Make Grand Grand

[DaveKCMO]

a road diet (two travel lanes with a dedicated center turn lane) with a considerable green buffer and bi-directional bike lane was the WINNING alternative at the public meeting last week. if you know of anyone with a stake in this corridor, get them involved! click below for the presentation from meeting 2 (alternatives are shown starting at slide 126).

http://grandblvdkc.com/2011/10/communit ... sentation/

in other news, KCATA is considering a realignment of MAX onto grand!

next public meeting is nov. 9.

[FangKC]

Looking through the presentation, it's interesting to see that in one frame, they estimate that there is room for 6,000 residential units along Grand (Page 92 of the slideshow), and 2.9 million square feet of potential office space. That's almost three One Kansas City Place buildings.

I like these photos of the Portland Transit Mall, and the Denver 16th Street streetscapes, and think Grand should look similar. I would hope the City would get rid of street parking and widen sidewalks (at least inside the Loop), add more trees, benches, kiosks, street lighting, etc. along the boulevard.

I think in some areas where the boulevard can't really be widened that much, the City could encourage developers adding new buildings on vacant lots to add width to the sidewalks and set the building back further from the current curbline more (on undeveloped soft parcels), to add more trees and landscaping, benches, etc.

Portland Transit Mall.





16th Street in Denver.

[IraGlacialis]

a road diet (two travel lanes with a dedicated center turn lane) with a considerable green buffer and bi-directional bike lane was the WINNING alternative at the public meeting last week. if you know of anyone with a stake in this corridor, get them involved! click below for the presentation from meeting 2 (alternatives are shown starting at slide 126).

http://grandblvdkc.com/2011/10/communit ... sentation/

Really nice design. I especially like the amount of vegetation put in and the tucked-away parallel parking. However, I'm wondering why only one side, the one with the bike path, gets to have substantially wider sidewalks vs both sides getting around 16'-18' of widening. And which side will most likely be picked for the path?

[pash]

.

[DaveKCMO]

next meeting is wednesday!

http://grandblvdkc.com/2011/10/youre-in ... meeting-3/

[DaveKCMO]

meeting tonight! "european-style cycletrack" on tap?

[smh]

I was impressed with the presentation last night. My concern is on the implementation. The presenters discussed "thinking big" so that if (when) reality hits and the project is scaled back we will be left with what is still a great project. My issue is that as I looked at the concept drawings of the streetscape--while very nice--there were no features that were particularly extravagant. The renderings simply look like a modern 21st Century street ought to look. This is a long way of saying that I worry we'll end up with a project that simply puts a nicer sidewalk in front of Temptations and the surrounding surface parking lots.

[kboish]

dave, do you have any links to the presentation?

@smh- that was a concern of mine as well. all though i did not attend last night, when I heard them say that in previous meetings my thought was...there really isn't anything extravagant or revolutionary in this....its just attempting to create a modern street.

That being said, i still think its a great idea and they should shoot for the moon.

Really though, it will all be contingent on if developers feel it warrants building on all those surface lots on grand to create the street they're shooting for. Without that its all window dressing parking lots. Hopefully it will help entice the development if it gets built.

[DaveKCMO]

keep an eye on the website. i'm sure the presentation will be posted there soon.

implementation is indeed key. P+L looked good on paper, as i'm sure the westport streetscape did, too. my big issues are materials. and i actually DO NOT believe that a black metal bench is no hotter than a wooden one. even if it's strictly perception, why discourage people from sitting?

NO MORE BRICK SIDEWALKS UNTIL THEY CAN BE PROPERLY DONE (and maintained).

[kboish]

ahh yes, the website. brilliant.

[smh]

keep an eye on the website. i'm sure the presentation will be posted there soon.

implementation is indeed key. P+L looked good on paper, as i'm sure the westport streetscape did, too. my big issues are materials. and i actually DO NOT believe that a black metal bench is no hotter than a wooden one. even if it's strictly perception, why discourage people from sitting?

NO MORE BRICK SIDEWALKS UNTIL THEY CAN BE PROPERLY DONE (and maintained).

Haha, so that was you Dave at the meeting? Yeah, I don't believe for a second that a metal bench is the same temp as a wooden one on a hot day. Plus, perception is reality.

I agree that a lot rides on accuracy of implementation as well. It's the small details--such as the doors on Main Street (Polish Nail Salon, Dry Cleaners, etc.) that open right onto the already too narrow sidewalk. Those doors should have been recessed into small alcoves so that they didn't open right into the walking path. Poor implementation.

[DaveKCMO]

http://grandblvdkc.com/2011/11/communit ... sentation/

[IraGlacialis]

Nice continuation of ideas; I especially like the green bridges idea. Personally think the whole Boulevard of the Americas a bit kitschy though.
Just curious, the idea of filling those parking lots long 20th, 17th, 13th, and 11th is great and all, but would the committee itself implement it, or would they set up incentives for an outside force to implement it?

[KC-wildcat]

For me, "Make Grand Grand" is a 'chicken or the egg' issue.

I think we can all agree that Grand will never be grand until the Critical Infill Zones (20th St., 17th, 12th, 10th) are filled in. It's fine and good to dream of Las Ramblas or Michigan Avenue, but the thing that all inspiring boulevards have in common is "destinations." Places to go, places to see. shops, restuarants, stores, offices, homes. widening and beautifying the pedestrian experience doesn't really accomplish a lot without..... pedestrians.

So, the question in my mind is whether the focus should be on streetscape or on infill. If we beautify the streetscape, will businesses flock to Grand? Or do we need to bring the businesses in before we beautify the streetscape? Or do the concepts go hand in hand?

How do we magically fill in these zones? Where does the money come from? Where are the developers? Where is the demand? Do we create an economic impact zone where taxes are abated, or something?

[kcjak]

I shouldn't complain since I didn't go to any of workshops/meetings, but I'm a bit disappointed in having different zones along Grand. If not done right it could look like a big theme party. Would the design reflect the Grand Blvd of the Americas idea and feature only architecture related to countries from the Americas or end up being Vegas-y with italian, asian and other attractions?

If the presentation references Kessler, why not try something Kessler-esque or (gasp) a unique approach that doesn't mimick something done before. The reason High Line, Las Ramblas, etc. are so iconic is largely because they don't rely on copying something else.

[smh]

For me, "Make Grand Grand" is a 'chicken or the egg' issue.

I think we can all agree that Grand will never be grand until the Critical Infill Zones (20th St., 17th, 12th, 10th) are filled in. It's fine and good to dream of Las Ramblas or Michigan Avenue, but the thing that all inspiring boulevards have in common is "destinations." Places to go, places to see. shops, restuarants, stores, offices, homes. widening and beautifying the pedestrian experience doesn't really accomplish a lot without..... pedestrians.

So, the question in my mind is whether the focus should be on streetscape or on infill. If we beautify the streetscape, will businesses flock to Grand? Or do we need to bring the businesses in before we beautify the streetscape? Or do the concepts go hand in hand?

How do we magically fill in these zones? Where does the money come from? Where are the developers? Where is the demand? Do we create an economic impact zone where taxes are abated, or something?

I would expand your question to the entire core. Density in KC is a "chicken and egg" issue that will be with us for the foreseeable future. I think projects like Grand Blvd are where the city can say, "Hey, developer, we're about to do this to this neighborhood, now would be a great time to drop that 10 story apartment building at 20th and Grand." I think when the city shows it is moving forward then development will follow. So I guess I'm saying it's chicken. Or is that egg?

[DaveKCMO]

at a million+ per block, the expectation is that the streetscape will attract private development. given the uniqueness of what was presented, i'd say they have a compelling case. where else in a 250-mile radius will you have such a street? (assuming it's implemented as presented)

[FangKC]

I tend to think that the City has to create a special place to encourage developers and employers to reconsider downtown.

One of the reasons that the Plaza is such an attractive place for employers and retail is the physical environment is superior, top-notch, and well-maintained.

One of the criticisms of downtown in the past has been the crumbling infastructure.

Let us revisit Polsinelli-Shughart. They were so hell-bent on having a 47th Street address that they were willing to tear down or modify part of the historic Plaza building stock, when another empty parcel already existed behind their present building.

I would say that some employers are willing to consider a prestigious location that is well-landscaped and attractive.

[aknowledgeableperson]

I I would say that some employers are willing to consider a prestigious location that is well-landscaped and attractive.

The saying goes something like this. There are three items in real estate: Location, Location, Location. If you want to beef up Grand then make the improvements first. The effort might not be a 'grand' success but then there are no guarantees in life, except death and taxes. If you wait for development first you will have a long wait.

[cdm2p]

I would not put any value in designers' ideas of the type of development that could happen on grand. They are mental masturbations.
last I checked, there is no one waiting in the wings to build any kind of building on grand.