KCK Gondola

[earthling]

Who is suppose to ride this? No tourist is interested in KCK.

This is worth checking out KCK for. Could see more of this brewing up closer to gondola stop over time, the more adventurous can check out Central Ave (reminds me of S Mexico). And not just for tourists but downtown dwellers likely to pop over once in a while.

[shinatoo]

Who is suppose to ride this? No tourist is interested in KCK.

I guess you haven't been to Slaps or El Camino Real on a Saturday, full of tourists. Or to one of the many events at Memorial Hall. There is also a casino. Plus, sometimes you build these things to drive development not to just enhance it.

[alejandro46]

Still can't believe this is a real idea.

Save the money and invest in streetcar or BRT transit to KCK. The aerial tramway in Portland has been mildly successful for Oregon Health Science employees, but the costs were out of control and impact has definitely been mixed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_ ... he_project

Agree with the fact it needs to connect to Main & DT KCK transit center. I don't think this is as much of a tourist attraction either. Just study all modes of transit without ruling anything out. I would be surprised if an aerial tramway is reccomended.

[earthling]

^Would rather see streetcar too but it's all about context, setting annual budgets properly with worst case scenario maintenance projections and what they want to get out of it. If it's just another streetcar line, it may not entice downtown KCMO visitors to check out KCK, many WILL be willing to pay $7 for a gondola ride and/or KCK may be willing to subsidize to bring visitors over as part of KS tourism budget. Can offer lower/free fares to residents or something like that. Atlantic City subsidizes train from Philly to bring in visitors.

OTOH, streetcar would be better for true commuting purposes and moving people between jobs with maybe higher volume but may cost 2-4X to deploy/maintain. Would like to see the 10 year cost projections for both modes.

[phuqueue]

Wait, this thing is supposed to cost $7 to ride? I don't remember seeing that in the article in the original post, but if it isn't going to be free or priced at a reasonable level for it to be used as everyday transportation for ordinary people trying to get between KCK and KCMO, I change my "tentatively positive" to a hard pass. Nobody is going to pay $7 to ride this when they could just pay $7 for an uber instead.

[earthling]

^I was giving an example that tourists would probably be willing to pay up to that. No fares have been reported or probably even considered yet. I also said that KCK may be willing to subsidize to bring over visitors, like Atlantic City does to bring in Philly visitors (that can come out of say tourism budget). Read whole post, which is just pointing out possible scenarios.

[GRID]

Still can't believe this is a real idea.

Save the money and invest in streetcar or BRT transit to KCK. The aerial tramway in Portland has been mildly successful for Oregon Health Science employees, but the costs were out of control and impact has definitely been mixed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_ ... he_project

Agree with the fact it needs to connect to Main & DT KCK transit center. I don't think this is as much of a tourist attraction either. Just study all modes of transit without ruling anything out. I would be surprised if an aerial tramway is reccomended.

Yeah. This is stupid AF.

Maybe if KCK encouraged development somewhere besides the speedway area, their downtown would not be one of the biggest jokes in the country.

Nothing about this aerial tram makes any sense. I sure hope KCMO doesn't spend money on this when it could be used for far more productive projects.

[GRID]

They have been trying for years to build one from Georgetown to Roslyn. It makes some sense, but it makes a lot more sense to just build a subway station since the trains are already there. But this is America where we seem to really have no idea how to build proper transit even in our best transit cities. If it does take decades to build a simple subway station, then sure build the gondola.

http://www.georgetownrosslyngondola.com/

I just don't see how a KCK to KCMO gondola would have any ridership what so ever. The West Bottoms is decades from being built out enough to warrant it. Downtown KCK probably will never get a lot better than it is now and there is no real transit focal point to connect it to in downtown KCMO. I don't even see the tourism appeal. You can barely see the the skyline from the west bottoms, KCK doesn't have a skyline and most of the west bottoms from the air is parking lots and industrial.

If they really wanted to connect the cities in an urban friendly way, they should have rebuilt the Lewis & Clark Viaduct as a parkway/greenway/transitway. Not an elevated six lane freeway that probably only carries 30,000 vehicles a day while another elevated six lane freeway 670 is right next to it and is also way under capacity. Do people even realize that there are 12 lanes of interstate connecting KCK and KCMO? I still can't believe that they built the Lewis & Clark viaduct back just the way it was in 1950. What a wasted opportunity.

[alejandro46]

If they really wanted to connect the cities in an urban friendly way, they should have rebuilt the Lewis & Clark Viaduct as a parkway/greenway/transitway. Not an elevated six lane freeway that probably only carries 30,000 vehicles a day while another elevated six lane freeway 670 is right next to it and is also way under capacity. Do people even realize that there are 12 lanes of interstate connecting KCK and KCMO? I still can't believe that they built the Lewis & Clark viaduct back just the way it was in 1950. What a wasted opportunity.

This was a dumb way to spend $65M and they knew that there were discussions about removing North Loop, but KDOT did it anyways.

There is plenty of room to fit a rail and trail on that along with keeping two lanes of traffic each way. Remove the north loop and connect those to an at-grade boulevard.

[GRID]

If they really wanted to connect the cities in an urban friendly way, they should have rebuilt the Lewis & Clark Viaduct as a parkway/greenway/transitway. Not an elevated six lane freeway that probably only carries 30,000 vehicles a day while another elevated six lane freeway 670 is right next to it and is also way under capacity. Do people even realize that there are 12 lanes of interstate connecting KCK and KCMO? I still can't believe that they built the Lewis & Clark viaduct back just the way it was in 1950. What a wasted opportunity.

This was a dumb way to spend $65M and they knew that there were discussions about removing North Loop, but KDOT did it anyways.

There is plenty of room to fit a rail and trail on that along with keeping two lanes of traffic each way. Remove the north loop and connect those to an at-grade boulevard.

YES YES YES. This has been a huge part of my Downtown KC master plan since I was in high school lol. But just like the new Broadway Bridge, I don't think there is an actual real urban planner that practices in KC or works for any KC developers or civic agencies. KC only seems to have "traffic engineers" and that's how everything is designed still. making sure commuters and through traffic never has to tap the brakes.

It's still worth it to undo that $65 million though and start over. However, KCK has yet to prove they have any real interest in having a decent downtown. It's all about Village West.

[phuqueue]

^I was giving an example that tourists would probably be willing to pay up to that. No fares have been reported or probably even considered yet. I also said that KCK may be willing to subsidize to bring over visitors, like Atlantic City does to bring in Philly visitors (that can come out of say tourism budget). Read whole post, which is just pointing out possible scenarios.

I read the whole post, but $7 seemed like a weirdly specific number to throw out if you were just making it up. While you might be able to squeeze a handful of tourists if the view is worth a one way trip, I can't imagine the revenue you'd get from that would make up for the added bureaucratic costs of multi-tiered pricing based on passenger residency. As far as I'm concerned, the thing is either meant for legitimate transportation or it's meant to be a tourist toy, I don't see it being worthwhile for it to try to be both. And if it's just a toy, it's not worth building, at least not with any public funds. Even as legitimate transportation, I only see a case for it if it's really as cheap as they say it will be, if it has the intermediate stops they showed on their example map, and if they extend it farther than they seem to be planning, so it's shaky even then, and I'm not sure it's a good idea to complicate it even further.

[earthling]

^Based on Portland's $5 intended for commuters, with perhaps up to a couple bucks more for tourists, but yeah, probably round trip ticket for that much - or subsidized as mentioned - was specific with range of optional possibilities. Zero fare to $7 round trip is a reasonable potential range. Have stated several times that streetcar would be more ideal but this isn't a completely ridiculous idea either if structured properly (obviously many here do think it's ridiculous and it's easy to cynically go there and I get it).

Either way, most of us are talking loosely about potential scenarios as it's an interesting exercise of discourse if this happens yet am not taking any of this very seriously. At least not until if/when it becomes a hard proposal.

[trailerkid]

This is the most imaginative, stimulating, coherent, practical (yes, practical!) concept to come out of an urban planning in Kansas City in a generation. https://youtu.be/WNo7U8WK6OM?t=1768

Bravo Gunnar Hand!

[SilentSpades24]

This is the most imaginative, stimulating, coherent, practical (yes, practical!) concept to come out of an urban planning in Kansas City in a generation. https://youtu.be/WNo7U8WK6OM?t=1768

Bravo Gunnar Hand!

If people only bothered to listen to the presentation and concept, it makes a lot more sense than it gets credit for.

That said, Downtown KCK needs to focus on getting any development (and not letting CPC/BOZA kill it).

[GRID]

This is the most imaginative, stimulating, coherent, practical (yes, practical!) concept to come out of an urban planning in Kansas City in a generation. https://youtu.be/WNo7U8WK6OM?t=1768

Bravo Gunnar Hand!

Except for the fact that KMCO drags developers through years of drama to get projects approved and KCK has one decent project proposed in five decades and proceeds to kill it. I really don't see the point of connecting them anymore...

KCMO needs to just do better and start doing what is best for the city and stop caving to the special interest and selfish. Concentrate on KCMO right now. Sill tons of infill needed there to be messing with spending money to connect to KCK.

And KCK? Well... KCK seems like a lost cause unless you actually like the tacky sprawl by the speedway.

If KCK had even an ounce of passion to build a real city and KCMO was actually seeing consistent development and more than one crane up a time, then yeah, this is actually a pretty neat idea.

I feel like whatever it would cost KCMO to build their side of this would be better used connecting KCMO's own districts together all of which have a brighter future than Downtown KCK.

[FangKC]

North Kansas City does a better job at infill. KCK should pay attention to NKC.

[Jblanco]

There is no interest in setting up transit from downtown KCK and downtown KCMO.
Until the West Bottoms is built out we should focus north to NKC.
NKC is where it's at!

[SilentSpades24]

This is the most imaginative, stimulating, coherent, practical (yes, practical!) concept to come out of an urban planning in Kansas City in a generation. https://youtu.be/WNo7U8WK6OM?t=1768

Bravo Gunnar Hand!

Except for the fact that KMCO drags developers through years of drama to get projects approved and KCK has one decent project proposed in five decades and proceeds to kill it. I really don't see the point of connecting them anymore...

KCMO needs to just do better and start doing what is best for the city and stop caving to the special interest and selfish. Concentrate on KCMO right now. Sill tons of infill needed there to be messing with spending money to connect to KCK.

And KCK? Well... KCK seems like a lost cause unless you actually like the tacky sprawl by the speedway.

If KCK had even an ounce of passion to build a real city and KCMO was actually seeing consistent development and more than one crane up a time, then yeah, this is actually a pretty neat idea.

I feel like whatever it would cost KCMO to build their side of this would be better used connecting KCMO's own districts together all of which have a brighter future than Downtown KCK.

That's a very short-sided view point and the same view that many legacy leaders in KCK and many in the metro have decided to hold for whatever reason. Ignoring and excluding KCK from the conversation will only continue to cripple us and it doesn't need to be that way. There are a lot more people than you think in KCK who want to develop/redevelopment and to truly make the city great, just gotta get some of these regressive old-heads out (which, luckily, a really bad mayor is actually accomplishing to a certain extend).

[SilentSpades24]

There is no interest in setting up transit from downtown KCK and downtown KCMO.
Until the West Bottoms is built out we should focus north to NKC.
NKC is where it's at!

There's a lot of interest in KCK.......but since the metro decides to ignore KCK, that interest is ignored.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

There is no interest in setting up transit from downtown KCK and downtown KCMO.
Until the West Bottoms is built out we should focus north to NKC.
NKC is where it's at!

There's a lot of interest in KCK.......but since the metro decides to ignore KCK, that interest is ignored.

Didn’t strawberry hill just murder a project a few months ago? And the UG just went along with it?