KCRag Forum

We really need this stadium to be in a spot where we can get surface lots filled near the core where they’re struggling to ever get filled. And also preferably keep it near entertainment and streetcar line.

I like that location because the only through street you would close is Holmes and it's getting closed anyway.

And Charlotte.

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 5:28 pm I suggested this as it's about the only thing that makes sense to save that building. However some people pushed back hard because there are some non-historical and non-impressive buildings being used.

Tearing down all the "non-historical and non-impressive" buildings is how we destroyed our freaking city.

TheLastGentleman wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 10:23 pm

DColeKC wrote: ↑Thu Jul 28, 2022 5:28 pm I suggested this as it's about the only thing that makes sense to save that building. However some people pushed back hard because there are some non-historical and non-impressive buildings being used.

Tearing down all the "non-historical and non-impressive" buildings is how we destroyed our fucking city.

Weird, seems like our city is doing the best it ever has and many buildings came down to make it so. Save and repurpose the historical ones sure, The Truman, u-haul place and Firestone car shop can go if it’s for a greater purpose.

Would argue KC 1900-1945 was economically and socially more important than today.

there is a fine line between historical preservation and building new buildings. Tearing down some structures to make way for new certainly did not as you quote "destroyed our fucking city". I would argue that decades of policies that supported suburban flight and at the same time a decay of development dollars, education dollars, civil engineering dollars, general services dollars, etc. to the Urban Core and Urban neighborhoods of KC destroyed our fucking city. The fact that the actual boundaries of KCMO the city spread well out into the suburbs created an impossible situation for them to manage and they failed to manage it with the leaders they had. KC chose to let it's Urban core rot for decades, that was a choice, and they have been paying the price ever since. Luckily some visionary leaders in the last 25yrs have developed a plan and decided to make an investment in downtown and surrounding areas which has, and is paying off. But we still have to maintain at least another 10-15yrs of progress to make up for the 25yrs of neglect still left on the 50yr old tab we are paying off so to speak.

dukuboy1 wrote: ↑Fri Jul 29, 2022 9:50 am Tearing down some structures to make way for new

It was a lot more than tearing down "some" and was for a lot less "new". I wish all the destruction was built back up, but that's not what happened.

That AT&T building.... How do we lose so many gems over the years and keep THAT one.

A problem with many telcom buildings of that era. Needs a new curtain wall even if with some fake windows. Verizon has an ugly one in Manhattan, which has been updated. Still not great but better.

earthling wrote: ↑Sat Jul 30, 2022 8:34 am A problem with many telcom buildings of that era. Needs a new curtain wall even if with some fake windows. Verizon has an ugly one in Manhattan, which has been updated. Still not great but better.

Can't imagine a developer having the budget to flip that west wall into a curtain wall as that's an expensive construction process! It's also the only way I see that building being viable for today's demand.

It wouldn't be so bad if ATT and the City would allow electronic media and billboards on the sides.

The bottom half of the building isn't that bad though.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.096195 ... 384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.096956 ... 384!8i8192

FangKC wrote: ↑Sat Jul 30, 2022 7:13 pm It wouldn't be so bad if ATT and the City would allow electronic media and billboards on the sides.

The bottom half of the building isn't that bad though.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.096195 ... 384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.096956 ... 384!8i8192

I count 160 spaces that would need to be opened up for windows to convert the top eight floors to commercial or residential. Doesn't seam like an insurmountable obstacle for a developer. Especially since they usually replace the windows anyway. Replacing the entire facad is another story.

shinatoo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 31, 2022 3:11 pm

FangKC wrote: ↑Sat Jul 30, 2022 7:13 pm It wouldn't be so bad if ATT and the City would allow electronic media and billboards on the sides.

The bottom half of the building isn't that bad though.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.096195 ... 384!8i8192

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.096956 ... 384!8i8192

I count 160 spaces that would need to be opened up for windows to convert the top eight floors to commercial or residential. Doesn't seam like an insurmountable obstacle for a developer. Especially since they usually replace the windows anyway. Replacing the entire facad is another story.

It's the de-construction to create the openings that would seem to add time and money compounded by the difficult location and proximity to highly active streets. It's almost a must if the developer plans residential.

So was THIS the "new location" for stadium that DCole was referring to???

EXCLUSIVE: East Crossroads site pitched as a prospect for downtown Royals stadium
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... -star.html

maybe? I read the article and of the 2 areas not to crazy about them. Maybe because of the demolition aspects and trying to assemble the parcels of land.

I still say something within the East Village or right in that general area is where it goes. It the most raw land for full development, helps a very much undeveloped side of downtown and will be a catalyst for development to the East, South, and North, plus create opportunities for better streetscapes and grid planning to the West with the P&L and Central Business district

dukuboy1 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 4:19 pm maybe? I read the article and of the 2 areas not to crazy about them. Maybe because of the demolition aspects and trying to assemble the parcels of land.

I still say something within the East Village or right in that general area is where it goes. It the most raw land for full development, helps a very much undeveloped side of downtown and will be a catalyst for development to the East, South, and North, plus create opportunities for better streetscapes and grid planning to the West with the P&L and Central Business district

I agree this site is weak. We have so many surface lots downtown that need to be filled downtown that it's just dumb to go in a site where you're not even filling any.

And they also said they'd want to cap 670 adjacent to this site for parking? LOL

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Thu Aug 11, 2022 3:36 pm So was THIS the "new location" for stadium that DCole was referring to???

EXCLUSIVE: East Crossroads site pitched as a prospect for downtown Royals stadium
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... -star.html

Ding Ding!

There are too many seperate landowners. The KC Star building does make sense somewhat, but it's not big enough site. The Site B referred to in the article is mostly low-rise buildings, but still that land is worth a lot in the urban core. It would take a while to assemble it all with emminent domain (which would also take a long time).

The easiest and cheapist option is still East Village imho.

I really wish they would just consider the Jail Site. It's the same vicinity they're looking at stadium sites anyways.

No one ever discusses or questions the continuous go-to in Kansas City of tearing down even more buildings for redevelopment purposes when we already have vacant cleared parcels. When there is a history of it being a mistake to do so because things do always pan out. One of the proposed sites would demolish structures that are less than 20 years old. I don't think that church on Grand is even 5 years old. All of that glass and concrete and metal used to build the KC Star printing plant produced a lot of carbon that contributes to heating our planet, and we're already suggesting tearing it down without even making a good attempt to reuse the building. The world is on fire and flooding and we seem to continue whistling past the graveyard.

In addition, one plan takes out older retail buildings along Grand. These types of buildings house other retail needed downtown. The buildings provide cheaper rents that are necessary for these types of retail to exist, or startups. Our city has removed so many of these places from downtown that we struggle to even have a functioning neighborhood. No one in power seems to protect existing businesses that operate almost every day of the year for a sporting facility in that location that doesn't.

All these machinations while a huge area of vacant cleared land already exists inside the Loop. Madness.

And still, we don't really know for certain that it will make any difference with respect to the Power & Light District. I'm not convinced it will matter if the stadium is in the East Village or south of the Loop. If people want to go to eat or drink at P&L before or after a game, they will regardless. I'm not even that convinced that many people will do it anyway. People eat and drink at the ballpark. They come from home or work to the game and usually go home afterward.