KCRag Forum

oh no. does this mean kcmo could be going through another funkhouser era of anti development?

This whole thing is silly. The City signed the agreement back in 2004. They are obligated to fund the parking garages and Cordish is obligated to build out at least to Four Light. All this will do is delay the project. Not a big deal, so maybe ground breaking doesn't happen until late Summer or Fall.

chaglang wrote:It make be ultimately pointless with regard to the Cornish agreement, but if this is the start of a shift by the city away from building parking garages, Shields and Canaday can take all the time they want.

Yes, the people of Cornwall can be quite stubborn.

There will be a need to build parking garages in some locations. Ideally, there will be less need for them downtown if people are living and working there, and not driving. However, there are still a lot of people who work in Greater downtown who don't want to live there, and live where there is not a lot of public transit. They will drive to work. So there might still be a need for some commuter garages that would hopefully be built on the periphery of downtown and near transit. This will be necessary if there is to be new development on many surface lots downtown. So instead of building parking garages onsite (when new buildings go up), the City needs to encourage placement of them elsewhere.

The City will need to be more strategic though in where it's willing to finance garages. An example of this would be the Isle of Capri parking lot, which could be used a commuter garage by day, and casino and event parking other times. This assumes the streetcar riverfront extension to Capri happens. The City might not even have to help finance that garage. It might be possible to get the Port Authority to finance it. I think the casino will probably build a hotel if they do.

The other location would be the north loop freeway vacation scenario. It would be a strategic investment to place garages near the streetcar line around 6th and Main in the freeway trench under a building. It would be used by commuters using I-29 and 169 from the north, and coming from KCK on the west. Another strategic garage would be in the Union Station east yards. That would be accessed via 20th Street from I-35 and Bruce Watkins using 22nd Street. Then construct buildings on top. If there is one location downtown that could handle a big skyscraper, it's this site. You could build a lot of parking underneath it.

GRID wrote:oh no. does this mean kcmo could be going through another funkhouser era of anti development?

2 out of 13 council. No.

KCPowercat wrote:

GRID wrote:oh no. does this mean kcmo could be going through another funkhouser era of anti development?

2 out of 13 council. No.

I was just talking about the mayor. Hopefully not. That was a dark time for KC development.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that most of the candidates except Reed, Justus, and Lucas(maybe) would lead to another development dark ages. I also have a feeling that the council member candidates are generally skewed anti-downtown. This is part of the reason why I want a large city wide transit proposal put up this year or early next.

GRID wrote:

KCPowercat wrote:

GRID wrote:oh no. does this mean kcmo could be going through another funkhouser era of anti development?

2 out of 13 council. No.

I was just talking about the mayor. Hopefully not. That was a dark time for KC development.

That time never happened...I blocked it from my memory

ldai_phs wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that most of the candidates except Reed, Justus, and Lucas(maybe) would lead to another development dark ages. I also have a feeling that the council member candidates are generally skewed anti-downtown. This is part of the reason why I want a large city wide transit proposal put up this year or early next.

Who else is there?

ldai_phs wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that most of the candidates except Reed, Justus, and Lucas(maybe) would lead to another development dark ages. I also have a feeling that the council member candidates are generally skewed anti-downtown. This is part of the reason why I want a large city wide transit proposal put up this year or early next.

That's pretty scary. It's like KC can't keep the momentum going politically. You need people in city hall that want to see all of KCMO grow, the Northland, East Side, South Side and the urban core. If you let the gas off on the Northland or Urban core, the missed opportunities easily go to Kansas instead.

On the topic of this thread. Why would the city even try to back out of an agreement they agreed to? That's not good business at all. That garage in Three Light will likely be available to the public which means the city can continue to develop other lots with less parking needed. Nearby projects can be built with less parking etc and you have more parking for the public to use in an area with a lot of visitors.

Even on the east coast except Manhattan almost all apartment towers have parking (and even most luxury towers in NYC do too) , so a tower in KC without parking is a pipe dream.

People are making too much out of this. Politicians are going to politician. It's going to eventually pass and time isn't a big issue here.

That are not made available to the public all the time...important clarification.

ldai_phs wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that most of the candidates except Reed, Justus, and Lucas(maybe) would lead to another development dark ages. I also have a feeling that the council member candidates are generally skewed anti-downtown. This is part of the reason why I want a large city wide transit proposal put up this year or early next.

Taylor and Wagner would not put us in a dark age IMO, based on their full tenure.

I'm not talking free. I'm saying the general public driving in looking for parking cannot park at cordish ran garages many times due to them being reserved for special parking permits etc....that to me is not public parking.

KCPowercat wrote:I'm not talking free. I'm saying the general public driving in looking for parking cannot park at cordish ran garages many times due to them being reserved for special parking permits etc....that to me is not public parking.

I don’t think I’ve ever experienced this. The only restrictions I ever see are limits on event parking in the Cosentions garage.

"Where are you going?"

"Uh, I'm just trying to get groceries, dude."

"Alright, go ahead."

That's been my experience at that garage.

StrangerThings wrote:

KCPowercat wrote:I'm not talking free. I'm saying the general public driving in looking for parking cannot park at cordish ran garages many times due to them being reserved for special parking permits etc....that to me is not public parking.

The only time they’re not available to the public is if the public has filled up all the available slots. The only garage that is ever really bought out is he H&R garage and that’s not a Cordish ran garage.

This isn't true. The P&L garage and Cosintinos garage is blocked off for various color reserved parking tags during events. People are also turned away from the Cosintonos garage at various times if they don't say they are going to the right businesses.

If Cordish doesn't think this is happening they need to go witness what their attendants are doing.

During the Big 12 there will be signs that say "yellow parking pass" only in front of the garages. If they are still open to the public it's very misleading for those coming downtown.

http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/edito ... 76174.html

The Star is calling the "examination" of the garage subsidy a worthy cause. Is it me or do they seem to have a soft spot for Kathryn Shields? Guess she helps them with their "MIDTOWN IS TOO CROWDED" articles.

I get the need for affordable housing, but it's not Cordish's problem at this point the city was (more) inept when they negotiated over 10 years ago. If they want to institute affordable housing, create a city oridinance requiring XX% of all residential projects be affordable, retroactive to all projects that have not begun construction by say August 2018. That seems like something that wouldn't violate the P&L agreement and addresses the current reality of urban housing.

I hope this means when other projects ask the city for help financing affordable units they will get some traction.

Many projects only need financing because of parking....ole Shields wants to require that of all new apartments...she's a slick one.