Downtown Aquarium

[bahua]

The only riverfront location that would appeal to me would be the Town of Kansas plot. Berkeley RP is completely disconnected from downtown. I think it's great for individual events, but not for everyday life.

[voltopt]

A couple thoughts -

Concerning the earlier comment about being through Design Development on a project - that means very little.  Without financing, it might not happen.  Many architecture firms take gambles on clients - sometimes producing work up through Design Development with very little payment, out of desperation to get a job or to move into another area of construction (from institutional to retail, etc)  Its painful, because the amount of work produced can be monumental and can make a project's success seem inevitable, but I've had a couple experiences where Construction Documentation was almost complete and the project fell through and nothing happened, except demolition. 

Concerning the Mission Aquarium - I hope for the best in Mission.  I think the redevelopment of the mall site will occur, and it wouldn't be so bad if it included some boutique retail and apartments.  It really isn't an attractive location for a regional tourist attraction, but it should be fine as a sleepy node, slightly upscale, on the shawnee mission parkway suburban trail from Fairway west into Shawnee.  An Aquarium, especially a half -assed one just to make financing work on a regrettably dubious project in its initial form, is not a good idea.

[KCMax]

Star: Four groups express interest in building an aquarium in KC

The parties expressing interest in a downtown aquarium:

•Union Station, which wants to team up with International Theme Park Services and Peckham Guyton Albers & Viets architects to build a $40 million, 1 million-gallon aquarium on a site north of the planetarium.

•The Port Authority of Kansas City, which wants Marinescape, a New Zealand firm that has developed for-profit aquariums throughout the world, to build a combination aquarium and new home for the Arabia Steamboat Museum on a site west of Berkley Riverfront Park.

•The Cordish Co. and Copaken White & Blitt, which want to develop an aquarium on the block northeast of 13th Street and Grand Boulevard north of the Sprint Center. Copaken White & Blitt was granted redevelopment rights to the property in 2005, but the original plan called for a large office project and garage.

A fourth group also responded, but information about its makeup was unavailable.

[GRID]

This is really kind of screwed up.

I will be the first to admit, I hate the idea of putting our aquarium in Mission.  I just think it’s a horrible location and it really just continues to dilute any chance of this city ever having any serious synergy.

I also hate the idea of building a half ass aquarium in Mission which would probably mean we will never get a world class aquarium.

But…

Why would a half ass aquarium in KCMO be any better?

Have we not learned that in order to build a top notch attraction like this that it will have to have some level of subsidization?

Science City is a failure why?  Because it has to pay its own bills.  It has zero outside funding.  It’s tiny and will never get updated.

The Zoo has similar problems.  It doesn’t have enough public funding it make it a top notch zoo.  FOTZ won’t cut it.

I feel a little bad for Mission in this case because they are trying to rebuild the city (along with Roeland Park) into more of an urban area.

I personally don’t think an Aquarium is the answer, but that is their door to star bonds.

I guess I feel sorry for both parties involved.  An aquarium is a neat idea if done right.

I don’t think a little 40-50 million dollar aquarium in Mission or KCMO should be built.  Build a real aquarium that will become a top regional draw in a location that makes sense. (I would prefer a location at the foot of the Grand Ave Viaduct (light rail stop?) along with the Arabia Steamboat Museum) that has a solid ongoing funding source, preferably regional.

Or don’t build one at all.

Looks like we might  get one or two half ass aquariums in bad locations though.

[KCMax]

Why don't we let Mission build its half-ass aquarium and instead focus on building something really neat like a natural history museum?

Midwestern cities don't really scream "aquarium" to me anyway. Just because San Diego has one doesn't mean we need one too.

[ComandanteCero]

•Union Station, which wants to team up with International Theme Park Services and Peckham Guyton Albers & Viets architects to build a $40 million, 1 million-gallon aquarium on a site north of the planetarium.

I wonder if there was a mistake in the article, because the guy from Marinescape (the folks going for a Riverfront Park location) also mentioned going for a 40 million dollar aquarium.  It might just be that's the standard price tag for a 1 million gallon aquarium.

In the greater scheme of things i'd rather have an aquarium downtown than in Mission, but I think if done there it should be a full blown balls to the walls aquarium, not a 1 million gallon 19 bucks a pop tourist trap.  I'd rather wait ten years to build up the funds and resources for a publicly/donation funded/non-profit oriented 5+ million gallon aquarium downtown than try to rush in on a small aquarium that locals will get sick of within the first couple of years.

sounds like the union station proposal would further restrict future passenger rail expansion. that sucks.

i assumed it would be on the land just west of Science City/north of the Planetarium, seems like Science City has already limited any potential for rail expansion in that area.

[GRID]

Why don't we let Mission build its half-ass aquarium and instead focus on building something really neat like a natural history museum?

Midwestern cities don't really scream "aquarium" to me anyway. Just because San Diego has one doesn't mean we need one too.

I kinda of agree with this.  Aquariums are quickly becoming the bass pros of the 00’s.  Everybody  will have one and eventually they won’t be destinations, especially the smaller ones like what KC is talking about.

The bodies revealed exibit is an example of this.  Every major city has one of these now.  They are not the major regional draws they were at first.

Can we do something with the Arabia/history museum that is only in KC?

Call me crazy, but I don’t want KCMO to build a cheesy aquarium that is typically found in places like Newport or Trenton or east st louis.

I would LOVE to see something like what Atlanta built though.  Wow.

I have nothing against the Mission development, but that development should be at the kaw point in KCK, especially if you are going to have an aquarium and you are going to use star bonds…

The mission development should be just a mixed use development.  If you have to force something in there with massive subsidy, it probably doesn’t have a market for it and will only sabotage other developments.

[KCMax]

The mission development should be just a mixed use development.  If you have to force something in there with massive subsidy, it probably doesn’t have a market for it and will only sabotage other developments.

I can't argue with that.

[Midtownkid]

The P+L is actually not the worst idea ever.  It won't have that connection w/ the River, but will the aquarium really be reflective of our river anyway...I really hope not. (Don't want to see brown water and catfish...)  That would help further the critical mass in the area.  Would Cordish help pay for it I guess?  Cordish's original development in B-more has a great aquarium nearby.  Then again, it is the NATIONAL aquarium and is more than 1 Million Gallons and it's on the harbor.

[Downtowner]

An aquarium in Mission adds to our history of misplacing most attractions in the metro: casinos in the oddest places (none at the city riverfront which would be logical), stadiums in one corner, an airport in another...kemper arena in no-man's land. We finally got it right with the Sprint Center & the PAC. And now we have every municipality vying for an attraction: an arena for Indpendence, an aquarium in dullsville mission, a bass pro on every corner. It will likely go the way of the Great Mall of the Plains...nice for a couple years then no one will go. It would have to rely on tourists and none will find Mission. Kudos to the city for trying to stay ahead of what is a disastrous suburban attempt to steal what belongs in the city.

[ComandanteCero]

right now it's looking like we'll have two half-assed aquariums in the metro... if that's the case, let the private developers sink their cash into these idiotic pursuits (of course, Kansas already put in 63 million into the gateway project).

Like Max says, save up public funds for a real attraction, be it a natural history museum (which i think would be tough considering they tend to bank on animal carcasses/bones collected by 19th and early 20th century rich guys who had no ethical qualms about downing endangered species and having them stuffed, to provide the still life stuff), or a botanical garden (Penn Valley Park could finally be re-made into something cool), or maybe just re-doing Science City into a real deal Science/Technology Center.

edit: and i agree with what Grid said.

[beautyfromashes]

I'd rather see an awesome train museum at Union Station. 

[GRID]

ComandanteCero,

I’m way off topic here, but a history museum doesn’t have to be a bunch of dead animals.  That’s how Cincinnati’s, history museum is too.  Dark, drab, dated and boring.

I would think that KC could theme such a museum around our transportation history.

I’m not talking about that other tiny, underfunded “rail exhibit” at Science City, that everybody went and saw the first week and never returned (same will happen with a small for profit aquarium).

But a true, world class museum on KC’s history.  Incorporate the Arabia Museum, do a rail exhibit only much larger, bring the airline museum over, have an exhibit on the stockyards etc.

What a better place to put this than at the foot of Grand where the ASB “RR” bridge crosses the “river” across from the downtown “airport”, under the light rail bridge and in the shadow of the new Paseo Bridge?

Agree KCmax?

[AJoD]

This is really kind of screwed up.

I will be the first to admit, I hate the idea of putting our aquarium in Mission.  I just think it’s a horrible location and it really just continues to dilute any chance of this city ever having any serious synergy.

I also hate the idea of building a half ass aquarium in Mission which would probably mean we will never get a world class aquarium.

But…

Why would a half ass aquarium in KCMO be any better?

Have we not learned that in order to build a top notch attraction like this that it will have to have some level of subsidization?

Science City is a failure why?  Because it has to pay its own bills.  It has zero outside funding.  It’s tiny and will never get updated.

The Zoo has similar problems.  It doesn’t have enough public funding it make it a top notch zoo.  FOTZ won’t cut it.

I feel a little bad for Mission in this case because they are trying to rebuild the city (along with Roeland Park) into more of an urban area.

I personally don’t think an Aquarium is the answer, but that is their door to star bonds.

I guess I feel sorry for both parties involved.  An aquarium is a neat idea if done right.

I don’t think a little 40-50 million dollar aquarium in Mission or KCMO should be built.  Build a real aquarium that will become a top regional draw in a location that makes sense. (I would prefer a location at the foot of the Grand Ave Viaduct (light rail stop?) along with the Arabia Steamboat Museum) that has a solid ongoing funding source, preferably regional.

Or don’t build one at all.

Looks like we might  get one or two half ass aquariums in bad locations though.

I agree with this.  Should be interesting.  A lot of good posts on this page, actually.  And I think a cool KC museum, incorporating the Arabia, would be great.  (And not in Parkville.)

After reading the Star article...I can't believe there are what sound like 4 half-assed MO proposals.

[KCMax]

ComandanteCero,

I’m way off topic here, but a history museum doesn’t have to be a bunch of dead animals.  That’s how Cincinnati’s, history museum is too.  Dark, drab, dated and boring.

I would think that KC could theme such a museum around our transportation history.

I’m not talking about that other tiny, underfunded “rail exhibit” at Science City, that everybody went and saw the first week and never returned (same will happen with a small for profit aquarium).

But a true, world class museum on KC’s history.  Incorporate the Arabia Museum, do a rail exhibit only much larger, bring the airline museum over, have an exhibit on the stockyards etc.

What a better place to put this than at the foot of Grand where the ASB “RR” bridge crosses the “river” across from the downtown “airport”, under the light rail bridge and in the shadow of the new Paseo Bridge?

Agree KCmax?

Absolutely. Make it unique. Something you can't find in Indianapolis, Oklahoma City or Charlotte. Do it right. Don't do what everyone else is doing.

Actually, I was thinking it would be really cool if a transportation museum was adjoining DaveKCMO's idea for a riverfront transit plaza. It could kinda be our Union Station of the 21st Century.

[KC12]

I think that the Aquarium would be great on the riverfront, kind of like the Aquarium in Chicago on Lake Michigan.

[knucklehead]

I have been to acquariums in New Orleans, San Diego, Minneapolis, Monterry, key west and Los Angeles

New Orleans was ok but not impressive. It is in a fairly large stand alone building right on the river, nice setting  but was definately over priced for what you got (about $25 for something that took an hour to tour). The acquarium in San Diego is very small and disappointing (it is up by U Cal San Diego, beautiful setting, not much on display. The for profit Minneapolis acquirum was a joke. I have also been to a for profit acquarium in San Fransciso near fisherman's wharf - it was bad too. The key west and Los Angeles acquriums were very small and low tech but very good. Let you get closer to the animals - made you feel like you were seeing a nice volunteer effort that cared about the fish and other animals.  Monterry was much bigger but gave off kind of the same vibe - Less commercial and more genuine/legitimate. The LA acquarium was just an old cinder block building on a beach that cost about $3 to get into with no tanks bigger than 500 gallons but they let you look into either side of each tank and was definately well done.

Make fun of me if you want - but I think the aquarium should be at the zoo. I think the zoo culture is much more tuned in to managing animals and putting things in context.

I also think acquarium technology needs a big update. Most are fairly drab. Right now the are stuck on fish tubes - which are great but only go so far. I want high definition flat screen panels showing loops of great above and underwater photography with close ups putting each environment in context and showing me the fish in action. When you get to the tide pool exhibit you see HD loops showing the tide stages, you see underwater photography of the shell fish that are in the tank next to it.

It is essential in my view that the exhibits be arranged by geographical area. The commercial acqurium in Minnesota made no effort to put things in context.

A couple of other observations - Fish Tubes are good but not the end all. Big tanks with flat glass surfaces floor to ceiling are also very popular. People will just sit in front of the big tanks watching the fish swim around. The monterray big tank (not a fish tube) had some tuna that had to go over 200 pounds. also you need something outdoors, even if it is just a tank with some trout in it, to break up the routine and get orientated to where they are and the kids need at least a few exhibits that allow them to touch a fish (like stingray) 

New Orleans has small penquins and they were very popular. Dolphin and sea lion exhibits are killer but mainly at zoos. The polor bear exhibit at the San Diego zoo was killer as well. That is one reason why I think the zoo is the right place. You can kind of morph into the larger acquatic zoo exhibits.  People can also sit at these types of exhibits, breaking up the walking from tank to tank routine. 

Basically, the for profit smallish acquariums I have been to are not worth much. But even with those the 5 year old kids get excited seeing the fish and the adults that bring them get a contact high. Guess we will have to settle for stupid but good enough for 5 year olds.

[KCPowercat]

can we try and focus on the "next" aquarium type attraction?  aquariums seem so played out.

huge mearkat farm?  I don't know, something different.  not to mention a freaking city history museum.  this city has such a rich, colorful history...it is a travesty we don't have a museum highlighting it.  sorry, offtrack.

[Highlander]

I have been to acquariums in New Orleans, San Diego, Minneapolis, Monterry, key west and Los Angeles

Make fun of me if you want - but I think the aquarium should be at the zoo. I think the zoo culture is much more tuned in to managing animals and putting things in context.

Those are my sentiments also.  I have been to aquariums all over the place including many here in Europe and I find them rather underwhelming everywhere.  I can spend a couple of hours most and, to me, it just makes sense to put it at the zoo as a combined exhibit where a slightly higher fee gets you into both places.  In that way, an aquarium and the zoo could mutually support each other and create an animal-themed attraction that would be a more regional draw.  I know a lot of people don't particularly like Swope Park but I think it's one of the most underutilized and interesting spots in the metro.  The park is not going anywhere and the zoo is not leaving, so we might as well think of some ways to utilize the place to its fullest potential. 

[GRID]

I think the zoo would be a great place to put it.  Along with another major zoo expansion or upgrade.