PAC Construction

LCDSI · Post by **LCDSI** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 8:24 pm

does anyone know when the construction will start for the new performing arts center?

also this is my first post and i wanted to comment how great it is that there's so much support for kansas city's development.

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Tue Sep 14, 2004 9:54 pm

Late 2005 is the latest figure. They have to wait for the KC Ballet's new building to be built so the old one can be torn down for the new PAC. There is also a funding gap, but I doubt it will slow down the project.

Welcome to the forum.

I know there are a lot of thread and it does not take long for a thread to get lost, but here is the PAC thread.

http://www.kcskyscrapers.com/kcforum/vi ... .php?t=862

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:49 am

Welcome! But yea, the Ballet school is currently on Broadway. I think the ground breaking for the school is scheduled for sometime soon. they said shortly after Labor Day, so I expect it'll be any day now. I've seen some trucks and surveyors around. I suspect that when the ballet construction begins, more money will flow towards the PAC.

scooterj · Post by **scooterj** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 10:10 am

Where will the new ballet be built in relation to the PAC and the existing ballet?

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 10:17 am

moving downtown

LCDSI · Post by **LCDSI** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 9:20 pm

thanks for the update will anyone be taking construction pictures of the ballet site as well? (i.e. similar to the H&R Block site)

aknowledgeableperson · Wed Sep 15, 2004 11:26 pm

GRID wrote: There is also a funding gap, but I doubt it will slow down the project.

Without Bistate II how would the gap be made up?

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 11:38 pm

Julia Irene has already stated they don't need the $50M to build the PAC. It's been reported everywhere.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 11:43 pm

KCPowercat wrote:Julia Irene has already stated they don't need the $50M to build the PAC. It's been reported everywhere.

That was dumb of her to say. Unless...

aknowledgeableperson · Wed Sep 15, 2004 11:48 pm

KCPowercat wrote:Julia Irene has already stated they don't need the $50M to build the PAC. It's been reported everywhere.

So why is she taking it?

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Wed Sep 15, 2004 11:50 pm

I'd take $50M for my pet project if the taxpayers would give it to me too.

http://kansascity.bizjournals.com/kansa ... tory5.html

it's funny, alot of people I've talked to say they will vote for BS2 because of the PAC, not the stadiums which they think is a waste of money.

aknowledgeableperson · Wed Sep 15, 2004 11:52 pm

Giving $50 to someone who doesn't need it doesn't make much sense. Did the PAC ask for it or was it just given?

aknowledgeableperson · Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:01 am

Well, if that is the case it might cause me to rethink my stance on Bistate II

GRID · Post by **GRID** » Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:01 am

aknowledgeableperson wrote:Giving $50 to someone who doesn't need it doesn't make much sense. Did the PAC ask for it or was it just given?

No, I believe it was offered to them. BSII needs the very sexy PAC to help it pass, that's why only 50 million of close to a billion will go to it.

WoodDraw · Post by **WoodDraw** » Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:02 am

aknowledgeableperson wrote:Giving $50 to someone who doesn't need it doesn't make much sense. Did the PAC ask for it or was it just given?

Don't hold me to this but I believe it was just tacked on. I'm sure it was just a move to get the KC art community behind the vote.

trailerkid · Post by **trailerkid** » Thu Sep 16, 2004 12:04 am

WoodDraw wrote:
aknowledgeableperson wrote:Giving $50 to someone who doesn't need it doesn't make much sense. Did the PAC ask for it or was it just given?
Don't hold me to this but I believe it was just tacked on. I'm sure it was just a move to get the KC art community behind the vote.

In all honesty, I think the renovations at the K were tacked on also. From what I've heard Lamar Hunt is using the Royals as leverage to get money for Arrowhead. And Glass isn't complaining...

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Thu Sep 16, 2004 7:46 am

Since half the money is to go to the arts, the PAC is a tangible project that people can look at and understand. Of course 50 million would help them reach the goal. Without it, it'll be more fundraising and looking for donors. This infusion of money would allow the PAC to shift some of its focus to things other than fundraising. I have no problem with a metro wide tax to pay for this. Its not a make or break issue, but it will make their job a hell of a lot easier.

Post by **dangerboy** » Thu Sep 16, 2004 8:56 am

The $50 million would be very helpful for endowment and ongoing operation/maintenance. Everyone knows that our region is really good at building stuff and really bad at maintaining it, so the Bistate would definitely be a boost for the PAC, even if they don't need it for the initial construction.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Thu Sep 16, 2004 8:59 am

I just get the feeling JIK is not depending on this money...I mean if she really needed it, would she be publically stating they didn't need it? Shouldn't she at the huge news conference yesterday begging for the citizens to approve the bs?

ComandanteCero · Post by **ComandanteCero** » Thu Sep 16, 2004 3:32 pm

I think that even beyond that she probably recognizes that it was tacked on as a way of getting the whole thing passed and just doesn't want to play that game where a vote for arts is a vote for the status quo. The PAC would benefit a lot more from the increased downtown investment due to a new downtown baseball stadium than renovations to the Truman Sports Complex. So I would say it's not that they don't need the money in the long run, it's just that they can afford to do without for now (and maybe if Bi-state fails, get a better more pro-downtown piece of legislature going that includes arts and PAC funding)