"Truman Blvd"??

Come here for discussion about the new downtown entertainment district.
Post Reply
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

shaffe wrote: then why diddn't it happen for the past 15 years?
Of course, this is totally off topic and there's one to discuess such things here: http://www.kcskyscrapers.com/newforum/i ... pic=2586.0

What MKB put together with Cordish, MoDESA, the Sprint Center as well as encouraging the downtown housing boom is pretty hard to argue against.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7290
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by beautyfromashes »

shaffe wrote: then why diddn't it happen for the past 15 years?
That was the environment of the 1980's.  The suburbs of most American cities, not just KC, were growing and people enjoyed the felt safety of seclusion from their neighbors, they enjoyed the increased ammenities the burbs could provide, and businesses moved further out because it was easier to build buildings with increased technology and cheap land prices than redevelop the core.  Now, lately people have realized that seclusion from their neighbors has damaged their souls, driving places instead of walking isn't all they thought it was, strip malls are boring and they miss the rhythm of the city.  And don't get me wrong, Barnes is smart!  She sees a trend and is keeping her ship in the middle of the stream, but, she has in no way CAUSED the revitalization of downtown or really increased it's timing much.  
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

beautyfromashes wrote: That was the environment of the 1980's.  The suburbs of most American cities, not just KC, were growing and people enjoyed the felt safety of seclusion from their neighbors, they enjoyed the increased ammenities the burbs could provide, and businesses moved further out because it was easier to build buildings with increased technology and cheap land prices than redevelop the core.  Now, lately people have realized that seclusion from their neighbors has damaged their souls, driving places instead of walking isn't all they thought it was, strip malls are boring and they miss the rhythm of the city.  And don't get me wrong, Barnes is smart!  She sees a trend and is keeping her ship in the middle of the stream, but, she has in no way CAUSED the revitalization of downtown or really increased it's timing much. 
Sorry, but this needs to be corrected. Look at the 1990s. Please explain why when many other downtowns experienced huge building booms, KC's downtown probably sunk to the lowest its ever been. MKB is not downtown's saviour, but its laughable to say she's had not positive influence on downtown.

The Xroads is an example of "people" taking over an area. Most of the new housing and such isn't just "people" taking back the city, but large scale development where the developer is often working with the city. Stuff like Western Auto isn't "the people" of KC reclaiming downtown and there is a possibility it won't even happen if the city isn't supportive or efficient with developers.
mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11240
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by mean »

I pretty much agree with beauty. Barnes is smart, but she deserves much less credit than most KCians are going to give her. Similar revitalizations have happened in just about every major US city, throughout the 1990s. It was going to happen, with or without P&L, with or without an arena, with or without the help of city hall. Those things MAY end up being helpful (most likely, I'd say), but they aren't deal makers or breakers. It was happening anyway.

Of course, on the other hand, Barnes has smartly positioned herself as the figurehead of the revitalization movement, so it isn't surprising that she gets the cred.  It's too bad you can't look around and individually give credit to the artists, residents, and business owners / investors who bet their asses that the city would come back, but it's really not realistic to do so anyway.
Sorry, but this needs to be corrected. Look at the 1990s. Please explain why when many other downtowns experienced huge building booms, KC's downtown probably sunk to the lowest its ever been. MKB is not downtown's saviour, but its laughable to say she's had not positive influence on downtown.
I think it's pretty clear that most other downtowns had less red tape blocking development (kudos to the city for apparently fixing some of these issues), and the Kemper-equivelant folks in these other cities were easier to deal with. Also, forget ye so quickly the original P&L district in the 1990s, that could have possibly caught us up in a more timely manner with these other downtowns? P&L died with its conceptualizer, but I find it telling that DESPITE this, people began moving downtown in numbers, often from other cities and regional burbs, with no idea or concern about any redevelopment / revitalization; as beauty says, it's a SOCIAL and CULTURAL paradigm shift that brought and continues to bring people downtown. Without this, all the arenas and P&L districts in the world couldn't save us.
"It is not to my good friend's heresy that I impute his honesty. On the contrary, 'tis his honesty that has brought upon him the character of heretic." -- Ben Franklin
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

mean wrote: Also, forget ye so quickly the original P&L district in the 1990s, that could have possibly caught us up in a more timely manner with these other downtowns? P&L died with its conceptualizer, but I find it telling that DESPITE this, people began moving downtown in numbers, often from other cities and regional burbs, with no idea or concern about any redevelopment / revitalization; as beauty says, it's a SOCIAL and CULTURAL paradigm shift that brought and continues to bring people downtown. Without this, all the arenas and P&L districts in the world couldn't save us.
Ummm...is this not the best argument in the world in favor of MKB. P+L was dead on the table and she made it happen. Imagine the crap we could've gotten in its place had she not been in office. I'm sure Glazer had some great ideas for the area... :lol:
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7290
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by beautyfromashes »

The 1990's was the beginning of the turn for the city.  People started to turn their attention more to areas inside the 435 loop.  And while people didn't jump directly from Lee's Summit and Stanley to highrises downtown, they started to conside a 'more' urban lifestyle and moved to Brookside and Waldo and Westwood, etc.  This was as comfortable as people were who basically grew up in suburbia.  It was a stretch for people used to living to themselves inside larger house with mass space between them and their neighbor to think about living in a closer-knit community with porches and being able to walk to whereever they wanted instead of driving.  After they became more comfortable, downtown became more of an option.  Hence, what we are seeing now is the expansion of the urban pioneers.
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

beautyfromashes wrote: The 1990's was the beginning of the turn for the city.  People started to turn their attention more to areas inside the 435 loop.
Examples please...
Long
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by Long »

trailerkid wrote: I disagree...

Why would you develop property when the city has already been vocal about redeveloping the entire area? That'd be like putting your business smack dab in the middle of 14th and Grand in 2001. The area south of P+L is a complete mess and we need to deck that thing. Not demolish every building in sight, but get the plan in motion.
I don't understand this paragraph.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7290
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by beautyfromashes »

trailerkid wrote: Examples please...
Gave 'em.  Have to read to whole post, kid.
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

Long wrote: I don't understand this paragraph.
Why would you open in a new business where the city has already expressed interest in completely redeveloping the neighborhood? What's not to understand about that?
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

beautyfromashes wrote: Gave 'em.  Have to read to whole post, kid.
So people moving to the Brookside, a clear cut suburb, reinvented downtown. I guess if people move back to 103rd and Metcalf it'll help bring a boom to Downtown OP.

Give examples of downtown momentum in the 1990s that foreshadowed what is going on now. In all indications, I would consider the 1990s the most depressing period of downtown's life except for the momentum beginning in the Xroads which I would almost detach from the CBD boom. The original spirt of the Xroads is the complete antithesis of P+L, River Market, condo highrises, etc.
Last edited by trailerkid on Fri May 20, 2005 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7290
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by beautyfromashes »

Doesn't make sense to me either.  Seems that is where you WOULD want to start a business.  Crossroads several years ago.  Would have been a great place to establish a business before the prospectors and big money came in to raise property prices.  
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

beautyfromashes wrote: Doesn't make sense to me either.  Seems that is where you WOULD want to start a business.  Crossroads several years ago.  Would have been a great place to establish a business before the prospectors and big money came in to raise property prices. 
Do the words "Kansas City" and "condemnation" mean anything to you?
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7290
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by beautyfromashes »

I gave them!  People moving from 119th and Metcalf or Blue Springs or Belton to 50th and Main is a clear cut momentum.  That is what you asked for.  They took half a step towards downtown and now are jumping in with both feet.  
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

beautyfromashes wrote: I gave them!  People moving from 119th and Metcalf or Blue Springs or Belton to 50th and Main is a clear cut momentum.  That is what you asked for.  They took half a step towards downtown and now are jumping in with both feet. 
In what way is that momentum for downtown? The Plaza, maybe. There are people who live on the Plaza or Brookside who think downtown is just as big of a hole as somebody from Blue Springs. The relationship between a Brooksider or South Plazaer and strict urbanism is similar to the relationship between driving a Mini Cooper and strict environmentalism. 
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7290
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by beautyfromashes »

Yeah, I just don't see downtown as an island that isn't affected by the communities that surround it directly.  Perhaps that is just a difference between us, but I believe there is a connection between movement in Valentine, Hyde Park, Union Hill, and Brookside and ultimately downtown.  As people have become more comfortable living in midtown and experiencing downtown on a limited scale they help push the economies and development projects of downtown as much as anyone. 
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by trailerkid »

beautyfromashes wrote: Yeah, I just don't see downtown as an island that isn't affected by the communities that surround it directly.  Perhaps that is just a difference between us, but I believe there is a connection between movement in Valentine, Hyde Park, Union Hill, and Brookside and ultimately downtown.  As people have become more comfortable living in midtown and experiencing downtown on a limited scale they help push the economies and development projects of downtown as much as anyone. 
Brookside and the Plaza are 30+ blocks from "downtown." I wouldn't quite say they surround it directly. Show me people moving from Blue Springs to Columbus Park, Union Hill, or the NE Side and then let's talk...those are much more "feeder" neighborhoods than Brookside, Waldo or the South Plaza.

So you're saying that people moving to Brookside in the 90s has done more for downtown's growth and development than MKB's efforts to develop housing, an arena  and an entertainment district? To each his/her own, I guess.
Long
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1450
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2005 11:47 pm

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by Long »

trailerkid wrote: Why would you open in a new business where the city has already expressed interest in completely redeveloping the neighborhood? What's not to understand about that?

I thought you were referring to something you said in my post, since you quoted it. . . my fault, nevermind.
User avatar
beautyfromashes
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7290
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by beautyfromashes »

You've fallen into this trap that defines downtown as this little circle of highways that locks everything in.  Downtown is more than inside the loop.  I'm sorry you've bought into the city planners of the 1960's. 

People rarely move from Blue Springs to a highrise downtown.  It's too much of a jump to have lived in the suburbs all your life and then to experience downtown.  Now, they might move to Waldo or Brookside or possibly Valentine.  Then, once they see what living in the city is all about then become more brave and move closer to the heart.  It's the Missouri Show Me mentality.  We're cautious.  That can be positive or negative.  These areas ARE in the sphere of downtown and people living in these areas experience more of downtown then people from Blue Springs or Lee's Summit because of simple local.  That's just how I see it.
mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11240
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: "Truman Blvd"??

Post by mean »

When I moved to the Volker neighborhood, it was because I wanted what an urban environment could offer, but I perceived DT as being inadequate due to lack of services. I think this is the case with a lot of suburban people, although it is less and less true every week. However, even living "in the city" it is but a fairly short walk to strip malls. Perhaps in some way these nearby suburban elements made me feel more comfortable living down here in the beginning? I dunno, but now they piss me off!
"It is not to my good friend's heresy that I impute his honesty. On the contrary, 'tis his honesty that has brought upon him the character of heretic." -- Ben Franklin
Post Reply