IKEA may be coming to Merriam Village

[Highlander]

This should be at the old Bannister Mall location.

I guess I don't get what you're saying by "should". Like it's not going to succeed at this location?

From all accounts, they considered Bannister - why would that have been a better decision for Ikea?

The Merriam location is a far, far better location than Bannister Mall. The Bannister Mall area has just a ton of problems - lower income demographics, peripheral to the metro, plus there's almost nothing surviving in that area commercially any more. Even IKEA would have a difficult time drawing a crowd there.

[KCMax]

Coming down today.



SAVE MERRIAM VILLAGE!

[GRID]

This should be at the old Bannister Mall location.

I guess I don't get what you're saying by "should". Like it's not going to succeed at this location?

From all accounts, they considered Bannister - why would that have been a better decision for Ikea?

The Merriam location is a far, far better location than Bannister Mall. The Bannister Mall area has just a ton of problems - lower income demographics, peripheral to the metro, plus there's almost nothing surviving in that area commercially any more. Even IKEA would have a difficult time drawing a crowd there.

Nah. Totally disagree. If metro KC is so racially screwed up and white people are seriously that scared of visiting an IKEA at the Bannister Mall location then there is not much that can help KC anyway.

I have seen most of the nation's IKEAs in person. They can go just about anywhere. Some are in the middle of absolute nowhere like the one between Providence and Boston. Others are in very gritty industrial areas that are not great areas like in NYC and South Philly. Many are in traditional shopping areas of varying economics from modest or even run down suburban areas to affluent suburban areas.

I keep thinking how this could have been a major anchor for a huge redevelopment of Bannister and 435. There is an IKEA in College Park, Maryland in an area with similar demographics, although it's near a college, I don't know why IKEA could not have worked at Bannister. Such a highly visible location, easy to reach from anywhere not only in metro KC but Lawrence, Warrensburg etc.

KC has got to stop subsidizing the crap out of places like Summit Fair and Prairie Fire and find ways to subsidize projects like Bannister. That entire section of KC is now a disaster and will only get worse. That is a HUGE eyesore for all of metro KC and should be a top priority for KCMO and the state of Missouri.

It's not and that's why IKEA didn't go there. On the other hand, IKEA was able grandfather themselves into a tif project in Merriam. It's better than the speedway, but I honestly think with the right people and planners behind the project, it could have been an amazing part of a huge attempt to bring back and stabilize a sizable part of metro KC. Just like Cerner, the Sporting Stadium etc. which are now is far flung BFE while so much of KC could have used such an influx of public assistance.

KC just continues to subsidize sprawl and watch much of the metro decay in the process. It's not working.

[winB]

Grid, your argument is dripping with so much personal bias that you fail to rationalize it with a single fact. IKEA is a regional destination where location is EVERYTHING. They've stated that the KC market was attractive to them because of the built in customer base that already travels to other locations to shop there. They have these statistics for every city, including Wichita, Topeka, and Omaha. All three of those are most accessible in Merriam. There's also the benefit of aligning its brand with other regional destinations. The Plaza, Crown Center, Sprintcenter, Nascar, Sporting KC, Village West are all closer and more easily accessible than the Bannister location. You can argue urban sprawl in many threads but a Bannister location is further into the burbs than Merriam.

Then there are the colleges/college towns that benefit more from the Merriam locale. Lawrence, Maryville, St. Joe, JCCC, Washburn. UMKC and Rockhurst sit right in between locations. The difference being they cross the Plaza and what is soon to be Mission Gateway on the way as opposed to the lovely south 71 to the Bannister complex. Warrensburg and Longview obviously take the shaft here but someone has to. Manhattan could get a mention due Merriam being a 2 hour drive but it's hardly argument-worthy. Columbia could be factored for the Bannister location the same way Manhattan is for Merriam but I believe that demographic is being included for a St. Louis store.

I grew up a south KC kid and it pains me to see what happened to Bannister. I also accept that it can't work as a retail location. There's just too much overwhelming evidence of that fact. I was a big supporter of the soccer stadium going in there but now I look at its success in KCK and realize just how wrong I was. I was of the opinion that IKEA would have done well in the Northland actually. I figured that's where they would go if they ever entered this market.

[mgsports]

Bannister Mall should have annnoucement with in 30 days about it's redevelopment and Metro North Mall Movie/Theater/Restaruants/one other Anchor and so on. Macy will be moving to a new Building.

[GRID]

Seriously? Do you actually believe that there is a difference between driving from Omaha, Lawrence etc to 435 and Bannister vs 35 and Jonson Drive?

That location is right on the beltway near the 71/49, 470 and 435. It's minutes from I-70. IKEA doesn't give a crap about the Sprint Center or Nascar track. What are you smoking? All IKEA generally wants is a place that is visible from a busy interstate. Period.

IKEA is a destination store and 20 minutes one way or the other in a metro area makes zero difference. Not to mention that there are probably just as many people within 30 or 60 miles of Bannister as Merriam.

You don't think St Louis has a "built in customer base"? The only reason they chose KC before StL was because they found a location in KC quicker. IKEA has a large customer base in every major metro.

And while I don't think Bannister could ever support a regional mall again. It could have supported an IKEA and can support about 500,000 sq ft of basic retail as the area is undeserved now.

But it needs more than retail. It needs a major master planned mixed use development that includes market rate housing, hotels, entertainment options etc. and IKEA could have been a part of that.

I just don't get the throw away mentality. That is such a huge part of metro KC and driving around KC and seeing that is embarrassing to the city and metro.

Gotta stop throwing in the towel and giving up on so much of metro KC. There are more construction cranes in freaking central Baltimore than central KCMO/KCK (by a lot) and that's saying a lot.

IKEA found a sweet deal. They get a graded and nearly cleared hilltop location with built in incentives that they don't have to ask for. All they have to do is knock down a few retails boxes and I doubt they are even paying for that.

They could have ended up anywhere in KC, but Bannister could have been a great project. Maybe Cerner would be there too instead of building towers overlooking STAR bonded sprawl 20 miles from anything. Maybe the Sporting stadium is there. Maybe that completely bullshit tax payer funded headquarters for Freightquote is part of the prjoect instead of 2 feet into KCMO across from Leawood.

The urban planning mistakes in regional KC continue to boggle my mind.

[KCMax]

That location is right on the beltway near the 71/49, 470 and 435. It's minutes from I-70. IKEA doesn't give a crap about the Sprint Center or Nascar track. What are you smoking? All IKEA generally wants is a place that is visible from a busy interstate. Period.

Yes. Isn't that what they got? I'm not sure I understand your argument. Who's fault is this? IKEA's for choosing a location they felt was best for them? Kansas City's for not offering enough incentives? Merriam's for offering a failed subsidized site? I'm not sure I understand the "should" part of "this should be at Bannister" or why infill in the suburban area of Bannister is better than the infill of suburban area of Merriam.

Fun fact: Merriam Village is 10 miles from downtown Kansas City (City Hall). Bannister Mall is 13.8 miles away. Which is the sprawl and which is not?

[chrizow]

yeah, from a regional perspective this isn't a "mistake" at all - the merriam spot is a great location for IKEA. I-35 near downtown and near the wealthy parts of JoCo makes more sense for IKEA than the bannister mall area. the bannister area needs to be completely returned to native grasses and 0 resources should be expended trying to bring it back. there are smaller strip mall centers all over the bannister road/87th/blue ridge area that are nearly totally FUBAR'd - but not quite and still could present viable retail options to that part of the metro. also there is that new proposed shopping area in grandview. why should KCMO give away zillions trying to revive a suburban corpse?

[GRID]

That location is right on the beltway near the 71/49, 470 and 435. It's minutes from I-70. IKEA doesn't give a crap about the Sprint Center or Nascar track. What are you smoking? All IKEA generally wants is a place that is visible from a busy interstate. Period.

Yes. Isn't that what they got? I'm not sure I understand your argument. Who's fault is this? IKEA's for choosing a location they felt was best for them? Kansas City's for not offering enough incentives? Merriam's for offering a failed subsidized site? I'm not sure I understand the "should" part of "this should be at Bannister" or why infill in the suburban area of Bannister is better than the infill of suburban area of Merriam.

I blame the city of kcmo and the state of Missouri. IKEA is just being a business.

But I also blame the residents of all of metro KC for not having enough vision to even fathom the idea of an IKEA (along with other new development) at 435 and Bannister. So long as the general mentality of the area is to walk away from 1/3 of the metro and subsidize sprawl instead, things like this will continue to happen.

[KCMax]

I blame the city of kcmo and the state of Missouri. IKEA is just being a business.

But I also blame the residents of all of metro KC for not having enough vision to even fathom the idea of an IKEA (along with other new development) at 435 and Bannister. So long as the general mentality of the area is to walk away from 1/3 of the metro and subsidize sprawl instead, things like this will continue to happen.

Blame them for what though? IKEA approached Merriam. KC has approved a TIF plan for Bannister in the past and no doubt would have bent over backwards for IKEA. But we have no indication IKEA was at all interested.

And isn't Bannister pretty much the epitome of sprawl? I agree with Chrizow, don't throw good money after bad. Build up your assets in the urban core.

[TheBigChuckbowski]

-

[chrizow]

So long as the general mentality of the area is to walk away from 1/3 of the metro and subsidize sprawl instead, things like this will continue to happen.

i agree with you generally but IKEA isn't an example of that. it's a great re-use of an inner-suburban (more inner than bannister) failed retail center. if IKEA was going into some greenfield by the airport or 199th and nall, then i would see your point.

bannister is dead, and it ain't coming back, nor should it. just because there was a suburban shopping center there in the 70s-80s doesn't mean there has to be one now. that entire area is pretty low density and almost rural, there is no hope for anything to cause any re-densification. channeling resources there is a lost cause.

[GRID]

I understand that Merriam is basically inner suburban redevelopment, which I support. My beef with this is not necessarily with Merriam or IKEA as I don't think it's a bad location for an IKEA.

My problem is that it seems nearly impossible for metro KC to stop subsidizing sprawl (especially the KCMO to Kansas economic migration).

IKEA was quite possibly the last chance Bannister had and somebody dropped the ball. The Merriam location was going to be fine regardless and would have eventually found tenants. The area around there is at least stable.

South KCMO on the other hand really needed a major anchor, be it Cerner, IKEA, Freightquote etc to be a part of a major redevelopment project. Much like how H&R Block was so important to the entire Downtown redevelopment effort.

Everybody in KC loves to praise Village West and ignore the fact that it's BFE and most of KCK is a joke and much of Jackson County and the lower Northland is deteriorating.

Nobody cares. If they did, you would see more going on in metro KC than tax payer funded development on the fringes of western KCK and southern Overland Park. Because the people would demand it.

I'm done here. I'm probably not eve making sense. Moving on

[winB]

Seriously? Do you actually believe that there is a difference between driving from Omaha, Lawrence etc to 435 and Bannister vs 35 and Jonson Drive?

That location is right on the beltway near the 71/49, 470 and 435. It's minutes from I-70. IKEA doesn't give a crap about the Sprint Center or Nascar track. What are you smoking? All IKEA generally wants is a place that is visible from a busy interstate. Period.

Are you under the impression that people leave Omaha, Wichita, etc and head to IKEA like it's a trip to the grocery store? NO! They do other stuff that they can't do at home. Do you really think that IKEA didn't take into account other regional attractions? Why else did they plant one next to the Mall of America in MN. Next to Pizza Hut Park and the outlet malls in Frisco, TX. The Streets at Southglenn in Centennial, CO. Check out the Portland location.

IKEA is a destination store and 20 minutes one way or the other in a metro area makes zero difference. Not to mention that there are probably just as many people within 30 or 60 miles of Bannister as Merriam.

They're going to pull KC people no matter where it's at. Why not draw people that are coming to KC for other reasons. If someone is coming into town for a Nascar race, Cabelas, Nebraska Furniture Mart, Sporting. If they're coming into town for a concert or the NCAA/Big 12 tournament, why in the hell would IKEA want to place themselves further away from those events.

You don't think St Louis has a "built in customer base"? The only reason they chose KC before StL was because they found a location in KC quicker. IKEA has a large customer base in every major metro.

I think I said that IKEA keeps tabs on every city. The only thing I said about StL is that the Columbia demographic could easily be factored in.

And while I don't think Bannister could ever support a regional mall again. It could have supported an IKEA and can support about 500,000 sq ft of basic retail as the area is undeserved now.

Again...opinion. One that I somewhat share with you. The only real evidence is that every plan has failed.

But it needs more than retail. It needs a major master planned mixed use development that includes market rate housing, hotels, entertainment options etc. and IKEA could have been a part of that.

I just don't get the throw away mentality. That is such a huge part of metro KC and driving around KC and seeing that is embarrassing to the city and metro.

There has to be an initiative to clean up the area though. Dropping an IKEA in there doesn't fix the area.

Gotta stop throwing in the towel and giving up on so much of metro KC. There are more construction cranes in freaking central Baltimore than central KCMO/KCK (by a lot) and that's saying a lot.

IKEA found a sweet deal. They get a graded and nearly cleared hilltop location with built in incentives that they don't have to ask for. All they have to do is knock down a few retails boxes and I doubt they are even paying for that.

They could have ended up anywhere in KC, but Bannister could have been a great project. Maybe Cerner would be there too instead of building towers overlooking STAR bonded sprawl 20 miles from anything. Maybe the Sporting stadium is there. Maybe that completely bullshit tax payer funded headquarters for Freightquote is part of the prjoect instead of 2 feet into KCMO across from Leawood.

You're really starting to show that your rationale is more about hating KS than anything else. It's not that it's 20 miles from anything. It's just 20 miles from Missouri. Any yes, sporting is there and they're outdrawing the Royals. There's also the Speedway, Cabela's, Great Wolf Lodge, T-bones, Chateau Avalon, NFM, Hollywood Casino. These are all huge regional draws that have no business within the urban core. People visiting KC for these attractions will not have to navigate completely around the city to get to IKEA.

The urban planning mistakes in regional KC continue to boggle my mind.

Completely agree. I hope I don't come off as an ass. Just spirited discussion. I really do respect your passion for the city. I share it. Just a differing opinion here.

[flyingember]

Bannister failed with MAJOR national tenants there. The Mission site failed because the major tenant went under. If I were a retailer I'd see those facts as a big deal difference.

The Bannister site is apt to never become retail again given how many new centers have popped up and how much less people live in east KC now vs 1990. The demographics just aren't there any more.

[Highlander]

Bannister failed with MAJOR national tenants there. The Mission site failed because the major tenant went under. If I were a retailer I'd see those facts as a big deal difference.

The Bannister site is apt to never become retail again given how many new centers have popped up and how much less people live in east KC now vs 1990. The demographics just aren't there any more.

That's my take on it too. The city doesn't have the resources to pour into this locale for some kind of grand development scheme. I do not even know why they would even consider it a good location for redevelopment. The demographics are poor and even rather low density (half the surrounding area is urban forest), and it's peripheral to KCMO. KCMO has more urgent matters to deal with. The Merriam location, on the other hand, is suburban - but inner ring suburban, and far more central. An ideal location for IKEA.

I do not see how anyone could argue that the Bannister site would be better. Forget about the Bannister site for any large scale redevelopment package, it should revert to single family housing and maybe a couple of fast food joints and an Applebee's will pop up in support.

[aknowledgeableperson]

Bannister failed with MAJOR national tenants there.

It opened with 4 major tenants - Penney's, Sears, Macy's (original), and Jones. Macy's went under and the space never reopened. Penney's has been a troubled retailer for a long time and that space closed before the center did. Jones was also a troubled retailer and was bought out and converted to a clearance center and either was still opened or closed before the center closed . Sears was also a troubled retailer which is still struggling.

Other reasons also exist, one being the change in the neighborhood from middle class to lower class.

[mgsports]

Montgomery Wards and Best Buy/Toysrus was their to.

[earthling]

I do not see how anyone could argue that the Bannister site would be better.

Yeah, is baffling anyone would think that is realistic for something like Ikea.

[earthling]

I do not see how anyone could argue that the Bannister site would be better.

Yeah, is baffling anyone would think that site is realistic for something like Ikea.