OFFICIAL - East Village

[FangKC]

On this project, I think the City is not reaching high enough (literally). We should be setting a higher standard in our hopes and goals for this part of town.  As it exists, it's basically a clean slate. Keep in mind that whatever is built there will probably exist for 80 years or more. Do we put townhouses and 4-story apartments there for the next century? Or do we recognize that as a uniquely urban location in the heart of the city, and place real dense housing there?

The City should be advocating constructing buildings similar in size to the Plaza House, Alameda Tower, the Locarno, Townsend Place, the Bellerive, the Ambassador Hotel, the poet apartment buildings, the Walnuts, Library Lofts, Walnut Tower, Plaza Point, Clubhouse Lofts, Quality Hill Towers, Regency Tower, the Sulgrave, San Francisco Tower, 21Ten Lofts, WallStreet Tower, 909 Walnut, Abdiana Building, and Western Auto Lofts, and the View.

I'd advocate a minimum of 10-stories.  There is no more appropriate place for mid-rise residential towers than this section of downtown. One doesn't have to worry about knocking down existing houses; upsetting existing residents with a large construction project; creating surface parking; or concerns about the mass of a taller building, like occurs near the Plaza. It's a chance to create instant urbanity. It's also a chance to create multi-tenant housing with underground parking.  This should be KC's equivalent of Battery Park City in NYC.

It's also the fastest and best way to help reach Mayor Barnes goal of having 30,000 people living downtown. This is an opportunity to maximize our population downtown very quickly, and bring a customer base to downtown businesses. Think how much more attractive it will be if retailers and businesses knew that literally thousands more people, that could walk to their establishments, would be moving nearby in the near future.

The main selling point should be sophisticated urban living, great views, access to highways, and the convenience (and health benefits) of walking to work for downtown workers.  The proximity of the Sprint Center, the P&L entertainment district, downtown library, PAC, downtown theaters, and the Crossroads District make this an appealing location in the long-term.

I would also suggest it's an opportunity for the City, and developers, to create beautiful apartment buildings in which people will still want to live in 75-100 years.

It would also be important not to create a clone-zone in that all the buildings would look similar. Instead, multiple developers and architects should be sought to create a variety of architecture that appeals to a lot of different people. I would even advocate architectural design competitions to seek out the best and most unique architectural ideas. It might be fun and productive to have metro residents vote on their favorite designs and have the winners selected through that process. This would create a sense of civic involvement and ownership in what's happening in Kansas City that has never been seen before.  That way, metro residents could participate in building the city they want to see.

People in KC often complain that they don't feel they have a part in the decision-making process about what happens downtown. This process would empower them and make them feel like they have a say. It would be similar to when the New York Times ran a contest that allowed ANYONE to submit design ideas for the rebuilding of the World Trade Center. It made people feel like they were involved.

Kansas City has incredible momentum right now with existing investment and development. An opportunity like this might not be available for another 80 years.

To facilitate the occupation of these buildings, the mayor and city leaders should engage in a "Move Downtown" advertising and marketing campaign to actively seek and convince metro residents to move downtown.  The City should consider polling workers in the River-Crown-Plaza area that live elsewhere; find out what kind of housing they want; what it would take to get them back in the inner core; and work to create that opportunity for them.

I'd like to see Mayor Barnes, and any future mayor, on television urging people to move downtown and help revitalize our city and create a dynamic, sophisticated city that will appeal to future generations of our young people who often leave and move elsewhere.  I'd like to see leaders actively recruit their workers to move and live downtown, and help them do so.

The City should also consider suspending the earnings tax on KC residents who live downtown to counteract other cities that advertise "no KC earnings tax" to lure people to live in their communities.

City leaders should also consider approaching developers who want to built multi-tenant housing in suburban KCMO, and ask them instead to consider building in the inner core, and make it easy for them to do so.  This counteracts and saves a lot on infastructure costs (streets, sidewalks, sewers, stormdrains, parks, community centers, police and fire protection) when the city has to deal with new development in the suburbs.

[Tosspot]

Indeed. 

[Thrillcekr]

On this project, I think the City is not reaching high enough (literally). We should be setting a higher standard in our hopes and goals for this part of town.  As it exists, it's basically a clean slate. Keep in mind that whatever is built there will probably exist for 80 years or more. Do we put townhouses and 4-story apartments there for the next century? Or do we recognize that as a uniquely urban location in the heart of the city, and place real dense housing there?

The City should be advocating constructing buildings similar in size to the Plaza House, Alameda Tower, the Locarno, Townsend Place, the Bellerive, the Ambassador Hotel, the poet apartment buildings, the Walnuts, Library Lofts, Walnut Tower, Plaza Point, Clubhouse Lofts, Quality Hill Towers, Regency Tower, the Sulgrave, San Francisco Tower, 21Ten Lofts, WallStreet Tower, 909 Walnut, Abdiana Building, and Western Auto Lofts, and the View.

I'd advocate a minimum of 10-stories.  There is no more appropriate place for mid-rise residential towers than this section of downtown. One doesn't have to worry about knocking down existing houses; upsetting existing residents with a large construction project; creating surface parking; or concerns about the mass of a taller building, like occurs near the Plaza. It's a chance to create instant urbanity. It's also a chance to create multi-tenant housing with underground parking.  This should be KC's equivalent of Battery Park City in NYC.

It's also the fastest and best way to help reach Mayor Barnes goal of having 30,000 people living downtown. This is an opportunity to maximize our population downtown very quickly, and bring a customer base to downtown businesses. Think how much more attractive it will be if retailers and businesses knew that literally thousands more people, that could walk to their establishments, would be moving nearby in the near future.

The main selling point should be sophisticated urban living, great views, access to highways, and the convenience (and health benefits) of walking to work for downtown workers.  The proximity of the Sprint Center, the P&L entertainment district, downtown library, PAC, downtown theaters, and the Crossroads District make this an appealing location in the long-term.

I would also suggest it's an opportunity for the City, and developers, to create beautiful apartment buildings in which people will still want to live in 75-100 years.

It would also be important not to create a clone-zone in that all the buildings would look similar. Instead, multiple developers and architects should be sought to create a variety of architecture that appeals to a lot of different people. I would even advocate architectural design competitions to seek out the best and most unique architectural ideas. It might be fun and productive to have metro residents vote on their favorite designs and have the winners selected through that process. This would create a sense of civic involvement and ownership in what's happening in Kansas City that has never been seen before.  That way, metro residents could participate in building the city they want to see.

People in KC often complain that they don't feel they have a part in the decision-making process about what happens downtown. This process would empower them and make them feel like they have a say. It would be similar to when the New York Times ran a contest that allowed ANYONE to submit design ideas for the rebuilding of the World Trade Center. It made people feel like they were involved.

Kansas City has incredible momentum right now with existing investment and development. An opportunity like this might not be available for another 80 years.

To facilitate the occupation of these buildings, the mayor and city leaders should engage in a "Move Downtown" advertising and marketing campaign to actively seek and convince metro residents to move downtown.  The City should consider polling workers in the River-Crown-Plaza area that live elsewhere; find out what kind of housing they want; what it would take to get them back in the inner core; and work to create that opportunity for them.

I'd like to see Mayor Barnes, and any future mayor, on television urging people to move downtown and help revitalize our city and create a dynamic, sophisticated city that will appeal to future generations of our young people who often leave and move elsewhere.  I'd like to see leaders actively recruit their workers to move and live downtown, and help them do so.

The City should also consider suspending the earnings tax on KC residents who live downtown to counteract other cities that advertise "no KC earnings tax" to lure people to live in their communities.

City leaders should also consider approaching developers who want to built multi-tenant housing in suburban KCMO, and ask them instead to consider building in the inner core, and make it easy for them to do so.  This counteracts and saves a lot on infastructure costs (streets, sidewalks, sewers, stormdrains, parks, community centers, police and fire protection) when the city has to deal with new development in the suburbs.

I agree with that totally.  Seems to me like lowrise housing in that area would give it a very odd appearance.  Maybe some smaller homes would be okay along the far eastern edge to create a cascade effect.

[LenexatoKCMO]

I am not just worried about the density.  I worry about how they can make this area desirable without including some big attraction or cool amenity.  In its favor it will be close to the arena and not too far of a walk from P&L.  However, it will have the ugly and intimidating county jail towering over it; the old courthouse/mass homeless gathering spot just a stone's throw away; and a  neighborhood to the immediate east that doesn't have the best reputation.  That is a lot to overcome with the sales pitch.  I would imagine they will need something a bit extra to make it more palatable. 

[Pastense]

On this project, I think the City is not reaching high enough (literally). We should be setting a higher standard in our hopes and goals for this part of town.

Thanks for your excellent thoughts. This is a recent KC disease, that any development activity is good, period. No long-range thinking. This applies to the Riverfront and recent plans for KCI. Precious city-owned resources being peddled for less-than optimum results. The city should be the most patient landowner and not settle for what the market will currently support. 

This should be KC's equivalent of Battery Park City in NYC.

By no coincidence, the original plans for the Riverfront were done by Cooper + Robertson, the Battery Park City planners. I suspect the Forest City proposal will look more like 119th & Nall.

[Maitre D]

So why are you bad mouthing Cauthen again?

If by again you mean, I've done it before: you're wrong.
If by again you mean, say it again: read on.

"When Cauthen even says it's trashy, that implies a lot." Cauthen has done more for downtown than any other city manager in the past 50 years. Please clairfy.

Take your xanax.  You mis-understood the post and that is to say, when even teh City Manager doesn't mince words about an area, you know it's bad.  Generally, politicians soften things up and are P.C. 

[K.C.Highrise]

I guess my point is that I just love how you bitch and moan about certain politicians even when they are taking radical steps to improve K.C. It adds to my belief that the only thing that unifies conservatives is fear mongering and bitching about things without having a logical plan to improve them. lol.

[K.C.Highrise]

I'm bored and just trying to start shit, nothing personal. 

[moderne]

    I don't think a bunch of high rises is the answer for success.  Quality Hill achieved its success maybe due to the lack of high rises.  I would opt for something in between that we don't often see--elevator bldgs of 4-6 floors.  This would give a much more human European style ambience.  Density can be achieved without skyscraping.

[KCMax]

I tend to agree with moderne. I'm just hopeful they do SOMETHING.

[kevink]

     I don't think a bunch of high rises is the answer for success.  Quality Hill achieved its success maybe due to the lack of high rises.  I would opt for something in between that we don't often see--elevator bldgs of 4-6 floors.  This would give a much more human European style ambience.  Density can be achieved without skyscraping.

I tend to agree. 3-6 stories is a wonderfully humane scale. Much above that and you lose your connection with the street, operable windows, high-rise construction, etc.  Plus, you'll still have to deal with parking, and it's much easier at the lower scale.

I'd love something on the order of what I've seen in the Uptown area of Dallas that Post Properties has developed. Generally about that height range, and 100 units/acre.

[Maitre D]

I guess my point is that I just love how you bitch and moan about certain politicians

Name them.  Other than Cleaver, whom I haven't even said much - be specific.  I bet you can't.

even when they are taking radical steps to improve K.C. It adds to my belief that the only thing that unifies conservatives is fear mongering and bitching about things without having a logical plan to improve them. lol.

1.  I like Cauthen and in fact, used his prior quotes as support for my own view.  How did that slip past you?
2.  The only thing uniting liberals then, must be poor reading comprehension.

[DaveKCMO]

From today's KC Business Journal:

Kansas City Business Journal - January 9, 2006
http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansa ... aily4.html

Kansas City Business Journal - 10:02 AM CST Monday

Council committee could advance East Village proposal
Jim Davis
Staff Writer

A Kansas City Council committee on Wednesday will review a request to let City Manager Wayne Cauthen respond to a development proposal for East Village from the project's private-sector proponents.

Councilman Troy Nash, who introduced the empowering ordinance on Friday and chairs the Planning, Zoning and Economic Development Committee, said Sunday that he wants to complete a deal as soon as possible with J.E. Dunn Construction Co. and Swope Community Builders because the $340 million East Village plan will require financial support from the state.

"We want to give the state an idea of how serious we are about this," he said.

Final approval of the ordinance could come as soon as Thursday from the City Council.

Nash said the financing request needs to reach state lawmakers quickly so they can take action this year. The General Assembly's session ends in May.

Tax increment financing, which probably will be sought for East Village, already has come under fire this session from critics in Jefferson City, including legislators representing Eastern Jackson County.

Nash said he knows from experience how tough it is to get state financing for Downtown. Kansas City Mayor Kay Barnes had to work for two years before legislators in 2003 passed the Missouri Downtown Economic Stimulus Act, which is helping finance the Power & Light District.

Now it's the East Side's turn, said Nash, whose 3rd District includes that area. Nash said he wants to get the East Side anchored before his term ends in 2007.

East Village calls for more than 1,200 housing units to be built in a forlorn 12-block area east of City Hall. The anticipated neighborhood, which would resemble Quality Hill on the West Side of Downtown, also is to include a new headquarters for J.E. Dunn.

The construction company, No. 1 on the Kansas City Business Journal's list of the Top 25 commercial contractors, has outgrown its current location at 929 Holmes St.

Swope, an African-American led community development organization, would become East Village's master developer. Then Swope would assign its rights to Dunn for a new headquarters on a now-vacant block bounded by 10th and 11th streets between Locust and Cherry streets.

Swope, which organized East Village LLC to work on the project, collaborated with Dunn late in December to give the city a joint request for public incentives.

A person who worked on the request and asked for anonymity to avoid influencing the city's consideration, said Friday that deliberations among the "trilateral partnership" are now trying to establish the city's financial commitment.

"Infrastructure is a very big issue," the source said. "That's one issue that has to be negotiated. What is the price tag? What level of incentives can this project have?"

Federal incentives also could be sought, the source said. Possible sources include low-income housing tax credits.

© 2006 American City Business Journals Inc.

[Tosspot]

If executed properly, this project would be a prominent lynchpin in the puzzle of downtown revibrancy -- so let's just hope the republican-led legislature likes their proposal -- although I doubt they will understand or comprehend the benefits.

[Tosspot]

I apologize if this post rehashes everything already argued over in the previous ten pages of this thread, but: I often say I couldn't care less if we never get another supertall again since I believe it's the street-level vista and design quality that is paramount. However it does seem a bit as though we should be concentrating our density in this area, instead of lowrises. And likewise, perhaps a 17 story condo in the Crossroads is a tad out of place. This may be completely dumb, but was just thinking about this.

[Long]

I apologize if this post rehashes everything already argued over in the previous ten pages of this thread, but: I often say I couldn't care less if we never get another supertall again since I believe it's the street-level vista and design quality that is paramount. However it does seem a bit as though we should be concentrating our density in this area, instead of lowrises. And likewise, perhaps a 17 story condo in the Crossroads is a tad out of place. This may be completely dumb, but was just thinking about this.

Yeah, once your buildings get to be a certain height, relative to the width of the street, you achieve that "canyon" effect where you feel like you're in an actual space formed by the buildings.  Broadway between 7th and 9th achieves this, the first block of 8th street east of Broadway, etc.  On a narrow, small scale street, maybe 3 stories is enough, if the buildings are close to the sidewalk (imagine rowhouses/townhouses).  Any wider and you need some more height, maybe 4-8 stories. 

I would rather see several blocks of mid-rise, instead of block after block of low-rise construction with the occasional tower sprinkled in. 

[warwickland]

I apologize if this post rehashes everything already argued over in the previous ten pages of this thread, but: I often say I couldn't care less if we never get another supertall again since I believe it's the street-level vista and design quality that is paramount. However it does seem a bit as though we should be concentrating our density in this area, instead of lowrises. And likewise, perhaps a 17 story condo in the Crossroads is a tad out of place. This may be completely dumb, but was just thinking about this.

yeah, i was thinking about that too. my position is that this city is so early in the revitalization cycle that i feel bad being picky. but, i think a height range in the crossroads between 3 and 6-7 stories would be cherry. it's just so early though. i'm sure the city is thrilled to have anything built, and i suppose i am too...eh

[shinatoo]

Bump.

(This is the offical thread)

[shinatoo]

From the renderings it looks mainly like three storey buildings.

[LenexatoKCMO]

From the renderings it looks aminly like three storie buildings.

The buildings all have ambiguous, featureless structures on top that might or might not be penthouse levels - Hate to read too much into a rendering that early on though.