KCRag Forum

KCMax wrote: They don't. We're not a vibrant city yet. And during a transition period, when residents are getting acclimated to the idea of going downtown again, there will be a learning process.

but we are still expanding single-use parking facilities downtown when it's wholly unwarranted. we will never be a vibrant city as long as this practice continues. there is still a huge, civic collective concern about a lack of parking. additionally, we are making parking as easy, cheap, and abundant as possible-- something you never see in a vibrant city. is this the best strategy to move forward? the best way to acclimate a suburbadroid to an urban environment would be to facilitate alternative means of transit in the city (cabs, buses, walking, bikes). these alternatives make the city easier to navigate and also provide a more authentic urban experience for KC neophytes.

trailerkid wrote: but we are still expanding single-use parking facilities downtown when it's wholly unwarranted. we will never be a vibrant city as long as this practice continues. there is still a huge, civic collective concern about a lack of parking.

I don't think anyone on this board will disagree with you that we don't need to expand parking. That's why we are doing our best to educated people on existing parking, so that people will see we don't need to expand parking.

additionally, we are making parking as easy, cheap, and abundant as possible-- something you never see in a vibrant city. is this the best strategy to move forward? the best way to acclimate a suburbadroid to an urban environment would be to facilitate alternative means of transit in the city (cabs, buses, walking, bikes). these alternatives make the city easier to navigate and also provide a more authentic urban experience for KC neophytes.

I think working towards vibrancy comes in phases. First, you need to get people to come downtown. Once you do that, you can begin the process of getting them out of their cars. That is going to involve making the plunge and getting a major transit line of some sort. Once that happens, I agree, we need to de-emphasize parking and make it a bit more difficult.

trailerkid wrote: What vibrant city dedicates a great amount of energy and accommodation into parking facilities? 100% serious question.

It is kinda interesting you post this right after the article I linked to. It was about making parking easier in San Francisco, a city I don't think anyone will deny is pretty darn vibrant.

trailerkid wrote: this is the reason people from hyde park drive downtown to go to work.

dont knock it til you've tried it!

KCMax wrote: It is kinda interesting you post this right after the article I linked to. It was about making parking easier in San Francisco, a city I don't think anyone will deny is pretty darn vibrant.

SF did not get that way by educating people about parking. just saying.

chrizow wrote: dont knock it til you've tried it!

trailerkid wrote: SF did not get that way by educating people about parking. just saying.

Parking is an art form in SF.

grovester wrote: Parking is an art form in SF.

which is why motorists need assistance with it. as long as you have working retinas you should be able to easily park 24 hrs/day, 365 days/year in downtown KC.

The services in Max's article would be good for KC because it would show businesses, govt entities and suburban visitors that KC doesn't need any MORE parking and frankly could survive on less.