Re: High Rises
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 8:23 am
LenexatoKCMO wrote: If you follow recent threads around here, surface parking lots are vastly preferable to high rise buildings in the Crossroads according to conventional wisdom.
Page 2 of 2
Re: High Rises
Posted: Mon Jul 18, 2005 3:57 pm
It's a few years old but here is what they plan to do with CC, i'm sure some things have changed since then... But probably not much
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:00 pm
It'd be nice if Grand and the "loft district" around Western Auto could really tie into Crown Center as one large walkable 'hood.Michael® wrote: It appears all of thier new construction will be to the south
Obviously that's where they've acquired all of thier land but it would be great if CC development could cross Pershing and start building new projects to the north to tie the loop and the CC together.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:08 pm
How much undeveloped land does CC own on its north side? Isn't most of its vacant space on its south side?
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 1:09 pm
I don't think it has any...KC0KEK wrote: How much undeveloped land does CC own on its north side? Isn't most of its vacant space on its south side?
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 2:17 pm
If they ever get around to pulling off the pedestrian bridge from amtrak/union station to the freighthouse I think they would be well on their way.trailerkid wrote: It'd be nice if Grand and the "loft district" around Western Auto could really tie into Crown Center as one large walkable 'hood.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jul 20, 2005 7:54 pm
The problem with Grand isn't south of Western Auto, its north. There really isn't much undeveloped space between Western Auto and IBM once you consider the tracks, but Grand north of 20th up to 18th, and then from 17th to 16th, is a wasteland.
Also, until Crown Center starts applying some concepts of urban design, they can keep their development on the south side. The new lawyer building at the south end suggests that Crown Center has no interest in walkable, urban design. Thing is, it wouldn't have taken much, they could have built the building in exactly the same place, just raise up the lobby level so it doesn't look like its in a ditch when you're driving down Grand, and build a plaza between the building and Grand. Of course that plaza would be vacant until the rest of Crown Center is modified to be more walkable, but at least it would have been a step in the right direction. But oh well.
Also, until Crown Center starts applying some concepts of urban design, they can keep their development on the south side. The new lawyer building at the south end suggests that Crown Center has no interest in walkable, urban design. Thing is, it wouldn't have taken much, they could have built the building in exactly the same place, just raise up the lobby level so it doesn't look like its in a ditch when you're driving down Grand, and build a plaza between the building and Grand. Of course that plaza would be vacant until the rest of Crown Center is modified to be more walkable, but at least it would have been a step in the right direction. But oh well.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 12:00 am
Anybody want to make a new list with all the development over 10 stories on here? Like a list of quicklinks to forum topics and webpages?
Re: High Rises
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2006 1:24 am
I agree. KCMO's downtown could really be enhanced with some tall 30 story + high rises added.
Maybe with all the billions spent downtown, adding all this stuff will lure more businesses downtown and more office space will be needed so we can build a tall glass tower.
Tulsa has 2 skyscrapers that are taller than One KC place for pete's sake!! Omaha has one that is barely taller- both much smaller cities, but that doesn't mean they have a better downtown of course. KCMO's DT is still denser by a long shot.
Maybe with all the billions spent downtown, adding all this stuff will lure more businesses downtown and more office space will be needed so we can build a tall glass tower.
Tulsa has 2 skyscrapers that are taller than One KC place for pete's sake!! Omaha has one that is barely taller- both much smaller cities, but that doesn't mean they have a better downtown of course. KCMO's DT is still denser by a long shot.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:14 am
High-rise towers are great for the skyline, but I think infilling all the open spaces with 4- to 10-story buildings would have a greater effect.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2022 1:42 am
Development contract obligates Cordish to building a hotel. Would like to see something substantial happen this decadeKCDevin wrote: ↑Wed Jul 13, 2005 9:02 pm Heres a list:
H&R Block - 18 floors
H&R Block 2010 Expansion - 10 floors
P&L Housing 1 - 22 floors 200 units
P&L Housing 2 - 10-20 floors 200 units
P&L Housing 3 - 10-20 floors 200 units
P&L Housing 4 - 10-20 floors 200 units
P&L Housing 5 - 10-20 floors 200 units
P&L Housing 6 - 10-20 floors 200 units
Tesla Building (Haven't heard of this)
Truman Boulevard 1000 room Hotel - 30-45 floors
1034 Main - 40 floors (may not happen for even a couple decades)
Re: High Rises
Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2022 9:27 am
Dallas as well with their Victory Park/Uptown area. Top picture is Dallas in 2001, bottom picture is 2021.hartliss wrote: ↑Sun Jul 17, 2005 7:11 pm I agreee with Michael. Fill up the crossroads with some mid to high rises and connect downtown with crown center. If you have ever been to Atlanta, they have something like that going on with downtown, midtown, and buckhead? all connected with high rises making for an awesome skyline.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Tue Jan 11, 2022 5:44 pm
cool picture, Dallas has been a boom town the last 20yrs. I mean that pace of building high rises rivals Las Vegas along the strip in terms of change
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 8:41 am
Wonder what the main catalyst was for their rapid development in Dallas? Obviously Texas in general has been popular for awhile with their friendly corporate tax policies and climate/airport situation.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:00 am
I would say the tax friendly nature of the state led to the boom. No state income tax for residents, and very friendly and aggressive pro-business policies bringing a boom to companies to TX. I would be curious to see how many companies relocated to TX in the last 20yrs to take advantage of these things. Plus the cost of living has risen in the last 20yrs in TX but at the start of the boom it was very similar to KC.
Also the weather in the major cities is typically mild and warm. Hot in the summer but winters are mild, so very appealing. I think it just decided to offer up what it had and was aggressive about bringing it to the state. You already had some established companies in TX 20yrs ago, big players like DELL, Texas Instruments, NASA, and the energy companies to name a few. Plus big banking presence, large universities, and an overall large population to be instant labor for some things. Then as companies moved in the bright in people from other areas and now the big cities of Dallas & Houston have a large mix of transplants and "native texans".
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:55 am
All of this.dukuboy1 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 12, 2022 10:00 amI would say the tax friendly nature of the state led to the boom. No state income tax for residents, and very friendly and aggressive pro-business policies bringing a boom to companies to TX. I would be curious to see how many companies relocated to TX in the last 20yrs to take advantage of these things. Plus the cost of living has risen in the last 20yrs in TX but at the start of the boom it was very similar to KC.
Also the weather in the major cities is typically mild and warm. Hot in the summer but winters are mild, so very appealing. I think it just decided to offer up what it had and was aggressive about bringing it to the state. You already had some established companies in TX 20yrs ago, big players like DELL, Texas Instruments, NASA, and the energy companies to name a few. Plus big banking presence, large universities, and an overall large population to be instant labor for some things. Then as companies moved in the bright in people from other areas and now the big cities of Dallas & Houston have a large mix of transplants and "native texans".
This specific area is interesting. In 2001, the city was trying to get Boeing to locate their HQ2 in Dallas. Boeing chose Chicago over Dallas. Allegedly, the wife of Boeing's then CEO did not think too fondly of the city's urban core, supposedly calling it a cultural backwater compared to Chicago. So that spurred some investment from the city be more intentional about making the city more vibrant to attract new businesses and people downtown.
The area where there's nothing but the arena in 01 used to be an old rail yard, power plant and landfill that left the area toxic. The city had to spend a lot to clean that site up before any development occured there. Once that happended, they bridged the gap downtown in a few ways (Klyde Warren Park over Highway 75 for instance) and added more parks.
Re: High Rises
Posted: Wed Jan 12, 2022 11:04 am
Oil money certainly helps.