KCMO Downtown Streetcar

[Highlander]

Disappointed to see the Star come out officially against this project. Hope that has no impact on the outcome.

[chaglang]

Disappointed to see the Star come out officially against this project. Hope that has no impact on the outcome.

Their support of previous projects didn't have an impact.

[loftguy]

Disappointed to see the Star come out officially against this project. Hope that has no impact on the outcome.

Evidently the editorial board of the Star does not read the informed and measured business analysis' that has been provided by Kevin Collison. I can't imagine his frustration with his employers blinded obstructionism.

[aknowledgeableperson]

One can be against a project for a variety of reasons, like how it is financed, but be for the concept of the project.

[shinatoo]

"A good plan today is always better than a perfect plan tomorrow." - Gen. George Patton.

"Just get the fucking thing going." - Shinatoo

[DaveKCMO]

One can be against a project for a variety of reasons, like how it is financed, but be for the concept of the project.

which is why there is no organized opposition to the streetcar. there is broad support amongst downtown stakeholders, but support for the financing method is where reasonable people disagree. amongst residents who will directly pay there is solid support (as witnessed in the first election, which had higher participation from owners than renters... even though owners are outnumbered amongst registered voters and in total population).

[shinatoo]

If you are a downtown business owner that is against this plan because you want a low traffic area that has low taxes then move you business out of downtown. Downtown KC isn't a glorified, half filled, business park anymore, that ship has sailed.

[DaveKCMO]

of note: the commercial assessment for streetcar is LOWER than the assessment for the CID. of course, it's a brand new assessment that they didn't get to vote on. also, the public/private partnership (streetcar authority) is heavily weighted to the private sector. this has improved communication and trust between downtown stakeholders and the city (though still much work to do there).

[KCPowercat]

of note: the commercial assessment for streetcar is LOWER than the assessment for the CID. of course, it's a brand new assessment that they didn't get to vote on. also, the public/private partnership (streetcar authority) is heavily weighted to the private sector. this has improved communication and trust between downtown stakeholders and the city (though still much work to do there).

I brought this up to an opponent (non voter) Who stated commercial owners not being heard. They responded with well yeah they will get benefit from the streetcar. i responded...exactly.

[DaveKCMO]

ha! commercial owners are definitely being heard if they come to the table, assuming they're saying more than "we don't want to pay" amongst themselves. some have met with the engineers, council members, and even the mayor. but, hey, disinformation comes with the territory...

[flyingember]

Back on topic: The more I walk through downtown and think about this project, the more excited about it's prospects I am. I'll be interested to see if there aren't a few more apartment projects announced along the line on some of the nasty surface parking lots.

Also, worth remembering: Streetcar project = removal of parking requirements in the Crossroads. HUGE.

Yes, I think this is the area that benefits the most from this. Really excited at seeing this district transform the next decade because of the streetcar.

the river market too. try and find a parking spot there on a spring to fall weekend. it's going to be the catalyst for retail downtown

right now people drive to and from the river market and then walk. I see it every time I go.

it's the thousands of people who will have access to other parts of downtown without moving their car or to be able to do the obvious and park elsewhere downtown

I'd agree the crossroads is the same way. we're going to see first fridays focus more along Main St and spreading out from there than before. It's currently clumped more around a triangle of 20th and Baltimore and SW Blvd.

putting the activity on a more visible through street will help it grow.

[bobbyhawks]

of note: the commercial assessment for streetcar is LOWER than the assessment for the CID. of course, it's a brand new assessment that they didn't get to vote on. also, the public/private partnership (streetcar authority) is heavily weighted to the private sector. this has improved communication and trust between downtown stakeholders and the city (though still much work to do there).

I brought this up to an opponent (non voter) Who stated commercial owners not being heard. They responded with well yeah they will get benefit from the streetcar. i responded...exactly.

How quickly do we think these commercial owners shift from complaining about the streetcar to selling potential clients on how nowhere else in KC has a streetcar line next to it? It is probably already in the marketing materials. City Center could have actually been a preemptive buy before everyone is aware of the passed streetcar plan.

[DaveKCMO]

that assumes owners are marketing their own space to tenants, which i don't think is the case. not an expert there, though.

[flyingember]

of note: the commercial assessment for streetcar is LOWER than the assessment for the CID. of course, it's a brand new assessment that they didn't get to vote on. also, the public/private partnership (streetcar authority) is heavily weighted to the private sector. this has improved communication and trust between downtown stakeholders and the city (though still much work to do there).

I brought this up to an opponent (non voter) Who stated commercial owners not being heard. They responded with well yeah they will get benefit from the streetcar. i responded...exactly.

How quickly do we think these commercial owners shift from complaining about the streetcar to selling potential clients on how nowhere else in KC has a streetcar line next to it? It is probably already in the marketing materials. City Center could have actually been a preemptive buy before everyone is aware of the passed streetcar plan.

that's my thoughts.

The new owners are from NYC and Seattle. Enough said.

[flyingember]

that assumes owners are marketing their own space to tenants, which i don't think is the case. not an expert there, though.

CBRE is going to be do leasing of the space. Used to be Colliers

sounds like tenant leasing to me.

[knucklehead]

Disappointed to see the Star come out officially against this project. Hope that has no impact on the outcome.

Would the Star have to pay the tax for the Streetcar line?

Just asking. They are failing as a business venture. That might explain their opposition.

[smh]

Disappointed to see the Star come out officially against this project. Hope that has no impact on the outcome.

Would the Star have to pay the tax for the Streetcar line?

Just asking. They are failing as a business venture. That might explain their opposition.

Yes, and they mention that in their editorial. But I don't think that is a significant reason for their opposition. Mostly it just comes from a lack of vision.

[knucklehead]

Just read the Star's editorial.

What I found striking is the lead. They try to pretent all Clay Chastain's petition initiative light rail proposals were backed by city government, the business community and the Star. Which of course none of them were.

We have had exactly one light rail proposal backed by the establishment fail. That was the proposal put forward to kill the Chastain proposal that was approved over the objections of the establishment (city, business and media). So the one that did fail was designed to fail. That was the whole point of putting it on the ballot -- to kill the initiative that did pass while giving plausible deniability to the establishment types that opposed it. If it was intended to pass, it would have been styled as a choice between Chastain's plan and the city's plan. Vote for one or the other. The winning plan gets implemented. The option of rejecting both plans would not have been presented because the Chastain plan had already passed.

Now somehow the fact that all but one of Chastain's petition initiatives failed is some how big proof of that light rail is deeply unpopular. When the fact of the matter is Chastain's initiatives were seat of the pants initiative with largely incoherent funding mechanisms, no establishment support and no campaign funds. The amazing thing is one Chastain's seat of the pants, totally outsider, initiative passed. It passed precisely because the population was disgusted with the lack of action by the establishment types. The Star has it ass backwards as usual.

I am not saying a full blown light rail plan would pass in the current environment. The great recession prevents that kind of progress at the current time. But the Star's propaganda angle in their lead puts to rest the idea that they are presented a true statement of the reasons for their opposition. They are spinning hard.

[flyingember]

Chastain proposal that was approved over the objections of the establishment (city, business and media). So the one that did fail was designed to fail. That was the whole point of putting it on the ballot -- to kill the initiative that did pass while giving plausible deniability to the establishment types that opposed it.

it never should have passed. no one who really cared about transit in the city then would have wanted the result

it passed for only one reason.
it threw reality to the wind and provided something for a ton of the city
http://www.lightrailnow.org/news/n_kc_2007-05a.htm

[knucklehead]

I think we are in agreement.

The city government, business community and media have done very little to promote light rail. The Star's citing of half backed petition initiatives in the lead of its editorial is misplaced.

Based on your response, I assume you agree with my assessment of the Star's lead.