Capping the Loop

[rxlexi]

Thanks for the pics and update Chris, much appreciated.

As presented/conceptually, this looks fantastic. I don't have any problem closing Walnut IF they can ensure Grand stays open. I actually like the idea behind the event pavilion placement at the center of the old Walnut intersection, near the food hall; provides a nice centerpiece for the space.

Would like to see a little better connection to the western block in front of Lowes. I could see it being a bit quiet over there between the elevation change, convention center on western edge, and separation from main portions of the park. Is potential ped bridge across an open Baltimore still being discussed?

[moderne]

Roo--Happy 1 year anniversary~!

[TheUrbanRoo]

Roo--Happy 1 year anniversary~!

Ah, thank you.

I guess for my birthday speech I’d just like to say, we should start focusing on getting a streetcar down 12th instead of Midtown. That is all.

[dukuboy1]

wow, love to see the renderings and all of the different amenities and activation planned for the areas. I like what they have planned as it appears the focus is to make it a downtown destination of sorts. Really neat stuff. The "adventure park" area looks fun. Homeless folks should love it

But in all seriousness this looks great and shows some serious thought and planning has been happening behind the scenes. Good to see these efforts

[DColeKC]

Closing Walnut will only help traffic. If any of you have spent time in your vehicle trying to leave downtown during a heavy traffic time, the walnut bridge is a mess. It tends to just backup and block eastbound traffic from flowing on Truman.

I obviously don't share the same concerns with a few about Cordish treating this like a private park. They've got money in the pot and I'm sure they'll do some small private events for residential but I also think all downtown stakeholders will have the same opportunity. They'll likely also execute some larger events that are open to the public like a beer fest or something similar.

I do love this concept, have a few critiques but nothing dramatic.

Park security will be one of the most critical aspects of this. It will need to be patrolled 24/7 and feature a great camera system.

[KCPowercat]

the walnut intersection could be improved vs. just close it. Also it's more of a mess when the Grand closure is in place.

I'm not all the way against closing Walnut. I'm just afraid the city isn't going to do enough with the roads around it to make that closure doable. The presentation said as much it is going to need other changes. I also think closing Baltimore makes a better park overall with the elevation changes but I do like the idea of having a performance area close to tmobile for pre-event events that are too big for Live!

[smh]

Lastly I hope they address (or we hear from kcstreetcar directly) that they are comfortable with traffic patterns not impacting streetcar.

I think this project has largely lost the plot and should go back to first principles and not we have money we need to spend.

I am still inclined to this point (albeit maybe less than I was previously). The renderings are beautiful, but the programming is vaporware for now. Have to focus on big pieces and I agree they seem to have lost the plot. Who is this space for? What is the goal of this park?

EDIT: Which isn't me saying it shouldn't happen. Just saying that right now it seems too being trying to do too much. I also think that the Wyandotte hill should be simpler and as is it has a lot of hidey holes for naps.

[DColeKC]

the walnut intersection could be improved vs. just close it. Also it's more of a mess when the Grand closure is in place.

I'm not all the way against closing Walnut. I'm just afraid the city isn't going to do enough with the roads around it to make that closure doable. The presentation said as much it is going to need other changes. I also think closing Baltimore makes a better park overall with the elevation changes but I do like the idea of having a performance area close to tmobile for pre-event events that are too big for Live!

Improving the Intersection:

Improving the intersection at this location presents a considerable challenge due to its limited space constraints. Particularly, the southbound turning lane on Walnut can only accommodate one vehicle at a time. This bottleneck causes traffic congestion whenever two vehicles simultaneously attempt to make left turns. Compounding the issue is the fact that the majority of vehicles heading south on the Walnut Bridge are making left turns. Given these circumstances, addressing the traffic flow at this intersection seems nearly impossible.

Concerning the Pavilion:

With the pavilion, it's important to have a level and spacious area to ensure maximum versatility for various event setups. Comparatively, the event lawn appears notably smaller than the live block. My estimate suggests that the event lawn can accommodate approximately 500 to 800 individuals standing at once, and this capacity diminishes to less than 250 when attendees bring blankets, chairs, or other items that occupy additional space.

Regarding Grand Street Closure on T-Mobile Event Days:

Grand Street will inevitably be closed on T-Mobile event days in close proximity to the event's start time. This closure persists even once the city handles the underlying issues that currently lead to frequent closures not related to event days.

[DColeKC]

Lastly I hope they address (or we hear from kcstreetcar directly) that they are comfortable with traffic patterns not impacting streetcar.

I think this project has largely lost the plot and should go back to first principles and not we have money we need to spend.

I am still inclined to this point (albeit maybe less than I was previously). The renderings are beautiful, but the programming is vaporware for now. Have to focus on big pieces and I agree they seem to have lost the plot. Who is this space for? What is the goal of this park?

EDIT: Which isn't me saying it shouldn't happen. Just saying that right now it seems too being trying to do too much. I also think that the Wyandotte hill should be simpler and as is it has a lot of hidey holes for naps.

I wouldn't be opposed to simplifying the plan. It does seem very busy with every inch being utilized.

[KCPowercat]

I'm absolutely positive it will be value engineered to be less stuff. I've seen too many renderings to be fooled at this stage.

[KCPowercat]

Improving the Intersection:

Improving the intersection at this location presents a considerable challenge due to its limited space constraints. Particularly, the southbound turning lane on Walnut can only accommodate one vehicle at a time. This bottleneck causes traffic congestion whenever two vehicles simultaneously attempt to make left turns. Compounding the issue is the fact that the majority of vehicles heading south on the Walnut Bridge are making left turns. Given these circumstances, addressing the traffic flow at this intersection seems nearly impossible.

There are more options available than that. maybe there isn't a left turn onto Truman for example. Especially when Grand is closed, get traffic going south and if they need to get back onto 670 East wrap back around up grand for that access.

Regarding Grand Street Closure on T-Mobile Event Days:

Grand Street will inevitably be closed on T-Mobile event days in close proximity to the event's start time. This closure persists even once the city handles the underlying issues that currently lead to frequent closures not related to event days.

This is not something that has to happen. For years of Sprint Center it didn't happen and it was fine. Put out security to help pedestrians before/after, sure. Great idea. It's the idea done all over around urban arenas. This complete blockage is the elephant in the room of this whole discussion and needs to be addressed.

[TheUrbanRoo]

Protect the pavillion & food court at all costs. We can negotiate down on the kids section.

[DColeKC]

Improving the Intersection:

Improving the intersection at this location presents a considerable challenge due to its limited space constraints. Particularly, the southbound turning lane on Walnut can only accommodate one vehicle at a time. This bottleneck causes traffic congestion whenever two vehicles simultaneously attempt to make left turns. Compounding the issue is the fact that the majority of vehicles heading south on the Walnut Bridge are making left turns. Given these circumstances, addressing the traffic flow at this intersection seems nearly impossible.

There are more options available than that. maybe there isn't a left turn onto Truman for example. Especially when Grand is closed, get traffic going south and if they need to get back onto 670 East wrap back around up grand for that access.

Regarding Grand Street Closure on T-Mobile Event Days:

Grand Street will inevitably be closed on T-Mobile event days in close proximity to the event's start time. This closure persists even once the city handles the underlying issues that currently lead to frequent closures not related to event days.

This is not something that has to happen. For years of Sprint Center it didn't happen and it was fine. Put out security to help pedestrians before/after, sure. Great idea. It's the idea done all over around urban arenas. This complete blockage is the elephant in the room of this whole discussion and needs to be addressed.

Given the significant volume of southbound traffic on the Walnut Bridge primarily intending to turn left, eliminating this option renders the bridge's continued operation unnecessary. I've observed this chaotic situation from my window for years.

Grand Blvd has been closed for pedestrian safety during arena events since its opening, and deviating from this policy is non-negotiable.

The notion of temporarily closing Grand Blvd on weekends without events to prevent it from becoming a reckless "Grand Speedway" is a valid topic under city consideration. For a while, it turned into a scene of drag racing, donuts, burnouts, and blaring portable stereos, spiraling into an uncontrolled street party. If you don't believe this poses a danger to our downtown area, I've got a great apartment in Afghanistan to sell you!

It's disheartening that my wife must maneuver our child's stroller evasively to avoid 4-wheeler convoys, and I shouldn't have to face threats from motorcycle-riding troublemakers who disregard law and order for a thrill in the form of them flashing guns tucked into their waistbands.

While I want a lasting solution to ensure safety without Grand Blvd closures, dismissing the minor inconvenience these closures cause in exchange for enhanced pedestrian safety is unjustifiable.

[smh]

Protect the pavillion & food court at all costs. We can negotiate down on the kids section.

Agreed there needs to be some sort of concessions... I question a little whether we need a food hall with multiple vendors. But agree need food option.

[TheUrbanRoo]

Protect the pavillion & food court at all costs. We can negotiate down on the kids section.

Agreed there needs to be some sort of concessions... I question a little whether we need a food hall with multiple vendors. But agree need food option.

They said at the meeting it was a decision between either one restaurant or the food hall. They said they went food hall to give visitors multiple options to eat at instead of just one option. So they did put in some good thought to that part, not sure if they wanna axe it.

Underrated part of the park is the plaza along Wyandotte with vendors. Looks like it did in DC on the Mall.

[DColeKC]

Protect the pavillion & food court at all costs. We can negotiate down on the kids section.

Agreed there needs to be some sort of concessions... I question a little whether we need a food hall with multiple vendors. But agree need food option.

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.

[KCPowercat]

Given the significant volume of southbound traffic on the Walnut Bridge primarily intending to turn left, eliminating this option renders the bridge's continued operation unnecessary. I've observed this chaotic situation from my window for years.

Quite the opposite, given it's used that way primarily could also make that ONLY left turn during those times. Other option of going straight only also would help disipate traffic to a less busy area for traffic to move about. Both options make the bridge remain valuable. Again I don't have faith KCMO would do all this.

Grand Blvd has been closed for pedestrian safety during arena events since its opening, and deviating from this policy is non-negotiable.

I know for a fact I've walked into that arena for an event without Grand closed. It was years ago granted.

The notion of temporarily closing Grand Blvd on weekends without events to prevent it from becoming a reckless "Grand Speedway" is a valid topic under city consideration. For a while, it turned into a scene of drag racing, donuts, burnouts, and blaring portable stereos, spiraling into an uncontrolled street party. If you don't believe this poses a danger to our downtown area, I've got a great apartment in Afghanistan to sell you!

It's disheartening that my wife must maneuver our child's stroller evasively to avoid 4-wheeler convoys, and I shouldn't have to face threats from motorcycle-riding troublemakers who disregard law and order for a thrill in the form of them flashing guns tucked into their waistbands.

Nobody is disagreeing it's a problem but closing two blocks isn't a) the only answer or b) fixing the problem at all. It's just moving it away from your front door which seems the only goal. Its a bad situation that no family should have to be faced with being in danger of, no doubt.

While I want a lasting solution to ensure safety without Grand Blvd closures, dismissing the minor inconvenience these closures cause in exchange for enhanced pedestrian safety is unjustifiable.

I don't consider these minor inconveniences and again it's not fixing any problem. Can find fresh tiremarks weekly around downtown evidencing this.

[KCPowercat]

Protect the pavillion & food court at all costs. We can negotiate down on the kids section.

Agreed there needs to be some sort of concessions... I question a little whether we need a food hall with multiple vendors. But agree need food option.

They said at the meeting it was a decision between either one restaurant or the food hall. They said they went food hall to give visitors multiple options to eat at instead of just one option. So they did put in some good thought to that part, not sure if they wanna axe it.

Underrated part of the park is the plaza along Wyandotte with vendors. Looks like it did in DC on the Mall.

I personally would like a nicer place versus another food hall but I can see the value. I'd prefer something like Bryant Park Grill in NY.

[TheUrbanRoo]

Protect the pavillion & food court at all costs. We can negotiate down on the kids section.

Agreed there needs to be some sort of concessions... I question a little whether we need a food hall with multiple vendors. But agree need food option.

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.

[smh]

Agreed there needs to be some sort of concessions... I question a little whether we need a food hall with multiple vendors. But agree need food option.

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?