KCRag Forum

GRID wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 10:26 am I think the location is fine. It's on the edge of a large residential district yet closer to Downtown's cultural attractions and retail.

I was just wondering what makes this project more enticing to developers vs them developing any other empty lot or dusting off old plans that have never been built. And you can't tell me that land downtown isn't easily available. I'm sure much is not in "friendly hands", but 80% of downtown KC is underdeveloped so developers can get property if they want it.

Anyway, I hope this goes through. Tens stories seems kind of small for a mixed use residential/office building on that lot though.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 6:17 pm My response to the RFP: Instead of trying to make BAP a park again and killing any real chance at adding population there, turn the entire rooftop of the convention center into a giant park. Build apartments on the 12th and Broadway site with views and connection directly to the park. The same for BAP with parking beneath. The park itself probably pays for itself with decreased utility costs at the convention center due to green roof.

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 6:39 pm I am 100% on-board with rebuilding the convention center or at least the original phase. Glass walls, modern design, etc.

However, as I understand we want column free space and a rooftop park is going to need a lot of columns.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 7:30 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 6:39 pm I am 100% on-board with rebuilding the convention center or at least the original phase. Glass walls, modern design, etc.

However, as I understand we want column free space and a rooftop park is going to need a lot of columns.

Why would that be? It’s a couple inches of dirt and grass at the least and add the weight of tree planters and path stone at the worst? Surely the roof would hold that as is or we could put stronger cabling instead of columned support.

shinatoo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:17 am

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 7:30 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 6:39 pm I am 100% on-board with rebuilding the convention center or at least the original phase. Glass walls, modern design, etc.

However, as I understand we want column free space and a rooftop park is going to need a lot of columns.

Why would that be? It’s a couple inches of dirt and grass at the least and add the weight of tree planters and path stone at the worst? Surely the roof would hold that as is or we could put stronger cabling instead of columned support.

People are heavy, rain is heavy, and would be retained in soil. The roof is probably rated to hold up to heavy snowfall but not a park AND heavy snowfall. Have to plan for the worst-case scenario if you don't want a repeat of the Kemper collapse.

But the location and architecture of our convention center are top of the list for worst facilities in our city. I would rebuild it in the east village or out at TSC. Then you have a reason to develop that area and add light rail.

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Sat Sep 17, 2022 9:41 pm

shinatoo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:17 am

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 14, 2022 7:30 pm
Why would that be? It’s a couple inches of dirt and grass at the least and add the weight of tree planters and path stone at the worst? Surely the roof would hold that as is or we could put stronger cabling instead of columned support.

People are heavy, rain is heavy, and would be retained in soil. The roof is probably rated to hold up to heavy snowfall but not a park AND heavy snowfall. Have to plan for the worst-case scenario if you don't want a repeat of the Kemper collapse.

But the location and architecture of our convention center are top of the list for worst facilities in our city. I would rebuild it in the east village or out at TSC. Then you have a reason to develop that area and add light rail.

Thoroughly disagree with this take

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:53 pm Because I know developers and architects look at this forum for feedback and to get ideas, what sorts of things would you like to see included in a response to an RFP here? I know this is sort of limited since you can’t build a hotel, height limited, and you only have about 1 acre of buildable space, but dream on.

I’ll start - make the ground floor welcoming on most, or the entirety, of Broadway to make up for the blank wall of the convention center across the street. Try to reduce the presence of a parking podium. Try and make the design “friendly”. And also, no one should try to replicate Brinshore’s building at Barney Allis Plaza. While that’s an ideal size in more than one way, the design is more suitable for that side of downtown and it’s not that friendly of a design.

GRID wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 12:45 am
What is the height limit?

trexel94 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 12, 2022 2:29 pm The city has recently issued an RFP to develop two surface lots on 12th and Broadway.

Criteria
- Up to 130 ft tall
- Ideally walkable/transit friendly
- Floor area ratio around 10.
- Maximum parking 0.9 for every residential unit

The building sqft could be around 500k/516k

For office it must result in at least 33% new jobs
For residential, should result in around 20% of units set aside for affordable housing or 60% of median income.

Link to article
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... 0#cxrecs_s

FangKC wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:50 pm The RFP shows two separate parcels. The question then is should it be developed as two separate projects, or one large one?

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:47 am

FangKC wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:50 pm The RFP shows two separate parcels. The question then is should it be developed as two separate projects, or one large one?

The more buildings we can fit on a site, the better. My vote is two separate projects.

Cratedigger wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 9:06 am

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Mon Sep 19, 2022 8:47 am

FangKC wrote: ↑Sun Sep 18, 2022 11:50 pm The RFP shows two separate parcels. The question then is should it be developed as two separate projects, or one large one?

The more buildings we can fit on a site, the better. My vote is two separate projects.

Why is that?