KCRag Forum

anonkcmo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 4:21 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:50 am

anonkcmo wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:29 am ....
IMO this look doesn't fit The Crossroads rugged and industrial feel.
....

The Crossroads' largest building is designed entirely out of smooth curves.

I hate corresponding with you (and when I say hate - it's a deep-seated loathing).
As usual your half-witted replies are veiled attempts to argue minutia, opinion and semantics.
And here again "smooth curves" on a particular building have nothing (zero) to do with my comment.
My comment is exclusively about the added texture/facade of the wave feature of 1800 Walnut.

If you're referring to 2 Pershing Sq, you are entirely wrong (as usual).
It clearly has some straight edges.... along with curved features on other corners.
https://media.bizj.us/view/img/10244473 ... 0-1062.jpg

Perhaps you're referring to another building?

AlbertHammond wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 12:23 pm

kboish wrote: ↑Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:34 pm This image gives a better look at how little active use there is on the ground floor.

kboish has it right. We must not be wowed by the building as a piece of sculpture. Look only at the bottom floor or two to see if it is good urbanism. This building is brutal from that view. At the pedestrian scale, 75% of this design is despondent and brutal. The 25% with storefronts can't make up for all the 'bad' happening here.





Sure, adding a building with housing and a bit of retail is good, but this is not as good as it could be.

After further review….

The entire west side of this building touches an open and useful alley. The service access and parking access could use it, but instead ignores it and puts these anti-urban uses on the street. We should fight these assaults on good urban form!!

That alley was vacated, so they do not own the entire thing. A vacation splits the public property between the adjacent owners.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:11 pm That alley was vacated, so they do not own the entire thing. A vacation splits the public property between the adjacent owners.

But, they would still have it for access to the garage. Make the garage entrance to the west.

Honestly, I like this building. Not perfect, but unique, tall enough and fills the block. Would like a better streetfront, but overall a good project.

Love the waves. Probably will by done by KC's own Zahner. Question to those lamenting the street experience: in your opinion, what differences would have made the building excellent? "More street level retail" alone isn't an answer as that would have reduced ground level parking. How would you add ground level retail, keep adequate parking, and keep costs in line? Informed ideas out there?

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:36 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:11 pm That alley was vacated, so they do not own the entire thing. A vacation splits the public property between the adjacent owners.

But, they would still have it for access to the garage. Make the garage entrance to the west.

Honestly, I like this building. Not perfect, but unique, tall enough and fills the block. Would like a better streetfront, but overall a good project.

No. The alley was vacated so the adjacent property owner can build on their half of the alley. That’s why you wouldn’t,and they didn’t, put a garage entrance there.

Can they build on their half of the alley? Are there no setbacks in KC?

missingkc wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:50 pm Can they build on their half of the alley? Are there no setbacks in KC?

Seems they would either want to build in it or secure joint access with the neighbor. Having half a wasted alley would be pointless if the neighbor builds in their half.

The alley was vacated by previous owners years ago -- before Lead Bank and Corrigan Station were even on paper.

cardium wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 4:51 pm The referenced building is KCPAC

If true, the PAC is nowhere near as large as Pershing Square Two.
1800 Walnut and the PAC have nothing in common.
#infiniterabbithole

anonkcmo wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 3:54 am

cardium wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 4:51 pm The referenced building is KCPAC

If true, the PAC is nowhere near as large as Pershing Square Two.
1800 Walnut and the PAC have nothing in common.
#infiniterabbithole

It's almost as if flyingmember was being facetious

missingkc wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:23 pm Question to those lamenting the street experience: in your opinion, what differences would have made the building excellent? "More street level retail" alone isn't an answer as that would have reduced ground level parking. How would you add ground level retail, keep adequate parking, and keep costs in line? Informed ideas out there?

I am not advocating "more street level retail" since the market can't really bare it. The building needs a liner space along both streets that can be flexible and can change over time, based on the market. Could be residential, office or retail. Yes, that impacts the parking garage arrangement, so they will need to adjust the building to meet their parking performa.

We must stop focusing on density for density sake. It means nothing if the street level experience is despondent and forces these residents and neighboring residents to prefer their car for local trips. A dense city with a boring, brutal walking experience makes the car a better option than walking.

Vancouver has a lot of larger apartment buildings especially in the less commercial part of their downtown that have apartments or condos on the ground floor that open directly to the street (higher levels have their own entrance) Is there something in the US zoning code that prevents this? It usually requires a setback for privacy, but it is a pretty good pedestrian experience.

tower wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:11 am Vancouver has a lot of larger apartment buildings especially in the less commercial part of their downtown that have apartments or condos on the ground floor that open directly to the street (higher levels have their own entrance) Is there something in the US zoning code that prevents this? It usually requires a setback for privacy, but it is a pretty good pedestrian experience.

Great example. There is nothing that prohibits this in the U.S. (though K.C's archaic code may not allow it). Residential uses on the ground floor are a great way to activate the street. If people fear that no one would rent/buy those units, then they might be designated as "affordable" units.

missingkc wrote: ↑Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:50 pm Can they build on their half of the alley? Are there no setbacks in KC?

There's no alley anymore legally so it's just like building on a lot that just happens to have been expanded to include a vacated alley.

There's no setbacks downtown to play a part.

This is one of the parcels they're building on. They fully own the land that used to be the alley.
Legal Description: 1800 WALNUT MCGEES ADD S 34.5 FT LOT 454 &ALL LOT 455 7 E 1/2 VAC ALY W OF & ADJ BLK 34

AlbertHammond wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:17 am

tower wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:11 am Vancouver has a lot of larger apartment buildings especially in the less commercial part of their downtown that have apartments or condos on the ground floor that open directly to the street (higher levels have their own entrance) Is there something in the US zoning code that prevents this? It usually requires a setback for privacy, but it is a pretty good pedestrian experience.

Great example. There is nothing that prohibits this in the U.S. (though K.C's archaic code may not allow it). Residential uses on the ground floor are a great way to activate the street. If people fear that no one would rent/buy those units, then they might be designated as "affordable" units.

Downtown is DC, DX and DR zoning at decreasing densities

As best I can tell zoning allows ground floor residential. Nothing bans it outright. City Club appears to have some units with street facing entrances so that's probably a good sign they're ok.

Multi-unit in residential zoning requires features like the below items for the ground floor which isn't a bad standard.

(1) covered porch or canopy;
(2) transom and sidelight windows;
(3) pilasters and pediment; or
(4) other significant architectural treatment that emphasizes the entrance. (Simple trimaround the doorway does not meet this standard.)

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0349076 ... 312!8i6656


Not downtown but still an example of street level residential on a newer and substantial development

KanzaSphinx wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:21 am https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0349076 ... 312!8i6656


Not downtown but still an example of street level residential on a newer and substantial development

Another great example of what could line the parking garage.

flyingember wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:06 am

AlbertHammond wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:17 am

tower wrote: ↑Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:11 am Vancouver has a lot of larger apartment buildings especially in the less commercial part of their downtown that have apartments or condos on the ground floor that open directly to the street (higher levels have their own entrance) Is there something in the US zoning code that prevents this? It usually requires a setback for privacy, but it is a pretty good pedestrian experience.

Great example. There is nothing that prohibits this in the U.S. (though K.C's archaic code may not allow it). Residential uses on the ground floor are a great way to activate the street. If people fear that no one would rent/buy those units, then they might be designated as "affordable" units.

Downtown is DC, DX and DR zoning at decreasing densities

As best I can tell zoning allows ground floor residential. Nothing bans it outright. City Club appears to have some units with street facing entrances so that's probably a good sign they're ok.

Multi-unit in residential zoning requires features like the below items for the ground floor which isn't a bad standard.

(1) covered porch or canopy;
(2) transom and sidelight windows;
(3) pilasters and pediment; or
(4) other significant architectural treatment that emphasizes the entrance. (Simple trimaround the doorway does not meet this standard.)

The City Club entrances on Walnut are perfect, i didn't realize they had that. The South Plaza example is good too, but damn that's an ugly building.

Hopefully City Club encourages other downtown developers to include some form of ground floor residential, but the units must not fetch as much because they're pretty rare in the US, as far as I've seen. Historically, that wasn't the case, but elevators changed all of that.

Yes, ground floor residential! I always think back to the linked article and the conversation about having retail streets and good residential streets (conversation with pics near the bottom of the article). Makes a lot of sense if done right. I especially like the terrace idea.

https://www.vox.com/2017/6/21/15815524/ ... ies-cities

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CptLScfVYAAzTdO.jpg:large