KCRag Forum

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 2:36 pm**

AlkaliAxel wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 2:28 pm Everything daGOAT is saying is exactly right

If it's part of a bigger plan that's built out along side the stadium, the highway is capped or bridged to some degree and the Paseo West is prevented from turning into parking lots then EV wins.

Mainly because I don't think the Vine district can overcome the 71 highway barrier.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:17 pm**

I believe Paseo West will continue to be a candidate for denser mixed income housing, with a focus on affordability and unhoused/at-risk families. EV wouldn't require as much parking be built and I like the idea of an East Loop Cap. What's tricky is, and this is just my opinion, along with North Loop removal I think 71 should become state designated and be rebuilt with a true LRT line from Banister to MCI in the median and a major stop at East Village/Paseo West. You guys let me know if I'm just crazy tho.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm**

daGOAT wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:17 pm I believe Paseo West will continue to be a candidate for denser mixed income housing, with a focus on affordability and unhoused/at-risk families. EV wouldn't require as much parking be built and I like the idea of an East Loop Cap. What's tricky is, and this is just my opinion, along with North Loop removal I think 71 should become state designated and be rebuilt with a true LRT line from Banister to MCI in the median and a major stop at East Village/Paseo West. You guys let me know if I'm just crazy tho.

It would be great for LRT and fits physically but 71 is far from most trip generators.

I was once a 71 Highway LRT fanatic but was talked out of it by this board and actual planners

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm**

^ why does it have to be a state route? MoDot is broke. That would probably make things worse.

But yeah, do it. LRT from MCI along 29 and 71 works for me haha.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:26 pm**

GRID wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm ^ why does it have to be a state route? MoDot is broke. That would probably make things worse.

But yeah, do it. LRT from MCI along 29 and 71 works for me haha.

Yeah you're right about the state they can't even pick up trash right lol

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:26 pm**

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm
daGOAT wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:17 pm I believe Paseo West will continue to be a candidate for denser mixed income housing, with a focus on affordability and unhoused/at-risk families. EV wouldn't require as much parking be built and I like the idea of an East Loop Cap. What's tricky is, and this is just my opinion, along with North Loop removal I think 71 should become state designated and be rebuilt with a true LRT line from Banister to MCI in the median and a major stop at East Village/Paseo West. You guys let me know if I'm just crazy tho.
It would be great for LRT and fits physically but 71 is far from most trip generators.

I was once a 71 Highway LRT fanatic but was talked out of it by this board and actual planners

Then do 29 and 70. I really do think that the MO side counties would pass a regional LRT system like that. But it has to include KCMO's east side and 71 is the easiest way to do that but a LRT along Troost makes more sense.

Ideally, something along 29, 70 and Troost would make the most sense. Just need a few billion dollars.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:31 pm**

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm
daGOAT wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:17 pm I believe Paseo West will continue to be a candidate for denser mixed income housing, with a focus on affordability and unhoused/at-risk families. EV wouldn't require as much parking be built and I like the idea of an East Loop Cap. What's tricky is, and this is just my opinion, along with North Loop removal I think 71 should become state designated and be rebuilt with a true LRT line from Banister to MCI in the median and a major stop at East Village/Paseo West. You guys let me know if I'm just crazy tho.
It would be great for LRT and fits physically but 71 is far from most trip generators.

I was once a 71 Highway LRT fanatic but was talked out of it by this board and actual planners

Being far from trip generators makes sense but man would it be great to connect Cerner/the Glade with downtown somehow

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:35 pm**

freedog wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:31 pm
normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm
daGOAT wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:17 pm I believe Paseo West will continue to be a candidate for denser mixed income housing, with a focus on affordability and unhoused/at-risk families. EV wouldn't require as much parking be built and I like the idea of an East Loop Cap. What's tricky is, and this is just my opinion, along with North Loop removal I think 71 should become state designated and be rebuilt with a true LRT line from Banister to MCI in the median and a major stop at East Village/Paseo West. You guys let me know if I'm just crazy tho.
It would be great for LRT and fits physically but 71 is far from most trip generators.

I was once a 71 Highway LRT fanatic but was talked out of it by this board and actual planners
Being far from trip generators makes sense but man would it be great to connect Cerner/the Glade with downtown somehow

Tram-train from UMKC down the Country Club ROW to Bannister and then over to Cerner and the Glade.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:35 pm**

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm
daGOAT wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:17 pm I believe Paseo West will continue to be a candidate for denser mixed income housing, with a focus on affordability and unhoused/at-risk families. EV wouldn't require as much parking be built and I like the idea of an East Loop Cap. What's tricky is, and this is just my opinion, along with North Loop removal I think 71 should become state designated and be rebuilt with a true LRT line from Banister to MCI in the median and a major stop at East Village/Paseo West. You guys let me know if I'm just crazy tho.
It would be great for LRT and fits physically but 71 is far from most trip generators.

I was once a 71 Highway LRT fanatic but was talked out of it by this board and actual planners

It would have a better shot than any other LRT line imo. Bannister grows, 63rd and Prospect is redeveloped, Linwood is dense and might start growing, 31st is upgraded to BRT or a possible streetcar, Beacon Hill is grown on both sides, a potential Royals stadium , and a NKC stop would spur all kinds of uses. Past that it wouldn't be very used except to reach the airport, but it would be better than the 229. I legit feel like the city should be pursuing this. There could likely be a stop at East Crossroads/Jazz District that would still encourage development, taking away the parking minimums needs to happen too.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:41 pm**

daGOAT wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:35 pm
normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm
daGOAT wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:17 pm I believe Paseo West will continue to be a candidate for denser mixed income housing, with a focus on affordability and unhoused/at-risk families. EV wouldn't require as much parking be built and I like the idea of an East Loop Cap. What's tricky is, and this is just my opinion, along with North Loop removal I think 71 should become state designated and be rebuilt with a true LRT line from Banister to MCI in the median and a major stop at East Village/Paseo West. You guys let me know if I'm just crazy tho.
It would be great for LRT and fits physically but 71 is far from most trip generators.

I was once a 71 Highway LRT fanatic but was talked out of it by this board and actual planners
It would have a better shot than any other LRT line imo. Bannister grows, 63rd and Prospect is redeveloped, Linwood is dense and might start growing, 31st is upgraded to BRT or a possible streetcar, Beacon Hill is grown on both sides, a potential Royals stadium , and a NKC stop would spur all kinds of uses. Past that it wouldn't be very used except to reach the airport, but it would be better than the 229. I legit feel like the city should be pursuing this. There could likely be a stop at East Crossroads/Jazz District that would still encourage development, taking away the parking minimums needs to happen too.

Jackson County Commuter Corridors study provided an initial look into connecting these sorts of destinations with downtown via “Streetcar Plus” and the Main Street streetcar line. This is similar to Tram train.

East/West could also be done in that “Streetcar Plus” type.

Johnson County could do a LRT line if one was proposed.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:53 pm**

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:35 pm
freedog wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:31 pm
normalthings wrote: ↑Mon May 16, 2022 3:23 pm

It would be great for LRT and fits physically but 71 is far from most trip generators.

I was once a 71 Highway LRT fanatic but was talked out of it by this board and actual planners
Being far from trip generators makes sense but man would it be great to connect Cerner/the Glade with downtown somehow
Tram-train from UMKC down the Country Club ROW to Bannister and then over to Cerner and the Glade.

Past Waldo and near B&M too... Neat

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 3:55 pm**

Thinking about this, it feels a bit like a negotiation. The Royals want to go in EV but don’t control the land and are using 18V as an alternative site as part of that negotiation. Only thing I can think of because 18V seems to make little sense to me. It’s also why I’ll probably stop talking about it and let the proper negotiation happen. I hope the right location is chosen.

Posted: **Mon May 16, 2022 4:07 pm**

I like the 71 turning into LRT idea. I’m sure a few adjustments could make it work splendidly.

Posted: **Tue May 17, 2022 7:05 am**

Just say no to transit in a freeway median. You get zero eco devo spinoff. Just look at the other cities that have done it (LA, Chicago).

Posted: **Tue May 17, 2022 11:22 am**

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 7:05 am Just say no to transit in a freeway median. You get zero eco devo spinoff. Just look at the other cities that have done it (LA, Chicago).

I am... I'm thinking convenience. The economic development should be able to happen anyway if KC had decent leadership and educated its residents. Also LA only has a small line on the Foothills of San Gabriel, which is seeing plenty of development. Chicago doesn't struggle getting development either even with the same %20 affordability requirement, they actually approve incentive packages. Basically, there's alot of reasons KC won't get development that have nothing to do with a heightened ability to vertically travel a city with normally terrible transit.

Posted: **Tue May 17, 2022 11:25 am**

I don't think major cities have to use transit as a development tool they never lost their density the way KC did, which was never that dense to begin with. Ig LA used the K Line to bring density to the Crenshaw corridor but that's something the community wanted to make happen anyway.

Posted: **Tue May 17, 2022 11:31 am**

Plus didn't a suburb of LA get two privately funded stadiums a mile north of the C Line running in the 105's median?

Posted: **Tue May 17, 2022 4:26 pm**

daGOAT wrote: ↑Tue May 17, 2022 11:31 am Plus didn't a suburb of LA get two privately funded stadiums a mile north of the C Line running in the 105's median?

Google says it's two miles from the nearest station, and even if it was one mile that wouldn't count.

Posted: **Tue May 17, 2022 8:24 pm**

But that’s already well in motion to change as well. Soon Century and Prairie will connect with the K line where you can get access to LAX or Mid City, which will expand North from Wilshire to Hollywood. We’ll see if Inglewood can get it together tho they have a fixation on elevated rail that makes things pretty expensive.

Posted: **Wed May 18, 2022 7:39 pm**

That's interesting. So what is the difference between the rags thoughts and the citizens that actually live in that area? Are they pro stadium build or con?

KCRag Forum

Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium

Re: Downtown Baseball Stadium