OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Issues concerning Downtown as described by the Downtown Council. River to 31st Street, I-35 to Bruce R. Watkins.
langosta
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1507
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 4:02 am

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by langosta »

Origin Kansas City's current design includes 118 rooms. Pending city approvals, the hotel hopes to break ground in early 2022 and open in early 2023, he said.

Port KC's board in late May approved execution of purchase and sale agreements for the hotel parcel, as well as another slated for an unnamed developer's seven-story apartment complex with 200 to 250 units.
User avatar
Chris Stritzel
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2294
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by Chris Stritzel »

normalthings wrote: Mon Jun 21, 2021 3:12 pm Kansas City Drawing
Image

Raleigh
Image
I'd imagine the KC one will resemble the Raleigh location just because it's not in an area full of older buildings. Maybe I'm wrong, but I think the Raleigh design would match the Riverfront area better.
atticus23
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 207
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 3:14 pm
Location: Roanoke/Volker

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by atticus23 »

I’m all about the development along the riverfront and yet, nothing that has been built or proposed is any more exciting than suburban apartments. My wish for anything in the core downtown area (river to 31st) is bigger and denser. I know I’m beating a dead horse by saying this, so apologies in advance.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18141
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by FangKC »

I'm not optimistic about the Riverfront ever being a truly walkable neighborhood.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

FangKC wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 10:25 pm I'm not optimistic about the Riverfront ever being a truly walkable neighborhood.
It's going to look like Renner Blvd in Lenexa. Actually, I think the stuff in Lenexa might be more urban/walkable. At least it's getting developed right
User avatar
im2kull
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3926
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 4:33 pm
Location: KCMO

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by im2kull »

atticus23 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 9:07 pm I’m all about the development along the riverfront and yet, nothing that has been built or proposed is any more exciting than suburban apartments. My wish for anything in the core downtown area (river to 31st) is bigger and denser. I know I’m beating a dead horse by saying this, so apologies in advance.
Same. The twin 10 story apartment proposal was the best, but it appears that's not happening. Omaha already has a better riverfront, with 20 story condos and what not. Ours is pathetic and the development occurring is something that should be occurring in a suburb of Springfield, not in KC.
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

im2kull wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:40 am
atticus23 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 9:07 pm I’m all about the development along the riverfront and yet, nothing that has been built or proposed is any more exciting than suburban apartments. My wish for anything in the core downtown area (river to 31st) is bigger and denser. I know I’m beating a dead horse by saying this, so apologies in advance.
Same. The twin 10 story apartment proposal was the best, but it appears that's not happening. Omaha already has a better riverfront, with 20 story condos and what not. Ours is pathetic and the development occurring is something that should be occurring in a suburb of Springfield, not in KC.
Omaha’s tower in the park are not all that urban nor walkable.
flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9862
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by flyingember »

normalthings wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:50 am
im2kull wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:40 am
atticus23 wrote: Tue Jun 22, 2021 9:07 pm I’m all about the development along the riverfront and yet, nothing that has been built or proposed is any more exciting than suburban apartments. My wish for anything in the core downtown area (river to 31st) is bigger and denser. I know I’m beating a dead horse by saying this, so apologies in advance.
Same. The twin 10 story apartment proposal was the best, but it appears that's not happening. Omaha already has a better riverfront, with 20 story condos and what not. Ours is pathetic and the development occurring is something that should be occurring in a suburb of Springfield, not in KC.
Omaha’s tower in the park are not all that urban nor walkable.
Yeah, the two notable Omaha towers next to the ped bridge are extremely isolated.
There's a giant parking lot between them and downtown.

The ped bridge itself is isolated enough that people were driving to it last time we were in Omaha
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

Image

Image

Image

Image
User avatar
Anthony_Hugo98
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1932
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2019 10:50 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by Anthony_Hugo98 »

Looks rather isolated I agree
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

Not sure anybody would say that the Omaha riverfront is walkable. They do have a couple of midrises, but it's not a "neighborhood" at all. But at least they got half of it right with the recreation aspect of their riverfront on both sides and the pedestrian bridge.

It will be a shame if KC spends 25 million to extend the streetcar to a handful of suburban apartment complexes and little else.

I don't think the KC riverfront will ever develop into an urban neighborhood, but at least it will be transit friendly.

And KC/NKC can still pull off building up the riverfront into a much bigger recreational destination although I honestly don's see that happening either. They are about to throw away the Broadway Bridge for crying out loud.

The ped/bike bridge from the river market to the park will be nice though.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

Oh and for those that don't think urban recreation is a big deal. It's a very big deal in most large cities. I see it every week in DC alone.

However, I went to NYC this weekend and by far the busiest places in that city were recreation attractions. Central Park, the Highline and the Little Island all were just insanely busy with locals and tourists. And there are way more places than those places.

Just like I used to scream back in the 90's that downtown KC desperately needed urban housing when KC was doing almost nothing while most other cities has started building housing. The same is true for recreation. KC is a great city with so much potential. But urban rec is still a major missing component there along with urban jobs of course.

I'm just saying, I'm not putting down KC. I'm just pointing out what I think the city is missing. My son and his wife live in DC near the river and having so much nearby recreation is one of the main reasons (if not the main reason) they choose to pay high rents for the location.
User avatar
Highlander
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 10169
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2004 1:40 pm
Location: Houston

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by Highlander »

GRID wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:45 pm Oh and for those that don't think urban recreation is a big deal. It's a very big deal in most large cities. I see it every week in DC alone.

However, I went to NYC this weekend and by far the busiest places in that city were recreation attractions. Central Park, the Highline and the Little Island all were just insanely busy with locals and tourists. And there are way more places than those places.

Just like I used to scream back in the 90's that downtown KC desperately needed urban housing when KC was doing almost nothing while most other cities has started building housing. The same is true for recreation. KC is a great city with so much potential. But urban rec is still a major missing component there along with urban jobs of course.

I'm just saying, I'm not putting down KC. I'm just pointing out what I think the city is missing. My son and his wife live in DC near the river and having so much nearby recreation is one of the main reasons (if not the main reason) they choose to pay high rents for the location.
It's definitely a shortcoming in KC and it partly is a result of having no true functioning urban parks other than Swope Park (which is too far removed from the urban part of the city to really be called urban). The amount of people that frequent Memorial Park and Herman Park in Houston is insane on weekends. Memorial Park didn't have all that much in terms of amenities (golf, an arboretum, tennis and lots and lots of trails) but middle class people lived very close to these park and the place was always packed.

OKC created some nice urban recreation along the the "Oklahoma" River (actually the North Canadian) adjacent to downtown. Some of the attractions would go well on the KC riverfront - particularly the whitewater stream for kayaks and rafts: https://www.riversportokc.org/
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

Highlander wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 9:19 pm
GRID wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:45 pm Oh and for those that don't think urban recreation is a big deal. It's a very big deal in most large cities. I see it every week in DC alone.

However, I went to NYC this weekend and by far the busiest places in that city were recreation attractions. Central Park, the Highline and the Little Island all were just insanely busy with locals and tourists. And there are way more places than those places.

Just like I used to scream back in the 90's that downtown KC desperately needed urban housing when KC was doing almost nothing while most other cities has started building housing. The same is true for recreation. KC is a great city with so much potential. But urban rec is still a major missing component there along with urban jobs of course.

I'm just saying, I'm not putting down KC. I'm just pointing out what I think the city is missing. My son and his wife live in DC near the river and having so much nearby recreation is one of the main reasons (if not the main reason) they choose to pay high rents for the location.
It's definitely a shortcoming in KC and it partly is a result of having no true functioning urban parks other than Swope Park (which is too far removed from the urban part of the city to really be called urban). The amount of people that frequent Memorial Park and Herman Park in Houston is insane on weekends. Memorial Park didn't have all that much in terms of amenities (golf, an arboretum, tennis and lots and lots of trails) but middle class people lived very close to these park and the place was always packed.

OKC created some nice urban recreation along the the "Oklahoma" River (actually the North Canadian) adjacent to downtown. Some of the attractions would go well on the KC riverfront - particularly the whitewater stream for kayaks and rafts: https://www.riversportokc.org/
The Buffalo Bayou in Houston is very nice too.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18141
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by FangKC »

Go look at the Griffintown riverfront development in Montreal. Go down to street level and advance around, since many of the vacant lots on the aerial are shown built-out at street level.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Richm ... 77.4360481

Toronto has been redeveloping its' waterfront as well. It is similar in that it lays between the waterfront and railroad tracks. It also has streetcar access. Go to streetview since it shows more developed buildings than the aerial.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Richm ... 77.4360481

https://waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe/wcm/con ... D=AJPERES

Harbor East in Baltimore is another impressive waterside development with a lot of density.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Harbo ... 76.6015556

Look at the streetview of Harbor East. It's a fairly-small area, but feels like you are in a big city.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.2832911 ... 384!8i8192
User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 33835
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by KCPowercat »

Parcel 9 had a ground testing drill machine on it last night. Has that parcel had an announced plan?
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

KCPowercat wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 6:59 am Parcel 9 had a ground testing drill machine on it last night. Has that parcel had an announced plan?
No

Image
User avatar
DColeKC
Ambassador
Posts: 3728
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by DColeKC »

GRID wrote: Wed Jun 23, 2021 8:45 pm Oh and for those that don't think urban recreation is a big deal. It's a very big deal in most large cities. I see it every week in DC alone.

However, I went to NYC this weekend and by far the busiest places in that city were recreation attractions. Central Park, the Highline and the Little Island all were just insanely busy with locals and tourists. And there are way more places than those places.

Just like I used to scream back in the 90's that downtown KC desperately needed urban housing when KC was doing almost nothing while most other cities has started building housing. The same is true for recreation. KC is a great city with so much potential. But urban rec is still a major missing component there along with urban jobs of course.

I'm just saying, I'm not putting down KC. I'm just pointing out what I think the city is missing. My son and his wife live in DC near the river and having so much nearby recreation is one of the main reasons (if not the main reason) they choose to pay high rents for the location.
Agree and this is why I think capping 670 would be so transformative for downtown KC. Would be so great seeing that park busy with activity on the weekends.
User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 33835
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by KCPowercat »

that linear park is not going to scratch Grid's itch in the least.
flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9862
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by flyingember »

DColeKC wrote: Thu Jun 24, 2021 10:08 am Agree and this is why I think capping 670 would be so transformative for downtown KC. Would be so great seeing that park busy with activity on the weekends.
It's a great idea, but someone at the river market isn't next to 670. Someone at Crown Center isn't next to 670.

A park over one freeway just transforms 3-4 blocks of 140+

Provides a nice amenity, sure, but it's not downtown transformative.

That would be parking maximums, minimum density zoning or something that changes every block.
Post Reply