This is NOT what we bargained for....
There was much rejoicing this week, at least from some people, when it was announced that the East Village project would move forward. I have been critical of this deal from the start. Today I read something in the Business Journal that has me gnawing on the furniture.The headline is one of those bittersweet titles that gives rise to your spirit, then dashes it to the floor. GSA considers office in East Village; housing units halved And people wonder why there is so much mistrust of City Hall. The taxpayers were promised an amazing Urban Village that was going to revitalize the east side of downtown. There were going to be 1,200 to 1,400 housing units. Now it has been announced that the number will be halved to "create more parking" to make the area more attractive to the GSA. Part of what makes an Urban Village "urban" is the density. A true downtown cannot be made up of acres of surface parking lots. The original justification for this project was to "remove blight". Part of that blight was described as underutilized surface parking lots. I've said this before. If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention. |











Comments on "This is NOT what we bargained for...."
-
adrianne said ... (12:04 AM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (7:57 PM) :
post a commentUgh! This just makes you want to spit with disgust. Not only is the plan going up with less housing than promised, the powers that be are still getting the benefit of tax credits and additional funding for low-income housing. This is a joke! Our City Council's hive-mind thinking is getting out of control. And despite all the posturing, J.E. Dunn still got what it wanted. Why does the city have to build their parking garage? Will J.E. Dunn be the architects for the GSA building? Why is Swope Community Builders satisfied with this? Bah humbug!
how many times is KC going to fall for the same set of tricks? The taxpayers give everything we can and then the developer starts taking away!!!