OFFICIAL: Penn Valley Park (Ideas+redeveloment)

[voltopt]

The west side expansion could cross the road/light rail (if built in that location) somewhat like Bartle Hall does 13th st. connecting the memorial to the park.

the memorial is in the park.  i just walked all through the east side of the park the other day, from pershing to 31st and around the dog park, the prairie mothers statue, the baseball fields, and the memorial.  there was no way that i would walk to the west side of the park because there is no clear trail, and there is the equivalent of a highway running through the middle of it.  a highway that is most unnecessary.

[ShowMeKC]

Damnit, it isn't a highway, it's a 4 land road, no different than Broadway or Main in any other location in the urban core.
Also, I know Liberty Memorial is in the park, however I'm talking about connecting the Memorial to the rest of the park, and encouraging the NORMAL tourist or visitor to use the park after visiting the memorial.

You guys need to get the blatant lie out of your head that automobiles are bad, and that Broadway is bad.

[DaveKCMO]

Damnit, it isn't a highway, it's a 4 land road, no different than Broadway or Main in any other location in the urban core.

except that there are no sidewalks, buildings or parking to be found and it dumps directly onto a major interstate. but a minor quibble, nonetheless...

[ShowMeKC]

So what if it dumps on a major interstate? It helps ease traffic from SW Boulevard, and helps connect people going to their work to Broadway and Main.
And you could easily put sidewalks and parking along it.
However it shouldn't have any buildings on it along it's length through PVP since it is a park.

Explain to me why you insist on attacking my posts, yet you haven't attacked Highlander's or GRID's posts on the issue of Broadway through PVP.

[voltopt]

i like my car.  i drive it when i have to.  i know we have to accomodate automobiles.  broadway through the park OVER accomodates them.  maybe if the connections to I-35 were removed, and broadway only connected to west pennway.  that would be an improvement.  its the people exiting of southbound 35 who come screaming through the yield sign that scare the crap out of me.  i understand cars should move through the park - its just that road is way too fast through the park - its an expressway between 23rd street and 31st.  i know two different people who were involved in accidents on one of those curves, and both cars were totalled.  if they removed the connections to freeway and put in some sort of traffic calming device, and a stoplight at 29th street, the park would be greatly improved.

[DaveKCMO]

Explain to me why you insist on attacking my posts, yet you haven't attacked Highlander's or GRID's posts on the issue of Broadway through PVP.

stop peppering your responses with absolutisms and assumptions that, because you've read a book or two, everyone else must simply be wrong or stupid. hmm... yeah, i guess that pretty much sums up my disdain for you. enjoy the rest of your day, good sir.

[kcmetro]

Did school get cancelled today, ShowMe?

[ShowMeKC]

Dave, yet I make the same exact argument that Highlander and GRID make... Yet you still insist on flaming my opinion, and don't even bother to respond to their posts. It really shows how much faith you have on defending your own argument against two people who know more about the subject rather than another person defending the same thing.

voltopt, we shouldn't disconnect it from 35, however we should decrease the speed limit to something more reasonable.

[voltopt]

highlander and grid don't take criticism personally.  we all have opinions, but i doubt any of us want to be so definitive to think only our opinion should be implemented, or that only our opinion is right.

[ShowMeKC]

I'm so fucking sick and tired of people assuming i'm stubborn and closed-minded...
Too many selfish people want you to convert to their complete opinion. And too many people are selfish and don't want to compromise and mold their opinion with part of someone elses.
And whenever someone refuses to convert to someones full opinion, they are branded as closed-minded and stubborn...

That is why I am taking things so personally, several members here expect me to completely change to their own opinion, and are selfish and would rather have me completely convert to their opinion rather than compromise and mold parts of their opinion with mine. (like I have been doing)

I have news for those few members who are treating me like shit because I refuse to accept their full opinion as my own... It's never going to happen, so be happy that i've taken parts of your opinion and have molded it with my own, rather than just being ignorant and completely shutting myself off from you and your opinions. You could at least give me and my opinion the same courtesy and respect.

[voltopt]

i think some sort of reasonable change should be made.  there are reasons to keep the roadway as is, to improve it some, to remove the connections to the interstate, and to remove it all together.

i'd like to see a comparison of the pluses, minuses, costs, and traffic analysis (although one thing i've learned in working in architecture for the past few years is that traffic engineers are using an outdated model from the 1950s that only increases traffic volume and use, instead of managing it.

[kcmetro]

i've learned in working in architecture for the past few years is that traffic engineers are using an outdated model from the 1950s that only increases traffic volume and use, instead of managing it.

Amen to that. Everytime I hear someone from KDOT talk about improvements, it always has to do with widening highways and increasing capacity. IMHO with working with traffic engineers, I find that they can be rather narrow-minded.

[aknowledgeableperson]

That is why I am taking things so personally, several members here expect me to completely change to their own opinion, and are selfish and would rather have me completely convert to their opinion rather than compromise and mold parts of their opinion with mine. (like I have been doing)

It is not that you need to change completely to their, or mine, opinions but to take this forum as an exchange of ideas.  Some of the ideas are great (like mine  ) and some are not so great.  But it would appear that almost everyone who posts want to get to the same place, we just have different paths to take to get us to that place.
For instance we all want a Penn Valley Park that would be a premier park, we just have different ideas on how to accomplish it.

[ShowMeKC]

I know akp, and I understand that completely. And that is what I see it as, an exchange of ideas, and I mold my ideas with other ideas all the time.

I was reading Jane Jacob's book last night, and forgot some details about borders being vacuums. A type of border is a large park.
While borders are bad things for cities, they can be corrected. Large parks are relatively simple to correct.

To reverse the vacuum effect on development caused by large parks (such as PVP), park uses should be placed on the edge of the park, as to create a seam between the park and the areas around it. (as these uses in the center of the park cannot be used at night) And the surrounding areas should have uses that complement the park. However the city should stay as the city, and the park should stay as the park.
Roads through the park also help the park. While Broadway is too large and too fast, that can be corrected without eliminating it.

Border "vacuums" like large parks need to have large counterforces in order to reverse their effects. The surrounding area has to be of higher density, and should be more diverse than other parts of the city. The street use should be frequent, fluid, and the blocks should be smaller and shorter surrounding the border.

In essence, if we want PVP to be a well-used and popular park, we need to redevelop the areas around it, as well as put popular uses on the borders with the surrounding streets.

[Highlander]

I'm so fucking sick and tired of people assuming i'm stubborn and closed-minded...
Too many selfish people want you to convert to their complete opinion. And too many people are selfish and don't want to compromise and mold their opinion with part of someone elses.
And whenever someone refuses to convert to someones full opinion, they are branded as closed-minded and stubborn...

That is why I am taking things so personally, several members here expect me to completely change to their own opinion, and are selfish and would rather have me completely convert to their opinion rather than compromise and mold parts of their opinion with mine. (like I have been doing)

I have news for those few members who are treating me like shit because I refuse to accept their full opinion as my own... It's never going to happen, so be happy that i've taken parts of your opinion and have molded it with my own, rather than just being ignorant and completely shutting myself off from you and your opinions. You could at least give me and my opinion the same courtesy and respect.

I really do not care if you change your opinions or not...and I'm not at all adverse to hearing them.  That's not the issue.  The issue is with how that opinion is stated....always as an all-or-nothing proposition followed by a barrage of hastily thought out statements that are borderline rude. 

Normally, I would not say anything but it does get a little old having to sift through pages of "noise" to actually get to the meaningful posts (and yours are often meaningful, they are worded as such that they start a descent into a acrimonious debate like we have here).  Anyway, if you took some time to round the sharp corners off your posts and replies, I suspect you could state the same opinion without all the pushback from the other forumers.   

[aknowledgeableperson]

tat2kc why do you think the Park board would not want to give up this brush jungle (edge) along Main Street for residential development? I think it would be great for the city, relieve the parks dept. from having to trim the ugly beast and open the park up with new life while connecting downtown with midtown. The places would sell like crazy and give the city a real San Fran feel.

You do not know the history of the KCMO Park Board very well, do you?  Yes, the Park Board has given up some land and traded land in the past but to do this it has to go to a vote of the people of KCMO if the land has been dedicated as parkland.  Bits and pieces are given up and traded if those bits and pieces are not deemed vital to the Board.  The Board does control some various pieces of valuable real estate around town and they could net some much needed funds but people around here put a very high value on parkland and would probably not be willing to let go of a piece of property like you propose.

[tat2kc]

Oh I think developing that stretch of Main would be a nice thing, but the parks dept. is not kown for being proactive on anything. They like to hold onto their power, and all their land, despite the fact that they cannot maintain it. You'd have to have the parks board agreeing with this project, as well as a city wide vote to turn that parkland over to private developers.

[tat2kc]

good question, harbringer I personally think they need to do a full on, in depth study of all the parkland and facilities, and dump that property they can't maintain or is no longer useful.  At the bare minimum, they need to do a complete survery of their holdings and give an honest assesment of what it would cost to actually maintain what we have.

But lets be honest, the parks downtown  (Case, Oppenhiemer, Davis, Liberty Memorial) are now being maintained by people other than parks dept. folks. Same with the zoo.  It appears to me that in order to have a signature park well maintained, it needs to be done by people NOT associated with the parks dept. 

Developing the edges of PVP makes sense. But given their track record, I can't see the Parks Dept. giving up any of their land or power.

[DaveKCMO]

during the liberty memorial dedication yesterday, the director of the parks board, sandra doolin aust, made a rather pointed statement about having to undergo an audit recently (part of the "challenge" of getting the museum up and running). i assume she was slamming funkhouser indirectly. anyone read that audit?

[ShowMeKC]

I hope it was a slam on him, he wouldn't have given the funding for Liberty Memorial, or at least in the capacity that it was given. Heck, he probably wouldn't have given as much funding for P&L, or any other projects for that matter.