kcmetro wrote:Isn't this good news? The streetcar line was intended to spur development like this, correct? I know it would be preferable to have them keep the old building intact, but it's hard to be upset about a new "high-rise" (whatever that entails) residential building in the crossroads.
the streetcar ideally should be encouraging development of empty parcels and reducing parking requirements that have long prevented older buildings from being redeveloped.
start with the surface lots and grass pads first. there's plenty to go around.
kcmetro wrote:Isn't this good news? The streetcar line was intended to spur development like this, correct? I know it would be preferable to have them keep the old building intact, but it's hard to be upset about a new "high-rise" (whatever that entails) residential building in the crossroads.
the streetcar ideally should be encouraging development of empty parcels and reducing parking requirements that have long prevented older buildings from being redeveloped.
start with the surface lots and grass pads first. there's plenty to go around.
Are they not using the grass pad to the south of the hotel as well? If that's the case, then I do agree, that sucks. I thought they were redeveloping the grass pad AND the hotel site.
kcmetro wrote:Isn't this good news? The streetcar line was intended to spur development like this, correct? I know it would be preferable to have them keep the old building intact, but it's hard to be upset about a new "high-rise" (whatever that entails) residential building in the crossroads.
^However there are several empty lots along the line that need infill. No need to tear down a functional building. And there's no guarantee that they will follow through with development.
kcmetro wrote:Isn't this good news? The streetcar line was intended to spur development like this, correct? I know it would be preferable to have them keep the old building intact, but it's hard to be upset about a new "high-rise" (whatever that entails) residential building in the crossroads.
That's why people want more details and are initially skeptical of a vague plan.
Dave, I suspect people on this forum would be more for saving the Midwest if the plans didn't mention 'highrise with street-level retail.' I'm worried that the bank would tear down the Midwest only to be told that the Crossroads has height limits and then the bank won't be able to make the building work without financial assistance. End result -> another surface lot.
kcjak wrote:Dave, I suspect people on this forum would be more for saving the Midwest if the plans didn't mention 'highrise with street-level retail.' I'm worried that the bank would tear down the Midwest only to be told that the Crossroads has height limits and then the bank won't be able to make the building work without financial assistance. End result -> another surface lot.
there is no height restriction on that block of main. those exist mainly to protect the southern view shed from kauffman to liberty memorial. arts patrons don't need a view of the east, silly.
the recommendation for that part of crossroads is no higher than 130' (maybe 10-12 stories?). anything higher just triggers a public review, but is not restricted.
Did the city adopt the height restrictions set forth in the greater downtown development plan? if so, that block has 130' restrictions or so. no too limited
So high rise - is this housing or office? Or unknown? I could kinda support if its housing. Office space - seems like there are vacant offices already downtown.
Save the midwest hotel and get it renovated. There are so many empty lots in the crossroads that should be built on first before demo should even be an option, especially when 90% of the demos in urban kc turn into surface parking lots (no matter how pretty the renderings are of some future development). That is a historic and dominating building for the neighborhood. I hope they don't tear it down.
Kerr wouldn't comment on what Great American Bank will do with the property, but redevelopment seems likely. The bank owns the squat building directly north of the hotel and the land to the south. But the building, which is 5,000 square feet per floor, is in such rough shape, it might not be worth preserving.
it's reinforced concrete and was built as a "fireproof" hotel. the structure is solid, it just looks like a mess (and most of that has to do with the crappy ground-level makeover from the 40s or 50s that's literally falling off.
I was talking last night with someone familiar with the building and they mentioned that one of the hindrances to redeveloping the HM is that the building is narrow and historic tax credits (assuming that would be part of the financing package) would be out if the developer deceided they need to reconfigure the hallways. Not a dealbraker, but an obstacle.
earthling wrote:I simply do not understand tearing down buildings when there are so many surface lots in Xroads that need infill. What's not to get about that.
you have to account for ownership interests. it's not like every owner will sell their lot to become a new building and suddenly want to figure out parking for their tenants/residents
if you can buy an old building and nothing else this is what happens
The Midwest Hotel, located at 1925 Main Street, Kansas City, Jackson County, Missouri, was designed by the noted Kansas City architectural firm of Smith, Rea and Lovitt and built by Aiken & Thayer Construction Company in 1915. As defined in the MPS Cover Document "Working Class Hotels at 19th and Main Streets, Kansas City, MO," the Midwest Hotel is an intact example of the Two-Part Commercial Block Hotel, featuring "prominent storefronts at the main facade, double-hung, sash fenestration set in groups of three and divided by spandrels between floors." Furthermore, the Midwest Hotel displays terra cotta at its main facade, which "was used to embellish the main facade from the storefront level and often, through the upper stories, thereby setting off the primary facade from the secondary elevations."
The five story commercial building is constructed of reinforced concrete and brick with a terra cotta veneer on the upper stories of the west or main facade. The original storefront was modified in 1952 and features non-original aluminum framed plate glass windows.
In addition to the Midwest Hotel, we should all be concerned about the two-story building to the north of it as it would probably be demolished as well.
