KCRag Forum

taxi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 10:26 am I know a restaurant owner in the RM and spoke to him right after the meters went in. He could care less about where his customers park but he was very concerned about his employees. The meters have time limits and they have to run out and feed them during their shift and can barely afford the cost, much less the price of a parking ticket. I never hear anyone talk about employee parking. It's an afterthought, much like low income housing.

There are free lots and free street parking in the north loop adjacent to the streetcar stop. Considering the long term nature of someone working at a restaurant, I’d encourage that option more than them parking directly in front of my business.

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 2:11 pm

taxi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 10:26 am I know a restaurant owner in the RM and spoke to him right after the meters went in. He could care less about where his customers park but he was very concerned about his employees. The meters have time limits and they have to run out and feed them during their shift and can barely afford the cost, much less the price of a parking ticket. I never hear anyone talk about employee parking. It's an afterthought, much like low income housing.

There are free lots and free street parking in the north loop adjacent to the streetcar stop. Considering the long term nature of someone working at a restaurant, I’d encourage that option more than them parking directly in front of my business.

I don't believe those are free during the week, only weekends?

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 2:47 pm

Anthony_Hugo98 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 2:11 pm

taxi wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 10:26 am I know a restaurant owner in the RM and spoke to him right after the meters went in. He could care less about where his customers park but he was very concerned about his employees. The meters have time limits and they have to run out and feed them during their shift and can barely afford the cost, much less the price of a parking ticket. I never hear anyone talk about employee parking. It's an afterthought, much like low income housing.

There are free lots and free street parking in the north loop adjacent to the streetcar stop. Considering the long term nature of someone working at a restaurant, I’d encourage that option more than them parking directly in front of my business.

I don't believe those are free during the week, only weekends?

The lots are only during the weekend, the street parking seems to be free during the week, unless that’s recently changed with the new rollout, but I haven’t seen those parking signs in that part of town yet

Isn't this project supposed to be breaking ground like very soon? I think they said March

TheUrbanRoo wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 11:37 pm Isn't this project supposed to be breaking ground like very soon? I think they said March

That’s what they want you to think. 3rd and Grand should’ve been well underway by now as well.

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 11:40 pm

TheUrbanRoo wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 11:37 pm Isn't this project supposed to be breaking ground like very soon? I think they said March

That’s what they want you to think. 3rd and Grand should’ve been well underway by now as well.

How is this thing still not going? It's been like shovel ready for 2 years now and the FAA cleared it. Even the cranes are ready to go.

TheUrbanRoo wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 11:41 pm

Chris Stritzel wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 11:40 pm

TheUrbanRoo wrote: ↑Mon Feb 26, 2024 11:37 pm Isn't this project supposed to be breaking ground like very soon? I think they said March

That’s what they want you to think. 3rd and Grand should’ve been well underway by now as well.

How is this thing still not going? It's been like shovel ready for 2 years now and the FAA cleared it. Even the cranes are ready to go.

KC Tenants opposed and still opposes the project. They spoke out against the $1,200 proposed monthly rents, and aspects of the parking garage. This slowdown coupled with the FAA actions delayed the project, causing its cost to grow from 75M to 95M. The longer a project sits, the more expensive it gets, and the less likely it is to come to fruition. Hopefully this helps a few folks understand the massive impact that kicking the can down the road and sending development proposals back in committee hearings again and again, can have. You don't need to deny a project to kill it. You just need to slow it down. 30% chance this project gets built.

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... rking.html
https://www.reddit.com/r/kansascity/com ... rs_kc_may/

The comments from Jaz Hays on there are from KCT's newest BZA member. Good luck y'all.

Wow, what's it going to take to get new construction going in KC again?

GRID wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 11:08 am Wow, what's it going to take to get new construction going in KC again?

A baseball stadium in the Crossroads.

For real though, City Harvest is one of the projects that I have been most looking forward to over the past couple years - really hope this makes it.

im2kull wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 1:12 am The comments from Jaz Hays on there are from KCT's newest BZA member. Good luck y'all.

Comments on a Reddit thread are what's stopping this from happening? I distinctly remember KC Tenants not actually saying/doing anything about this project, at least publicly. In fact, we had a discussion about it in this very thread a few pages back. Now, that doesn't mean they weren't working behind the scenes or I/we missed something but if some Reddit comments are your evidence then...

I am with you on KCT but throwing out untrue accusations isn't a way to build your case.

TheBigChuckbowski wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 12:32 pm

im2kull wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 1:12 am The comments from Jaz Hays on there are from KCT's newest BZA member. Good luck y'all.

Comments on a Reddit thread are what's stopping this from happening? I distinctly remember KC Tenants not actually saying/doing anything about this project, at least publicly. In fact, we had a discussion about it in this very thread a few pages back. Now, that doesn't mean they weren't working behind the scenes or I/we missed something but if some Reddit comments are your evidence then...

I am with you on KCT but throwing out untrue accusations aren't a way to build your case.

If I remember right it was more FAA + Local business owners concerned about parking. Including one business owner that was on the CPC and probably should have recused himself... But whatever.

bspecht wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 4:42 pm Apparently the structure got taller and requires a new round at the FAA?
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... =602692294
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... =602692295
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... =602692296

There are still FAA issues for this site. A "circularization" (public notice) was issued 2 weeks ago, with responses required by 3/20/24.

bspecht wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 1:44 pm

bspecht wrote: ↑Mon Nov 27, 2023 4:42 pm Apparently the structure got taller and requires a new round at the FAA?
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... =602692294
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... =602692295
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/se ... =602692296

There are still FAA issues for this site. A "circularization" (public notice) was issued 2 weeks ago, with responses required by 3/20/24.

At least this is nice to have straight from the FAA. Hope this study can then be applied to the area as a whole so that other projects won't need to go through this bottleneck too.

Preliminary FAA study indicates that the above mentioned structure would:

• have no effect on any existing or proposed arrival, departure, or en route instrument flight rules (IFR)
  operations or procedures.

• have no effect on any existing or proposed arrival, departure, or en route instrument/visual flight rules (IFR/
  VFR) minimum flight altitudes.

• have no physical or electromagnetic effect on the operation of air navigation and communications facilities.

• have no effect on any airspace and routes used by the military.

TheBigChuckbowski wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 12:32 pm

im2kull wrote: ↑Tue Feb 27, 2024 1:12 am The comments from Jaz Hays on there are from KCT's newest BZA member. Good luck y'all.

Comments on a Reddit thread are what's stopping this from happening? I distinctly remember KC Tenants not actually saying/doing anything about this project, at least publicly. In fact, we had a discussion about it in this very thread a few pages back. Now, that doesn't mean they weren't working behind the scenes or I/we missed something but if some Reddit comments are your evidence then...

I am with you on KCT but throwing out untrue accusations isn't a way to build your case.

KC Tenants has made very public statements against this development. They also have a very public policy for seeking social housing.. not affordable housing. Literal social housing. It's in their mission statement.

https://www.dwell.com/article/kansas-ci ... 7-aa8857bf

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... s-faa.html
"Before the vote, Kathleen Pointer, senior policy strategist with Kansas City Public Schools, spoke in opposition"

https://flatlandkc.org/news-issues/prop ... ent-model/
"The requested initial 85% property tax abatement was criticized as being too large by Kathleen Pointer, a representative of the Kansas City Public Schools. She also noted the planned rents were not affordable to families."


Anti-development comments on Reddit by KCT members who hold positions on boards that developments have to pass through for approval, are inherently noteworthy. If they're willing to say these kinds of things publicly, imagine what is occurring behind closed doors.

im2kull wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 10:34 am KC Tenants has made very public statements against this development. They also have a very public policy for seeking social housing.. not affordable housing. Literal social housing. It's in their mission statement.

https://www.dwell.com/article/kansas-ci ... 7-aa8857bf

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... s-faa.html
"Before the vote, Kathleen Pointer, senior policy strategist with Kansas City Public Schools, spoke in opposition"

https://flatlandkc.org/news-issues/prop ... ent-model/
"The requested initial 85% property tax abatement was criticized as being too large by Kathleen Pointer, a representative of the Kansas City Public Schools. She also noted the planned rents were not affordable to families."


Anti-development comments on Reddit by KCT members who hold positions on boards that developments have to pass through for approval, are inherently noteworthy. If they're willing to say these kinds of things publicly, imagine what is occurring behind closed doors.

Again, I completely agree with your overall position on KCT and have been banging the same drum about their unwillingness to support privately owned affordable housing. We are not in disagreement on that.

However, your contention in this thread was that this project hasn't started because KCT has complained about it and your evidence is some Reddit comments (no project has ever been stalled by a Reddit comment) and criticism from Kathleen Pointer, that didn't go above and beyond the same line the school district has said about every incentive that's ever been proposed, in a meeting where incentives were endorsed by the committee. So, again, you're presenting zero evidence that KCT has stalled this project one iota.

TheBigChuckbowski wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 11:06 am

im2kull wrote: ↑Wed Feb 28, 2024 10:34 am KC Tenants has made very public statements against this development. They also have a very public policy for seeking social housing.. not affordable housing. Literal social housing. It's in their mission statement.

https://www.dwell.com/article/kansas-ci ... 7-aa8857bf

https://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/ ... s-faa.html
"Before the vote, Kathleen Pointer, senior policy strategist with Kansas City Public Schools, spoke in opposition"

https://flatlandkc.org/news-issues/prop ... ent-model/
"The requested initial 85% property tax abatement was criticized as being too large by Kathleen Pointer, a representative of the Kansas City Public Schools. She also noted the planned rents were not affordable to families."


Anti-development comments on Reddit by KCT members who hold positions on boards that developments have to pass through for approval, are inherently noteworthy. If they're willing to say these kinds of things publicly, imagine what is occurring behind closed doors.

Again, I completely agree with your overall position on KCT and have been banging the same drum about their unwillingness to support privately owned affordable housing. We are not in disagreement on that.

However, your contention in this thread was that this project hasn't started because KCT has complained about it and your evidence is some Reddit comments (no project has ever been stalled by a Reddit comment) and criticism from Kathleen Pointer, that didn't go above and beyond the same line the school district has said about every incentive that's ever been proposed, in a meeting where incentives were endorsed by the committee. So, again, you're presenting zero evidence that KCT has stalled this project one iota.

To be fair, it's hard to share much when Port KC's official meeting minutes read as follows:
"[There were discussions, comments, and questions from the Board, Public, and Staff.]"
Not joking. That's a real set of Port KC meeting minutes.

I don't disagree with your take on the topic, but everyone in the room understands that Kathleen Pointer is speaking for both KC Public Schools and KC Tenants, and that KCT has been exceptionally good at interfering. That her comments didn't rise beyond her usual measure of rhetoric isn't noteworthy, given that her usual rhetoric is pretty extreme.

We need to get this project going already. Having this and 3rd & Grand coming up the same time would be spectacular.

Cleared by the FAA in early April.