FangKC wrote: ↑Thu Mar 04, 2021 2:56 pm
I don't mind there being a master developer who sets some guidelines for the blocks/neighborhood. They should be willing to divvy-up the parcels to other developers though. That even means dividing city blocks -- even if four different developers do projects on that one block.
Swope was a terrible master developer for the East Village. VanTrust has been very pokey as well since they took over. There have been a couple of developers who have done multiple projects in other parts of the City, and they announced after VanTrust took over the East Village.
In the 2006 ordinance 060455 they made it so every individual project had to be approved anyways. So why did they need a master developer at all?
I think the master developer might oversee things like updating the water lines, utilities, etc. in the neighborhood; interacting with various developers with ideas; guiding potential developers through City zoning, overlays, etc.; walking them through incentives processes, and helping them get everything approved by various agencies and the Council. This might include doing public interface with various neighborhood groups and interested parties.
The utility part is unlikely. The streetcar project has a single developer for a large plan and it relies on the city and utilities to update these. They don't oversee, the city does this part because they're the master developer of the project approving the work done by each party without a middle man.
At the end of the day the city should have required the approach you mentioned for the project with a timeline. I don't blame Swope for the lack of guidelines up front but I do blame them for bad results.
Tom Smykowski : Well-well look. I already told you: I deal with the god damn customers so the engineers [the city] don't have to. I have people skills; I am good at dealing with people.
It's funny how many people, on a massively pro development forum, are anti pedestrian street. You guys are impossibly american. Get out and see the world. These streets are absolutely THRIVING, even in small, 2000 person villages. It's not rocket science.
im2kull wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 8:37 pm
It's funny how many people, on a massively pro development forum, are anti pedestrian street. You guys are impossibly american. Get out and see the world. These streets are absolutely THRIVING, even in small, 2000 person villages. It's not rocket science.
I don’t think that’s what’s been said at all. They are great in certain locations where there is already some foot traffic and people are given an incentive to use it. Nichols is an example where making it pedestrian only would cause that road to be much more of a central hub. The EV has zero traffic and nothing relatively close to be connected to.
im2kull wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 8:37 pm
It's funny how many people, on a massively pro development forum, are anti pedestrian street. You guys are impossibly american. Get out and see the world. These streets are absolutely THRIVING, even in small, 2000 person villages. It's not rocket science.
I don’t think that’s what’s been said at all. They are great in certain locations where there is already some foot traffic and people are given an incentive to use it. Nichols is an example where making it pedestrian only would cause that road to be much more of a central hub. The EV has zero traffic and nothing relatively close to be connected to.
This is an example of being wrong in exactly the way said in the post you quoted.
Think 4th dimensionally. When your Delorian Time Machine stops in the neighborhood of 2040 it will be designed right and have a thriving pedestrian presence that loves its pedestrian street.
flyingember wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 10:02 pmThis is an example of being wrong in exactly the way said in the post you quoted.
Think 4th dimensionally. When your Delorian Time Machine stops in the neighborhood of 2040 it will be designed right and have a thriving pedestrian presence that loves its pedestrian street.
This might be the most inscrutable post I’ve seen on this forum not posted by mgsports
flyingember wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 10:02 pmThis is an example of being wrong in exactly the way said in the post you quoted.
Think 4th dimensionally. When your Delorian Time Machine stops in the neighborhood of 2040 it will be designed right and have a thriving pedestrian presence that loves its pedestrian street.
This might be the most inscrutable post I’ve seen on this forum not posted by mgsports
Go back and read the content on induced design and it will make sense.
flyingember wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 10:02 pmThis is an example of being wrong in exactly the way said in the post you quoted.
Think 4th dimensionally. When your Delorian Time Machine stops in the neighborhood of 2040 it will be designed right and have a thriving pedestrian presence that loves its pedestrian street.
This might be the most inscrutable post I’ve seen on this forum not posted by mgsports
I don't know what the obsession is with Back to the Future and Office Space quotes is. Honestly, just ignoring them. Just weirdly random.
FangKC wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 9:19 pm
And yet they have had a 89 percent failure rate in the USA. They have only worked in very specific situations.
Agree. In US ped only streets tend to only work (to successfully support retail) in areas that already have or are conducive to drawing outsiders/tourists and daily large crowds... mostly. Not isolated neighborhoods. In KC they could work on Plaza/Nichols or possibly off streetcar stops like in RM or potentially 8th St to Broadway in future if designed right. Can't see it work in E Village with or w/out stadium. Maybe if streetcar runs down Indep Ave but that doesn't seem likely given low tax base, maybe in a few decades.
im2kull wrote: ↑Fri Mar 05, 2021 8:37 pm
It's funny how many people, on a massively pro development forum, are anti pedestrian street. You guys are impossibly american. Get out and see the world. These streets are absolutely THRIVING, even in small, 2000 person villages. It's not rocket science.
I don’t think that’s what’s been said at all. They are great in certain locations where there is already some foot traffic and people are given an incentive to use it. Nichols is an example where making it pedestrian only would cause that road to be much more of a central hub. The EV has zero traffic and nothing relatively close to be connected to.
+1
Nichols Rd needs to happen. The Plaza needs a plaza.
I've been pondering Cherry Street between 6th and 12th streets. Should it just be designated as an alley? It's mostly just parking lot and garage entrances for its' entire length. Is it impossible at this point to make it an urban street based on what has already been done along it?
Should it just be made a one-way alley with diagonal parking along one side of it? Should infrastructure be put in place for food trucks to be parked there and turn it into a food alley during certain hours? Other trailer- and truck-based businesses could park there as well.
Should Holmes be made straight again from 8th to 9th? It was originally.
FangKC wrote: ↑Sat Mar 13, 2021 11:37 pm
Should Holmes be made straight again from 8th to 9th? It was originally.
Do you happen to know why the change?
I assume it had to do with the original proposal for what are now the Metropolitan and Manhattan. That development was supposed to have four or five buildings total. I'm sure they demolished a lot of historic buildings and changed the street grid because it was the 60s and the trend was curvy suburban mimicry.
I looked at the 1940 tax photos for those blocks, and old Sanborn maps, and Holmes was straight then. It appears that once the buildings on those blocks were demolished, they veered Holmes to the West to create more parking spaces for the Charlotte, Holmes, 8th, and 9th-bounded block. Why they did this, I don't know. It's the only explanation I can come up with. The Auditorium Theater used to stand on the NE corner of 9th and Holmes. It was demolished in 1960, so it happened after that.
