OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Issues concerning Downtown as described by the Downtown Council. River to 31st Street, I-35 to Bruce R. Watkins.
flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9862
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by flyingember »

Riverite wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:43 am I don’t think we need lrt in the northland in the meantime. A street car that slowly builds up combined with zoning reform would drive density and could change things in the future. As far as the airport a free or cheap express bus to downtown and the plaza would be plenty. Honestly a bus with two stops is probably nicer anyways.
We could build more LRT-like. The biggest slowdown is how often the stops are.

We have a bus to the airport with minimal stops and are building a massive parking garage without a dedicated bus area. That should show you how sufficient it is today.

The problem is that the bus only starts from one place so 99% of people would need to go downtown and catch the bus there.

It's why an airport train that's contigious with the rest of the system makes sense. It's not just going to the airport, it's going to work from the northland. It should also be part of the airport transit system, connecting people to the rental car facility and long term lots. Bundle all the demands into one system. The NKC section to 32nd and a line to the current long term lots is 20% of the distance, which isn't bad.

The idea is to build track that drives demand from others. If the city could get airport to downtown built Jackson County has an incentive to take rail to downtown more seriously. Johnson County the same but for transit in general.
Last edited by flyingember on Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Riverite
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1042
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 5:49 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by Riverite »

flyingember wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:59 am
Riverite wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:43 am I don’t think we need lrt in the northland in the meantime. A street car that slowly builds up combined with zoning reform would drive density and could change things in the future. As far as the airport a free or cheap express bus to downtown and the plaza would be plenty. Honestly a bus with two stops is probably nicer anyways.
We could build more LRT-like. The biggest slowdown is how often the stops are.

We have a bus to the airport with minimal stops and are building a massive parking garage without a dedicated bus area. That should show you how sufficient it is today.

The problem is that the bus only starts from one place so 99% of people would need to go downtown and catch the bus there.

It's why an airport train that's contigious with the rest of the system makes sense. It's not just going to the airport, it's going to work from the northland. It should also be part of the airport transit system, connecting people to the rental car facility and long term lots. Bundle all the demands into one system. The NKC section to 32nd and a line to the current long term lots is 20% of the distance, which isn't bad
I definitely agree with the need to have fewer stops for the team, and hopefully a dedicated lane. Just making it faster or equal to cars would be great.

If they build the train to the airport great, I guess I’m just more concerned with building out in the northland more in the right way however they certainly aren’t exclusive just need a dream and commitment to it
flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9862
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by flyingember »

Riverite wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:03 am If they build the train to the airport great, I guess I’m just more concerned with building out in the northland more in the right way however they certainly aren’t exclusive just need a dream and commitment to it
committment is the key word. Rail is a committment.

I've never seen a transit plan that we could commit to. So many people don't ride the bus because if the ATA won't commit why should they?
earthling
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8519
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm
Location: milky way, orion arm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by earthling »

The upside to keeping rail within Central City (including NKC/KCK) for a good decade or so is that it will encourage deeper density and contiguous urban infill given streetcar stops are fairly close. Expanding LRT to burbs sooner than later will encourage more commuter sprawl with pockets of density per stop, though would help justify need for less parking within city core (fewer suburban commuters driving into city). I'll take the former in meantime but broader suburban LRT/commuter on freight lines might be worth pursuing in 10-20 years.
User avatar
alejandro46
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1350
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:24 pm
Location: King in the North(Land)

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by alejandro46 »

earthling wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 10:19 am The upside to keeping rail within Central City (including NKC/KCK) for a good decade or so is that it will encourage deeper density and contiguous urban infill given streetcar stops are fairly close. Expanding LRT to burbs sooner than later will encourage more commuter sprawl with pockets of density per stop, though would help justify need for less parking within city core (fewer suburban commuters driving into city). I'll take the former in meantime but broader suburban LRT/commuter on freight lines might be worth pursuing in 10-20 years.
That is a fair and valid arguement, and generally in the beginning I agree. The problem is funding. I don't know how much a steeper central city tax of somekind to pay for core only streetcar would be able to pass versus a regional plan. However, there would obviously need a plan to show these voters about how the streetcar would directly benefit them.
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

flyingember wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 9:31 am
kboish wrote: Thu Aug 26, 2021 11:33 pm but, i'm saying the way they are going about this is going to end up a waste, they'd have been better off pursuing a short term solution that paved the way to a river crossing.
You keep confusing who "they" is

They is the Port Authority primarily

they want track to their development so they're paying for track to their development and they put in a funding request to the feds to help pay for exactly this.

The rest is irrelevant at the end of the day

I believe the Port Authority even paid for the entire $300k for the initial feasibility study, but I would need to double check that I'm remembering right but don't care to because it doesn't matter
This is a point I was trying to get to with my post. No one here or in the real world has identified a way to get over the HOA.

Port KC has funds to build a RF streetcar because developers at the RF are paying them to expand it. NKC streecar maybe barely panned out financially just within NKC not including the large sum to cross the river. There is no money to cross the river even if they "studied it more."
flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9862
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by flyingember »

alejandro46 wrote: Fri Aug 27, 2021 11:40 am That is a fair and valid arguement, and generally in the beginning I agree. The problem is funding. I don't know how much a steeper central city tax of somekind to pay for core only streetcar would be able to pass versus a regional plan. However, there would obviously need a plan to show these voters about how the streetcar would directly benefit them.
The 2014 vote showed the size of area needed to fund a rail system in just a tiny amount of it. It was roughly 50x the size of the area receiving the direct benefit with midtown included. Today? It would need to be much larger. That’s a hard sell for the 90%+ of the taxing district that doesn’t get anything for a yes vote.

It’s why a regional plan needs to be the overlay that is used to find more funding from cities, counties, etc and build pre-figured corridors on a map that don’t get canceled or rerouted in 5-10 years. If it’s a bus or train it needs to be a 30 year tax with a 30 year promise.

The riverfront has a bus route today and it goes to the casino but they’re spending money to replace demand for it.
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by FangKC »

The Business Journal is reporting an affordable housing development for Block 10.

Berkley Riverfront affordable housing project could include units for the chronic homeless

...
Espero Kansas City, developed by the Vecino Group, is slated to bring 63 affordable and supportive apartments to a tract southwest of Berkley Parkway and North Lydia Avenue, on the riverfront's Parcel 10, a Thursday filing with city planning staff shows.

The Springfield-based builder proposes a four-story building with a mix of one-, two- and three-bedroom units. Of the 63 apartments, 15 are to be set aside for residents identified as chronically homeless and part of the local coordinated entry list under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Continuum of Care program. The 48-unit balance will be reserved for renters earning at or below 60% of the area median income.
...
If the developer receives credits, construction on Espero Kansas City is anticipated to begin in the fall of 2022. The city filing includes a projected December 2023 completion.
...
https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity ... 2021-09-06
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

From Port KC talk at BikeWalk KC

1. Riverfront Parkway will get a protected bikeway. Renderings online.
2. Want Riverfront to feel like Navy Yard in DC. Next building to be announced is around is 8-10 floors
3. North shore (Harlem riverfront) should never be developed in a way that can't support regular flooding
Last edited by normalthings on Mon Sep 13, 2021 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

normalthings wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 1:33 pm 2. Want Riverfront to feel like Navy Yard in DC
How? The riverfront is developing nothing like the DC NavyYard. It's more like Renner Blvd in Lenexa or something.

The Navy Yard is wall to wall 12-14 story buildings fronting sidewalks with a subway under it and dedicated bike lanes on nearly every street (which are all being converted to cycle paths) and a riverfront trail system that connects to hundreds of miles of regional bike trails. Two stadiums and no surface parking anywhere once the last few lots developed. Navy Yard has probably twice the population of all of Downtown KC so the sidewalk activity is more than any part of KC will probably ever see. And DC has a dozen areas just like the Navy Yard. I don't think people realize how vibrant some places are.

There are single developments in the Navy Yard that have more units than all the the KC riverfront will have. All parking is underground and everything it at least ten stories.

It's a nice goal but it's not really developing into even a small version of the Navy Yard. Reminds me more of what has happened in Richmond along their river front or St Paul.

It's cool that riverfront parkway will have dedicated bike lanes though. Can you post renderings?
Last edited by GRID on Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:04 pm, edited 3 times in total.
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

GRID wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 2:35 pm
normalthings wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 1:33 pm 2. Want Riverfront to feel like Navy Yard in DC
How? The riverfront is developing nothing like the DC NavyYard. It's more like Renner Blvd in Lenexa or something.

The Navy Yard is wall to wall 12-14 story buildings fronting sidewalks with a subway under it and dedicated bike lanes on nearly every street (which are all being converted to cycle paths) and a riverfront trail system that connects to hundreds of miles of regional bike trails. Two stadiums and no surface parking anywhere once the last few lots developed. Navy Yard has probably twice the population of all of Downtown KC so the sidewalk activity is more than any part of KC will probably ever see. And DC has a dozen areas just like the Navy Yard. I don't think people realize how vibrant some places are.

It's a nice goal but it's not really developing into even a small version of the Navy Yard. Reminds me more of what has happened in Richmond along their river front or St Paul.

It's cool that riverfront parkway will have dedicated bike trails though. Can you post renderings?
Next aparrtment building will be 8-10 floors. Big big announcement in November for a major development
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

normalthings wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 2:40 pm
GRID wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 2:35 pm
normalthings wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 1:33 pm 2. Want Riverfront to feel like Navy Yard in DC
How? The riverfront is developing nothing like the DC NavyYard. It's more like Renner Blvd in Lenexa or something.

The Navy Yard is wall to wall 12-14 story buildings fronting sidewalks with a subway under it and dedicated bike lanes on nearly every street (which are all being converted to cycle paths) and a riverfront trail system that connects to hundreds of miles of regional bike trails. Two stadiums and no surface parking anywhere once the last few lots developed. Navy Yard has probably twice the population of all of Downtown KC so the sidewalk activity is more than any part of KC will probably ever see. And DC has a dozen areas just like the Navy Yard. I don't think people realize how vibrant some places are.

It's a nice goal but it's not really developing into even a small version of the Navy Yard. Reminds me more of what has happened in Richmond along their river front or St Paul.

It's cool that riverfront parkway will have dedicated bike trails though. Can you post renderings?
Next aparrtment building will be 8-10 floors. Big big announcement in November for a major development
That's good, but I don't think the Navy Yard is a realistic comparison unless you crammed two dozen 14 story buildings in there, a new soccer stadium and the new Broadway Bride was for cars but mostly designed for cyclists and pedestrians and part of a major bike trail network on both sides of the river. Then you would feel like part of the Navy Yard.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

I think the Riverfront is fine BTW, but it's suburban more than urban and KC still needs to spend some money on recreation beyond a block here and there.

I really hope the city builds a new bridge for the street car extension across the river to get more of that going. I'm still pretty disappointed in the whole Broadway Bridge project. The city should have found the money to do more with that and make it a destination. This is why the capping the freeway stuff doesn't excite me. I fear it will be a bare bones project with nothing that makes it a destination and nothing that will tie to other downtown recreational infrastructure (which will need to be added as well).

A 670 deck should be connected to the Riverfront via some sort of greenway/cycle path etc and then it should carry across the river. Need a master plan.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

I have relatives that live on Ghillam Road and they say hardly anybody uses the new cycle path there. I really hope that's not true or people just don't know about it. If nobody or very few people are using that really nice and long cycle path, then maybe there really is just no demand for such infrastructure in KC and that is why the city struggles so much building such infrastructure.
swid
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 592
Joined: Wed Jul 10, 2013 8:29 pm
Location: Union Hill

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by swid »

The Gillham cycle track is definitely being used; I've seen at least one bike in it every time I've been out running along the 31st-39th section.

I have no idea how much daily use qualifies as being "successful", but it's not going unused.
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

IMHO. We have yet to reach the "cycle during the day" for fun weather season. I
User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 18142
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by FangKC »

What I'm curious about is if the Port Authority has any plan to negotiate with the railroads to move the northern-most track further south in alignment with its' southern alignment to open up more land to develop south of Berkley Parkway?

Yellow is the alignment of a single track. Blue lines outline the gained parcels for development south of the parkway.

Image

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1167435 ... a=!3m1!1e3
User avatar
normalthings
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8018
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by normalthings »

FangKC wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:39 pm What I'm curious about is if the Port Authority has any plan to negotiate with the railroads to move the northern-most track further south in alignment with its' southern alignment to open up more land to develop south of Berkley Parkway?

Yellow is the alignment of a single track. Blue lines outline the gained parcels for development south of the parkway.

Image

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1167435 ... a=!3m1!1e3
It’s been tried for years by Port KC. 13 acres of development would be unlocked but no interest on the railroads part or not enough money on Port KCs part to make it happen. It’s mentioned in the presentation also. https://youtu.be/wqobNlRmjFE

Back to Navy Yard, I’m just relaying the message. I feel like a KC version of Navy Yards it could become. An exact replica not so much. I think the Port KC is trying to take design ques directly from Navy Yard for future projects
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17083
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by GRID »

swid wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:25 pm The Gillham cycle track is definitely being used; I've seen at least one bike in it every time I've been out running along the 31st-39th section.

I have no idea how much daily use qualifies as being "successful", but it's not going unused.
From what my relatives say, it's barely used at all. I just asked for an update if anything has changed. Yesterday, on a nice weekend, they were at Gillam Park for several hours hours for a kickball tourney and didn't see any cyclists.

I would expect to see at least a half dozen cyclist every time you drove along that cycle track if it were being utilized on a nice day. During a weekday, probably a few at least when driving along it. You would see a lot more than that on something similar in DC where the trails are almost like highways at times. So I would say so far it's not very successful whish is a bummer since that is actually a really nice cycle track.

Maybe it's the location since both ends don't really connect to anything yet but they also say the Armour Road bike lanes are rarely used as well.

Last time I was in KC, we rode from Waldo to the River market and back and I don't think I saw a single cyclists along the entire route. It was a weekday, but nice out. If I were to ride that far in DC, or MSP or Denver, Philly or even Richmond VA, I would see dozens, if not well over a hundred other cyclists (you would see that many in DC, but DC is above average).

I honestly don't think there is much outdoor/recreation culture in KC. Never has been outside the suburban trails, but I thought it would have improved a lot more by now. I don't know if more infrastructure will help or not at this point. It just doesn't seem like something KC does or even wants to do.
shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 7393
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: OFFICIAL: Port Authority Riverfront Project

Post by shinatoo »

GRID wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:01 pm I have relatives that live on Ghillam Road and they say hardly anybody uses the new cycle path there. I really hope that's not true or people just don't know about it. If nobody or very few people are using that really nice and long cycle path, then maybe there really is just no demand for such infrastructure in KC and that is why the city struggles so much building such infrastructure.
I see use every time I drive it. 2-3 times a week. It's still hot as balls. Most people don't know about it yet. The southern end is a closed off construction site.
Post Reply