KCRag Forum

Tastes change. There will be a point that *two* glass curtain buildings next to each other will be seen as the best thing ever for that part of town. They'll be retro chic. Besides, they won't look exactly the same. Each building will reflect different buildings in the day and different lights at night. You'll see different shapes from a spot because each building will be at it's own perspective. There will be different things on the balconies and different murals on the outside.

I can see value in them doing the look differently, but not doing things differently is way down on the list of things to worry about because what's important is to meet goals around number residents, the tax base, removing surface parking and the like. The color of a building is a nitpick compare to having a strong downtown that can provide jobs reachable by transit for people across the city. This is how you rebuild the east side so sprawl development and freeway widenings isn't a thing.

Nitpicking over the color is missing the need to replant a forest because you're focusing on planting two oaks next to each other.

They're not shortsighted, worrying about meeting an arbitrary taste today over building a quality space is shortsighted.

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2 ... ckers-ball

Tourists visiting the neon-lit, celebrity-studded Art Deco district of Florida’s South Beach might be surprised to learn that, just over a generation ago, the area was a shabby neighborhood developers were lining up to demolish. The once-beloved Art Deco-style had become passé, and South Beach was on the verge of seeing its architectural heritage carted off to the landfill.

While I'm a big proponent of variety in building aesthetics, I can live with the similarities in Cordish's towers just so long as each one isn't topped off with "(Number) Light" in huge letters at the top. One Light is fine, but I think it will look increasingly tacky to do the same with each successive tower as they come online.

While I am not a huge fan of the blue/green style of 1/2/3/etc. Light, I can appreciate the surface parking lots that are disappearing and the hundreds of residents breathing new life into Downtowns KC. The idea of a $1,800 one-bedroom apartment was laughable no more than a decade ago whereas today people cannot get enough of them.

Jane Jacobs' "Life and Death of Great American Cities" talks about the diversity needed for a city to succeed. These new buildings mix into the 100+ year old existing buildings (Power and Loght Building, President Hotel) to create a diverse mix of architecture the is vital for a healthy city. I am hopeful that Cornish adds more diversity insofar as the shape/style/color of their buildings, and while that seems increasingly less likely, the new residents, ground floor retail, and tax revenue are welcome at the very least.

KC_JAYHAWK wrote:I was told by one of the contractors on 2 Light they would start 3 Light after 2 Light is topped out, at which time the crane will be moved to the other lot. Interior work will continue on 2 Light while they start 3 Light.

That approach would make a lot of sense and it's what I would hope to see. However, wouldn't things need to start moving fairly soon for that to happen?

How long until 2 Light gets topped off? Maybe 2 months? 3 Light would probably need a few weeks of site prep before it is ready for the crane, so that would mean ground breaking wouldn't be too far off.

How many stories is 3 scheduled to be?

StrangerThings wrote:We all know you're not a fan of the "glass wall" but I'd say you're in the minority. From a developers perspective I'm not sure why they'd want their buildings to not be obvious sister buildings. I think that although you can tell one and two light are related, they're very difference and avoid being too cookie cutter.

I think it's safe to say that MOST people actually are NOT fans of huge, monotonous, cookie cutter developments. That goes for skyscrapers as well. A giant cordish wall of mid-rise skyscrapers in front of everything that makes Downtown KC, Downtown KC, will ruin Downtown KC.

Sure, most folks will say that they don't care about the design of any specific one high rise. BUT, when you ask what people like about our "Skyline" they'll most likely mention the fact that it's varied and stepped in appearance. It's a very visually pleasing skyline, and signifies a city much larger than what our city actually is. Visitors from all over are routinely impressed by our skyline. It definitely stands out and appears much more prominent than many larger cities skylines. Something cordish is completely disregarding in their hastily conceived cookie cutter "Light" towers.

StrangerThings wrote:
Sure, most folks will say that they don't care about the design of any specific one high rise. BUT, when you ask what people like about our "Skyline" they'll most likely mention the fact that it's varied and stepped in appearance. It's a very visually pleasing skyline, and signifies a city much larger than what our city actually is. Visitors from all over are routinely impressed by our skyline. It definitely stands out and appears much more prominent than many larger cities skylines. Something cordish is completely disregarding in their hastily conceived cookie cutter "Light" towers.

You mentioned the stepped appearance. Is it not the variance in material that concerns you? If they built one with green glass and another in brick it would still disturb the stepped appearance and block views of other older buildings.

Comparing stone look-alike houses lining a residential street in a streetcar suburb is not the same thing as a monotonous line of identical 24 storey towers that just happen to have become the front wall of the most popular skyline angle.


I would like to see a different glass color used, like very light green. And a thinner, taller structure that doesn't use the entire Truman Road side. That would be enough to differentiate Three from Two and make it interesting. We know what Two Light and the new convention hotel is going to look like in the skyline from the obligatory southern view. Three Light is going to be one of the the middle pieces - I hope it's something interesting.

^And with reflective glass that looks like cheap plexiglass. Can't stress enough that each with different design/external material would significantly improve overall appearance.

There is no doubt that the new buildings along Truman Road will hide most of the smaller, thinner buildings behind them, diminishing the tiered and diverse density and impact that gives the KC skyline it's beauty and uniqueness Hopefully there will be some nice new mid-rise construction that fronts the new towers that will again give the skyline that tiered, dense appearance. The new hotel on Baltimore and new hotel at 16th & Main will help a lot.

earthling wrote:^And with reflective glass that looks like cheap plexiglass. Can't stress enough that each with different design/external material would significantly improve overall appearance.

if you think that looks like cheap plexi I don't know what to say.

I don't know what to say if you think it doesn't. The wavy appearance in the glass makes it look like plexiglass. But do you really want a wall of glass dominating front of skyline all looking the same whether cheap looking or not?

HalcyonKC wrote:I do like the fact that they varied the height of Four Light in this latest rendering--making it taller, and also both Three and Four are drawn with slightly more complex roof lines, departing from the flat boring rectangle of One and Two--which helps break up the visual monotony to my eye. Also it looks like there is at least some effort to vary the look of the buildings' first few stories from one another. If they follow through with at least these changes, I don't think they will look project-y in 20 years.

Just as a reminder, this is what the latest renderings looked like... I don't see any communist blocks in this rendering. They don't blow me away, but they look completely fine to me. The only thing that is a MUST for me in these developments is a homerun on the ground-level pedestrian interaction. Based on what is being done a two light thus far, its looking pretty decent.

I've seen a marked change in the finishes and style from One Light and what will be in Two Light. While the former has the cliche exposed ductwork and concrete floors that was sold to young grads ten years ago, the new building seems to be expanding to a higher quality client. With demand increasing and rents/prices growing in what developers can get, I hope that Cordish continues to refine their product to the growing market. This would include the style and look of the outside. It's a business decision that I think would pay off when 3 is completed in a few years.

The other glass buildings don't look like plexiglass (One Place, HR Block, Pavilion). The bottom line is that all 3 Light buildings will apparently have about the same building materials with roughly same design and it will be a large wall of this. Some are apparently OK with it, others acknowledge it can be avoided by mixing things up. I favor the latter is all.

At one point this was the centerpiece of our skyline and I imagined that people complained when it was blocked by newer architecture. IJS

StrangerThings wrote:And what smaller buildings will these towers block that anyone wants to see? Did the community complain when town pavilion was being built that it would block the southern view of other buildings?

The President Hotel, One Light, H&R Bloch, Federal Reserve Bank are a few that come to mind. The biggest loss will be hiding the tiered look and cluster of shorter buildings behind. But that's OK and bound to happen with new development. I'm still for the new development all day every day.

StrangerThings wrote: I appreciate the need to maintain a cool skyline, but how many of us are sitting up lawn chairs and starring at the souther view of the skyline over a corona and some popcorn?

Sorry but I had to

The "Plexiglas" comment is just silly, it really is. The glass looks wavy in a way because it's reflective, very similar to the US Bank tower, it has that almost chrome glass look to it and it looks wavy, but in reality it's not, it the reflections of the other buildings and the sunlight that gives it that look. It's also very energy efficient, like the Light towers are/will be.

StrangerThings wrote:
Good point and good picture! Although I don't think any of the new towers will be visable from that union station angle. However, point taken.

I'm sorry, what?!? The construction of Two Light has been visible from Union Station for months now and isn't even topped out. I'd encourage you, and any new resident to Kansas City, to go up there. It's iconic KC.

beautyfromashes wrote:

StrangerThings wrote:
Good point and good picture! Although I don't think any of the new towers will be visable from that union station angle. However, point taken.

I'm sorry, what?!? The construction of Two Light has been visible from Union Station for months now and isn't even topped out. I'd encourage you, and any new resident to Kansas City, to go up there. It's iconic KC.

I'm sure someone can find a spot they can't see them from, like when standing at the entrance, but that's going to be true of many spots downtown. Skylines change. The convention hotel will block The President from certain angles and not others.

the best skyline views are where you have a sea of parking lots in between.