Star tearing down buildings for parking lots

[LenexatoKCMO]

Since parking lots seem to be the theme of the day - did anyone else notice in this self promoting article today where the Star drops that they are going to be tearing down a couple of their buildings for MORE SURFACE LOTS!.  Hasn't the Star paved over enough of the northern xroads already?

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascit ... 126513.htm

[staubio]

I was worried about what the new press building would do to the various smattering of buildings the Star has now, especially when the new building has no structured parking to accomodate it.  Looks like we end up with zero sum, or even worse off than we would have been should the Star had left things as they were.

[chrizow]

wtf?  the star publishes articles about KC's urban renaissance, the Ed page gushes over the Xroads and rails against skywalks...and comes up with this?

[LenexatoKCMO]

I guess the only potential brightside would be if the Star turns loose some of their further away lots for development (like the giant on the West side of Soho South).  

[ComandanteCero]

anyone know what these buildings look like? (they are being very quick about it too................... starting this week?)

Also this week, a storage building immediately north of The Star’s headquarters will be torn down. Another storage building immediately north of that structure will be razed by the end of the month. The two buildings are being demolished to make way for more parking

[Tosspot]

I can't even articulate how disgusted I am with this.

[staubio]

If we flood them with letters to the editor, think any of them will be published?

[Long]

Looks like we end up with zero sum, or even worse off than we would have been should the Star had left things as they were.

I agree it sucks to see buildings being torn down for more parking, but your statement is just absurd.  When I get home I'll dig through my old photos and see if I can find anything from what this district looked like in 2002.

[staubio]

I agree it sucks to see buildings being torn down for more parking, but your statement is just absurd.  When I get home I'll dig through my old photos and see if I can find anything from what this district looked like in 2002.

I'm speaking simply of the difference between right before the press pavillion and right after.

[Long]

I'm speaking simply of the difference between right before the press pavillion and right after.

So am I.   The idea that what was there before is better than what is there now minus two more buildings is ridiculous. 

[nota]

You guys blow me away. The Star spends zillions of extra dollars to build their place in the DT area rather than in a greenfield place that would have saved lots of money and you are bitching over a few buildings for parking?!?!?!?!?

As for me-I think the Star should have built in the burbs and left the whole place DT to rot like they could have for all the appreciation folks have for their decisions.

[Long]

You guys blow me away. The Star spends zillions of extra dollars to build their place in the DT area rather than in a greenfield place that would have saved lots of money and you are bitching over a few buildings for parking?!?!?!?!?

As for me-I think the Star should have built in the burbs and left the whole place DT to rot like they could have for all the appreciation folks have for their decisions.

Exactly. . .  the buildings torn down for P&L represent a greater loss than anything the Star has done or is planning.  But I suppose someone would argue that the new Star building is bad because it doesn't have street level retail and residential on top of the sloping roof.

[dangerboy]

Calm down folks.  Surface lots are an endangered species in the Crossroads.  Property values are climbing too fast for parking to remain an economical choice for many of these lots.  Once the rest of the existing buildings are renovated developers will start looking at the surface lots for new construction.

[LenexatoKCMO]

Nota - have you been to the northern xroads lately?  Take a look around and count how many surface parking lots there are sprinkled everywhere that have little signs on them that say "KC Star employee parking" - they are everywhere- some of them huge.  If a company is going to hold itself out as a great savior of downtown and promoter of the neighborhood (as the Star has done in countless self-promoting articles and even recently in a full blown sectional insert) have the decency to build a parking gargage for your employees rather than hundreds of acres of lots.  Hallmark and H&R Block had the decency to build garages for their employees around their downtown facilities rather than paving over the whole neighborhood - why shouldn't the Star be held to the same standard?  

[nota]

Nota - have you been to the northern xroads lately?  Take a look around and count how many surface parking lots there are sprinkled everywhere that have little signs on them that say "KC Star employee parking" - they are everywhere- some of them huge.  If a company is going to hold itself out as a great savior of downtown and promoter of the neighborhood (as the Star has done in countless self-promoting articles and even recently in a full blown sectional insert) have the decency to build a parking gargage for your employees rather than hundreds of acres of lots.  Hallmark and H&R Block had the decency to build garages for their employees around their downtown facilities rather than paving over the whole neighborhood - why shouldn't the Star be held to the same standard?  

Honey, I've had a private tour of the whole new facility inside and out. I know which buildings are being torn down, etc. They are not "hundreds of acres."

I saw nothing in the article or anything else they have printed that was "self promoting."

This whole thread is  just another "blow it all out of proportion" rant.

[ignatius]

I think we all appreciate what the Star has invested downtown but two of the most destructive actions to the urban fabric is to tear down buildings and expand surface lots, worse to do both.  The Star of all people doing this is really sad if not hypocritical.  They could get tax breaks for building a garage if they try.

[Long]

Given how much the Star has invested to stay downtown, I'm willing to cut them a little slack on the surface lots.  Once I hear about the Star turning down good offers from developers on their lots, I will change my tune.  But what do you want them to do in the meantime?  Build a parking garage and then plow up the remaining surface lots to grow crops?

Seriously-- I appreciate the idealism some of you have-- but until you go out and see the actual buildings and site in question, and understand the actual facts, you sound like fools.

[LenexatoKCMO]

Honey, I've had a private tour of the whole new facility inside and out. I know which buildings are being torn down, etc. They are not "hundreds of acres."

I saw nothing in the article or anything else they have printed that was "self promoting."

This whole thread is  just another "blow it all out of proportion" rant.

1) I was refering to their existing stock of parking - not just the new lots.  Have you seen their lot west of Soho South - it is one of the largest downtown - nearly a city block

2) not self promoting - are you kidding me?  Did you see the insert?  Have you missed the fact that their weekly "news" articles about their facility almost always contain a reference to the fact that they could have put it out in timbukto but were magnanimous enough to locate it downtown?  The hyperbole about bringing the city into the 21st century?  You don't think any of that is self-promoting?  I call it questionable journalisim at best.

[Long]

I think we all appreciate what the Star has invested downtown but two of the most destructive actions to the urban fabric is to tear down buildings and expand surface lots, worse to do both.  The Star of all people doing this is really sad if not hypocritical.  They could get tax breaks for building a garage if they try.

Walk over, stand in the middle of the block bounded by 16th, 17th, Grand, and McGee, and try to say "urban fabric" with a straight face.

[ignatius]

^"urban fabric!!!"