KCRag Forum

chingon wrote:I'm not sharing their link. But here's a quote about why they need to Save Westport.

Meanwhile, the building at the southwest corner of Westport and Broadway was recently replaced with a new restaurant and bar operated by the national HopCat chain. Another developer is currently revising plans which originally called for a pair of 14-story mixed use towner above Manor Square. A Wichita developer last year presented plans for replacing the former XO nightclub at 40th and Central with a four-story Town Place Suites by Marriott extended stay hotel.

So there was a proposal at XO spot but was there NIMBY or a fight against it?

Was on the city's development tracker map and saw this new street vacation request that asks to vacate Westport Rd between Mill St and Broadway, and vacate a significant portion of Pennsylvania Ave north and south of Westport Rd.

Anyone know what this is?

http://maps.kcmo.org/kcgis/rest/service ... ents/10881

I was surprised to see that. Am I wrong in assuming since it is a vacation, this isn't just for temporarily closing the streets (for weekends, like they often do)?

I am surprised to see that Pennsylvania would be vacated all the way to 40th St. That would cut off the access to the garage from Pennsylvania (although it could still be entered from Mill St.). It seems like 40th Terrace might be a better stopping point.

I assume this would spell the end of the little parking lot in front of McCoys and Foundry. That could be the best result of the vacation.

I could see a lot of people objecting to this (more complaints about lack of parking) so I'm skeptical that this will happen.

Here's the official explanation of a vacation

http://kcmo.gov/planning/request-vacati ... lopment-2/

The only reason that makes any sense is to turn it into a pedestrian plaza, but I doubt that would require vacating the street to do.

Vacating the street would make it much easier to create a permanent KC Live-style setup where you can have open containers, maybe?

This seems like a terrible idea. The street grid has already been massacred in that part of the city by various institutions and developments.

Murray's Ice Cream spot to be taken over by family from Jersey...
http://www.kansascity.com/news/business ... 17649.html

Has the Thai restaurant across from Port Fonda opened yet? Have noticed it's basically ready but haven't seen it open yet.

earthling wrote:Murray's Ice Cream spot to be taken over by family from Jersey...
http://www.kansascity.com/news/business ... 17649.html

Has the Thai restaurant across from Port Fonda opened yet? Have noticed it's basically ready but haven't seen it open yet.

Hasn't it been open for months? I think I've seen people in it...

It's open.

Ah, I've been in Florida most of Winter. Have gone by a couple times recently but was closed, maybe because it was afternoon. Look forward to trying it.

edit: Just checked and they are indeed closed afternoon weekdays, which is when I happened to check a couple times.

I heard second-hand that BOA is vacating the building at Broadway and Westport Rd in August (not sure if related to the development). Also, comments from the Nextdoor app said that the meeting last night brought to light concerns about traffic and parking...shocker. Area residents allegedly asked whether the building could be scaled back (could not) and want the developers to work with the neighboring homes and business that feel Central is already a traffic problem.
~250 parking spaces for 270 apartments since about right to me, and I can't see where traffic would be any worse than what already goes thrrough the bank, drive thu and nightly Westport parking.

kcjak wrote:I heard second-hand that BOA is vacating the building at Broadway and Westport Rd in August (not sure if related to the development). Also, comments from the Nextdoor app said that the meeting last night brought to light concerns about traffic and parking...shocker. Area residents allegedly asked whether the building could be scaled back (could not) and want the developers to work with the neighboring homes and business that feel Central is already a traffic problem.
~250 parking spaces for 270 apartments since about right to me, and I can't see where traffic would be any worse than what already goes thrrough the bank, drive thu and nightly Westport parking.

Thanks for the update. Hopefully this project gets through CPC on Thursday. I'd encourage anyone who supports a walkable, mildly denser future for Westport to turn up and make themselves heard.

^Given even pro-development people who live in Westport zip (myself included) are not thrilled with the project, likely not much support unless they revise plans not to tear down that stretch of Westport. The BOA lot is massive enough to build a large residential project w/out tearing down 100+ yo buildings, a notable chunk of real Westport.

There's one thing not mentioned often.

Petition for project changes along with parking maximums and no minimums be set

The entire first floor is parking. Do away with the need for this and the building is way easier to save

I bet parking is a good 20-30% of the size

earthling wrote:^Given even pro-development people who live in Westport zip (myself included) are not thrilled with the project, likely not much support unless they revise plans not to tear down that stretch of Westport. The BOA lot is massive enough to build a large residential project w/out tearing down 100+ yo buildings, a notable chunk of real Westport.

"Stretch of Westport"?
"...buildings, a notable chunk or real Westport."

Dude, I'm not saying the demolition is justified or not, but it is only one building. Only the BOA. No other buildings to be torn down for this project based on the submitted plans.

earthling wrote:^Given even pro-development people who live in Westport zip (myself included) are not thrilled with the project, likely not much support unless they revise plans not to tear down that stretch of Westport. The BOA lot is massive enough to build a large residential project w/out tearing down 100+ yo buildings, a notable chunk of real Westport.

There's nothing authentic remaining about that building nor is there for the anti-development argument.

Critical_Mass wrote:

earthling wrote:^Given even pro-development people who live in Westport zip (myself included) are not thrilled with the project, likely not much support unless they revise plans not to tear down that stretch of Westport. The BOA lot is massive enough to build a large residential project w/out tearing down 100+ yo buildings, a notable chunk of real Westport.

"Stretch of Westport"?
"...buildings, a notable chunk or real Westport."

Dude, I'm not saying the demolition is justified or not, but it is only one building. Only the BOA. No other buildings to be torn down for this project based on the submitted plans.

Isn't it also the stretch up to but excluding Ragazza/303 restaurants? Or is it that they purchased those buildings but not part of project... yet.

earthling wrote:

Critical_Mass wrote:

earthling wrote:^Given even pro-development people who live in Westport zip (myself included) are not thrilled with the project, likely not much support unless they revise plans not to tear down that stretch of Westport. The BOA lot is massive enough to build a large residential project w/out tearing down 100+ yo buildings, a notable chunk of real Westport.

"Stretch of Westport"?
"...buildings, a notable chunk or real Westport."

Dude, I'm not saying the demolition is justified or not, but it is only one building. Only the BOA. No other buildings to be torn down for this project based on the submitted plans.

Isn't it also the stretch up to but excluding Ragazza/303 restaurants? Or is it that they purchased those buildings?

The project does not include the stretch you are referring to. Only the BOA building. The developer may have purchased those buildings (I think I did read that somewhere) but they are not included in this proposal. The apartment project is 'L' shaped and basically wraps around those buildings, infilling all the parking/bank drive thrus and removing the corner building only. See the north elevation here: http://maps.kcmo.org/kcgis/rest/service ... ments/8648 , east elevation here: http://maps.kcmo.org/kcgis/rest/service ... ments/8646 , and site plan here: http://maps.kcmo.org/kcgis/rest/service ... ments/8649

^Thanks for the clarification, the rest of the stretch has been brought up often being now owned by Opus and thought it was also part of project for teardown. Would still be ideal to save the bank building and gut it as restaurant space with exposed brick. Would make a great space for farm-to-table type restaurant. Given how massive the lot is next to BOA, the tear down isn't necessary and can still have a large residential project. Is at least worth attempting a compromise than just let developers come in and tear down old buildings.

I don't know. I just don't see any reason to save that building other than it's old. I mean, that's great, and I support keeping old buildings but not at the expense of quality development. It's easy to sit online and say there's enough room and they can figure it out but maybe they can't. Are we really willing to throw away this kind of development because a non-historic old building isn't getting saved? Like, let's understand all the facts first (not just assume every building on the block is getting torn town), get some perspective, ignore out idealized version of the block and find the best solutions to making our city a better place to live. This project does that IMO.