reconnecting: part 1

RECONNECTINGCOMPREHENSIVE VISION PLAN FOR GREEN + CIVIC SPACES IN GREATER dOwNTOwN KANSAS CITy

GREEN + CIVIC SPACES in Greater Downtown Kansas City, Missouri

Comprehensive vision plan for

KANSAS CITY DESIGN CENTER URBAN STUDIO 2012The University of Kansas + Kansas State University

This studio publication, generated during the 2011-2012 academic year at the Kansas City Design Center, was written and designed by Nicole Kubas, Tiffany Cartwright, and Lauren Kelly, in collaboration with Vladimir Krstic, Studio Director and Instructor.

This publication is not intended for retail sale and cannot be sold, duplicated, or published electronically or otherwise without the express written consent of the College of Architecture, Planning & Design at Kansas State University. The purpose of this publication is academic in nature and is intended to showcase the research, scholarship, and design work of the students of the College of Architecture, Planning & Design.

CONTENT

RESEARCh + ANAlySIS

ComPREhENSIVE VISIoN PlAN

DESIGN PRoPoSItIoNS

KESSLER PARK SYSTEMPARKS + CiviC SPACESPhYSiCAL CondiTionS

viSion PLAn inTEnTionSAnChoR PARKSCoRRidoRSinfiLL PARKS

AnChoR PARKS: WAShingTon SquARE + RAiL PARKCoRRidoRS: BEARdSLEY RoAd-ThiRd STREETinfiLL PARKS: 17Th STREET + gRAnd BouLEvARd infiLL PARKS: 10Th STREET + ChERRY STREETCLoSing ThoughTS

foREWoRdgREEn + CiviC SPACES

REFERENCESCiTY PRojECTSREfEREnCESACKnoWLEdgEMEnTS

Research + Analysis4

5This publication is an account of a yearlong study focused on rethinking the way in which a city can be reconstituted into an organized urban whole through a system of green and civic spaces. Fundamental to this was a question what constitutes public realm of the city and how it can be organically reconfigured to ingrain itself as an indelible part of the city form and life experience.

The project was originally conceived in collaboration with the Kansas City Downtown Council Green Space Committee and subsequently funded and executed through the support of the city PIAC funds and in cooperation with the Parks and Recreation Department of KCMO. The specific purpose of the project was to create a comprehensive vision plan for green and civic space in the downtown KCMO area building on the work of the Green Space Commit-tee and aligning it with the Greater Downtown Area Plan guiding document and related ongoing urban improvement projects. In doing so we have tried to create a compelling perspective that is both rooted in an understanding of the place and its circumstances as well as the study of advanced contemporary practices. Our intention was to offer a constructive vision that exceeds norma-tive typology and recasts the city in an integrated view laden with forward-thinking possibilities to enhance its character and livability through green and civic space design. We hope that the project and this publication as its com-prehensive record will be used to that effect.

All materials included in this publication, including writings and photographs, have been authored by KCDC urban design studio members. I am deeply in-debted to the former studio members Tiffany Cartwright, Nicole Kubas, and Lauren Kelly, who have worked long hours to organize and edit the publication materials, design and lay out the book and see that its quality be sustained through all instances of the publication preparation. They have done a great service to the project stakeholders, Kansas City Design Center and their studio classmates. Thank you.

Vladimir Krstic

FoREwoRD

6Public spaces are open to all, regardless of ethnic origin, age, or gender, and as such they represent a democratic fo-rum for citizens and society. When properly designed and cared for, they bring communities together, provide meet-ing places and foster social ties of a kind that have been disappearing in many urban areas. These spaces shape the cultural identity of an area, are part of its unique character and provide a sense of place for local communities.1

7GREEN + CIVIC SPACESGreen and civic spaces are a significant factor in the liv-ability of any city. The intention of this project is to re-think, reconsider, and re-envision the idea and definitions of those spaces and their relationship. The plan aims to provide a constructive vision for an ordered and related system of urban spaces that will enhance functional and spatial cohesion of the downtown area and serve as an instrument for qualitative change and development within the Greater Downtown Area of Kansas City.

The following publication is organized into three main sec-tions; research and analysis, comprehensive vision plan, and design propositions. The research and analysis begins with a detailed look into the historical heritage of Kansas City and the current physical conditions of the green and civic spaces within the downtown. Establishing these situ-ations identified a need to redefine the relations of the parks to one another and their connectedness. The vi-sion plan outlines the concept for a cohesive system com-posed of three distinct elements. A detailed look at each of these individual project types is illustrated within the design propositions.

RESEARCh + ANAlySIS

Research + Analysis 11

KESSlER PARK SyStEmThe 1893 Kessler Plan, created by George Kessler, repre-sents the most significant artefact and an urban idea that defined the character of Kansas City. The plan served as a grand civic vision which is a necessary reference for the examination of the current order of the citys urban envi-ronment. The Kessler Plan was the first plan for a network of green spaces in Kansas City. Prior to the implementation of this plan, Kansas City developed in a haphazard manner with little consideration for future growth. By creating a system of parks, he aimed to improve the quality of life of the citi-zens, create an attachment to the city as a place, promote civic pride, and increase the citys economic vitality and growth of population.

Kessler wanted to blend the artificial structure of the city with the natural beauty of its site, and at the same time would supply recreation-grounds.2 The plan addressed a way to exhibit the natural, dramatic topography and beau-ty of the area as an amenity around which to develop a series of parks and boulevards that would serve the citys inhabitants.


KESSLER 1893


Five Photographs: Missouri Valley Special Collections, Kansas City Public Library, Kansas City, Missouri.

Through park planning, Kessler zoned the city into resi-dential, trade, and industrial functional uses to stabilize and guide city development.3 Kessler intended to tame the volatility of informal settlements through parks and stabilize residential land values by preserving the natu-ral beauty of Kansas City. Kesslers system of parks and boulevards united formerly segregated sections of Kan-sas City and continues to shape the land use pattern sur-rounding the park system today.


KESSLER 1900 KESSLER 1915 KESSLER 1940 KESSLER 1960

As the city has continued to develop, much of Kesslers original park system has became fragmented as various highways have been built running through the downtown. Kesslers plan was designed in a time when motorized transportation was leisurely and conceived very differ-ently from today. Although it is still a significant artefact, changes due to the automobile have compromised the plans ability to define the order of the city. While some of Kesslers original parks still remain, due to this fragmenta-tion the parks no longer relate to one another or create a coherent order of connected green and civic spaces in the Greater Downtown Area.


KESSLER 2011


PARK + CIVIC SPACESIn order to create a comprehensive vision plan for the Greater Downtown Area, research and analysis was com-pleted to determine how the current parks and civic spac-es are serving Kansas City. The current system of public space is comprised of parks, boulevards, trails, and civic spaces. Establishing the individual parts of the system, allowed the existing conditions to be better evaluated. Analysis concluded that these elements have become fragmented and do not currently function as a cohesive system. As the use of automobile has changed over time, Kesslers boulevards no longer fully serve their primary purpose as green connectors between the parks. While significant efforts have been made to establish a compre-hensive system of trails within the downtown, the system is not yet complete.

The complete set of findings were then aligned with ex-isting urban development plans; the historic Kessler Plan and the current plan to re-envision the public space within the city, the Greater Downtown Area Plan (GDAP). These plans embody several urban principals that should be ad-opted in order to create a successful comprehensive sys-tem of public space.


Composite of the green spaces,

trails, boulevards, and civic spaces in

the Greater Downtown Area.

Parks

Gardens

Trails + Boulevards

Civic Spaces


A significant urban principal common to both the Kessler Plan and the GDAP is the understanding that the city is composed of a system of related elements. Kessler pro-posed a system of parks and boulevards, while the more recent GDAP emphasizes a system of corridors and activ-ity nodes. Unlike an interlaced, nonhierarchial grid, both of these cohesive systems of parts provide order to the city.

The idea of public space is more than just a system of parts. The interconnectivity between each element of the system is equally critical for the improvement of the urban environment. Public streets and outdoor spaces play an integral role in stitching together the urban fabric. When the urban environment has a high level of connectivity and spatial definition, people will be naturally drawn to it.4This connectivity and activated spatial realm are both di-rectly achievable through a well designed system of parks and civic spaces. This system will serve as an amenity for the city, enhancing the livability downtown.

In order to address project issues it is necessary to explore ideas and concepts that define notions of green and civic space. Parks are defined as, enclosed areas for public rec-reation, usually large and ornamentally landscaped area especially in or adjoining a city.5 Civic spaces are areas of or pertaining to the city or citizenship or being proper to a citizen.6 Together these spaces make up the public realm.


TRAILSBOULEVARDSGREEN SPACES


CIVIC SPACES

By providing a setting in which urban life can take place and the citys identity can develop, the civic framework serves to improve the quality of the built environment.

The civic framework establishes the structure within which urban life takes place, and it offers the single stron-gest opportunity to create a distinc-tive identity that cannot be matched in the outlying suburban districts.7

PARK KEY1. Richard L. Berkley Park2. Garrison Square Park3. Riverbluff Park4. City Market and City Market Park5. Columbus Square Park6. Belvidere Park7. Case Park (West Terrace Park)8. Garment District Park9. Admiral Plaza10. Ilus W. Davis Park and Court-house Plaza11. Margaret Kemp Park12. Paseo Boulevard13. Mulkey Square Park (West Ter-race Park)14. Barney Allis Plaza15. Oppenstein Brothers Park16. Kansas City Plaza17. Andrew Dripps Park (West Ter-race Park)18. Jarboe Park (West Terrace Park)19. Parade Park20. Observation Park21. Gage Park22. Triangle Park23. Washington Square Park24. Hospital Hill Park25. Liberty Memorial Park26. Longfellow Park27. Shelia Kemper Dietrich Park28. Penn Valley Park29. Troost Lake Park30. Troost Park31. Family Justice Center32. Crown Center Plaza

1

2

654

3

7 8 9

10 11 12

1415

1613

1718 19

20

21

2223

24

25 26

28 29

30

23

26 26

PARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACESPARKS + CIVIC SPACES

Park

Civic Spaces


PARK + CIVIC SPACE INVENtoRy

REGIONAL CITY NEIGHBORHOOD

In order to contextually analyze and order every park and civic space within the downtown, a system of categori-zation was developed. Each space was categorized as a regional, city, or neighborhood park or civic space based on its use, connectivity, and area served. Once these con-textual categories were established, an individual analysis of each space identified the positive and negative attri-butes within the system.

FIGURE GROUND

PARK

STREETS

REGIONALLiberty MemorialLocation: 31st &BroadwayProgram: Active &PassiveScale: Regional Park Maintenace: Parks & Rec

Penn Valley ParkLocation: 31st & WyandotteProgram: Active & PassiveScale: Regional ParkMaintenace: Parks & Rec

FIGURE GROUND

PARK

STREETS

REGIONALLiberty MemorialLocation: 31st &BroadwayProgram: Active &PassiveScale: Regional Park Maintenace: Parks & Rec

Penn Valley ParkLocation: 31st & WyandotteProgram: Active & PassiveScale: Regional ParkMaintenace: Parks & Rec

CONNECTIVITY

BARRIERS

PENN VALLEY PARKFIGURE GROUND

PENN VALLEY PARKADJACENT STREETS

PENN VALLEY PARKSURROUNDING BARRIERS

Research + Analysis 25 Research + Analysis 25

CONNECTIVITY

BARRIERS

REgionAL: PEnn vALLEY PARKThis analysis of Penn Valley Park represents an example of the inventory completed for every park. The views, ameni-ties, current park improvements, and Memorial Hill were found to be the most positive attributes of Penn Valley. The location and adjacent civic functions of Union Station and Crown Center present a strong potential, if capitalized on, to become positive attributes. The drastic topography, barriers created by major roads, lack of pedestrian access and circulation, and absence of surrounding development providing eyes on the park, were found to be Penn Valleys most negative attributes in need of improvement.

PENN VALLEY PARKREGIONAL CONNECTIVITY

26

CIVIC SPACES

Barney Allis PlazaLocation: 12th & WyandotteScale: City SpaceMaintenance:Other

City MarketLocation: 3rd & WalnutScale: City SpaceMaintenance:Other

Crown Center PlazaLocation: Grand Blv & Pershing RdScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Family Justice CenterLocation: 26th & CherryScale: Neighborhood SpaceMaintenace: Parks & Rec

Hospital HillLocation: 25th & CharlotteScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Power & Light And

Location: 12th & LocustScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Court HouseLocation: 12th & LocustScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Oppenstien Brothers

CIVIC SPACES

Barney Allis PlazaLocation: 12th & WyandotteScale: City SpaceMaintenance:Other

City MarketLocation: 3rd & WalnutScale: City SpaceMaintenance:Other

Crown Center PlazaLocation: Grand Blv & Pershing RdScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Family Justice CenterLocation: 26th & CherryScale: Neighborhood SpaceMaintenace: Parks & Rec

Hospital HillLocation: 25th & CharlotteScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Power & Light And

Location: 12th & LocustScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Court HouseLocation: 12th & LocustScale: City SpaceMaintenace: Other

Oppenstien Brothers

BARNEY ALLIS PLAZAFIGURE GROUND

BARNEY ALLIS PLAZAADJACENT STREETS

BARNEY ALLIS PLAZASURROUNDING BARRIERS

27

CiviC : BARnEY ALLiS PLAZABarney Allis Plaza serves to represent the analysis also completed for every civic space within the downtown. Due to the raised nature of Barney Allis, the plaza lacks a strong physical and visual connection with the street on three sides. The cafe building, trellis, fountain, and ample seating serve as great amenities for the space but are un-der-utilized due to the plazas overall lack of identity. The location and adjacency to Memorial Auditorium and the Convention Center provide the potential for Barney Allis to become a very active space.

BARNEY ALLIS PLAZACITY CONNECTIVITY


CiTYREgionALPENN VALLEYPARK

BERKLEY RIVERFRONTPARK

CASE PARK CITY MARKETPARK

FIGURE GROUND

STREETS

BARRIERS

CONNECTIVITY

BARNEYALLIS PLAZA

CITY MARKET COURTHOUSE + FEDERAL BLDG PLAZAS


ILUS W. DAVIS PARK

MULKEYSQUARE PARK

PARADEPARK

WASHINGTONSQAURE PARK

CROWN CENTERPLAZA

FAMILY JUSTICE CENTER

HOSPITAL HILL

OPPENSTEINPLAZA


nEighBoRhoodADMIRAL PLAZA

BELVIDEREPARK

COLUMBUS SQUARE

GAGE PARK GARRISONSQUARE

HOSPITAL HILL PARK

JARBOE PARK

KANSAS CITY PLAZA


PoCKET OBSERVATIONPARK

OPPENSTEIN BROTHERS PARK

SHELIA KEMPERDETRICH PARK

WESTERNAUTO PARK

ANDREW DRIPPS PARK

GARMENTDISTRICTPARK

MARGARETKEMPERPARK

LONGFELLOWPARK

TRIANGLEPARK


PARK SECtIoNS

1. BARNEY ALLLIS PLAZA

2. BERKLEY RIVERFRONT PARK

3. CASE PARK

5. HOSPITAL HILL PARK

6. LIBERTY MEMORIAL

7. MARGARET KEMP PARK

8. MULKEY SQUARE PARK

9. PENN VALLEY PARK

4. HOLLAND PARK

10. TROOST LAKE PARK

11. RIVERFRONT TRAIL

12. RIVERBLUFF PARK

1

2

8

4

5

6

73

910

1112


FREQ. OF USE + RESIDENTIAL FREQ. OF USE + COMMERCIAL FREQ. OF USE + INDUSTRIAL

RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL


FREquENCy oF uSEAnalyzing various urban use populations identified where people live, work, and shop within the downtown. In order to evaluate the need for public space, these populations were overlaid with the current park system. Determining where people spend the majority of their time downtown, exposed the areas with the highest need for public space. Determining the need for and over-abundance of park land will allow the disproportionate ratio of public space to become more balanced.

The urban use populations were also overlaid with all of the parks within the Greater Downtown Area ranked ac-cording to their usage to identify a connection between the activities of people downtown and park usage. It was assumed that areas with the highest residential popula-tions would have the greatest park usage but this proved to not be true in all cases. Analyzing the population and use patterns also helped to guide the individual park and civic space programming.

Park, it is the creature of its surroundings and of the way its surroundings generate mutual support from diverse uses, or fail to generate such support.8


PhySICAl CoNDItIoNSGreen and civic spaces are a vital element of the physical form of Kansas City. Their character is determined by how they exist in relation to the citys topography and mor-phology. The physical conditions that affect the park sys-tem were defined to discover how the elements relate to one another. This also identified how the city has formed over time to create the spaces which make up system.

Sections through the city examined the relationship be-tween the existing green and civic spaces and the citys topography. The vegetation, topography, figure ground and streets established the base situations after being overlaid with the parks system. Analyzing the watersheds and sewer system identified the potential for a public space system with a sustainable infrastructure function. The inventory of parking lots and examination of right-of-way space was crucial in determining land which could be repurposed to better serve the city. The land use, zoning, and city projects provided information on existing and fu-ture development and guided design decisions.


The views from atop Memorial Hill

offer a strong visual connection to

the Performing Arts Center and the

Convention Center on account of

Kansas Citys dramatic topography.

The Paseo Boulevard creates a

strong north/south connection be-

tween Kessler Park and The Parade

Park while providing ample green

space.

Looking from West Terrace Park to

Ilus W. Davis Park shows the lack of

green space within the Downtown

Loop and the absence of a green

east/west connection.


CIty SECtIoNS


Capturing the relationship between the built environment and the topography of Kansas City through vertical sec-tions, informed how Kansas City developed in the land-scape. The city and the parks formed in intriguing ways. The points of the city that were iconic, both built and nat-ural were not accidentally selected.

The Greater Downtown is situated on two hills, with a val-ley between them. The Loop, including the Central Busi-ness District, rests on the northern hill while Crown Cen-ter sits on the southern hill. Historically, the valley running through the two major commerce locations enabled the railroad lines to easily enter the most dense area of the city. Today, this topography allows a strong visual con-nection between the two destinations which represents a great potential on which to capitalize.


Upon examining the citys topography and development, it is evident that the parkland acquired by Kessler was left-over, undevelopable land. This attribute is currently a hin-drance to the park system but has the potential to become an asset which ties to the parks to the character of the city. Due to their original design catered to the automo-bile, many of the parks are inaccessible, which is worsened by the extreme topography. However, this topography creates excellent views of the city from Kesslers original parks, as well as views of landscape in which the city sits.

In addition to design issues and potential, investigation of the topography identified significant areas of the city which lack an adequate amount of public space or are void of a functioning connection between the existing green and civic spaces.


PARKS + TOPOGRAPHY PARKS + FIGURE GROUND PARKS + STREETS

Vertical sections revealed separation between the built environment and the natural en-vironment. Further study of infrared technology revealed the urban core had virtually no green space, public or private. Analyzing distribution of public green space within the Greater Downtown Area of Kansas City affirmed that parkland is inadequately distrib-uted. A shortage of green space in the urban core burdens the citys infrastructure and contributes to the negative heat island effect.


PARKS + SEWER SYSTEMWATERSHEDS + SEWER SYSTEM


SuStAINAbIlIty

As the world exhausts its vital resources, parks and public space need to be examined for functionality and ability to improve the environment of the city.

Parks and civic spaces should be flexible spaces which serve more than one purpose. One of the major functions of public space should be to act as an infrastructural el-ement. In order to understand this capacity to function as infrastructure, the sewer system was superimposed on the watersheds and park system. This analysis uncovered the potential opportunities for the parks and civic space within the downtown to improve the citys sustainability.

Kansas City relies on a combined sewer system, which col-lects the citys storm-water run-off, industrial waste, and human sewage in the same pipes. This out-dated system has become overburdened and is currently presenting the city with flooding issues. In addition to flooding, the sys-tem discharges over 6.4 billion gallons of untreated sew-age and stormwater into area streams and rivers annually.9


VACANT LOTS

PARKING LOTS

VACANT + PARKING LOTS


UnderUtilized landAn unintended consequence of the superhighway move-ment in America was the realization that personal vehicles must have a place to park. The mindset of those in Kansas City is such that driving has displaced walking as the ma-jor mode of transportation. Convenient parking is desired everywhere, requiring large storage spaces which are most often surface parking lots, the easiest and cheapest method of accommodating automobiles. A major change takes place in downtowns throughout America at a mor-phological level: fields of parking, with object-buildings and/or fragments of urban fabric sitting on them become the dominant landscape.10 More than twenty percent of the land cover in downtown Kansas City is made up of off-street parking, this does not include on-street parking or underground parking garages.


Text

Adaptively reusing this waste landscape figures to be one of the twenty-first centurys great infrastructural challeng-es as these sites are potentially transformable into new productive uses such as permanent open landscapes or infill developments.

RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT-OF-WAY + PARKS

11

Waste landscapes are places that people often overlook, driving through without recognizing the potential of the space. Most appear unoccupiable, servicing as barriers to divide up cities. Thus, the cities become sections, frag-menting what should be a cohesive whole.

An analysis of the parking lots, vacant lots, and right-of-ways, showed that in comparison to the amount of green space, wasted space is far more abundant throughout the downtown. Kansas Citys haphazard development and ex-cess of wasted space has been caused by the citys sub-urban sprawl. This unsustainable method of development must be addressed for the future success of the city. Fu-ture infill and growth depend on salvaging and reimag-ining the collective body of in-between landscapes.12There should be an evaluation of how land use could be made stronger to better serve a denser city. Some of Kan-sas Citys wasted spaces have the most unique charac-ter within downtown and the potential to become public spaces which will promote socialization, recreation, and sustainability. These underpass spaces, highway right-of-ways, and abandoned parking lots have the ability to be-come infrastructural parks and meaningful civic spaces.

MAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTSMAP OF PROPOSED + ONGOING URBAN IMRPROVEMENT PROJECTS

CITY PROJECTS1. Berkley Riverfront Redevelopment 2. Columbus Square Park3. Case Park (West Terrace Park)4. 12th St. Viaduct Improvements5. Main Street Streetcar6. Grand Blvd. Improvement Project7. Capping of I-6708. 17th Street9. West Pennway Streetscape Plan10. 20th St. Streetscape Plan11. 18th Street 12. Penn Valley Park

1

2

3

4

5 6

7

8

910

11

12


CITY PROJECTS

Examining the current land use and

zoning identified where various ac-

tivities occur, or are allowed to occur,

within the downtown. Foreseeing the

possibilities of types of future devel-

opment aided in the planning of the

current parks and civic space system. ZONING LAND USE

In order to create a thorough understanding of the situa-tion that bears on the development of any comprehensive plan, all proposed and currently ongoing projects within downtown Kansas City were studied and taken into con-sideration. The projects with the most impact to the Com-prehensive Vision Plan are described in full detail at the of this publication: the Main St. Streetcar Project, Grand Boulevard Improvment Project, 20th St. Streetscape Plan, and West Pennway Streetscape Plan.

48-49.pdfRECONNECTING Part 549

reconnecting: part 1

Documents

civic space design

city form

design work

planning design

greater downtown area

city piac funds

system of green

constructive vision