KCRag Forum

dukuboy1 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 8:57 amAgain I don't know but just trying to frame it beyond "big dummies, use public transit"

The $350 million transit project outside should at least allow projects right next its stations to reduce parking. I'm not expecting it to be eliminated, especially for a mixed use development that's at the high end of the market.

Although if they're seeking incentives, shouldn't they seek to comply with the city's policy goals?

I'm glad all the parking is planned to be hidden underground. Even with the streetcar, many people who live here will have jobs in JOCO or up north and need to drive. They will also want to go to the grocery store and target and places like that. Even if they could use the streetcar access shopping in the future, they won't want to carry tons of groceries home on the streetcar. Also, with those price points, many units will be occupied by 2 (or more?) people. Both residents may need a place to park.

I am not happy to hear the building will be designed by Burns & Mac. I don't like their aesthetics, especially for that neighborhood. Reverb is cool. According to the rendering, W&R will be absolutely ugly. Maybe they will come up with something totally different for this, I should reserve my judgement.

I like this quote: “ground level mixed-use and landscape is intended to create a design focused node connecting the streetcar to the arts district.” They have the space to create something really interesting. A new sculpture garden that visually connects to the Kemper's sculpture garden would be amazing. They should partner with some institution to get quality art put in place. Imagine exiting the streetcar and having the option to use the street-side sidewalk or to wander through the sculpture garden when heading toward the museums.

Could have changed but I thought the idea was build the below-ground garage upfront but only phase 1 of the surface project for now. The garage will support additional phases as they come online.

If they are calling it "Museum Tower" I would expect a high rise, but in low rise KC sometimes 5 story buildings have "tower" in their names.

moderne wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:18 am If they are calling it "Museum Tower" I would expect a high rise, but in low rise KC sometimes 5 story buildings have "tower" in their names.

Its possible. As shared here before, the idea had been multiple buildings on the site including a 30 floor apartment building. Price is a bit low for a 30 floor development but I think the general idea is still there.

My main problem with B&M’s other projects has been how they handled the parking and the street interaction. Ive thought the remainder of the buildings were quite neat aesthetically. So with the garage pledged to be underground and this development meant to serve as a gateway (pedestrian included, id assume) to the museums- my hopes and expectations are high for this project.

These are good points. If it is multiphase but they're incurring all the parking expense up front perhaps it makes sense.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 10:16 am Could have changed but I thought the idea was build the below-ground garage upfront but only phase 1 of the surface project for now. The garage will support additional phases as they come online.

That's interesting and maybe would make it more understandable. I'm also glad the parking appears to be underground. Honestly, if it's underground I don't really care how many spaces they build, having a vibrant and alive streetscape is critical along the most important transit spine in our city. We also don't know if there are plans for a large restaurant or retail spaces there that may also want to have available parking. I will hold judgement until the final plans are released.

I agree with excusing the number of parking spaces with the project if it is meant to support other projects or nearby uses. On its own, the number of spaces is soo egregious that must be the case.

But, all too often we never see future phases, so im skeptical.

IIRC, the holiday inn already had a below-ground garage. I am not sure how many spaces are currently there.

I should also add: The groundfloor will have a lot of retail and f&b. Parking will also be made available to those tenants.

Looks like a very nice and possibly tall/dense project. I think you guys get too worked up over parking though for a development of this type. (higher end residential)

The streetcar would reduce the amount of car trips, but not eliminate the need for a car for most people. The streetcar is hardly true regional mass transit. It's a local tram and KC still lacks a lot of basic living services along the route. KC needs more trams that go more places to develop a true carless culture like you see in Amsterdam or something. If people happen to work downtown or crown center they might use it or they might use it to go events downtown, but I would guess over 90% that would live in a building like that would still have at least one car per unit.

I would be super happy it's underground and can possibly accommodate other uses in the area and eliminate the need for above ground parking for retail etc.

Even in developing areas of DC like navy yard which are very walkable and have good bus routes and subway access have relatively large garages under most of the buildings even if people hardly ever use their cars. And each building seems to have just enough space to charge $40 for a few dozen cars for ball game traffic etc which might be what this development has in mind.

Live view:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1R9gSIojLQ

With such a bad taste in their mouth about Americo and the W&R backout, I can't see any way that the council gives incentives for this project, no matter how nice it is. You have to feel like the two situations are a joint negotiation in some way.

The W & R is being completed by the developers. Why should they be punished for the backout by W & R?

moderne wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 3:50 pm The W & R is being completed by the developers. Why should they be punished for the backout by W & R?

Who made the decision to abandon W&R building?

GRID wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 3:08 pm Live view:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1R9gSIojLQ

So about half of the property already has below-ground parking today. That garage was tight (vertically and horizontally) so I wonder if they are going to have to dig more.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 5:09 pm

moderne wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 3:50 pm The W & R is being completed by the developers. Why should they be punished for the backout by W & R?

Who made the decision to abandon W&R building?

Neither Burns & mac or Americo

If you’re investing in new higher-end residential, a direct garage-to-hallway elevator connection is a must. That’s a nightmare to retrofit through an existing garage (which is likely poured in place concrete). Couple that with an expectation for a renter to be able to park their luxury SUV comfortably and I’ll be extremely shocked if they’re keeping the existing garage.

An outmoded garage is also a tough sell for a market like KC for prospective national retail tenants...if that’s even a targeted user for the retail space.

horizons82 wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 5:29 pm If you’re investing in new higher-end residential, a direct garage-to-hallway elevator connection is a must. That’s a nightmare to retrofit through an existing garage (which is likely poured in place concrete). Couple that with an expectation for a renter to be able to park their luxury SUV comfortably and I’ll be extremely shocked if they’re keeping the existing garage.

An outmoded garage is also a tough sell for a market like KC for prospective national retail tenants...if that’s even a targeted user for the retail space.

I don’t think anyone thinks they are keeping the existing garage.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Mar 18, 2021 7:04 pm I don’t think anyone thinks they are keeping the existing garage.

Sorry, on first glance I misread your post about digging out the existing garage.