P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Come here for discussion about the new downtown entertainment district.
User avatar
Eon Blue
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1053
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 11:28 pm
Location: Downtown KCMO

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by Eon Blue »

DColeKC wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:03 pm
They do this every Thursday as Ford is a sponsor. The vehicles don't block pedestrian access and are on Cordish owned property. There have been some 311 complaints but those always come from road closures, as to be expected. From what I've read on here, many members are not fans of road closures.
Cordish doesn't own that sidewalk, according to the Parcel Viewer.

User avatar
smh
Supporter
Posts: 3752
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:40 pm
Location: Central Loop

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by smh »

missingkc wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:41 pm
1. What is Ford sponsoring? 2. How does parking a car on the sidewalk promote that sponsorship? Seems to me it's just some combination of hubris and laziness.
They sponsor the KC Live Block. Automobiles are their product, so I believe the idea to be that having a new vehicle parked at the entrance to the block allows potential purchasers to be reminded of the Ford brand.

But I'm no marketer.

User avatar
wahoowa
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 408
Joined: Sat May 02, 2015 2:57 pm
Location: CBD

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by wahoowa »

they're thinking too small here. give a ford permanent residence in the pizza bar and rebrand it to "pizza car"

User avatar
DColeKC
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by DColeKC »

Eon Blue wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:34 am
DColeKC wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:03 pm
They do this every Thursday as Ford is a sponsor. The vehicles don't block pedestrian access and are on Cordish owned property. There have been some 311 complaints but those always come from road closures, as to be expected. From what I've read on here, many members are not fans of road closures.
Cordish doesn't own that sidewalk, according to the Parcel Viewer.
Cordish property stops and city property starts at the concrete curb. At least around the “live” block.


As for other questions. Ford sponsors the country concert series and on-site activation is part of their deal. I don’t see how the vehicle would distract someone considering there’s often cars parked in that lane and the vehicle is 15ft south of the crosswalk.

It also doesn’t disrupt pedestrian access. Not that I’ve ever seen anyway.

User avatar
DColeKC
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by DColeKC »

smh wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:15 am
missingkc wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:41 pm
1. What is Ford sponsoring? 2. How does parking a car on the sidewalk promote that sponsorship? Seems to me it's just some combination of hubris and laziness.
They sponsor the KC Live Block. Automobiles are their product, so I believe the idea to be that having a new vehicle parked at the entrance to the block allows potential purchasers to be reminded of the Ford brand.

But I'm no marketer.
Ding ding ding! We’ve all seen cars parked in the middle of a mall concourse right?

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9074
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by flyingember »

DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:14 am
smh wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 9:15 am
missingkc wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 9:41 pm
1. What is Ford sponsoring? 2. How does parking a car on the sidewalk promote that sponsorship? Seems to me it's just some combination of hubris and laziness.
They sponsor the KC Live Block. Automobiles are their product, so I believe the idea to be that having a new vehicle parked at the entrance to the block allows potential purchasers to be reminded of the Ford brand.

But I'm no marketer.
Ding ding ding! We’ve all seen cars parked in the middle of a mall concourse right?
You put them where people might have time to kill and their car becomes the alternative to standing doing nothing.

I've seen them inside Kauffman Stadium.

gfenn11
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 186
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2016 2:15 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by gfenn11 »

DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:12 am
Eon Blue wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:34 am
DColeKC wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:03 pm
They do this every Thursday as Ford is a sponsor. The vehicles don't block pedestrian access and are on Cordish owned property. There have been some 311 complaints but those always come from road closures, as to be expected. From what I've read on here, many members are not fans of road closures.
Cordish doesn't own that sidewalk, according to the Parcel Viewer.
Cordish property stops and city property starts at the concrete curb. At least around the “live” block.


As for other questions. Ford sponsors the country concert series and on-site activation is part of their deal. I don’t see how the vehicle would distract someone considering there’s often cars parked in that lane and the vehicle is 15ft south of the crosswalk.

It also doesn’t disrupt pedestrian access. Not that I’ve ever seen anyway.

The crosswalk is within 3ft, not 15 away from the front of this vehicle- aka close enough to add another layer so that drivers do not stop for pedestrians (inebriated or not).

User avatar
DColeKC
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by DColeKC »

gfenn11 wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 5:23 pm
DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:12 am
Eon Blue wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:34 am

Cordish doesn't own that sidewalk, according to the Parcel Viewer.
Cordish property stops and city property starts at the concrete curb. At least around the “live” block.


As for other questions. Ford sponsors the country concert series and on-site activation is part of their deal. I don’t see how the vehicle would distract someone considering there’s often cars parked in that lane and the vehicle is 15ft south of the crosswalk.

It also doesn’t disrupt pedestrian access. Not that I’ve ever seen anyway.

The crosswalk is within 3ft, not 15 away from the front of this vehicle- aka close enough to add another layer so that drivers do not stop for pedestrians (inebriated or not).
Correction, it's about 10 feet from the crosswalk. I took some pictures this morning. I don't see how a car on the sidewalk would be a distraction for drivers but that's just my opinion. I almost get hit crossing there weekly, regardless if there's a car on the sidewalk!

It's only there Thursdays and is gone by noon Friday's.

WoodDraw
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1889
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by WoodDraw »

I think you'll find most people here object to the principle of it, and your statement that you almost get hit constantly reinforces that. A lot of us spend a lot of time walking around downtown and have the same experience you do almost getting hit, so we get bitchy about best practices.

I don't think it's a huge logical leap to see the issue. Suburban driver coming through not used to the area, oh wow there's a car on the sidewalk was there an accident or something going on, fuck there's a pedestrian right in front of me.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30732
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by KCPowercat »

Anybody who thinks that car doesn't impede the view of a driver on walnut seeing a pedestrian in that crosswalk doesn't walk.

It ridiculous thing to defend. There is no need for a car to be parked on a public sidewalk to advertise cars. Come on.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30732
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by KCPowercat »

DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:12 am
Eon Blue wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:34 am
DColeKC wrote:
Thu Jul 25, 2019 4:03 pm
They do this every Thursday as Ford is a sponsor. The vehicles don't block pedestrian access and are on Cordish owned property. There have been some 311 complaints but those always come from road closures, as to be expected. From what I've read on here, many members are not fans of road closures.
Cordish doesn't own that sidewalk, according to the Parcel Viewer.
Cordish property stops and city property starts at the concrete curb. At least around the “live” block.
This is not correct.

User avatar
DColeKC
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by DColeKC »

KCPowercat wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:05 pm
DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:12 am
Eon Blue wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 7:34 am

Cordish doesn't own that sidewalk, according to the Parcel Viewer.
Cordish property stops and city property starts at the concrete curb. At least around the “live” block.
This is not correct.
I was the director of operations for the district for several years. It’s correct. For example, scalpers can not sell tickets on the sidewalks around the live block but can on city property. When someone is banned from the live block or is ejected, if they step foot on the brick sidewalk around the live block they’re on Cordish property. This was clearly communicated to me as I was employed before the district was open. In my time there we constantly spent time and money repairing and maintaining the sidewalks.

As for the cars on sidewalks. I understand why some may not like it. I’m just not so sure I agree that it’s any more unsafe than a car parked in the parking lane a few feet away. That’s very simply my own opinion.

missingkc
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1114
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:16 pm
Location: Charlotte, NC

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by missingkc »

I don't know that safety has anything to do with objections to the promotional car parked on the sidewalk. It's more a matter of midwestern mores, of propriety. Maybe Cordish should take a lesson from the folks from whom they wish to make money. It's annoying. After all, it's just a Mustang. It's not like we don't see them everywhere. Why should anyone think it's a "special" Mustang with "special" import?

User avatar
DColeKC
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by DColeKC »

missingkc wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:48 pm
I don't know that safety has anything to do with objections to the promotional car parked on the sidewalk. It's more a matter of midwestern mores, of propriety. Maybe Cordish should take a lesson from the folks from whom they wish to make money. It's annoying. After all, it's just a Mustang. It's not like we don't see them everywhere. Why should anyone think it's a "special" Mustang with "special" import?
Sponsors want on-site activation. It may be old school but anytime you have several thousand people walking directly past the vehicles, it’s a desirable asset to sell to sponsors. I’ve personally witnessed on many occasion people stopping and looking at the window tags. Great care is taken to ensure the districts guests aren’t negatively impacted by the cars placement.

The one they place on Grand fits into a much better spot.

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5235
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by beautyfromashes »

I really don’t see how this is any different than letting people park in the turning lanes along the streetcar line. Either we’re keeping parking laws or we aren’t.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30732
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by KCPowercat »

DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:27 pm
KCPowercat wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:05 pm
DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:12 am


Cordish property stops and city property starts at the concrete curb. At least around the “live” block.
This is not correct.
I was the director of operations for the district for several years. It’s correct. For example, scalpers can not sell tickets on the sidewalks around the live block but can on city property. When someone is banned from the live block or is ejected, if they step foot on the brick sidewalk around the live block they’re on Cordish property. This was clearly communicated to me as I was employed before the district was open. In my time there we constantly spent time and money repairing and maintaining the sidewalks.

As for the cars on sidewalks. I understand why some may not like it. I’m just not so sure I agree that it’s any more unsafe than a car parked in the parking lane a few feet away. That’s very simply my own opinion.

If the sidewalk is public or private vs the agreements made on maintenance are two different things I believe. The only reason I keep on this was we gave so much trouble to Westport for taking our sidewalks and power and light was held up as an entertainment district that can do crowd control without taking public sidewalks.

I agree they are both dangerous and we shouldn't allow cars to be parked as ads on either the sidewalk or parking lane. Now let's get it stopped.

User avatar
DColeKC
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by DColeKC »

KCPowercat wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 8:35 am
DColeKC wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:27 pm
KCPowercat wrote:
Fri Jul 26, 2019 11:05 pm


This is not correct.
I was the director of operations for the district for several years. It’s correct. For example, scalpers can not sell tickets on the sidewalks around the live block but can on city property. When someone is banned from the live block or is ejected, if they step foot on the brick sidewalk around the live block they’re on Cordish property. This was clearly communicated to me as I was employed before the district was open. In my time there we constantly spent time and money repairing and maintaining the sidewalks.

As for the cars on sidewalks. I understand why some may not like it. I’m just not so sure I agree that it’s any more unsafe than a car parked in the parking lane a few feet away. That’s very simply my own opinion.

If the sidewalk is public or private vs the agreements made on maintenance are two different things I believe. The only reason I keep on this was we gave so much trouble to Westport for taking our sidewalks and power and light was held up as an entertainment district that can do crowd control without taking public sidewalks.

I agree they are both dangerous and we shouldn't allow cars to be parked as ads on either the sidewalk or parking lane. Now let's get it stopped.
My point is it’s private property and it would be an uphill battle to try to get the city to tell Cordish what they can’t do on their own sidewalks. These may get more attention being in the sidewalk but there’s often other vehicles parked that are meant to gain attention, like media vehicles which do require a city permit. News and radio vans, corporate vans etc. Hell, tour buses which are much more attention getting than a ford vehicle.

I used to attend weekly meetings with the city and never heard any push back about the districts sidewalks. My only complaint about the sidewalks is I wish they would have went with stamped concrete because the maintenance never stopped with the brick.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30732
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by KCPowercat »

You understand that until last go bond vote we all maintained the public sidewalk in front of it other right?

Of course the city didn't say anything about the cars. City staff is notoriously lackadaisical towards pedestrian safety.

User avatar
DColeKC
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu Jul 25, 2019 10:50 am

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by DColeKC »

KCPowercat wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 9:24 am
You understand that until last go bond vote we all maintained the public sidewalk in front of it other right?

Of course the city didn't say anything about the cars. City staff is notoriously lackadaisical towards pedestrian safety.
If you’d like to reach out to someone at the city and ask, feel free. I’m positive about who owns what as this was carefully negotiated before the agreement was signed.

User avatar
KCPowercat
Ambassador
Posts: 30732
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 12:49 pm
Location: Quality Hill
Contact:

Re: P&L District: 13th & Walnut Site Proposal

Post by KCPowercat »

DColeKC wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 12:29 pm
KCPowercat wrote:
Sat Jul 27, 2019 9:24 am
You understand that until last go bond vote we all maintained the public sidewalk in front of it other right?

Of course the city didn't say anything about the cars. City staff is notoriously lackadaisical towards pedestrian safety.
If you’d like to reach out to someone at the city and ask, feel free. I’m positive about who owns what as this was carefully negotiated before the agreement was signed.
It's really moot to the entire point. It does seem odd that if P&L owns those sidewalks that it wasn't THE major talking point of the westport folks bid to get their sidewalks. It was never mentioned once.

Please pass along that neighbors don't like cars on our sidewalks. It's not safe.

Post Reply