OFFICIAL - East Village

[FangKC]

The biggest problem with a pedestrian street is finding tenants for the retail spaces. Business owners are very risk-adverse. They see pedestrian-only streets differently than you do. If your business is in the middle of the block, you can't be seen by passing traffic, Will your only customers be people living and working within a 5-block radius? Is that enough? What if on three sides of the neighborhood, there are major interstates as boundaries -- a wall of sorts? What if on the other side are undeveloped, unpopulated neighborhoods for several blocks?

See below the Fusion plan and the surrounding neighborhoods.



If you are a restaurant, will your competitors be in-building office cafeterias (Federal building)? If you are a gym, will it be in-building resident gyms? Will there be enough other business owners also willing to take a risk to create enough crossover retail activity that benefits everyone? The drug store benefits the dry cleaner and hair salon. Without the drug store anchor, will the other businesses survive?

Overcoming this resistance will be huge. Local regional malls have been an example of enclosed pedestrian streets. It's basically the same concept, yet they are climate-controlled year-round. We've seen recently the failure rate of malls, i.e. enclosed pedestrian streets. A pedestrian street won't be climate controlled.

Let's apply the pedestrian street concept in another neighborhood. I did these graphic awhile back for the redevelopment of the Paseo West neighborhood. I've plopped the Fusion plan for the East Village down in the middle of the Paseo West plan. I can see it working better here if my entire plan were achieved completely.



I'd rather see retail placed along the existing streets with wider sidewalks than we have done traditionally in Kansas City. This would allow for landscaping and street trees and outdoor seating.

[FangKC]

Many cities have tried pedestrian malls, but most have failed

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news ... -most.html

The Trouble with Pedestrian Malls

https://www.governing.com/archive/troub ... malls.html

The Failed Experiment of the American Pedestrian Mall

https://www.gmfus.org/blog/2014/01/16/f ... trian-mall

I'm not opposed to pedestrian malls. I personally like them. But I'm not a typical American.

[normalthings]

I’m not sure what the problem is with a 2 lane road. Close it during events and provide ample sidewalk space. Pedestrian malls I’m not really a fan of including the Plaza. I really think the Plaza just needs a road diet in the center

[earthling]

^I do think turning Nichols Rd into ped only would be highly successful and a needed new dynamic to breathe new life for Plaza. Otherwise I think (based on global travels) ped only streets mostly only work off of transit lines stops that are also heavily used by tourists/metro visitors (KC's streetcar). So it likely won't work in E Village but I could imagine 8th Street from Broadway to Main with hirises and ground retail along ped only 8th street as has been discussed in other threads.

E Village needs to become mostly a residential district. If the stadium isn't along streetcar line it may as well stay where it is. But if it does go where E Village is, fuse the stadium literally into hirise residential/public use buildings and think Wrigleyville as a model but don't make it a standalone structure with only baseball/event use, fuse it into daily lives.

[flyingember]

I’m not sure what the problem is with a 2 lane road. Close it during events and provide ample sidewalk space. Pedestrian malls I’m not really a fan of including the Plaza. I really think the Plaza just needs a road diet in the center

Do we really want to induce demand for more parking? Does that meet the goals of a walkable urban envoronment? Holmes dead ends on the north end of the East Village, it's not a thru street

Most streets downtown are two lane streets and people are trying to shrink them in size.

Also, what events?

The biggest problem with a pedestrian street is finding tenants for the retail spaces. Business owners are very risk-adverse.

Why does a pedestrian street need retail space?

Couldn't it be the functional backyard for residential buildings on either side? Basically serve as a public courtyard only. The space between buildings at 400 Delaware could be the model. It's a functional pedestrian street today.

Otherwise I think (based on global travels) ped only streets mostly only work off of transit lines stops that are also heavily used by tourists/metro visitors (KC's streetcar).

So locals can *never* possibly want to go outside and sit under trees because it's in the place of a street.

The difference between a ped only street and path in a park crossing a plaza is the physical location of the construction.
They're the same thing.

This argument is saying we shouldn't build paths in parks because only tourists use them.

[earthling]

^Not that can support broad range of retail.

[smh]

This one didn't place, but what I liked about it was the additional pedestrian grid that created more street frontage for housing, etc. Agreed that the pedestrianization of Holmes might need rethought.



https://uli.secure-platform.com/a/galle ... tails/3264

[flyingember]

Here's an example of a model of pedestrian space facing entry for a residential developement.

viewtopic.php?f=31&t=21076

Look at the image directly above this post and it's the same idea on a different scale.

We need a downtown that supports everyone and a step free ground level entry for wheelchairs that exits to a private plaza so someone with chronic exhaustion can enjoy green space without traveling anywhere is an inclusive action we can take.

[FangKC]

I get the point you are making about creating a courtyard space for residents. However, if you want to reduce demand for parking in that neighborhood, you certainly want to create a retail corridor that services building residents. Holmes certainly could become a restaurant strip as well. Maybe some small pubs. You want things like a dry cleaner, hair salons, phone store, convenience store/bodega, several restaurants, and maybe two pubs. I'd also include doctors and dentists offices. Those are things you don't always want to get on a bus or streetcar to do. The problem with not having a street / alley of some kind is deliveries to businesses.

Pedestrian streets don't always have to be wide plazas. Some of the best pedestrian streets in Europe are narrow, but you still see people sitting along them on benches.

[beautyfromashes]

Places become more walkable because there is somewhere TO walk. This is evident with the RM and Crossroads with their relation to DT. The East and West sides of DT need to find a way to connect with other neighborhoods to bring more foot traffic. The NE is vital to East Village. If there isn't a connection to that large residential area, EV will be a dead end. The west side of DT needs to find a better way to connect with the West Side south across 14th street and, hopefully, the West Bottoms. Those neighborhoods are connected. People don't usually walk just for the sake of walking.

[taxi]

The developers of the CP Lofts in Columbus Park claim (and I say claim because I don't believe much of anything they say) that they were going to make 4th St. a "greenway" pedestrian street but were denied by public works, who said they must have access for emergency vehicles – wide enough to make a U-turn! One of many missed opportunities in that development.

Which also reminds me of a problem I find often in this city. They grant development rights of a very large area to a single developer. In CP's case, they claim (again) to be open to other developer partnerships, but they really aren't and what is possibly one of the most desirable development sites in downtown has seen very little development in the 15 years they have had the rights. Probably a similar situation going on in EV.

If the city were to grant sections of a large area to different developers, then if one fails, there might be someone else ready to pick up the slack. It makes more sense on many levels. P&L might be an exception.

[FangKC]

Don't get me started on Columbus Park.

I've heard that said in other situations about the emergency vehicles needing to be able to access buildings. To some extent, it's true -- especially in situations where there is a fire.

Many of the narrow retail streets in Europe, Asia, etc. where built before such rules/ordinances applied.

That said. There are alleys in Kansas City where you couldn't get a fire truck down them.

The wide enough to make a U-turn is a ridiculous requirement. A fire truck couldn't make a U-turn on the street in front of my house because it's lined with cars.

[normalthings]

The developers of the CP Lofts in Columbus Park claim (and I say claim because I don't believe much of anything they say) that they were going to make 4th St. a "greenway" pedestrian street but were denied by public works, who said they must have access for emergency vehicles – wide enough to make a U-turn! One of many missed opportunities in that development.

Which also reminds me of a problem I find often in this city. They grant development rights of a very large area to a single developer. In CP's case, they claim (again) to be open to other developer partnerships, but they really aren't and what is possibly one of the most desirable development sites in downtown has seen very little development in the 15 years they have had the rights. Probably a similar situation going on in EV.

If the city were to grant sections of a large area to different developers, then if one fails, there might be someone else ready to pick up the slack. It makes more sense on many levels. P&L might be an exception.

Berkley broke from the single developer and its gone pretty well.

[flyingember]

People don't usually walk just for the sake of walking.

There's entire product lines built around the idea of people walking for the sake of walking. In come specific cases there's even discussions around racial, and economic disparities in who walks for recreation about how it's largely a white pursuit.

Dr. Emmett Brown: And in the future, we don't need horses. We have motorized carriages called automobiles.
Jeb: If everybody's got one of these auto-whatsits, does anybody walk or run anymore?
Dr. Emmett Brown: Of course we run. But for recreation. For fun.
Jeb: Run for fun? What the hell kind of fun is that?

[FangKC]

I don't mind there being a master developer who sets some guidelines for the blocks/neighborhood. They should be willing to divvy-up the parcels to other developers though. That even means dividing city blocks -- even if four different developers do projects on that one block.

Swope was a terrible master developer for the East Village. VanTrust has been very pokey as well since they took over. There have been a couple of developers who have done multiple projects in other parts of the City, and they announced after VanTrust took over the East Village.

Imo, the two blocks on the north end between 8th and 10th, and Holmes and Charlotte, should have already had new apartment buildings completed. And not like the East Village Apartments structure, but more like 6-9 story buildings. I'd like to see one of those blocks even have 15-story tower.

[beautyfromashes]

People don't usually walk just for the sake of walking.

There's entire product lines built around the idea of people walking for the sake of walking.

Dr. Emmett Brown: And in the future, we don't need horses. We have motorized carriages called automobiles.
Jeb: If everybody's got one of these auto-whatsits, does anybody walk or run anymore?
Dr. Emmett Brown: Of course we run. But for recreation. For fun.
Jeb: Run for fun? What the hell kind of fun is that?

Ummm, are you on a bender today?

[flyingember]

People don't usually walk just for the sake of walking.

There's entire product lines built around the idea of people walking for the sake of walking.

Dr. Emmett Brown: And in the future, we don't need horses. We have motorized carriages called automobiles.
Jeb: If everybody's got one of these auto-whatsits, does anybody walk or run anymore?
Dr. Emmett Brown: Of course we run. But for recreation. For fun.
Jeb: Run for fun? What the hell kind of fun is that?

Ummm, are you on a bender today?

I edited it for a better point.

But if you didn't get the point based on that, you really are clueless that people actually do walk for the sake of walking in droves.

edit: by 2017 it reached where 2/3 of adults who go on walks

[flyingember]

I don't mind there being a master developer who sets some guidelines for the blocks/neighborhood. They should be willing to divvy-up the parcels to other developers though. That even means dividing city blocks -- even if four different developers do projects on that one block.

Swope was a terrible master developer for the East Village. VanTrust has been very pokey as well since they took over. There have been a couple of developers who have done multiple projects in other parts of the City, and they announced after VanTrust took over the East Village.

In the 2006 ordinance 060455 they made it so every individual project had to be approved anyways. So why did they need a master developer at all? The city council was serving as de facto as the final say in the development of the area. The city should hire a master developer only to produce results faster, like with a one year contract where they must have approved projects for all parcels to get their full fee.

[FangKC]

When I lived in New York City, on Fridays after work, I would walk south from 69th Street down to 13th Street (where I lived) on purpose. If the weather was decent. But I would even do it when it was cold -- as long as it wasn't below zero, raining, or sleeting. I would take different routes each time. It's how I got to know the City.

[FangKC]

I don't mind there being a master developer who sets some guidelines for the blocks/neighborhood. They should be willing to divvy-up the parcels to other developers though. That even means dividing city blocks -- even if four different developers do projects on that one block.

Swope was a terrible master developer for the East Village. VanTrust has been very pokey as well since they took over. There have been a couple of developers who have done multiple projects in other parts of the City, and they announced after VanTrust took over the East Village.

In the 2006 ordinance 060455 they made it so every individual project had to be approved anyways. So why did they need a master developer at all?

I think the master developer might oversee things like updating the water lines, utilities, etc. in the neighborhood; interacting with various developers with ideas; guiding potential developers through City zoning, overlays, etc.; walking them through incentives processes, and helping them get everything approved by various agencies and the Council. This might include doing public interface with various neighborhood groups and interested parties.