Big news!

imran wrote:You could take your pick of any number of underused lots in the area. Why the f%^& is it always the historic building location that is targeted for demo?

Because we are backwards. Parking lots for the win! Preservation for the loss! (I’m kidding). Maybe if the architects can preserve the first 6 floors of the tower with the old building’s design.

That entire strip is flanked by surface parking and parking garages. How are neither an option? That's a beautiful building right there. And in use, yes?

I love the development, though it'll be subsidized once again. I just... can we get some creativity while still adding instead of replacing the density that we have?

I thought there was a height restriction of 300 feet east of broadway? Maybe I'm wrong.

This is awesome. Seems silly that they can't go to the parking lot south of this, but I see this as a huge transformation for downtown.

Ballpark Village hasn't even started yet and people are already interested in surrounding tracts.

Although I think ballpark village has a lot to do with this proposal, a lot of this must have to do with downtown's overall success in the residential sector. (Downtown KC doesn't have any high rise proposals aside P&L). I think this and BPV are gonna turn Downtown into a boom town for new construction. I'm excited.

It sucks that they are targeting one of the only historical buildings left in that corner of downtown. I would be willing to bet these will be marketed with inside the ballpark views though so I bet this is one of the only feasible locations. I'm pretty sure I also heard that the lot to the south was purchased last year by some skyscraper company out of Nashville, so hopefully we end up with a big tall building there too.

Edit: If this moves quickly the skyline in the background of the ballpark is going to be filled with cranes this season. Great for civic perception. Woohoo!

WOOF! Someone quick! Go snag those renderings!

GoHarvOrGoHome wrote: ↑

Dec 07, 2017

It sucks that they are targeting one of the only historical buildings left in that corner of downtown. I would be willing to bet these will be marketed with inside the ballpark views though so I bet this is one of the only feasible locations. I'm pretty sure I also heard that the lot to the south was purchased last year by some skyscraper company out of Nashville, so hopefully we end up with a big tall building there too.

I wonder if the Community College has something to do with this. They own the building and their name appears in the document put out buy the city. Plus, if the lot to the South is built on, Broadway will look great at this end with this tower, some sort of tower at 500 South Broadway, Ballpark Village and the Stadium. Coming in from Illinois will also look good. I don't th9ink Tums is going anywhere so that's good. Maybe this development will spark a Millennium Hotel Redevelopment?

I drive by this building everyday. It’s a beautiful building, but if given the option I’d rather see the high rise. Along with BPV, that corner can capitalize on a lot of foot traffic on game days and hopefully activate the corner on non game days.

Hmmmmmmm...

Hopefully HDA is able to muster something a little more inspired than their usual super value engineered concepts.

I didn't know I could be uneasy with a 30+ story tower in Downtown...

addxb2 wrote:I didn't know I could be uneasy with a 30+ story tower in Downtown...

What do you mean by this? Design wise? I am worried that the tower will be a taller version of 212 in Clayton.

Not to be pissy, but I am more than willing to take what we can get for Downtown development. We haven't even seen a single rendering. Let's please relax, everyone.

chriss752 wrote: ↑

Dec 08, 2017

addxb2 wrote:I didn't know I could be uneasy with a 30+ story tower in Downtown...

What do you mean by this? Design wise? I am worried that the tower will be a taller version of 212 in Clayton.

I could come up with 300 different building configurations for the area of south of market, not a single one of the configurations would include touching the only fully developed block. On top of that, this is an old building with character. Massive parking garages, an empty hotel from the 50s, and surface parking lots.

I rank this close losing the Cupples 7, but even worse because the building is actually maintained and leased.

dylank wrote: ↑

Dec 07, 2017

Although I think ballpark village has a lot to do with this proposal, a lot of this must have to do with downtown's overall success in the residential sector. (Downtown KC doesn't have any high rise proposals aside P&L). I think this and BPV are gonna turn Downtown into a boom town for new construction. I'm excited.

Yea. Outside of River market, P&L, and Crossroads we don't have much. It would be cool if this STL Tower could at least incorporate the facade of the current historical building.

While some are complaining about the availability of surface lots that can be built up on we must remember not all surface lots are up for being sold to developers. I agree it will be sad to lose another historic building at least this building will be getting replaced by a modern high-rise and not for more green space and or a surface lot.
I'm geek to see the renderings.
What makes me even happier that this is Downtown and not Clayton or the CWE

The business journal wrote a story about it but you need a subscription.

St.Louis1764 wrote: ↑

Dec 08, 2017

While some are complaining about the availability of surface lots that can be built up on we must remember not all surface lots are up for being sold to developers. I agree it will be sad to lose another historic building at least this building will be getting replaced by a modern high-rise and not for more green space and or a surface lot.
I'm geek to see the renderings.
What makes me even happier that this is Downtown and not Clayton or the CWE

Not sure why everyone ignores this point. Developers don't have their pick of the open lots in a certain area. Ideally it's not a historic building they have to replace, but maybe this development leads to the owner of the adjacent lot putting up a high rise as well. Bigger picture, I'm excited to see if this immediate area can build itself into a functional sub-neighborhood similar to what Wash Ave has sort of become. Add the residential density between this, BPV, Pointe 400 and maybe we'll see some legit retail start to fill up empty spaces.

In a perfect world, someone would re-face or add some ground level retail to the hideous garages along the same block. I'd really like to see this building be something modern/unique. I'd agree that another 212 would be kind of disappointing.

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Dec 08, 2017

I didn't know I could be uneasy with a 30+ story tower in Downtown...

+1. The existing property is such a great building with height to it and excellent massing. I am very conflicted. On one hand, I am extremely excited to have two ~30 floor skyscrapers going up across the street from each other. I also hate to lose this building in the process.

Whomever said the company from Nashville that bought the lot down the street...that is the kicker for me. If we get a significant tower on that lot, as well as BPV 2 and this tower here, this area will truly be trans formative for downtown and the region as a whole. Let's hope this occurs.

Need renderings ASAP

There's no way they can say the sightlines are exclusive to this lot. There's an ugly parking garage dying to be torn down RIGHT NEXT DOOR

https://ibb.co/cq77hw

Could we get them to build it on one of the many empty parking lots already cleared instead of destroying a handsome older building downtown? I can see this project leveling a nice building and then abandoning the tower so they can have another parking lot right across from Busch.

Or do it the way my Brother’s Boston architecture firm did a Tower and satisfied the city and neighboring residents— tear down only the back part of the building and have the tower appear to rise from behind the current structure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk