Streetcar to the riverfront

Transportation topics in KC
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 17673
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by DaveKCMO » Wed Jan 02, 2019 9:39 pm

Riverfront was a brownfield. It's ripe for infill and streetcar will (and already has) delivered.

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4806
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by beautyfromashes » Wed Jan 02, 2019 10:18 pm

wahoowa wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 8:29 pm
[taking a moment to acknowledge that if it weren't for the entire rest of my posting corpus this would be one hell of a post for making people think i'm a 60 year old lady lawyer instead of a male child who can mostly operate an internet-enabled device!]
The ‘old’ and ‘lady’ terms were just discriptors. That I mentioned her being a lawyer is just my own personal bias and animous. If dislike of lawyers is an -ism than I apologize profusely.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14215
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by FangKC » Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:31 am

scooterj wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 5:36 pm
beautyfromashes wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:14 pm
snigglefritz wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:44 pm
Agreed, but I'm not sure that a riverfront extension prohibits extensions elsewhere, i.e. to areas which are already somewhat developed and needing incentive to get more dense. If there are entities that have the power and money to push this extension, more power to them.
The entities with the power and money is the KCATA. They are fronting the money and putting up $1M, 1/3 of the cost. They could have chosen a different extension. An extension to Brookside would is twice the length but with no bridge/roadwork, owned right of way on Trolley Trail and relatively flat ground. I’m not so sure that it couldn’t have been done for not much more in money.

Yeah but then you have to deal with DeJanes and her cabal of NIMBYs. As long as she lives in Brookside, a line there is never going to happen.
A media campaign can dispatch DeJanes easily. Just point out how she illegally extended her yard, and built a garage, on the former trolley trail that is the KCATA's right-of-way. She can be painted as a disgruntled violator of the law, and her motives to stop the streetcar extension are simply spite.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14215
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by FangKC » Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:44 am

flyingember wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 1:49 pm
beautyfromashes wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 11:33 am
I just don’t understand why this extension was done without it going to the casino. It doesn’t bring any additional destinations, doesn’t provide large park and ride garages like the casino has and adds few residents to the line for commuting...all while making the loop trip longer for others riding the streetcar. Save the extra sales tax money the district has generated. You’ll need it later for some cost or there would have been a better short extension than this one.
The streetcar is meant to encourage development and this is supposed to be an amenity to market the Port Authority land to developers. There could be thousands of people in the area in a decade.
...
Here is a aerial showing that the City owns the parcel that the casino sits on, and the big parking lot across the street. The Port Authority owns the big parcels west of the Bond Bridge. It's in the interest of both to develop that land, and generate tax revenue, and rentable space for commerical and apartment rentals. Any new residents in the area could potentially benefit the casino, assuming the casino would program itself to become more attractive to people in the neighborhood. This would include better dining options, and night life programming.

I have family members that go to the casino simply to eat out. Some of them might play the slots for awhile, while the others sit in the bar and socialize.

The areas outlined in red are potential parcels for further and denser development.

Image

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14215
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by FangKC » Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:48 am

I've cut and pasted some downtown buildings on the vacant parcels to show how much further development might occur, and what potentially could happen as a result of extending the streetcar to the casino. The development would likely be denser. It might include some large garages to service office buildings and the casino, as well as park-and-ride commuters. I've filled in part of the casino lake to allow for trucker parking.

Since the moat law for casinos in now defunct, Isle of Capri might benefit by building a new structure across the street, and the City can fill in that moat and eventually develop the parcel for something else. This might allow the casino to add a small hotel, comedy club, dinner theater space, and live event theater to attract residents and hotel guest seeking nightlife options -- ones that might not normally come to a casino to gamble.

Image

shinatoo
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6358
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by shinatoo » Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:40 am

A large park and ride facility at the casino with a streetcar extension would have been ideal. Parking for riverfront events will become more scarce as the port authority fills in the area. Plus it will help justify easing parking mandates in the downtown area.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7822
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by flyingember » Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:32 am

snigglefritz wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 3:44 pm
Agreed, but I'm not sure that a riverfront extension prohibits extensions elsewhere, i.e. to areas which are already somewhat developed and needing incentive to get more dense. If there are entities that have the power and money to push this extension, more power to them.
It bridges developed areas. Bus route 77 already follows the path (I think. the system map is different from the route map) so it could be the first bus route that gets truncated for the streetcar.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7822
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by flyingember » Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:35 am

shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:40 am
A large park and ride facility at the casino with a streetcar extension would have been ideal. Parking for riverfront events will become more scarce as the port authority fills in the area. Plus it will help justify easing parking mandates in the downtown area.
Parking for riverfront events will become dramatically easier with the streetcar. This last year it was already normal for people to ride the streetcar and walk down the viaduct. They have closed off access and provided shuttle busses into the area for big events for years.
Image

And the projects so far are putting in more parking than could have fit on the same surface area. The area will have a net increase in parking in the end.

shinatoo
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6358
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by shinatoo » Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:03 am

flyingember wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:35 am
shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:40 am
A large park and ride facility at the casino with a streetcar extension would have been ideal. Parking for riverfront events will become more scarce as the port authority fills in the area. Plus it will help justify easing parking mandates in the downtown area.
Parking for riverfront events will become dramatically easier with the streetcar. This last year it was already normal for people to ride the streetcar and walk down the viaduct. They have closed off access and provided shuttle busses into the area for big events for years.
Image

And the projects so far are putting in more parking than could have fit on the same surface area. The area will have a net increase in parking in the end.

You're not tracking with me. I'm talking about when the whole area is developed. Yes, there will be more net parking, but there will also be a 100% increase in residents over last year (there were zero before The Union opened), so there will be fewer available parking spots for non-residents. Also, see my point about reducing the required parking downtown.

If I have an apartment downtown that doesn't offer parking I can rent a spot out at the end of the streetcar and just ride out there when I need my car, and the rest of the time live car-free. Anything we can do to get cars out of the center of the city will help us develop into a more dense city, which is better for pedestrians, and the environment.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
taxi
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1702
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:32 am
Location: North End
Contact:

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by taxi » Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:31 pm

Can we have a streetcar in a moat?

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7822
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by flyingember » Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:13 pm

shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:03 am
You're not tracking with me. I'm talking about when the whole area is developed. Yes, there will be more net parking, but there will also be a 100% increase in residents over last year (there were zero before The Union opened), so there will be fewer available parking spots for non-residents. Also, see my point about reducing the required parking downtown.

If I have an apartment downtown that doesn't offer parking I can rent a spot out at the end of the streetcar and just ride out there when I need my car, and the rest of the time live car-free. Anything we can do to get cars out of the center of the city will help us develop into a more dense city, which is better for pedestrians, and the environment.
The idea that we should move cars to a parking garage on the edge of the system is as bad as downtown. There's over 100,000 parking spots downtown. Before trying to build space for tens of thousands of cars away from downtown let's fill what we have already.

You idea of renting spaces could be done today without building anything.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14215
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by FangKC » Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:24 pm

TheLastGentleman wrote:
Wed Jan 02, 2019 4:06 pm
While I do agree that it would be nice to get the center of downtown filled in, particularly the loop, that just doesn't seem to be what developers want to do right now. The north loop and the east village are still wastelands, and everywhere else in the loop is pockmarked with surface lots or packed with parking garages, yet we're seeing loads of construction in the crossroads and elsewhere. I see the riverfront as just an example of that.
I think the problem with the East Village is that there is one master developer holding dominion over all the parcels' future. Now, and in the past with VanTrust and Swope. At this point, I think the better course would be for the City / Land Clearance Redevelopment Authority to just put out requests for proposals (RFPs) for various blocks to encourage different developers to move forward.

Would Milhaus be developing at 19th and Cherry if they had been able to assemble a block in the East Village instead at about the same price point for acquisition? The same with Cornerstone Associates and the Berkley Riverfront Park area.

https://cityscenekc.com/affordable-apa ... iverfront/

Van Trust can still play a role by developing a block of its' own.

I only say this because of the delay in activity. There have been several projects announced and finished since the East Village redevelopment plan was announced.

The North Loop might see some activity at some point. I think the parcel on the SW corner of 9th and Wyandotte (east of the Savoy) is being marketed for development. DST owns the two blocks south of that, and their activist board has been pressuring them to get out of the real estate game.

https://images2.loopnet.com/d2/zkRhJnhn ... cument.pdf

This parcel in the North Loop, bounded by Grand, McGee, 8th and Admiral is for sale as well. It's almost the entire block.

https://www.loopnet.com/for-sale/?sk=0e ... 30llK97g-d

shinatoo
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6358
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by shinatoo » Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:23 pm

flyingember wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:13 pm
shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:03 am
You're not tracking with me. I'm talking about when the whole area is developed. Yes, there will be more net parking, but there will also be a 100% increase in residents over last year (there were zero before The Union opened), so there will be fewer available parking spots for non-residents. Also, see my point about reducing the required parking downtown.

If I have an apartment downtown that doesn't offer parking I can rent a spot out at the end of the streetcar and just ride out there when I need my car, and the rest of the time live car-free. Anything we can do to get cars out of the center of the city will help us develop into a more dense city, which is better for pedestrians, and the environment.
The idea that we should move cars to a parking garage on the edge of the system is as bad as downtown. There's over 100,000 parking spots downtown. Before trying to build space for tens of thousands of cars away from downtown let's fill what we have already.

You idea of renting spaces could be done today without building anything.
And once we fill in all those surface lots downtown where will nonresidents park?

At the park and ride lots we build on the edge of the streetcar system next to the interstate.

But if that option isn't there the political cost will be too high for anyone in the city government to get rid of the current parking minimums. So we will just keep on building more parking with every new building. And I know there are already variances, but if development continues it's going to come to head.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2045
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by normalthings » Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:53 pm

shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:23 pm
flyingember wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:13 pm
shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:03 am
You're not tracking with me. I'm talking about when the whole area is developed. Yes, there will be more net parking, but there will also be a 100% increase in residents over last year (there were zero before The Union opened), so there will be fewer available parking spots for non-residents. Also, see my point about reducing the required parking downtown.

If I have an apartment downtown that doesn't offer parking I can rent a spot out at the end of the streetcar and just ride out there when I need my car, and the rest of the time live car-free. Anything we can do to get cars out of the center of the city will help us develop into a more dense city, which is better for pedestrians, and the environment.
The idea that we should move cars to a parking garage on the edge of the system is as bad as downtown. There's over 100,000 parking spots downtown. Before trying to build space for tens of thousands of cars away from downtown let's fill what we have already.

You idea of renting spaces could be done today without building anything.
And once we fill in all those surface lots downtown where will nonresidents park?

At the park and ride lots we build on the edge of the streetcar system next to the interstate.

But if that option isn't there the political cost will be too high for anyone in the city government to get rid of the current parking minimums. So we will just keep on building more parking with every new building. And I know there are already variances, but if development continues it's going to come to head.
Park and rides add few transit riders while sucking up huge amounts of funding. The 20-70 million spent on park and rides at the Riverfront could fund things like a new BRT line or another streetcar expansion.

Designing our cities for “non residents”and their parking is a dated, suburban mindset.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7822
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by flyingember » Thu Jan 03, 2019 5:09 pm

shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 4:23 pm
flyingember wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 1:13 pm
shinatoo wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:03 am
You're not tracking with me. I'm talking about when the whole area is developed. Yes, there will be more net parking, but there will also be a 100% increase in residents over last year (there were zero before The Union opened), so there will be fewer available parking spots for non-residents. Also, see my point about reducing the required parking downtown.

If I have an apartment downtown that doesn't offer parking I can rent a spot out at the end of the streetcar and just ride out there when I need my car, and the rest of the time live car-free. Anything we can do to get cars out of the center of the city will help us develop into a more dense city, which is better for pedestrians, and the environment.
The idea that we should move cars to a parking garage on the edge of the system is as bad as downtown. There's over 100,000 parking spots downtown. Before trying to build space for tens of thousands of cars away from downtown let's fill what we have already.

You idea of renting spaces could be done today without building anything.
And once we fill in all those surface lots downtown where will nonresidents park?

At the park and ride lots we build on the edge of the streetcar system next to the interstate.

But if that option isn't there the political cost will be too high for anyone in the city government to get rid of the current parking minimums. So we will just keep on building more parking with every new building. And I know there are already variances, but if development continues it's going to come to head.
We're not going to fill in all those spots because about 2/3 are on street or in garages. Most remaining surface lots are paired with a building. Like the bank at 18th and Main owns the lot next to them. It's going to be 50+ years before there's no surface lots downtown.

Moving parking doesn't work because you've moved the problem. If you build 3000 spaces for commuters you need train and bus capacity for 3000 spaces per hour. At 150 people per train that's one every 3 minutes. That's London Underground levels of service.

It's much better financially to build a 15-20 mile high density spine and run busses further out plus have bike paths that connect.

Then rezone that requires higher density along transit corridors so more people never use their car to begin with. Not just downtown, N. Oak should be zoned so all new projects are much higher density than today and we run the transit service to support it. Look at downtown Gladstone, imagine that size of building from the NKC city limits to Barry Rd

No parking minimums don't stop businesses from building parking. You want to set parking Maximums. The number of spaces being built is already trending down. Did you not notice that Union at the riverfront has less spots than units? Children's Mercy is putting up a huge new building without a new garage. One Light used an existing garage. The Lowes hotel will have ~450 spots for 800 rooms. It's not universal, but newer projects have less spaces than just a few years ago.

This is the plan if you want to actually reduce car dependence:
1. rezone setting a minimum project size on major corridors. Instead of requiring affordable housing, require all projects include housing and let the market work. it's all econ 101- you lower prices through excess availability of a product.
2. set parking maximums downtown to cap the number of spots. You can't induce demand to not need parking if you build it of course.
3. add higher capacity train and bus service as areas grow.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14215
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by FangKC » Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:26 pm

It may not take 50 years to do infill. Some in the auto industry are predicting that fewer people will own personal vehicles. These aren't futurist philosophers. These are auto executives. Driverless cars will be cheaper to operate than taxis or Uber/Lift, because they have no driver to pay. All-electric vehicles are also cheaper to operate per mile than gas-powered. People might use this for all their vehicle-based transportation, or augment mass transit use.

Studies say personal vehicles sit at least 90 percent of the day. Driverless cars will be operating constantly, so it's a more efficient use of this type of transportation. They drop people off and leave downtown. If demand drops, unneeded vehicles will use downtown garages, or go to some less dense parking lot -- like in the Bottoms.

User avatar
normalthings
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2045
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by normalthings » Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:59 pm

FangKC wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:26 pm
It may not take 50 years to do infill. Some in the auto industry are predicting that fewer people will own personal vehicles. These aren't futurist philosophers. These are auto executives. Driverless cars will be cheaper to operate than taxis or Uber/Lift, because they have no driver to pay. All-electric vehicles are also cheaper to operate per mile than gas-powered. People might use this for all their vehicle-based transportation, or augment mass transit use.

Studies say personal vehicles sit at least 90 percent of the day. Driverless cars will be operating constantly, so it's a more efficient use of this type of transportation. They drop people off and leave downtown. If demand drops, unneeded vehicles will use downtown garages, or go to some less dense parking lot -- like in the Bottoms.
In a recent interview, Ford’s new CEO (a former furniture exec) discussed how he thought building highways was a mistake, that we shouldn’t expand our highway system, and that Fords future is in technology and providing first/last mile solutions to public transit.

User avatar
TheLastGentleman
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1159
Joined: Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by TheLastGentleman » Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:15 pm

normalthings wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:59 pm
In a recent interview, Ford’s new CEO (a former furniture exec) discussed how he thought building highways was a mistake, that we shouldn’t expand our highway system, and that Fords future is in technology and providing first/last mile solutions to public transit.
That lines up with what they're planning to do with Michigan Central Station in Detroit. A mixed use facility with autonomous vehicle development, all in a building that was a victim of the highway system.

User avatar
FangKC
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 14215
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by FangKC » Thu Jan 03, 2019 10:26 pm

Yes, and Detroit, the capital of the auto industry, has/is putting in a streetcar line down Woodward Avenue with possible future spokes.

https://tinyurl.com/yav5egj2

https://detroit.curbed.com/2016/3/24/11 ... ward-qline

https://www.crainsdetroit.com/article/2 ... pion-money

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 7822
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Streetcar to the riverfront

Post by flyingember » Thu Jan 24, 2019 8:21 pm

Has a good image showing the track connection

https://twitter.com/ghost_inthecity/sta ... 66787?s=21

If I’m reading it right the stop at 3rd and Grand would be moved

Post Reply