horizons82 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2019 6:07 pm
They're referring to it as " iconic building would consist of a 10-story, 320,000 square feet – including 270,000 square feet of office/hotel and 50,000 square feet of retail. It would also include 1,300 below-grade parking spaces."
In the video on that page, there's the super block of 13th & Grand & the former BOE building block. Twister Tower sits on 13th & grand's side, while the other half shows a complex that seems to come close to meeting the above description. Could Copaken be flipping the layout for expediency with W&R? Lower-rise at 13th & grand, with the twister tower still in a holding pattern...but now at the BOE site?
Or would they go ahead and build the full 25-story tower, knowing W&R would occupy 10 of those floors?
IF W&R ends up working with them on the 13th and grand lot, I bet Cordish will be a bit annoyed considering H&R pulled a slick one by deciding to work with Copaken on the Strata project when Cordish was next in line. Cordish really wanted to do at least one office building within the district.
That's the way the cookie crumbles I guess. Can't be mad about 1000 well paid employees downtown.
kenrbnj wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2019 1:41 pm
However, those other cities do not have the interstate competition.
Lots of cities have interstate competition where the downtown is close to the same distance away from a different state
For example,
St. Louis, MO
Omaha, NE
Memphis, TN
Louisville, KY
Cincinnati, OH
Savannah, GA
Chatanooga, TN
Philadephia, PA
Providence, RI
Everyone of these cities (ok, I can't vouch for Savannah or Providence) have major rivers separating the competitive outlying suburbs in another state from the primary city's urban core. Kansas City is really rather unique and we should not downplay the fact that KC's richest district directly abuts Kansas (and Kansas's richest district as well). Not only that, topography of the KC metro that has been historically favored in settlement (essentially the high areas between the NE-SW trending streams like Turky Creek and the Blue River) very much naturally pushes population growth and development towards the SW towards south Johnson County in the KC metro. It's clear just looking at Google maps that growth in KC across the blue river was stunted unless a pre-existing town already occupied that area (e.g., early in KC's history with the case of Independence). Little wonder why Kansas has been more an active (and more recently equal) partner in the development of the metro. KC is pretty unique in that way and it has had a major impact on the health of the urban core. That said, once the pendulum started swinging in the other direction, you saw how quick Kansas was to declare a truce in the border war.
kenrbnj wrote: ↑Thu Oct 24, 2019 1:41 pm
However, those other cities do not have the interstate competition.
Lots of cities have interstate competition where the downtown is close to the same distance away from a different state
For example,
St. Louis, MO
Omaha, NE
Memphis, TN
Louisville, KY
Cincinnati, OH
Savannah, GA
Chatanooga, TN
Philadephia, PA
Providence, RI
That said, once the pendulum started swinging in the other direction, you saw how quick Kansas was to declare a truce in the border war.
Kansas called a truce to the border war right before some of their big acquisition’s incentives were about to end. WR, US Bank, JP Morgan Retirement Services, etc. The second two are actively moving operations in other comparable city’s to towers in their downtowns. Its almost a given they would have come to downtown KC as well. I don’t think there is anything that prevents giving incentives for new construction office alone though.....
Yea, none of those cities compare to KC. Maybe Philly with Delaware (Jersey is not really much of a threat). Wilmington has gone after a lot of Philly banking firms etc. But that damage is minimal since Philly has so many other companies still in the city, namely Comacast. Kansas basically emptied out downtown KC.
Most of those other cities don't have an extensive economy on the other side of the state line and the ones that do, the metro gets along far better than metro KC (Northern KY and Cincy work very well together and they don't do the shit that Kansas does to KCMO).
I always thought it was dumb for KC to keep pushing for the truce. I was all for the truce 5-20 years ago, but the economic numbers have been trending to the MO side for some time now. KCMO should have just told them to F off at this point. That's basically what KS told KC for the past 20 years. Then KC could have gone after some of the companies that left. It's stupid, but the Kansas side deserves it. The state line is absolutely the primary reason KC (all of metro KC) fell off the national map for so many years and and still struggles to compete with most mid sized cities outside the rustbelt.
GRID wrote: ↑Fri Oct 25, 2019 1:57 pm
Yea, none of those cities compare to KC. Maybe Philly with Delaware (Jersey is not really much of a threat). Wilmington has gone after a lot of Philly banking firms etc. But that damage is minimal since Philly has so many other companies still in the city, namely Comacast. Kansas basically emptied out downtown KC.
Most of those other cities don't have an extensive economy on the other side of the state line and the ones that do, the metro gets along far better than metro KC (Northern KY and Cincy work very well together and they don't do the shit that Kansas does to KCMO).
I always thought it was dumb for KC to keep pushing for the truce. I was all for the truce 5-7 years ago, but the economic numbers have been trending to the MO side for some time now. KCMO should have just told them to F off at this point. That's basically what KS told KC for the past 20 years. Then KC could have gone after some of the companies that left. It's stupid, but the Kansas side deserves it. The state line is the absolutely the primary reason KC (all of metro KC) fell off the national map for so many years and and still struggles to compete with most mid sized cities outside the rustbelt.
I agree that KCMO was in a good place going forward and was likely to recover some of the companies they lost (and then some). The truce helps in that KCMO doesn't now have to practice defensive incentives to keep what it has gained. The truce, of course, is only good as the current government in Kansas and I suspect it will be off when the next republican governor of the state is elected. That said, KCMO and KS collectively have wasted incentives moving companies around the metro to the point they are not in a position to offer much for companies coming into the area from the outside. It's amazing that the KC metro has done as well as it has in terms of population growth with this albatross around their necks and so few major corporations calling it home. Yet, It will almost certainly pass the St Louis metro in population over the next 25-50 years - if not sooner.
WHEREAS, Project Leavitt (the Project) has identified a site to create a business presence in Kansas City, Missouri (Business Site), at which it anticipates employing approximately 568 net new full-time employees, with an anticipated average annual salary of $117,000.00, which would generate a projected payroll of $66,456,000.00 per year; and
WHEREAS, the Project also anticipates entering into a long-term lease (15 years with options to extend) for the Business Site;
WHEREAS, Project Leavitt (the Project) has identified a site to create a business presence in Kansas City, Missouri (Business Site), at which it anticipates employing approximately 568 net new full-time employees, with an anticipated average annual salary of $117,000.00, which would generate a projected payroll of $66,456,000.00 per year; and
WHEREAS, the Project also anticipates entering into a long-term lease (15 years with options to extend) for the Business Site;
Sounds close to USDA move.
USDA sounds very likely. I had also heard of a bank looking to move to KCMO but I don't think the job number line up.
Last edited by normalthings on Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture's initial wave of local job postings seeks to hire at least 50 people, and up to 90 people, for two agencies being relocated to the Kansas City area. In total, USDA plans to move 568 jobs to a yet-to-be-determined site.[/quote[
WHEREAS, Project Leavitt (the Project) has identified a site to create a business presence in Kansas City, Missouri (Business Site), at which it anticipates employing approximately 568 net new full-time employees, with an anticipated average annual salary of $117,000.00, which would generate a projected payroll of $66,456,000.00 per year; and
WHEREAS, the Project also anticipates entering into a long-term lease (15 years with options to extend) for the Business Site;
Sounds close to USDA move.
USDA sounds very likely. I had also heard of a bank looking to move to KCMO but I don't think the job number line up.
BOK? (Formerly Mobank) I know they were looking awhile ago
flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2019 3:24 pm
The number of jobs matches perfectly
A new file was uploaded that confirms this is USDA.
"The USDA has signed a lease for permanent office space located at 805 Pennsylvania, which is managed by Penn Seven LLC and which is anticipated to create up to 568 net new jobs for the City of Kansas City. In conjunction with this business recruitment project the City has offered to redirect certain taxes as part of an Operations Cost Reduction Program for the project."
kcjak wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:34 pmI wouldn't cry if they bulldozed their current building (or the one across the street).
Neither of those buildings are great by any means, but i think 2 Pershing is the more egregious of the two.
It has full-on suburban office park architecture and planning, being just a giant forbidding featureless mass surrounded by a moat of train tracks, pits and parking. It's also super out of scale and matches poorly with its surroundings. From Liberty Memorial it disrupts the skyline vista by jutting up from behind Union Station and is clad with completely incompatible materials. Probably its worst offense is its sprawling below-grade garage which engulfs all of the former railyard immediately east of Union Station, ensuring trains will never be able to run under the last bay of the waiting room instead of the crummy Amtrak cage out back.
The BCBS building at least attempts to be urban with its colonnade and not being set back too far from the street. It's a much better focused building.
They're both reminders of Trizec's failure to redevelop the decaying Union Station and their attempt to demolish its waiting room, but 2 Pershing is the only one that feels like it was built out of sheer spite.
kcjak wrote: ↑Wed Nov 13, 2019 2:34 pmI wouldn't cry if they bulldozed their current building (or the one across the street).
Neither of those buildings are great by any means, but i think 2 Pershing is the more egregious of the two.
It has full-on suburban office park architecture and planning, being just a giant forbidding featureless mass surrounded by a moat of train tracks, pits and parking. It's also super out of scale and matches poorly with its surroundings. From Liberty Memorial it disrupts the skyline vista by jutting up from behind Union Station and is clad with completely incompatible materials. Probably its worst offense is its sprawling below-grade garage which engulfs all of the former railyard immediately east of Union Station, ensuring trains will never be able to run under the last bay of the waiting room instead of the crummy Amtrak cage out back.
The BCBS building at least attempts to be urban with its colonnade and not being set back too far from the street. It's a much better focused building.
They're both reminders of Trizec's failure to redevelop the decaying Union Station and their attempt to demolish its waiting room, but 2 Pershing is the only one that feels like it was built out of sheer spite.
How, why, did those towers get built there? Seams like a weird location and a weird time in history to build. Was Union Station basically mothballed at that point, and there had to be plenty of places to build downtown? What was the desire to be in that location when so many others were available. Anyone have the backstory?
The city government of Kansas City wished to preserve and redevelop the building. To facilitate this, in 1974, they made a development deal with Trizec Corporation, a Canadian redevelopment firm.[9] Included in the deal was an agreement that Trizec would redevelop the station. Between 1979 and 1986, Trizec constructed two office buildings on surrounding property, but did not redevelop the station.
1988 The city of Kansas City, Mo. initiates legal action against the redevelopment company for failing to redevelop the Station.
1994 The City and Trizec agree to settle their six-year lawsuit. A new not-for-profit corporation, Union Station Assistance Corporation (USAC), is established to own the Station.
