KCRag Forum

Kinda funny that the only building on that corner that meets current urbanist standards is a parking garage.

It's surprising to me that anyone could look at a building of more than a couple stories and take the bet that whatever replaced it would be better. That so rarely works out in Kansas City.

East Village's westward expansion

Bravo, internet

ctrl+c
ctrl+v

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑

Thu Nov 26, 2020 12:05 pm

Why do I get the feeling this thread will get lots of use over the next several years? It’s the new ballpark/P&L thread.

And hooray for that.

Looks like ~95 spaces per floor just looking at Google Earth. A similar garage could be constructed over the surface lot to the west of Panchos. My preference would be to leave it where it is, out of sight, and not put it on Main. But it's unlikely that MAC will ask me for my opinion. I do not care...

Like the Housing Authority building, I suspect that a significant part of the US Bank building's value is the parking garage to the west. Even if that that building doesn't get any taller/denser, the garage should soak up some of parking requirements on adjacent parcels and allow those to be denser....

Construction fencing is up and site work is in progress at the NE corner of Armour and Troost. At last!

Most of it came down yesterday.

Looking at what they did with the old Housing Authority building and the old Red Cross building, I suspect the US bank building will be substantially renovated.

IIRC the Linwood/Troost development has an affordable component... or it did when UCB was the developer.

Option 3 seems like $20m well-spent. We've blown more on dumber things.

5800sf seems very high. I'd have guessed it was 3500 max.

^ Good looking project. Too bad the current site is a green space. Would be much better if that building was built. There are other parcels in the Crossroads that could support a project like this. Being almost 14 years since that project was initially proposed, the neighborhood has changed enough ...

if you aren't building housing it's less likely you'll get tagged as a gentrifier. *upside-down head emoji* The circularity of the logic joining the the coalition of people opposing density because it will lower their property values with the people opposing density because it will gentrify a neigh...

It would be interesting to see what would happen if someone proposed something like this now. I suspect the allure of urban retail options and plentiful parking would probably get it further than we would like to think - especially if the retailer is someone like Target. Density is still a bad word ...

herrfrank wrote: ↑

Tue Nov 10, 2020 2:21 pm

Yes, the inhabitants of that district in 1980 were poor and had problems, but why did we destroy block after block of city to resolve a relatively straightforward human problem?

Sadly, your answer is in your question.

What's happening in the lot across the street from the Linwood Ave entrance to MM?

IIRC there's nothing in his papers, and I know it's not on the building permit. But there's kind of a valid question here that if it wasn't Curtiss, who else could it have been? There aren't any likely other candidates.

Hmmm. I see what the NR says but I also remember an extensive search for verification turning up nothing. Either way, it's an interesting building.