5th and Main (Northwest Corner)

[alejandro46]

Happy this will (likely) move forward. I think swapping the 15 super-affordable (50% AMI) units for parking is an acceptable and maybe even preferable compromise in this location, given the parking was promised in the RFP and this is a high-value residential site that also serves as a central companion lot to the City Market.

Bigger issue to me is zoning and the elimination of parking minimums in the urban core. Wish we could see this happen sooner than later and let developers build what they deem necessary and profitable re: parking without these crazy back and forth discussions.

There are no longer parking minimums along the streetcar route. This is all pushback from these businesses.

We need to have parking maximums unless there is an exception of some kind.

[smh]

Happy this will (likely) move forward. I think swapping the 15 super-affordable (50% AMI) units for parking is an acceptable and maybe even preferable compromise in this location, given the parking was promised in the RFP and this is a high-value residential site that also serves as a central companion lot to the City Market.

Bigger issue to me is zoning and the elimination of parking minimums in the urban core. Wish we could see this happen sooner than later and let developers build what they deem necessary and profitable re: parking without these crazy back and forth discussions.

You may right on the parking/housing switch. I'm probably too sore about it to see clearly yet. I question the effect of removing parking requirements in the future if all roads still lead to CPC which seems to rule as the wind blows. Won't future projects just run into a similar problem if CPC decides they just don't feel like there is enough parking?

[TheUrbanRoo]

There is no winning with any of these groups.

Build more affordable housing, eliminate parking = NIMBY's mad
Build more parking, eliminates affordable housing = Tenants groups mad
Build more parking, more affordable housing = project dies & then urbanists/developers mad

The point is, there is no way to satisfy everyone. Not every special interest group can be assuaged. So when you're faced with never pleasing everyone- just do what's best for the city then. Yes, *someone* will be mad but that's just city politics.

In my personal opinion I think what's best for the city is adding density, however I get that we need affordable housing too. The NIMBY's and their parking bs are really the most selfish ones of the interest groups above. They'd crater the city into a hole as long as their life is slightly more convenient and THEIR home is okay in the suburbs. The tenants groups are annoying but they're atleast still open to things like transit and trying to help the community even if might inconvenience them some.

[HalcyonKC]

Received the following campaign flyer today. It fetishizes parking and makes the false claim that further additional River Market contruction will be "devastating" to business including the farmer's market. Never mind that the farmer's market takes place on a closed parking lot as we've discussed here. I definitely *won't* be voting for this particular candidate as a result.

[Chris Stritzel]

Received the following campaign flyer today. It fetishizes parking and makes the false claim that further additional River Market contruction will be "devastating" to business including the farmer's market. Never mind that the farmer's market takes place on a closed parking lot as we've discussed here. I definitely *won't* be voting for this particular candidate as a result.

Image isn’t loading for me.

[HalcyonKC]

Image isn’t loading for me.

Here's the direct link: https://i.imgur.com/2G9Xo9V.jpg

[alejandro46]

Image isn’t loading for me.

Here's the direct link: https://i.imgur.com/2G9Xo9V.jpg

Oh man that is bad. So much fear mongering and misinformation.

Also that design is so bad. Is that comic sans?

GraPhiC DesiGn iS mY PasSiOn

Also, after checking out his website, this is actually THE FIRST accomplishment he lists:

Midtown
As a Missouri State Rep Henry passed legislation that assisted City Councilman Jim Glover in establishing the Midtown Plan that created the development of the midtown Home Depot/Costco development.

[TheUrbanRoo]

I think he’s probably worse than Crissy Dastrup, which is incredible

[Chris Stritzel]

I think he’s probably worse than Crissy Dastrup, which is incredible

I’m still backing him on the basis that of the three candidates, he’s the only one to respond to communications I’ve sent. He’s old school. No question about that, but I can at least have a discussion with him about anything and even agree to disagree on issues. But that’s a discussion for the 2023 election thread.

But regarding this situation with City Harvest, a compromise can definitely be found when it comes down to parking for businesses and building a new development. The RFP was clear with the expectations for parking. While we’d like to see less, the RFP’s language is what’s changing this and causing issue. If the original RFP did not include the part about rebuilding some lost parking, I imagine this would’ve been approved by now in spite of business concerns. It seems to me that the compromise would be opening residential parking to the public during specified hours and then leave a few spaces open to the public outside of those specified hours. I believe this would resolve concerns over lost parking during market days.

It is true streetcar will be used to transport people to and from the River Market. It is true the new developments will provide hundreds of new customers for businesses. And it is true that many customers will still arrive by car. A balance between all three can, and must, be struck to ensure an even better future for the neighborhood. I believe we can start by building dense housing buildings that include shared parking garages (if the site size allows). Additionally, those structures need to have ground-level activation. On small sites where that’s not possible, take the 413 Delaware approach.

[Stbikeskc]

Rizzo went to prison for a check kiting scheme in the 1990's, is out of touch with most of the 4th district, is pro-cop, pro-car, pro-parking. He's backed by some serious racist, and old school establishment that want to take this city back, no forward, not to mention he claims to be a Northland Advocate
Henry has deep ties in the Northland and has been a long-time advocate for residents north of the river, but only a small part of the district he is running for is north of the river. He would be better suited running for 1st or 2nd districts, not 4th.

[Cratedigger]

Rizzo went to prison for a check kiting scheme in the 1990's, is out of touch with most of the 4th district, is pro-cop, pro-car, pro-parking. He's backed by some serious racist, and old school establishment that want to take this city back, no forward, not to mention he claims to be a Northland Advocate
Henry has deep ties in the Northland and has been a long-time advocate for residents north of the river, but only a small part of the district he is running for is north of the river. He would be better suited running for 1st or 2nd districts, not 4th.

Yup this is my thought on Rizzo as well. Glad to hear he's responding to you, but not someone I personally support

Also, hey ST! Welcome to the rag. Big fan of yours on Twitter

[smh]

I think he’s probably worse than Crissy Dastrup, which is incredible

I’m still backing him on the basis that of the three candidates, he’s the only one to respond to communications I’ve sent. He’s old school. No question about that, but I can at least have a discussion with him about anything and even agree to disagree on issues. But that’s a discussion for the 2023 election thread.

It shocks me to hear this. I could not imagine a more out of touch, KC of Old, let's teardown an entire neighborhood to build a Home Depot candidate than Rizzo. If you are a person who wants to densify the city, supports transit, and believes that KCMO can be a multimodal, dense, walkable place, Rizzo is not your man.

That man has one name and it is Eric Bunch. Quite literally walking the walk each and every day doing what it takes out front and behind the scenes to kick this stubborn mule of a city into gear.

[smh]

FFS the man sent a postcard in Comic Sans with dubious information. Mark my words, your project will be next.

[langosta]

Bunch is pretty bad at his job and really doesn’t understand development or how to get it going. But the other options are 10,000 x worse and actively advertise that they will push us in the other direction

[Chris Stritzel]

I think he’s probably worse than Crissy Dastrup, which is incredible

I’m still backing him on the basis that of the three candidates, he’s the only one to respond to communications I’ve sent. He’s old school. No question about that, but I can at least have a discussion with him about anything and even agree to disagree on issues. But that’s a discussion for the 2023 election thread.

It shocks me to hear this. I could not imagine a more out of touch, KC of Old, let's teardown an entire neighborhood to build a Home Depot candidate than Rizzo. If you are a person who wants to densify the city, supports transit, and believes that KCMO can be a multimodal, dense, walkable place, Rizzo is not your man.

That man has one name and it is Eric Bunch. Quite literally walking the walk each and every day doing what it takes out front and behind the scenes to kick this stubborn mule of a city into gear.

I understand, I just wish Bunch was as responsive as his counterparts in St. Louis. If I have a question about something, they’d get back to me within a day. Bunch is hit or miss. I’m not opposed to Bunch and I’d be fine if he wins again because he’s done good things and pushed the urbanist cause forward even if I disagree with him on some issues. But he needs to work on communication and take a more aggressive stance on urbanist issues. I know what Rizzo stands for and I can’t lie, I disagree with his positions on things (no different than Bunch), but I can at least have a chat with Rizzo.

I want this city to be multi-modal and dense to the point where a walkable lifestyle is more common. That’s why I’m supportive of new developments like City Harvest, Atlas 303, 413 Delaware and so on.

I also understand that not everyone is ready for something like that. So that’s where I think it’s key to hear other’s concerns and address them adequately with the hopes of winning others over. City Harvest is the perfect opportunity for that and 112 East 31st will try to be as well. Rizzo and others can be, and are, stuck in the past, but I don’t write them off as being able to be convinced about other things. Communication and understanding is key as is respectful discussion. Councilman Bunch should be the one to help organize such meetings as they can be productive. Don’t just leave it up to the neighborhood associations or developers.

The biggest problem we have right now is that NIMBY voices are amplified due to the meeting times at City Hall. That amplification gives some the false sense that they have a chance to win a City Council seat by aligning with those that speak the loudest at the meetings.

FFS the man sent a postcard in Comic Sans with dubious information. Mark my words, your project will be next.

I expect the worst on 31st Street and am adequately prepared.

[KCPowercat]

YIMBY people can never be as loud as NIMBYs, I mean we can say "we support this" but we don't really have a compelling argument like a boogeyman like "losing parking". It takes leaders to understand what these do to improve the city tax base, affordable housing, etc. and sticking to the city's strategic goals.

[WoodDraw]

YIMBY people can never be as loud as NIMBYs, I mean we can say "we support this" but we don't really have a compelling argument like a boogeyman like "losing parking". It takes leaders to understand what these do to improve the city tax base, affordable housing, etc. and sticking to the city's strategic goals.

I agree, and I’ve been talking to people about this. The problem is that kct has effectively become a political party and I don’t think continuing to count on elected representatives to do the right thing in the face of public pressure is sustainable.

We need to reframe the issue in a way that works. Instead of losing parking, reframe it as housing cars over affordable housing for people.

I do think we have to be more offensive instead of always defensive. And less technocratic - no one wants to hear about tax bases and the like. That’s fine for this forum, but in public more of a these people are wrong, fuck them attitude is needed.

We’re trying to build affordable housing, but they want you to subsidize their employees parking.

[KCPowercat]

Great point. Another is more housing even if it's expensive range, expands supply and creates affordable housing on the backside.

[WoodDraw]

Great point. Another is more housing even if it's expensive range, expands supply and creates affordable housing on the backside.

And to stop accepting their language for things too. Too often people let them frame it and then try to respond on their terms.

By nature I think proponents enjoy the nuances of things and are less comfortable playing the politics.

But if they’re going to make it political, so must we. And we need the language to match it.

[Cratedigger]

I really think an environmental argument needs to be made as well

I was surprised to see Sunrise KC arguing against the Armour development