OFFICIAL - Main Street Streetcar Extension

[DaveKCMO]

here's a good US example of how to build streetcar + trail in a not-very-urban environment like brookside/waldo: http://www.shstreetcar.com/

[flyingember]

you know, parking don't have to be above ground. we keep thinking about losing parking and trying to think in 2D. there's a MAJOR parking garage near the loop in Chicago that's below ground around Jackson and Michigan. the big impact to this idea is utility placement and if it allows major digging and the geology of the area

it might be possible to get close to the same number of spots by putting a garage under the area of the brookside tennis courts

could possibly do a larger below ground garage at 75th and Wornall where there's a large lot and more parking in the row

costly, yes. but worth putting on the table. A TDD for select areas that funds transit service + shared parking could be the kind of thing that drives transit forward

See this...

One idea my table had was move the tennis courts over to the Border Star school asphalt area. There is plenty of room, it's not used for parking, it's just a massive asphalt lot for recess. No reason two tennis courts couldn't be placed there. Then a small garage, maybe one level underground, two levels above could be placed on the area where the courts are today.

I get your idea I just don't think above ground parking fits into brookside at all. waldo maybe, but not brookside. the Nelson is the same way in a historic area where below ground fit the environment perfectly.

[DaveKCMO]

let's just leave it at "structured parking" and let the actual residents decide.

[flyingember]

here's a good US example of how to build streetcar + trail in a not-very-urban environment like brookside/waldo: http://www.shstreetcar.com/

the segment to brookside feels very much like the St Charles line in NOLA. Nice homes, through street, running trail (people actually use the row to run), they hop off when a vehicle passes).

whereas the NOLA canal line feels more like Main north of UMKC. urban, businesses, concrete

[flyingember]

one of the big questions is stop placement. speed vs flexibility.

is there any plans to have non-improved stops on the map that the vehicle stops at only non-peak? the country club line seems like the perfect place to have the peak-period rapid service and then go to more of a local-service line

[DaveKCMO]

this article about the country club ROW is now free for all to read (previously only for biz journal subscribers):

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/p ... y-put.html

[Eon Blue]

Is anyone else put off by the Kerr stuff? A JoCo developer using his resume from developing an area that is 110% auto-oriented and did much to contribute to the urban core's decline to say that he's a credible person for streetcar/light rail-oriented development? Has he done any other projects that might be a bit more encouraging?

Of course, if he's just blowing hot air and there's no realistic chance of the city taking the streetcar past Waldo or even Dodson, I'm fretting over nothing.

[DaveKCMO]

he is not a credible TOD expert.

[Eon Blue]

Great job by the KCBJ to present him without comment or reservation, then.

[pash]

.

[flyingember]

people complain about Cerner's massive parking lots. but they do a lot. there's no tear down to eat up funds. the land is nice and flat already. it's not crazy valuable forest land someone will fight over. for any use that needs some parking, it's already there to use

so if a streetcar or commuter rail get there someday it's ripe for the picking and could go in very quick compared to having to worry about filling in old mines, an old building or level a hillside

[pash]

.

[Eon Blue]

Perhaps accommodations for future commuter rail parking was one of the conditions the city asked for as part of the TIF agreement?

I agree that doing it on their own seems more than a little unlikely.

[aknowledgeableperson]

One thing to consider if the line extends to Waldo would be to provide space for a park-n-ride. A place for this might be where the closed school is located.

[DaveKCMO]

One thing to consider if the line extends to Waldo would be to provide space for a park-n-ride. A place for this might be where the closed school is located.

there will be no park and rides on the streetcar line as you've seen them built on light rail and commuter rail lines elsewhere in the US. that thinking has pretty much gone by the wayside (and good riddance). stations are what generate the economic development, so you build transit-oriented development instead of large garages (unless you're talking far into the hinterlands, where streetcar will never go).

waldo (or brookside) may decide to build structured parking if streetcar is extended there -- and it's not as guaranteed as some would have you believe -- but parking will not consume the developable land directly adjacent to the streetcar stop. that precious commodity will be reserved for actual development (residential/commercial) that adds directly to the tax base.

[longviewmo]

Perhaps accommodations for future commuter rail parking was one of the conditions the city asked for as part of the TIF agreement?

I agree that doing it on their own seems more than a little unlikely.

This. And Cerner would agree to it because they:
a) don't need all that land
b) are already building so much parking, so what's an extra lot to them?

[flyingember]

One thing to consider if the line extends to Waldo would be to provide space for a park-n-ride. A place for this might be where the closed school is located.

there will be no park and rides on the streetcar line as you've seen them built on light rail and commuter rail lines elsewhere in the US. that thinking has pretty much gone by the wayside (and good riddance). stations are what generate the economic development, so you build transit-oriented development instead of large garages (unless you're talking far into the hinterlands, where streetcar will never go).

waldo (or brookside) may decide to build structured parking if streetcar is extended there -- and it's not as guaranteed as some would have you believe -- but parking will not consume the developable land directly adjacent to the streetcar stop. that precious commodity will be reserved for actual development (residential/commercial) that adds directly to the tax base.

there's no way you can possibly know what ever developer will do. I would not be surprised if a developer sees value in providing parking along the line to commuters and to businesses nearby looking to sell their parking lot space for development. there's going to be companies that won't sell their employee/resident/customer parking until a solid alternative is available.

does that mean big empty garages at each stop? not at all. the solution is shared parking carefully placed and it's already leading to more density in some places. River Market West is making use of the Populous garage. Cordish(?) is using an existing garage for One Light.

[DaveKCMO]

Main Street south to 51st got high marks in part because of its population density, good ridership potential, anticipated federal funds, and strong support from the University of Missouri-Kansas City and its student government.

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/11/04/45 ... s-get.html

[DaveKCMO]

"main street plus" has emerged as the recommended scope. going to 63rd street in one swoop is still the top-scoring corridor, so brookside is pretty much a given. there is a lot of pressure to go further south, even past 75th, to take advantage of the existing right of way that was preserved for transit use. 5th/6th district indicated they want to investigate improvements to the trail in addition to preserving it. even the owner of brookside shops is now on board.

anyone seen these yard signs?

[PumpkinStalker]

I think I saw that sign....yep. Every time I pull in my driveway!