Is Cordish Co. good for downtown?

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Tue Apr 01, 2003 6:33 pm

I realize the importance of a downtown tourist district, but it just annoys me that we have to bring in a company that builds tourism districts all over the country. Can't we build a tourism district that is unique and completely Kansas City, instead of letting someone from Baltimore do it? They might know about landing the biggest names, and what worked in other places, but what do they know about KC?

BTW, of course the chairman of Cordish is going to call Bass Pro the "crown jewel" of retail because he's trying to sell it to us. He wouldn't try to tell people in Chicago or Frisco that Bass Pro is the gem of retail or whatever the hell he said. They simply wouldn't buy it. He doesn't care if he puts a Kmart and Dollar Store downtown as he gets coin from for bringing them in.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Apr 01, 2003 6:43 pm

I disagree....I think you have to leave something like an entertainment district to people that have done it. First off because they know the type of mix that we should shoot for. Second because they have the ties to big name retailers to bring them in.

Now I wouldn't want something like Crossroads, Westport, or even crown Center or the Plaza done this way but for this project, I don't have a problem with it.

I don't think they are just feeding us crap when they say BPS is a big draw...I think BPS's numbers show that they are really a big time draw.

I understand everybody's hesitation with this development....it was nice to have so many unique districts of Kansas City and not have a mass "entertainment district" in the urban core. That being said, the positives of such a district outway those negatives.....at least I think so.....now if we didn't have the City Market, Plaza, Westport, 39th street, 18th & Vine, Southwest Blvd, & Brookside type areas, I would really be pissed if this was being proposed.....but since we have all those awesome unique areas, I don't have as much of a problem with a district that appeals more to the masses and will have destination retail. We still will have a lot of unique areas even inside the downtown loop if this plan goes through...just look at Quality Hill and the Garmet District.

KCN · Post by **KCN** » Tue Apr 01, 2003 6:57 pm

The tourist attractions that are "purely Kansas City" have not drawn the numbers anticipated. Look at Union Station. I say, whatever gets people downtown, we need to consider.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Apr 01, 2003 7:38 pm

bottom line for me is I want something that compliments the convention and tourist people WITHOUT taking away from the plaza (which I doubt will ever happen)

Post by **dangerboy** » Tue Apr 01, 2003 8:50 pm

We tried it before and it didn't work. The Power and Light District was gonna be built by Centertainment, which was Stan Durwood - the owner of AMC Theaters. Doesn't get much more local than that.

The important thing is that we get the best people for the job, regardless of where they are from. We have enough uniquely Kansas City areas that this one project shouldn't be a big deal. Sadly the Plaza doesn't really count as unique anymore.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Apr 01, 2003 10:08 pm

danger...the tenants, no, but the urban feel of the district will always be the Plaza's strongest suit....to have that mix of urban high rises, offices, and retail will always make it stand out.....I wish they wouldn't put so many national chains in it but don't we all

Post by **mean** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 5:32 pm

The tourist attractions that are "purely Kansas City" have not drawn the numbers anticipated. Look at Union Station.

There was a Science City in St. Louis for years before we ever built one. There's nothing uniquely KC about it. The jazz district is a different story, but it's also touristy crap. I love jazz, but I bet you can guess how many times I've been to the jazz museum: zero. Yeah, there's a museum...and that's about it. Only just now are restaurants and real nightspots starting to appear.

Trailerkid validly points out that the mayor of Chicago or San Fran would laugh Cordish out of the planning meeting if they suggested that Bass Pro is the crown jewel of retail. Those markets are different, and I don't think it's unfair to say that if BPS is "right" for the KC market (which it may be) it really speaks volumes about this market. What, precisely, it says is left as an exercise for the reader.

Post by **dangerboy** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 6:39 pm

The lackluster performance of Union Station is largely tied to how much Science City sucks. They disguised the science so well that it's really just an expensive romper room with any real educational value. Then they added a giant movie screen when we already had the Imax at the Zoo. It just doesn't compare well with St. Louis which is free, is better quality overall, and has an Omnimax theater, which is on the inside of a dome rather than a flat screen.

ignatius · Post by **ignatius** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 7:19 pm

Working in Crown Center, I eat at Union Station a couple times a week. There is more activity in the station at lunchtime than most realize but it's Science City that is the problem... because it charges way too much.

I wouldn't mind seeing SC fail (the station is repaired is what matters to me) and then turn Union Station into something that functions as a part of the neighborhood with the tourist element as a secondary point... not specifically something for tourists only or families that have $100+ to blow on a visit. It is a higlight of the city w/out adding sensory experiences. The building itself is one.

If Science City fails, what would you want it to become? Ideally, if the JoCo heavy rail runs and BRT in the city, I'd like to see its primary function as a station again that has amenities that serve commuters. I like the idea that the Post Office will open a retail center in there. I also like the touring exhibits they have. With the pedestrian bridge going to the Frieghthouse district, it will feel like a natural extension to that area. The threatre stage needs to collaborate with an already successful theatre company and convince them to move in as the primary tenant.

When the IRS opens up across the street and additional residents are added in the area, Union Station could definitely survive if catering to the business/residential neighborhood instead of tourists. Make it tourist friendly but not dependent on them.

phxcat · Post by **phxcat** » Fri Apr 04, 2003 8:02 pm

I like that thought about Science City failing. I have never bee nto Science City, but I've been to Union Station a couple time recently, most recentlyu for the Declaration of Independence, and I see no reason why it shouldn't be an attraction on its own. The little historical thing upstairs is very cool, and the connection to the Smithsonian will bering in some nice traveling exhibits. Amtrak is operating out of there now instead of downtown, and the Johnson County commuter rail would force it to become a commuter center. That, along with the pedestrian bridge would provide a huge boost for the Crossroads, and for the Downtown area as a whole, as anything to strengthen the Crossroads will help to tie the loop with Crown Center.

With all this, Science City just seems a bit out of place. If we go with an aquarium on the river, that would be a better location for a science museum.

We've got to get that JoCo heavy rail!

Post by **mean** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 1:39 am

I don't wanna pay for heavy rail myself, but if JoCo wants to build it and subsidize its operation for eternity I would love to see it hapen.

Post by **bahua** » Sat Apr 05, 2003 11:58 am

Because it would need to be subsidized. To get people in JoCo to vote for the tax increase, some other deal-sweetener, like adding lanes to I-35, would have to happen. Once that cookie gets handed to the people, they will _never_ ride the train.

Oh... and I like Union Station. it's cool.

Post by **mean** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 2:07 pm

I've said it before, but the American romantic fantasy world where driving is equated to freedom, independence, and affluence needs to die.

SonicBoi · Post by **SonicBoi** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 4:25 pm

I agree, even though we do need cars to take us places where mass transit isn't really a possabillity (rural communities, etc...). Just the other night my family was complaining about having to walk a few blocks to get somewhere downtown. I refuted by saying I used to walk 3 blocks a day to work, but they didn't care. It is my opinion the Downtowns are designed for pedestrians, not cars (even though they are a necessity).

KCgridlock · Post by **KCgridlock** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 8:01 pm

KC could use commuter rail for sure, but commuter or heavy rail is sort of a double edged sword. It might take some cars off the road and put some more peds on the sidewalks downtown, but it contributes to sprawl about as much as a highway giving people more reasons to live as far out as possible. Of course if I had a choice, I would take commuter rail, but just saying it's not a real big deal if we don't get it. Light rail is a different story. Rather than having a few stops and only running a few trains a day, light rail is very freqent all day and night and has more stops. I have always thought they could build light rail from through JoCo via some major thouroghfares like SMP and Antioch and it would work much better. It would then tie into a transfer center near the plaza and KCMO's system. I know I'm dreaming. Then at union station, other lines connecting Belton, Blue Springs, KCK and KCI would connect. Dream dream dream.

Anyway, I think you will see the JoCo and probably the lines to Odessa and Warrensburg in the next ten years especially after the initial BRT opens and even more so if the metro passes Smartmoves next year.

eliphar17 · Post by **eliphar17** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 8:50 pm

First, my story: I am a junior at Shawnee Mission Northwest High School in Shawnee. I have been interested in downtown since reading the series of articles in the Star last fall about what could be done to make downtown better. The issue that first caught my attention was a new arena. I strongly believe that Kansas City needs a new downtown arena, because Kemper just isn't good enough anymore to draw the kinds of events that Kansas City deserves. I am very encouraged to read about all the new residential projects happening downtown because I think that a healthy downtown absolutely must start with residents, not tourists. I like the idea of a "critical mass" of residents that would demand goods and services downtown, thus bringing in retail development and changing the whole atmosphere of downtown.

With regard to the topic of the Cordish Co. development and Bass Pro Shops... I think that the nature of big, elaborate development plans is such that they simply cannot succeed in reaching their objective. Look what happened with the Power & Light District: the big, elaborate plan collapsed, leaving a vacuum in the downtown loop. I think the best way to go about development (in almost any case) is to let the economy and the local market dictate what is and isn't built. The extent of city involvement should simply be to take steps to encourage demand for residential and retail development. Designing a specific plan for development (especially retail) is beyond the scope of the city's ability, and while it may be something an outside company could do, I find it an iffy concept. But that's just me, a high school junior. I trust that Barnes at least has the right goals, if not the best methods for reaching them.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 9:01 pm

eliphar17...excellent first drop in. I wish I had the passion for development as you do at that age.....I only started getting interested in college.

Be interested to hear your views on many topics being discussed here because you are a bit younger than most on here and hence not the typical "urban liver" that we have in here.

Thanks for stopping by, hope we hear a lot from you.

ignatius · Post by **ignatius** » Sun Apr 06, 2003 9:58 pm

Nice analysis, eliphar17. Many in here, including me, agree with that assessment.

Post by **mean** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 7:28 am

Many in here, including me, agree with that assessment.

Me too. Generally speaking, when the market rules, the people win.

Post by **dangerboy** » Mon Apr 07, 2003 8:09 am

mean wrote:
Many in here, including me, agree with that assessment.
Me too. Generally speaking, when the market rules, the people win.

Great examples are the Crossroads, West 39th St, Northtown, Mission, and Main Street in Lee's Summit. Those are all successful places because of small businesses rather than a giant developer.

KCRag Forum