Capping the Loop

[TheUrbanRoo]

Agreed. I don't think downtown has the lunch business to keep these places going through the winter. Some kind of seasonal concession setup would be more realistic. Maybe if it has multiple spaces it could be rented out to downtown tenants as an extension, this way they could maybe use it as a satellite location. Cuts down on storage space required.

No, they gotta do the food hall, or a nice restaurant (like Central Park has)

I talked to one of the engineers at the meeting and he made it very clear they've got to get multiple amenities in the park to keep it active. If we start just stripping away all the amenities willy nilly then the park becomes irrelevant. They're gonna have to do the food hall, and they're gonna have to spend in general on this. Gotta have a city mindset on this for once, park the nimbyism for this project.

The city mindset is that this is a place for downtown residents, visitors, and workers to spend time enjoying greenspace. This is their yard, because they are in hotels, condos, offices without green space. The way it is designed currently is as a theme park. There is a lot to like here, but I still think it should be dialed down a little. Look at Madison Square in NY as an example. One eatery, very popular.

This also gets back to the park's purpose. If we have to load it down with amenities so that it isn't empty, why are we building the park? Is there a demand here for park space? If so, a nicely designed park should do fine. If we are trying to create demand where none exists, why?

You already have those green spaces downtown in multiple spots and nobody cares about them. They're trying to actually do something people will use, including residents. We have to be realistic here.

[smh]

No, they gotta do the food hall, or a nice restaurant (like Central Park has)

I talked to one of the engineers at the meeting and he made it very clear they've got to get multiple amenities in the park to keep it active. If we start just stripping away all the amenities willy nilly then the park becomes irrelevant. They're gonna have to do the food hall, and they're gonna have to spend in general on this. Gotta have a city mindset on this for once, park the nimbyism for this project.

The city mindset is that this is a place for downtown residents, visitors, and workers to spend time enjoying greenspace. This is their yard, because they are in hotels, condos, offices without green space. The way it is designed currently is as a theme park. There is a lot to like here, but I still think it should be dialed down a little. Look at Madison Square in NY as an example. One eatery, very popular.

This also gets back to the park's purpose. If we have to load it down with amenities so that it isn't empty, why are we building the park? Is there a demand here for park space? If so, a nicely designed park should do fine. If we are trying to create demand where none exists, why?

You already have those green spaces downtown in multiple spots and nobody cares about them. They're trying to actually do something people will use, including residents. We have to be realistic here.

What spaces are those really though?

Barney Allis: Forlorn
Case Park: Well utilized by residents in the area
Oppenstein Bros: Chairs come up in the evening. Limited non-lunch programming (at least prior to Covid, not sure there is any programming today) and grass.
River Market Park: Decently used by locals
Ilus Davis: This, I think is really what people are thinking about. I would submit that Ilus Davis is a decent design but in a place that is totally devoid of foot traffic and that closes up shop at 5pm.

The difference with the South Loop is that it is in the heart of it all. Surrounded by activity on some of the busiest pedestrian corridors in the city. It will be naturally activated by folks crossing it at all hours of the day. It doesn't need an only-in-the-region amenity to convince people to spend time there.

I'm not saying it should just be a field, but it also isn't Tivoli Gardens.

[Chris Stritzel]

In defense of the food hall and the small retail space, the goal is to create a spot where small restaurants can startup and become popular in a bid to grow into a larger space (think KC Mac Co going from Parlor to 11th and Main).

Both the food hall and the retail space will provide a revenue stream to help maintain the park instead of relying on other sources.

The park, as designed, will be welcome. As a downtown resident, I like the way they have it envisioned. Downtown has a growing population of children, so give them a place to play and hang out. Create the retail and food hall spaces to bring more people down and contribute to activity on the park. Have a central pavilion where people can meet or take part in an event.

While other green spaces and open spaces in downtown are almost always dead from the lack of active elements (namely Barney Allis Plaza, Ilus Davis Park, 8th and Broadway, and 11th and Walnut/Oppenstein Park), the South Loop Park should be entirely different. Make it the place to be all year.

[Cratedigger]

^ Plus none of those parks are in the Crossroads

This map isn't perfect (it ignores the city harvest/river market park for instance) but underscores how devoid the Crossroads is of Greenspace

https://parkserve.tpl.org/mapping/#/?CityID=2938000

[moderne]

The water bill for irrigation will be absolutely enormous. Keeping trees alive in shallow pans of earth is a challenge. I guess if it can be done in even hotter and drier Dallas it can be done here, as long as someone does not come along and try to save on the budget by thinking they can reduce water requirements. With all the planting areas indicated as natives and prairies I am sure the planners will be choosing water wise and heat tolerant trees.
Still think a large colorful vertical signature sculpture on the western slope would give the park an identity and an attraction in itself.

[Cratedigger]

Still think a large colorful vertical signature sculpture on the western slope would give the park an identity and an attraction in itself.

Completely agree and I think the project team does as well. They emphasized the opportunity for a signature public art piece by the food truck plaza during the presentation

[WoodDraw]

Have we heard that officially from the streetcar authority?

Sorry I should clarify. Members on their own behalf have talked publicly about their concerns. I don't think the streetcar authority itself has, and I'm not sure it's within their job description to do so publicly as an authority.

But I don't know.

[KCPowercat]

Have we heard that officially from the streetcar authority?

Sorry I should clarify. Members on their own behalf have talked publicly about their concerns. I don't think the streetcar authority itself has, and I'm not sure it's within their job description to do so publicly as an authority.

But I don't know.

Yeah I'd agree I wouldn't see anything that official just didn't know if someone like Tom had been heard complaining.

[bspecht]

Presentation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMvMWlhaeOw

[WoodDraw]

I assume cordish is heavily against any changes to Truman as well as street closures in their district, and I don't think this works without it.

I know people love renderings, but these are big changes and I don't think they're going to work.

Everyone started getting money and I think we're making very bad decisions.

[Chris Stritzel]

I will say that in Cordish's own renderings from a number of years ago, they had Walnut closed in a hypothetical park. So if they're against it now, I wonder what the change was? Just going by this, I'd say the new renderings with the Walnut closure are no mistake.

[WoodDraw]

I will say that in Cordish's own renderings from a number of years ago, they had Walnut closed in a hypothetical park. So if they're against it now, I wonder what the change was? Just going by this, I'd say the new renderings with the Walnut closure are no mistake.

I think cordish is very much for it? They already have a dog park for two light thereish? I think they're against any two way conversions or agreeing to limit closing "their" streets.

I'm not sure what they have to lose when they own most of the surrounding land and get to close off any streets as they please?

And now get a heavily subsidized amenity they'll ask to close again at their will.

[kcjak]

I feel like with so many images/renderings showing the bandstand, which is situated over Walnut, there is already an assumption by the developers that Walnut will be closed. If not, it seems like there would need to be some redesign to keep that as part of the plan. There's a lot to like with the designs, and some great niches but I think the eastern block should feature more open green space, or just move the bandstand further east and open the lawn in the middle a bit more.

A signature art piece needs to be included - a destination photo op like Cloud Gate in Chicago.

[DColeKC]

I will say that in Cordish's own renderings from a number of years ago, they had Walnut closed in a hypothetical park. So if they're against it now, I wonder what the change was? Just going by this, I'd say the new renderings with the Walnut closure are no mistake.

I think cordish is very much for it? They already have a dog park for two light thereish? I think they're against any two way conversations or agreeing to limit closing "their" streets.

I'm not sure what they have to lose when they own most of the surrounding land and get to close off any streets as they please?

And now get a heavily subsidized amenity they'll ask to close again at their will.

Walnut closure has always been the idea. They’ll be losing what’s now a private dog park in favor of a larger public one.

All of downtown is getting a heavily subsidized amenity but keep in mind, Cordish has been a major catalyst in this project for well over a decade. I’m sure they’ll continue to work closely with the city and designers on this.

[KCPowercat]

This seems like we're getting what Cordish wants and this public feedback meetings are window dressing. Let's just call it what it is. They made a significant investment downtown and this is their payoff.

Has there been one thing changed based on public feedback on actual design? Amenities are all vaporware right now anyways so that isn't any real changes.

[DColeKC]

This seems like we're getting what Cordish wants and this public feedback meetings are window dressing. Let's just call it what it is. They made a significant investment downtown and this is their payoff.

Has there been one thing changed based on public feedback on actual design? Amenities are all vaporware right now anyways so that isn't any real changes.

It just never ends man.

This design isn't even slightly similar to what Cordish was originally involved in. There are several developers and key downtown people involved in this. It's a collaborative project but it's intent is for all of downtown and not some kind of reward to Cordish for having invested a billion dollars downtown. I'm sure that gets them some weight, as it should, but implying everyone is just getting what one developer wants is shortsighted.

[WoodDraw]

This seems like we're getting what Cordish wants and this public feedback meetings are window dressing. Let's just call it what it is. They made a significant investment downtown and this is their payoff.

Has there been one thing changed based on public feedback on actual design? Amenities are all vaporware right now anyways so that isn't any real changes.

The decision was made before the meeting lol. People involved were told it was going to be walnut so it leaked pretty quickly.

[DColeKC]

This seems like we're getting what Cordish wants and this public feedback meetings are window dressing. Let's just call it what it is. They made a significant investment downtown and this is their payoff.

Has there been one thing changed based on public feedback on actual design? Amenities are all vaporware right now anyways so that isn't any real changes.

The decision was made before the meeting lol. People involved were told it was going to be walnut so it leaked pretty quickly.

Walnut being closed as part of this park must be the worst kept secret over the last decade considering it's been discussed to death on this forum for 5 years or more at minimum.

To make this park great, there needs to be at least one super block and Walnut makes the most sense.

[smh]

This seems like we're getting what Cordish wants and this public feedback meetings are window dressing. Let's just call it what it is. They made a significant investment downtown and this is their payoff.

Has there been one thing changed based on public feedback on actual design? Amenities are all vaporware right now anyways so that isn't any real changes.

The decision was made before the meeting lol. People involved were told it was going to be walnut so it leaked pretty quickly.

Walnut being closed as part of this park must be the worst kept secret over the last decade considering it's been discussed to death on this forum for 5 years or more at minimum.

To make this park great, there needs to be at least one super block and Walnut makes the most sense.

I feel like this is baked, but I actually think Baltimore makes the most sense as it doesn't connect to River Market so has the least utility as a through street. This would also have allowed the "SMH Patented Fun Hill" to be deployed wherein the hill between Baltimore and Wyandotte is kept simple and used as both amphitheater seating and a great sitting spot to watch the world go by. Side benefit: Families can sled down it on one of our last few snow storms before excessive heat becomes the norm.

[WoodDraw]

The elephant in the room is that cordish is going to keep closing grand.

And I was just responding to kcp's question if all of this is made up with a predetermined answer. And yep.