GSA considers big office complex downtown

[macnw]

That's what people said about the NE area of the loop. I remember hearing people say that part of downtown is dead, nothing will happen on the east side. Now, that may be one of the potential hotter areas of downtown. Our riverfront is pitiful, especially when compared to other cities. The riverfront is the one unique characteristic that downtown has going for it. Let the public see what each site can offer and let that guide the city/govt.

[KCPowercat]

Im not sure having a ritesernt downtown is that unique.  almost every major us city is on a river.

[FangKC]

This just might be the bargaining chip the City needs now to deal with the J.E. Dunn threat to leave the East Village project.  This certainly gives the City leverage to say:  "Fine. Leave. We'll put the GSA Building on your spot. More employees anyway.  Oh, by the way, we'll use all our influence in Washington to see that J.E. Dunn doesn't get the job building the GSA. Just thought you'd like to know, so you can make plans." 

I think, regardless of what J.E. Dunn Complaining Construction Co. does, that GSA should go in the government district. It makes sense to group government services together and share garages, federal credit union, daycare, security, etc.  Besides, government agency staff are always meeting with each other.

As far as a big GSA parking garage goes, if one has to be built, put it over 670 on a deck between Cherry and Holmes, where it doesn't hog a block that could be used for another building, or create a dead block.  Make it dual-use so that it can serve the AT&T Longlines Building, and the Sprint Center crowds as well.  Then the surface lots AT&T staff use now can be used for more infill construction.

Powercat is correct about government employees being more apt to use mass transit. In some cases, the federal government even subsidizes those employees who use it.  It would create more users for mass transit and any light rail service.  The federal government also employs a lot of lower-income workers who might live on the East Side and require mass transit (clerks, secretaries, assistants, mail room staff, receptionists, word processors, data input operators, janitors, security, maintenance, cafeteria staff).

I personally think the riverfront should be almost exclusively residential with some retail.

The only problem I would have if the GSA requires vast security-oriented barriers and design -- like the Federal Reserve Bank.  I would hate to see some fortress built that is hateful to the street.

We can hope that any GSA Building would attempt to be a landmark signature type of building that would look good too.

The other good thing about having the GSA there is that they tend to maintain their property better than almost anyone else, and might even have their own security patrol in the neighborhood, which can't hurt.  They also provide steady jobs, so there's less worry about layoffs or companies going bankrupt and leaving a lot of vacant office space on the market.

I think some goverment workers would live in the East Village if there was housing they could afford.  They tend to be stable, responsible citizens as well.  And not all of them are married with families.  Put a good school, playground, and daycare in the East Village, and it might be attractive to single working moms as well.

[Highlander]

My vote is east loop.....this just doesn't seem like the right anchor for the riverfront to me.

Personally I couldn't care less about the riverfront developing though....I find it to be isolated geographically as much as the west bottoms due to our elevation changes....if anything is to become of the riverfront I'd rather see a cultural/entertainment type of development....for example Town of Kansas, aquarium (I'm not an aquarium proponent though), outdoor ampitheatre like Sandstone....

Have the gov't throw up a 20 story tower by the Federal building and bring on more CBD employees.

Let's hope they take this advice. Kansas City never learns.  Concentrate employment and infrastructure in the CBD and only then start worrying about the outlying districts.  While I see Sprint's recent move to the bottoms as a positive, I also see it as an opportunity lost for downtown.  Build the GSA downtown, if it goes to the riverfront, it will sit there alone looking like a forlorn child for the forseeable future. 

KC has a horrible history of spreading out its employment base, entertainment ventures and basic infrastructure so that nothing is mutually supporting and we are on the verge of doing it again with the proposed light rail route.  They do not need to repeat the same mistakes with the GSA.

[tat2kc]

the site on 12th they were looking at is surrounded on two sides by the highway, so no worries about dead spaces on those sides.  Its really on a very dead parcel of land, that seems to me to be the ideal location for a building like this. The garage could go on the highway side, which wouldn't put a garage facing an active street.  On the street side, why not a fountain or series of fountains? Barny Allis plaza comees to mind.

[macnw]

Does the Fed government get involved with providing housing for some of its employees? Nothing like a built in base for P+L district.

[aknowledgeableperson]

The GSA should go to the riverfront.  If it was built in the EV it would very likely take up 3 blocks (think of the current Fed building on steroids) with its proposed size and US government required setbacks.

And as stated before the GSA would give the riverfront development a good start.

[Highlander]

And as stated before the GSA would give the riverfront development a good start.

Probably a good start and finish.  I am not convinced that the GSA is going to spur much development on the riverfront, it would just sit there like a beached whale.  Put it downtown where you can build some critical mass. Even with the setbacks, its worth it as east downtown has plenty of unutilized space.  Just as long as it does not look anything like the IRS facility.....not a fatal design at its location but would be a disaster if downtown. 

[Highlander]

Start with critical mass, take advantage of public transit and build downtown residential.
Critical mass.... if we ever really get it the bottoms and riverfront will eventually flourish.

Exactly.  Solve one problem at a time.  This is the way other cities have grown and prospered, by building on a critical mass in one place and letting satellite developments come along in thier own time once the success of the core is assured.  Trying to use the limited assets you have to attempt to spur multiple developments is not a recipe for success.  We should know that by now....Kemper and the Sports Complex, and to a lesser extent KCI, reveal the problems with this approach. 

[ShowMeKC]

It won't take up 2-3 blocks with it's size. Look at the Federal Reserve. The GSA won't go the way of the IRS in the Loop. If put in the riverfront, they will most definitely make the mistake of the Federal Reserve and build a suburban campus/office park instead of a more urban development that the Riverfront needs.
They should go in the Loop for now, the riverfront does not need a suburban office park...

[ignatius]

I agree that Riverfront development should not start until thare are no more surface lots in the downtown loop left to develop.

[kard]

[quote="ignatius"]
I agree that Riverfront development should not start until thare are no more surface lots in the downtown loop left to develop.
[/quote

Ok, now we're going a little extreme.

[ShowMeKC]

It isn't that extreme, we have about 1 million square feet of surface parking left to replace... The Loop needs to reach critical mass, but I believe the riverfront should have it's residential component started well before the loop reaches critical mass.

[KCMax]

You guys have convinced me. This belongs in the loop, not the riverfront. One huge project like this would probably doom the riverfront for good. It needs something more specialized for its needs, not one huge office project.

[kard]

It isn't that extreme, we have about 1 million square feet of surface parking left to replace... The Loop needs to reach critical mass, but I believe the riverfront should have it's residential component started well before the loop reaches critical mass.

To do nothing with the Riverfront before your one million square feet of surface lots are replaced is a tad extreme.  For comparison, downtown Chicago has surface lots.

[ShowMeKC]

Kard, you didn't read what I said did you? lol
I didn't say to not do anything with the Riverfront till we get them full, I said to develop it while we are filling the Loop, then, when the loop is full, we should start hitting the riverfront more aggressively with tenants.

I know DT Chicago has surface lots, but I'm talking about 1 square mile of area in our 2.9 square mile DT...

Consider this: Most blocks in the DT loop are about 300-380ftx250ft, that is almost 100,000 square feet alone. We have several surface lots that encompass a full block, fill those up, and the 1 million square feet of surface lot space will drop dramatically. I care more about the surface lots that take up 50,000 square feet or more than I am the surface lots that take up 10,000 square feet, at least, right now.

[GRID]

Could somebody please explain the logic behind this huge push to develop the riverfront?

I may be the only one, but I for one could really care less if anything gets built on the river so long as there is vast amounts of empty and or underutilized land between the City Market and Crown Center (and there still is, especially east of Grand).

Do you guys want critical mass or not?  Do you want transit to ever work here?

FOCUS!!!!  Lets get our downtown respectable then worry about our riverfront which may as well be in Liberty.

Kemper is on the "river", wow that did a lot...

We have GOT to get more people "DOWNTOWN", people that can easily walk to the P&L district or a condo, people that can take a bus downtown, people that would interact with Downtown everyday in some fashion.  29 and Front Street will do nothing for downtown except give people something to look at when driving 70mph across the Paseo Bridge.

JMO.

[aknowledgeableperson]

You are terribly miscalculating. A single million Sq. Ft. structure even with tremendous set-backs would require a full block at the most. And there is land on the extreme eastern fringe of the loop near the highway with plenty of dead space for GSA. Sure the structure would have to be  at least 45-50 stories tall - BRING IT ON!

1.  Seriously doubt that GSA would build 45-50 stories - not their style.
2.  Due to security reasons from OK City and 9-11 the Feds require more set backs than what is currently with the existing Fed building DT.  (That is why you have the police cars parking around the building wherever possible - cars instead of concrete barriers.)
3.  As part of their setbacks they would also like to have a courtyard area much like what is currently on the NW corner.
4.  The current building takes up 2 blocks as it is  - the proposed one probably more.
5.  It is likely that the proposed building will have a larger footprint on the land than the current building since it is likely to have more sq ft per floor.

[GRID]

The fed building is over 1 million sq feet, I think it's 1.2 million and it's around 20 floors I think.

I would bet we are looking at a very similar sized building if they go downtown.  15-25 floors, on the block just east of the Fed Building.

Or they could go to the river front like many of you want and build a 5 story campus surrounded by surface lots, that way people can easily drive to Arby's at Armour and I-35.

[ShowMeKC]

Exactly GRID...

I'd like to see what regulations mandate that a federal company needs to build their buildings with large setbacks. Look at the Federal Courthouse, and that was post-OKC/WTC (1st bombing)
It doesn't matter how far a building is from a road, look at the Pentagon and what happened with it, and what could have happened with the Capitol/White House. I went to OKC this summer, and i'll tell you something, the blast from the car bomb damaged the buildings blocks away, you can't tell me something of this magnitude would not affect a building with setbacks, or pushed away like the Federal Reserve. The best security is to stop them before they enter the country, and to catch them if they get in. But that is another issue for another discussion.

The old federal courthouse probably represents what they could do, build a base building, and set back the upper floors away from the street. Even the Johnson County Courthouse could represent what they might do.