KCRag Forum

grovester wrote:Has Cordish indicated their anticipated contribution?

Since they will be the primary beneficiary, this is an expectation. I would also expect a contribution from Loews and AEG. There's no public support for this being primarily funded by local city dollars.

I'd like to know where the economic impact number was figured out.

If Cordish funds it, they're going to want to shut it down for private events all the time right?

Again, Cordish funds the cap of the highway in exchange for firm approval of the city funding all parking garages for Light 3-6. Good deal for both. Park shouldn’t be closed during normal business and entertainment hours. Would have to make sure it’s closed overnight so it doesn’t become a homeless tent city.

I'm confused by this part:

The other significant savings comes from reducing the cost of ventilation and life-safety requirements by limiting the stretch of the South Loop running beneath the deck to 800 feet.

What's shown in the images is an uninterrupted deck between (effectively) Central and Grand which covers some 1700+ feet. If there's going to be a gap of more than 100 feet right at Main St then that's a big drawback that needs to be presented clearly.

On a separate note, I'm disappointed that there's never been any talk about doing something with the east side of Grand. It seems like a huge fail to me to spend so much money on a deck and leave half of a major street exposed like that. If it were up to me, I'd put in a thin retail strip there, maybe 50 feet wide -- just something as small as possible that would function as an attractive sound barrier. It would probably add less than $10 million to the project cost and part of that would be offset by the rents generated. It's a small price for something that would give this project its logical bookend. (I know that MODOT opposes using their air rights for private sector buildings, but that's purely a political issue that could be dealt with. Cities in other states do it.)

kas1 wrote:I'm confused by this part:

The other significant savings comes from reducing the cost of ventilation and life-safety requirements by limiting the stretch of the South Loop running beneath the deck to 800 feet.

What's shown in the images is an uninterrupted deck between (effectively) Central and Grand which covers some 1700+ feet. If there's going to be a gap of more than 100 feet right at Main St then that's a big drawback that needs to be presented clearly.

On a separate note, I'm disappointed that there's never been any talk about doing something with the east side of Grand. It seems like a huge fail to me to spend so much money on a deck and leave half of a major street exposed like that. If it were up to me, I'd put in a thin retail strip there, maybe 50 feet wide -- just something as small as possible that would function as an attractive sound barrier. It would probably add less than $10 million to the project cost and part of that would be offset by the rents generated. It's a small price for something that would give this project its logical bookend. (I know that MODOT opposes using their air rights for private sector buildings, but that's purely a political issue that could be dealt with. Cities in other states do it.)

Im pretty sure that its basically illegal to use it. Also, it would probably add a lot more than $10 to the cost

If it's illegal then it's only a law at the state level -- so as I said, a political issue. What sort of constituency would care at all about fighting to keep such a law on the books?

And as far as that goes, the image in the article shows retail/restaurant spaces in several locations anyway.

ldai_phs wrote:Also, it would probably add a lot more than $10 to the cost

It might actually be cheaper: https://casestudies.uli.org/wp-content/ ... 035010.pdf

I'm sitting with the designer. What would you like to know? Quickly!

Any limitations to water features or vegetation?

Could it support a stage? Maybe just something temporary for outdoor events or concerts

does the designer agree that it would be reeeeeally nice to extend it east of grand?

Can there be a place for food trucks like a food truck park?

It's not a bad idea. A food truck park at this location along streetcar line might attract broadly. Though if Cordish is partly funding the cap, they'll probably kill it (competing with P&L restaurants). Union Station needs to allow food trucks at the streetcar platform, even if licensed with a few allowed per day or timeslot.

Can we make it retractable?

&

Sorry for the tease, but our (unrelated) meeting ran long so I didn't get to ask. I'll try to follow up offline.

DaveKCMO wrote:I'm sitting with the designer. What would you like to know? Quickly!

Did he mention anything about how the tunnel will deal with ventilation and emergency access? Like would it be completely sealed or will there be gaps between the overpasses and the decks to allow fumes to exit? I guess I'm wondering if it will be an actual tunnel with ventilation fans, smart technology to close lanes etc or will they build it to somehow avoid those added expenses.

That might be one reason they stop at Grand to keep it under a specific length to avoid the extra tunnel equipment. However, if they do avoid making it an actual ventilated tunnel to save money, that could dramatically change what they can do with the actual park on the deck. There might be more gaps etc, much like how bartle hall and the ballroom create a tunnel effect, but don't actually close off the interstate from carbon monoxide or fumes from a fire etc.

You would just have decks built over the interstate connected to the bridges with small foot bridges etc.

Just wondering how they are planning to do this.

Based on the story sounded like they were doing what they could to avoid the ventilation infrastructure expense...at least that's this specific plan and why it's so much lower....something about under 800 feet...

It sounds like cordish knows that they're going to have to fund a significant part of this. I'm both thankful and nervous at the same time.

WoodDraw wrote:It sounds like cordish knows that they're going to have to find a significant part of this. I'm both thankful and nervous at the same time.

How do you reach the conclusion that Cordish will contribute anything to this? they are not even funding parking garages physically attached their buildings.