KCRag Forum

Here's a quick outline I did of the land involved in this project.



We were told that the project will not demolish the southernmost building in the picture (just at the edge of the image). Something about water retention/runoff/flooding.

they actually will demolish that small building on the south edge. that's how they absorb more runoff

also, the small lot in the middle is not part of the deal. the rendering showed it in its current state (not spiffed up).

DaveKCMO wrote:they actually will demolish that small building on the south edge. that's how they absorb more runoff

also, the small lot in the middle is not part of the deal. the rendering showed it in its current state (not spiffed up).

I thought they said they were not demoing that building that they were just leaving it alone? In any case, water is the issue.

Is the 'Westside Professional Building' parcel included in the site (and being razed)? It looks to be in rough shape (it has at least one tree growing ON it) but it has character. I could see it being fixed up into something nice. kcmidtowner's outlines from earlier excluded it but this outline includes it.

Critical_Mass wrote:Is the 'Westside Professional Building' parcel included in the site (and being razed)? It looks to be in rough shape (it has at least one tree growing ON it) but it has character. I could see it being fixed up into something nice. kcmidtowner's outlines from earlier excluded it but this outline includes it.

It will be demolished.

The Star finally picked these 3 projects up.

^ http://www.kansascity.com/2014/04/09/49 ... suing.html

Was excited to learn that the Crossroads West project is designed by Helix who I think does really nice contemporary work.
The QH projects are designed by the previously mentioned NSPJ Architects of Prairie Village, so I'll be happy with anything that doesn't look like it should be perched up on the bluffs at Briarcliff.

Critical_Mass wrote:^ http://www.kansascity.com/2014/04/09/49 ... suing.html

Was excited to learn that the Crossroads West project is designed by Helix who I think does really nice contemporary work.
The QH projects are designed by the previously mentioned NSPJ Architects of Prairie Village, so I'll be happy with anything that doesn't look like it should be perched up on the bluffs at Briarcliff.

This is also the firm doing the P&L redo / new building right? How the hell are they all of a sudden the downtown architect?

Its about time projects like this get going DT. I'll debate details all day over what I like and don't like about the design... but i love all of this dev down town...so many empty lots getting filled in!

It's kind of annoying that I sat in an hour long meeting about this project with the developer and he did not share the above rendering given to the Star.

Without PnL none of this happens. That's what justified the investment. Got to spend money to make money.

Without PnL none of this happens. That's what justified the investment. Got to spend money to make money.

Thank you, agreed.

I hope this developer takes heed of the development proposal at 1914 Main Street (http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=19221, namely: 1. orientation to the street 2. ground floor commercial space. This project is a fraction of the size of Crossroads West yet they are adding a mixed-used component.

Wald & Co Fireworks occupied part of that site for years if I'm not mistaken. Imagine a large quantity of commercial grade fireworks (and stuff for the kids of course) stored in an area that built-up nowadays... not going to happen!

Worn Copy wrote:I hope this developer takes heed of the development proposal at 1914 Main Street (http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=19221, namely: 1. orientation to the street 2. ground floor commercial space. This project is a fraction of the size of Crossroads West yet they are adding a mixed-used component.

mixed use needs to happen across downtown, but better to push on projects where it's more centrally located for more people
let the residents of a corner development have a quiet back street

and then the city can legitimately they push where it makes sense, they're not being unreasonable and being particular about everything out there

Additional photos for this project.










http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... ge_gallery

flyingember wrote:

Worn Copy wrote:I hope this developer takes heed of the development proposal at 1914 Main Street (http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=19221, namely: 1. orientation to the street 2. ground floor commercial space. This project is a fraction of the size of Crossroads West yet they are adding a mixed-used component.

mixed use needs to happen across downtown, but better to push on projects where it's more centrally located for more people
let the residents of a corner development have a quiet back street

and then the city can legitimately they push where it makes sense, they're not being unreasonable and being particular about everything out there

How does a small ground-floor commercial space not make sense here? Several hundred-unit building, surrounded by offices and other apartment buildings, restaurants and shops either side along SW Blvd. In most cities, a development of this size and context would be required to provide ground-floor retail or other public amenities by the development code. This encourages pedestrian connectivity, vibrancy, and ultimately = the value of the developer's investment. Developers with experience in progressive markets understand the value of context-sensitive design. If the wedge north of the site were incorporated in combo it's got potential to be a great small urban public space.

Worn Copy wrote:

flyingember wrote:

Worn Copy wrote:I hope this developer takes heed of the development proposal at 1914 Main Street (http://kcrag.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=19221, namely: 1. orientation to the street 2. ground floor commercial space. This project is a fraction of the size of Crossroads West yet they are adding a mixed-used component.

mixed use needs to happen across downtown, but better to push on projects where it's more centrally located for more people
let the residents of a corner development have a quiet back street

and then the city can legitimately they push where it makes sense, they're not being unreasonable and being particular about everything out there

How does a small ground-floor commercial space not make sense here? Several hundred-unit building, surrounded by offices and other apartment buildings, restaurants and shops either side along SW Blvd. In most cities, a development of this size and context would be required to provide ground-floor retail or other public amenities by the development code. This encourages pedestrian connectivity, vibrancy, and ultimately = the value of the developer's investment. Developers with experience in progressive markets understand the value of context-sensitive design. If the wedge north of the site were incorporated in combo it's got potential to be a great small urban public space.

Look at a map. For someone looking to lease space, you would pick a block to the north on sw blvd. this project would still be close to this spot and you would have way more visibility.

It's likely lease value was less than the cost to build the commercial space. Especially when downtown has a glut of it right now

No one wants to be in a back corner.

not to mention the poster child for ground-level retail requirements -- portland -- has had trouble filling it all. focus on the streets that are already well suited for retail uses first (like southwest boulevard). kansas city seems pretty saturated for retail anyway.