KCRag Forum

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Fri Dec 30, 2022 5:53 pm The problem is that you can't tell private land owners what to do. If you put a football stadium somewhere urban in KC, it's just going to get surrounded by parking lots.

The big deal downtown wasn't the sprint center, it was the dump truck of money we gave cordish to actually develop with their expertise on these projects.

Look at the non cordish controlled land around them

The land is not owned by the Chiefs. It's owned by Jackson County.

I see the land deal in East Village being less complicated transactionally, but more complicated politically because of the city/county relationship.

I think voters would be pleased if the only KCMO contribution was free or $1 land* to the county and then maybe incentives that actually follow the current policy (rather than via PortKC or KCATA).

*This applies to EV only

Another possible thing for the parties to consider is EV developers buying the jail complex from Jackson County and demolishing the buildings and including that in the greater area redevelopment plan. Leave the old Jackson County Juvenile Court building as a county annex building. Redevelop the rest of the block.

Anyone see this before? I don't remember it. From the business journal. Tight fit it looks like

That would take out 14 existing parcels with occupied structures. Assuming the stadium is owned again by Jackson County as the current stadium is today, that would wipe out that tax revenue.

Meanwhile, the already cleared land in EV is some are owned by the city and thus not generating any tax revenue.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 1:42 pm That would take out 14 existing parcels with occupied structures. Assuming the stadium is owned again by Jackson County as the current stadium is today, that would wipe out that tax revenue.

Meanwhile, the already cleared land in EV is some are owned by the city and thus not generating any tax revenue.

And the parking garages they would want to build would have taken out the other half of the neighborhood.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 1:42 pm That would take out 14 existing parcels with occupied structures. Assuming the stadium is owned again by Jackson County as the current stadium is today, that would wipe out that tax revenue.

Meanwhile, the already cleared land in EV is some are owned by the city and thus not generating any tax revenue.

I hate the crossroads location for that reason. It's a mistake KC has repeated over and over again through its history. Do not destroy viable neighborhoods and urban space when it's not necessary.

The listening tour continues

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Jan 23, 2023 1:25 pm Anyone see this before? I don't remember it. From the business journal. Tight fit it looks like

I would be opposed to this one. East Village is perfect for a stadium, not the north Crossroads or anywhere else really

But the perfect outfield skyline view .... of the AT&T barn.

I oppose anything that will require demolition of Temptations lol

It's an insanely poor location.

Bad location. No reason to tear down buildings when we have an open area in EV.

Also, if you’re gonna do a Crossroads stadium…please just atleast make it blend in with the neighborhood. Come on.

@normalthings wheres's the link in the business journal for that?

I think I recall seeing that as an option just showing how locations could accommodate around the downtown loop. They showed East Village, North Loop, one around Grand & SW BLVD (across from old Bob Jones shoe store area). They were pointing out options that had been brought up before over the years.

I still say East Village to really activate the Eastern edge of downtown & spurn meaning development into that area, including potential improvement to roads & highway interchanges on that side of town. Could be catalyst to redoing the Northloop if you start creating better highway Flow on East side. Plus having a draw over there will help connect the blocks better from the West into the East. At least I feel it will IMO

Bummer of a update Chris but thanks for the pictures at least. Sad to see this building come down.

https://twitter.com/chris_stritzel/stat ... 2307600384




I just don't understand how part of the building couldn't have been incorporated into the project as a whole. For instance, why not make it the leasing office of an apartment complex like here? The new build isn't anything special - but at least they saved the historic building.

^Sorry. I was going to post the photos but got caught up in a bunch of things pertaining to work, school, and health.

This building couldn't be reused as a leasing office, because if the East Village is the site of the future baseball stadium, the stadium will sit on this parcel.

It's too bad they didn't at least remove the terracotta along the roof line and reuse that somewhere in the neighborhood reconstruction. If you look closely, those terracotta panels have little faces on them. They would look good sitting atop a fountain. A good mason could have easily removed them.

That terracotta would have been a great addition to the City Museum's collection of lost architectural details.

Most of their collection is socked away in an underground cave I'm told, and never sees the light of day. I'd rather it be reused in the neighborhood like this was.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1037242 ... 384!8i8192