, the growth market is not retail and industrial space. It's housing for seniors and aging baby boomers who will need to live near retail and services--especially when they get too old to drive.

Kmart threatened to move to Kansas.

If the taxes to be generated by the project are to cover the taxing authorities subsidies then what is the big deal?

Kmart threatened to move to Kansas.

Since the K-Mart is out of the redevelopment area it will probably move anyway.

Plan to redevelop Bannister Mall site scores a victory

Robb Heineman, president of Trails Properties, told TIF commissioners that Patterson and Illig had invested about $40 million so far. He added that Cerner eventually might occupy office space there should the company achieve its projected employment growth.

The development plan projects up to 7,400 jobs would be there when the project is completed, although backers acknowledged that was not a firm number.

The multiphase plan calls for 1.3 million square feet of retail space and 1.57 million square feet of office and light industrial space that would be developed over roughly eight years with a tentative construction start in 2012.

The proposal calls for the retail to be developed primarily along the I-435 frontage of the Trails site, with the offices farther east. The initial phase calls for 812,500 square feet of larger big-box stores, with later retail to be developed as smaller stores.

christ.  812,000 sq feet of big box retail?  so basically tens of millions in subsidies are being used to facilitate new big box retail in a location that USED to have big box retail?  can someone explain the intelligence of this?

One of the articles says KCMO has a huge amount of vacant retail space, 4X the size of Oak Park Mall.  This project doesn't make sense on multiple layers.  It seems to be a knee jerk reaction to compete with KCK's Legends, etc.

OTOH, investing to modernize S KC could help it move forward. S and E KC are losing population so some form of investment is needed - not convinced yet this is the right approach.  But I also can't think of a better way to improve S KC.

Does anyone know what (if any) tie in there is with the development happening on 87th street, just west of the bannister site? I think a medical company purchased the property a few years ago.

I wonder if we can stop this TIF plan with the City Council, and force them to come up with a better plan that includes residential and less big box retail?

can KCMO deannex?

Of course a city can de-annex, but I doubt they ever will.

I just don't see why something like Stapelton couldn't go in there.  Go big if you are going to spend that kind of money it will take to bring in big box crap, spend more and do it right.

GRID wrote: I just don't see why something like Stapelton couldn't go in there.  Go big if you are going to spend that kind of money it will take to bring in big box crap, spend more and do it right.

What is Stapleton?

KCMax wrote: What is Stapleton?

It is representative of the civic envy that I feel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stapleton_ ... al_Airport

http://www.stapletondenver.com/

KCMax wrote: What is Stapleton?

http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.75932 ... &t=h&hl=en

Go to google earth at that location and play with the history function and watch the airport turn into a massive infill neighborhood.  The only thing left from the airport is the parking garage, which was being used as a park and ride.  But it came down early this year and will be replaced with more homes etc.

There is no way something that large could happen in KC where land is cheap and the throw away mentality is off the charts.

But I think you could do a smaller version of it.

One of the reasons Bannister Mall failed is because the neighborhood around it aren't very dense, and there is a lot of undeveloped land still in that part of the city.

The fact that they are making the same mistake over again, and not adding residential, is just foolish.  They should be adding residential there, and encouraging more dense residential on all the big tracts of remaining undeveloped land around that area so that there is enough population to support any retail on that site.

Take a look on Google maps at that area and you will see what I'm talking about.

FangKC wrote: One of the reasons Bannister Mall failed is because the neighborhood around it aren't very dense, and there is a lot of undeveloped land still in that part of the city.

The fact that they are making the same mistake over again, and not adding residential, is just foolish.  They should be adding residential there, and encouraging more dense residential on all the big tracts of remaining undeveloped land around that area so that there is enough population to support any retail on that site.

Take a look on Google maps at that area and you will see what I'm talking about.

I believe the land to the northwest and west is very unstable and would be very expensive to develop. It will probably be prohibitively expensive to put anything in that area for years to come.

I sincerely hope this project gets off the ground and becomes a success.  But I think the odds are stacked against it.  Portions of it might work (such as the office part).  The retail, though, is misdirected.
When Bannister Mall was first opened the residential area to the east was, for the most part, middle class.  Not professional middle class but solid, blue color working class.  It was a regional mall that for years during the Christmas shopping season it was difficult to find a parking spot and the food court was packed throughout the year.  But within a few years three of the big anchors had financial problems, two anchor spots became vacant, and the livings areas around it turned for the worse (one kid who grew up in the area called it a ghetto).
The area will never become a regional shopping draw again and the only retail that has a chance to survive will have to rely on the workers in the office areas.  If area light rail does come into existence (IMO very low chance) and a station is built here it will help somewhat but not enough to survive on.  Yes, a residential part will help but what kind of residential?  Apartments?  Row housing? Detached?  Senior?
What might work is a mixture of office, retail, and residential.  Something like a cross between the Plaza, Zona Rosa, Crown Center, and the new development north of the Town Center Plaza.  Offices along the highway like the low rise on the east side of CC.  Retail with residential above and alongside it across the street with some small office thrown in.  On the east side of Hillcrest something could be built like John Knox Village, a mixture of single family, duplexes and quads with a little more retail thrown in.  

mistervinix wrote: I believe the land to the northwest and west is very unstable and would be very expensive to develop. It will probably be prohibitively expensive to put anything in that area for years to come.

Much of that area to the west is still being mined with the company collapsing the mines afterwards, or so i have been told.  Eventually to be made into an industrial park (Dean Machinery being the first company).