Capping the Loop

[DaveKCMO]

Keep Walnut open & incorporate a landscaped pedestrian overpass with appropriate safety guards. Not sure how that would work as I’m not an engineer, but I’m sure there are professionals to figure it out.

STL’s linear CBD park paved the cross street with pavers and close it off as needed.

Exactly. Consensus won’t be difficult if the people who want a federal grant do their required homework.

[KCPowercat]

We want to keep cars off main and Cordish closes grand on a whim so blocking off walnut is just dumb.

[FangKC]

The point of the cap is to reconnect neighborhoods. Removing the Walnut crossing doesn't do that. It just creates yet another dead-ending street that inhibits nature flow through the city's core, and forces traffic onto other streets. No one has yet mentioned one compelling reason to eliminate Walnut crossing Truman Boulevard. Just because Walnut doesn't have as much traffic now doesn't' mean it won't in the future as new buildings replace surface lots.

[smh]

Keep a defined crossing for pedestrians and bikes (like the paver idea mentioned above). Open as needed to cars when Grand is closed to preserve access. Otherwise I think limiting car accessibility might also help people choose to walk, bike or take transit as opposed to jumping in the car.

[AlkaliAxel]

I'm brand new here, not an expert. But my only concern with opening Walnut, Main, etc. all the roads through the capped loop park is that it wouldn't make it a very good park to walk in if you have to stop every block to cross a road. Atleast if one of the roads is down, people can have atleast one large continuous space without all the roads in the way. However, I do see the points people are making for Walnut as well.

[beautyfromashes]

How about making Walnut pedestrian only through the Crossroads and DT?

[smh]

I'm brand new here, not an expert. But my only concern with opening Walnut, Main, etc. all the roads through the capped loop park is that it wouldn't make it a very good park to walk in if you have to stop every block to cross a road. Atleast if one of the roads is down, people can have atleast one large continuous space without all the roads in the way. However, I do see the points people are making for Walnut as well.

Agreed.

[smh]

How about making Walnut pedestrian only through the Crossroads and DT?

I love the concept but still think we lack the density of pedestrians to support this level of pedestrianization without Walnut becoming a ghost town.

[DaveKCMO]

I also think the concept of a "street" in the final design may be different. I'm certainly not arguing that Walnut look exactly like it does today (traffic signal, left turn pockets, concrete road surface, narrow sidewalks, standard curb). Kansas City has little to no experience effectively mixing cars with other road users in a safe way -- it's either 35mph or nothing. This project could be that first real example.



Even Klyde Warren Park has a paved surface where Harwood Street could be reopened, if needed.

[DColeKC]

The walnut debate will likely be the most controversial topic when this project gets down to the final design. I'm torn and could be supportive of either option. I do think it would end up being closed often to allow for better flow during events. Would be ideal to do as mentioned above with a brick section and install proper traffic bollards to avoid requiring ugly type3 road closed barricades.

The comment about Cordish closing Grand on a whim isn't accurate. Before covid, Grand was closed a total of 3 or 4 times a year by Cordish request to hold an event. The other times were T-Mobile requests. Lately, it's been closed Thursday, Friday and Saturday evenings to combat the street racing issues that were getting out of hand several weeks back.

[DaveKCMO]

The comment about Cordish closing Grand on a whim isn't accurate. Before covid, Grand was closed a total of 3 or 4 times a year by Cordish request to hold an event. The other times were T-Mobile requests. Lately, it's been closed Thursday, Friday and Saturday evenings to combat the street racing issues that were getting out of hand several weeks back.

I think the point of reference here is that they can close it whenever they want. I'm not aware of any limitations on the privilege.

[DColeKC]

The comment about Cordish closing Grand on a whim isn't accurate. Before covid, Grand was closed a total of 3 or 4 times a year by Cordish request to hold an event. The other times were T-Mobile requests. Lately, it's been closed Thursday, Friday and Saturday evenings to combat the street racing issues that were getting out of hand several weeks back.

I think the point of reference here is that they can close it whenever they want. I'm not aware of any limitations on the privilege.

Ahh, yes, technically speaking there's no limitations but realistically, they can't close it whenever they want. They've worked closely with the city and limit the amount of times it's closed for events to a few times a year. Obviously, being closed for pedestrian safety is always agreed upon by everyone involved and 9 out of 10 times, the reason it gets shut down.

[AlkaliAxel]

The walnut debate will likely be the most controversial topic when this project gets down to the final design. I'm torn and could be supportive of either option. I do think it would end up being closed often to allow for better flow during events. Would be ideal to do as mentioned above with a brick section and install proper traffic bollards to avoid requiring ugly type3 road closed barricades.

The comment about Cordish closing Grand on a whim isn't accurate. Before covid, Grand was closed a total of 3 or 4 times a year by Cordish request to hold an event. The other times were T-Mobile requests. Lately, it's been closed Thursday, Friday and Saturday evenings to combat the street racing issues that were getting out of hand several weeks back.

If Walnut would end up being closed when there are events (high amount of traffic periods) anyway then what's the point of even keeping Walnut? So when it has low traffic, we need it open? Wouldn't the only time Walnut be valuable for cars is when we have events (and traffic) coming through? I don't see the point of keeping Walnut then. Might as well go all out and make a great park downtown finally without street interuptions.

[DaveKCMO]

Yeah, if Walnut isn't important let's close the whole street to cars -- River Market to the tracks.

Thanks for the new strawman!

[beautyfromashes]

Yeah, if Walnut isn't important let's close the whole street to cars -- River Market to the tracks.

Thanks for the new strawman!

Well, I just honestly can’t think of much reason you would need Walnut going south if it’s broken at the loop. It doesn’t go anywhere, dead ends at the tracks. It’s usually just a way to avoid Main or Grand. Make it vibrant.

[AlkaliAxel]

Isn't Walnut already shut down partially on weekends anyway?

[swid]

The only stretch of Walnut to be closed on a sporadic basis is through P&L, and it is closed less frequently than Grand. In the Before Times, the events I could expect to close Walnut were:

- Big 12
- family fun days in the summer months
- KC Beer Fest (RIP Flying Saucer)
- exceptionally popular concerts at the Sprint T-Mobile Center or the Live block
- World Cup/World Series-level watch parties

[dukuboy1]

Well they just opened up Walnut through the City Market like 18 months ago or something like that. So you can go from 3rd ST, all the way through downtown, and into the Crossroads. Once you cross 670 into the Crossroads the street is much more of a "residential" street that ends just past 21st at Belger Arts Center.

I think that Walnut not being a through street at the proposed park area is no big deal, with minimal impact to traffic. Grand is rarely shut down during business hours MON-FRI, and only closed for special events and or events at TMobile Center. Plus traffic can go over at Main easily or even further West. Perhaps it will inspire people to use Oak more on the East side to come back West, as Grand is typically only closed from 13th to Truman Rd, or about 2 blocks North to South. Then you can cross over 670 there still.

I hope with the cap it will allow for improvement options along Truman RD, especially from Grand West. Improve the street scape, lanes etc. so that if you take Walnut to Truman you just turn right and then cross at Main. Perhaps there could be improvements made to Main as well heading South to help with traffic flow. With the Development planned right there at Truman Rd & Main on the South side of 670 I think there could be options to again improve the street and street scape to help with traffic.

Bottom line closing Walnut at the park is not a big deal at all and there are several options you have and opportunities to make improvements and create a new traffic pattern/flow that actually will work out great.

[DaveKCMO]

Bottom line closing Walnut at the park is not a big deal at all and there are several options you have and opportunities to make improvements and create a new traffic pattern/flow that actually will work out great.

But are those new traffic patterns part of the project scope? (psssst... they're not)

The new traffic pattern was to convert all streets to two-way traffic. That also hit a stopping point where DTC and the city lost interest in continuing the work they started.

[dukuboy1]

Well if they are not, it seems silly since you are transforming a location into an entirely new area and parcel of land. The impacts to the surrounding blocks, including traffic patterns should be like development 101 IMO, and I'm not a developer, engineer, or architect. Just a businessman with some leadership experience at running projects

Hopefully if they get some FED money they can do a proper study or even a half assed one to solve for a simple problem that will have a positive impact on the development.