350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan

350 HIGHWAY / BLUE PARKWAY CORRIDOR PLAN

A Land Use, Transportation, Aesthetic and Implementation strategy for the Redevelopment of the Corridor

For The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Client Team

January 12, 2007 by Acknowledgements

This study was made possible by the unprecedented cooperative efforts of the public officials, the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Action Team, the Steering Committee, and concerned citizens and business owners, too numerous to name, along the Corridor. Without their funding commitment, dedication, perseverance, and willingness to take the time to plan for their collective futures, this study would not have been possible.

Public & Agency Officials :

City of Raytown, Missouri Sue Frank - Mayor

Dan Estes ± Acting City Administrator

John Ness - Alderman Ward I Greg Walters - Alderman Ward I Jim Aziere - Alderman Ward II Christine White - Alderman Ward II Jeff Kinman - Alderman Ward III Charlotte Melson - Alderman Ward III Barb Schlapia - Alderman Ward IV Sandy Hartwell - Alderman Ward IV Patrick Riehle - Alderman Ward V Marilyn Fleming - Alderman Ward V

City of Kansas City, Missouri Kay Barnes - Mayor

Wayne Cauthen ± City Manager

Deb Hermann - Council Member District I Bill Skaggs - Council Member District I Bonnie Sue Cooper - Council Member District II John Fairfield - Council Member District II Troy Nash - Council Member District III Saundra McFadden-Weaver - Council Member District III Jim Glover - Council Member District IV George Blackwood - Council Member District IV Becky Nace - Council Member District V Terry Riley - Council Member District V Alvin Brooks - Council Member District VI Charles A. Eddy - Council Member District VI

Missouri Department of Transportation Beth Wright - District Engineer (District 4) Linda Clark ± Project Development - Assistant District Engineer (District 4) ± Planning & Design

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 2 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Chris Redline ± Assistant District Engineer (District 4) ± Construction & Maintenance Operations

Mid-America Regional Council David Warm ± Executive Director Marlene Nagel ± Director of Community Development Mell Henderson - Director of Transportation

Study Funding Sources :

Aquila City of Kansas City, Missouri City of Raytown, Missouri Commerce Bancshares Foundation Dean Development First Federal Savings Kansas City Area Transit Authority (KCATA) Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) Mid America Regional Council (MARC) William T. Kemper Foundation

350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Client Team :

City of Raytown, Missouri Tim Truesdale ± Director Community Development John Benson ± Senior Planner Jason McMahon ± Director Public Works

City of Kansas City, Missouri Gerald µBo¶ Williams ± Area Planner

Missouri Department of Transportation LeeAnn Kell - Transportation Planning Manager (District 4) Eric Foster ± Intermediate Transportation Planner (District 4) Joshua Scott - Senior Transportation Planner (District 4)

Mid-America Regional Council Jim Hubbell ± Transportation Planner II Charles Gorangantula ± Transportation Planner II

Steering Committee Members :

Norm Beeman - MoDOT Linda Clark - MoDOT Todd Ashby ± MARC Marlene Nagel ± MARC Becky Nace ± Council Member, City of Kansas City

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 3 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Dan Porrevecchio ± Business Owner, Resident Jim Davis ± Jackson County Mark Swope ± KCATA Greg Pomeroy ± Unity Village Mark Dawson ± Business Member Kim Lady ± Business Member Bob Lewis ± Business Member J.C. Bungart - Business Member Gary Graham ± Business Member Greg Bordner ± Business Member Jeff Page ± Business Member Ernie Remy ± Resident Mark Smith - Business Member

Additional Plan Area Resource Sources :

City of Lee¶s Summit, Missouri Bob McKay ± Director Community Development

Town of Unity Village, Missouri Greg Pomeroy ± Director Village Services

Consultant Team Members : Ochsner Hare & Hare ±Planning and Design Consultants Burns & McDonnell ± Transportation and Infrastructure Engineering Consultants Jane Mobley Associates ± Public Involvement and Media Relations Parsons ± Market Study and Positioning Strategy Stinson Morrison Hecker ± Consulting Attorney and Code Writing

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 4 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Table of Contents

Page Number Acknowledgments««««««««...««««..«««««««««. 2 - 4 Table of Contents ««««..««««««««««««««««««. 5 Executive Summary««...««..«««««««««««««««. 6 - 25 Summary of Project Purpose.««««««.....««...««««««.. 26 - 29 Existing Conditions Summary«««««««««««««««.... 30 - 32 Project Public Input««««««««««««««««««««« 33 - 34 Corridor Vision, Goals and Objectives««««««..««««««... 35 - 39 Market Positioning Plan ...«...«««««««««««««««...... 40 - 45 Corridor Plan ««««..«««..«««««««««««««..«« 46 - 51 Land Use Plan «««««...«««««««««««««..« 52 - 63 Transportation Plan «««««...««««««««««««. 64 - 80 Aesthetic Plan ««««..«««««««««««««..««. 81 - 103 Implementation Plan ««««««««««««««««« 104 - 122

List of Report Maps

Corridor Boundary Map«««««««««««««««««.. pages 28-29 Existing Land Use Map«««««««««««««««««« pages 53-54 Proposed Land Use Map«««««««««««««««««.. pages 56-57 Development and Redevelopment Opportunities Map«««««. pages 61-62 Major Proposed Transportation Improvement Concepts Map«... pages 69-70 Transportation and Infrastructure Plan««««««««««« pages 72-73 MoDOT Guidelines for Access Management«««««««««. pages 75-76 Roadway Access Analysis Map«««««««««««««««pages 77-78 Conceptual Access Management Techniques««.. «««««««« page 79 Aesthetics Plan«««««««««««««««««««««.. pages 91-92

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 5 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Executive Summary

This executive summary provides an overview of the purpose, study area, recommendations, implementation and potential implementation timeline of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan. Additional study documentation may be found in theµ350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan ± A land use, transportation, aesthetic, and implementation strategy for the redevelopment of the corridor¶ dated October 23, 2006, and the µ350 Highway / Blue Parkway - Existing Conditions Report¶, dated October 4, 2004.

OVERVIEW

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Study is a redevelopment and economic development study for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. It is a joint effort by the City of Raytown, Missouri; the City of Kansas City, Missouri; the Missouri Department of Transportation; the Mid-America Regional Council; citizens; and business owners to develop a plan for the economic rejuvenation and redevelopment of the corridor and the study area. The study area is approximately ½ mile wide along 350 Highway from I-435 south to I-470.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor is approximately 8.28 miles long. The study area along the corridor encompasses retail development, office development, light industrial development, civic and community uses, and residential neighborhoods.

The study area is governed by City of Raytown, Missouri; the City of Kansas City, Missouri; the City of Lee¶s Summit, Missouri; The Village of Unity Village, Missouri; the County of Jackson County, Missouri; The Missouri Department of Transportation owns and maintains the roadway. The project area also lies within the Mid-America Regional Council regional planning area.

STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

This study was prepared because the jurisdictions, business owners, and residents in the study area, recognized the need to address numerous and intertwined land use, transportation, and aesthetic issues along the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. This study identifies and analyzes those issues (The Existing Conditions Report), provides a framework to modify or enhance the conditions contributing to those issues (The Corridor Plan), and provides a roadmap to address those issues (The Implementation Plan).

THE STUDY

The Study was prepared in four parts; The Existing Conditions Report; The Market Strategy and Visioning, The Corridor Plan; and The Implementation Plan.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 6 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 The Existing Conditions Report

The Existing Conditions Report provided in-depth information on the Physical Characteristics, the Market Characteristics, and the Public Perception and Desired Future Development of the corridor.

Physical Characteristics

The physical characteristics of the corridor studied were the Urban Design, Aesthetics, Zoning, Land Use, Topography, Public Facilities, Parks and Open Space, Infrastructure and Transportation.

Four key elements were identified as determining factors in the existing character, condition, and resultant issues of the corridor:

1. The Route ± The roadway itself is the major contributing factor for the existing character and nature of the corridor. The initial design complied with accepted standards of the times. The routes expansion to a 4 lane divided highway, put into place more modern standards, new lanes were separated from the original lanes creating developed land in the median, and numerous intersections.

Additionally, when the route was designed it cut diagonally through the urban grid, divorcing the grid on the north side from the south side, creating skewed intersections, and odd shaped lots adjacent to the roadway.

The route also carries a high volume of traffic. In 2002, the Average Daily Traffic ranged between 10,000 to 22,000 vehicles per day. The heavier volumes were found at the western end of the corridor, near I-435, and the lightest traffic volumes were found at the eastern end of the corridor near I-470.

The route is a state highway, so the expectation for most drivers is one of convenient, fast, access to and from Downtown Kansas City. This causes numerous conflicts in balancing the efficiency of the commuter traffic, with the viability, ease of access, and safety of the surrounding commercial and local traffic.

The changing nature and function of the roadway also contributes to the character of the corridor. On the west, the corridor is a standard controlled access urban expressway. In Raytown, the road functions as an accessible commercial corridor. To the east, in the Little Blue River Valley, the road functions as a rural expressway, and further east to Lee¶s Summit, functions as an urban expressway again. This is significant change of use, of function, of character in 8 miles.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 7 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 and redevelopment. The few undeveloped areas that exist in the corridor are undeveloped because of lack of infrastructure.

Age is contributing to the overall aesthetic character and quality of the corridor as well. Older buildings in need of rehabilitation are abundant, as are signs, each competing in size for visibility. Overhead lines are abundant. Additionally, numerous outdated and outmoded parcels do not have modern site layouts, lot sizes, storm drainage systems, landscape, or facades. This contributes to an overall feeling of the corridor being dated and not modern.

3. Boundaries ± The corridor itself has along its length, 6 separate jurisdictions, KCMO, Raytown, Lee¶s Summit, Jackson County, Unity Village, and MoDOT, the owner of the road way. Each has its own set of regulations, codes, guidelines, and agenda for the corridor contributing to the highly diverse character and conflicting uses along the route. Generally those changes occur at the municipal and jurisdictional boundaries.

4. Infrastructure ± A significant factor contributing to the existing character of the corridor is the existing infrastructure. While the Little Blue Valley Interceptor Sewer runs through the Valley, significant portions of the Little Blue Valley area have not developed because of lack of parcel specific accessible sanitary sewer. There are also significant areas in the Valley within the flood plain of the Little Blue River in the Valley. Additionally, lack of storm sewer and storm water detention are significant issues in the Raytown and the Knobtown areas.

The corridor also lacks significant non-vehicular walk/trail/connection infrastructure.

These key factors contribute greatly to the existing nature and character of the corridor. They represent challenges and opportunities for the future development and redevelopment of the corridor.

Market Characteristics

A Market Study was conducted to analyze the market factors contributing to the study area. That study identified the following assets and limitations for development and redevelopment of the corridor:

Assets of the Highway 350 Corridor include:

· Direct connection to downtown Kansas City. · Connecting link between two interstate highways (I-435 and I-470). · Centralized location in an area circled by an interstate highway system. · A high volume of commuter traffic flowing from employment centers to suburban housing developments. · Location on the fringe of a major growth area. · Large expanses of vacant, developable land in the southern portion of the corridor in Kansas City.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 8 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Reasonably priced land and development sites. · Local economic development policies that encourage development. · A relatively high concentration of housing density (rooftops) flanking the central portion of the corridor that represents a market for neighborhood retail and service commercial uses.

Limitations of the Highway 350 Corridor include:

· Rough terrain and absence of infrastructure for the majority of the undeveloped areas in the southeastern portion of the corridor in Kansas City, primarily east of Noland Road. · Arterial function and traffic flow/speed on Highway 350 limits capturing through- traffic and creates a ³pedestrian unfriendly´ environment. · Awkward vehicular circulation at strategic intersections with Highway 350 within the City of Raytown (e.g. Blue Ridge Boulevard, and Raytown Road and 75th Street). · Preponderance of excessive curb cuts, limited lot depth and small parcels fronting Highway 350 in the commercial district in Raytown. · Intense competition for consumer expenditures from other corridors. · Discontinuities between businesses and functions served along the corridor in Raytown. · Absence of true ³nodes´ or ³nuclei´ of business and activity centers. · Lack of growth and only moderate purchasing power with stagnant household income growth within the surrounding market area.

Public Perception and Desires

The public was given numerous opportunities to provide input and express their desires for the redevelopment of the corridor. A main focus of the public input was a series of public forums, information meetings, and workshops. There were several public meetings during the project:

350 Highway Issues Forum - June 26, 2002 (Pre-Consultant Selection) Issues Identification Workshop - March 26, 2003 (Pre-Consultant Selection) Corridor Plan Kick-off Meeting - January 22, 2004 Visioning Workshop - February 26, 2004 Existing Conditions & Transportation Open House- May 25, 2004 Transportation, Land use & Aesthetics Concepts Open House -Feb 3, 2005 Transportation, Land use & Aesthetics Final Plans Open House - Sept. 12, 2005 Implementation Plan Presentation - October 27, 2005

The comments gathered can be organized in three broad categories: Vision and Aesthetics, Land Use and Infrastructure, and Implementation and Financing.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 9 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Key input on Vision and Aesthetics: · A Vision is needed to help guide the future development of the corridor. · The Vision should knit the community together. · Safety is a key issue in the corridor. · One organization is needed to tie the entire corridor together. · The aesthetic appearance of the corridor needs to be updated and improved.

Key input on Land Use and Infrastructure: · Utilize the existing framework as a starting place. · Develop guidelines for future development. · Update and upgrade look of corridor. · Roadway does not function well for Raytown. · Infrastructure should be extended to areas without it.

Key input on Financing and Implementation: · Need a governing group of all jurisdictions. · How do you pay for changes? · Need alternative ways to finance development. · Whatever the cost, increased safety on the highway would be worth it. · Should be long range and be able to do in pieces (phases).

Market Strategy and Visioning

Utilizing the info gathered in the Existing Conditions Report, a market positioning report, and a vision statement and goals and objectives were developed prior to guide the plan.

Market Positioning Strategy

A market positioning strategy for the Highway 350 Corridor will involve related combined strategies for successful implementation. Successful development of the Highway 350 Corridor will involve both new development, and redevelopment of existing developed parcels.

The analysis concluded that the primary market focus for the Highway 350 Corridor will be the local market, not a regional or sub-regional market. Local and area-wide demographics and development trends have determined the current and, to some degree, the potential market. An aging population, modest household purchasing power, and stagnant household income growth pose limitations for any robust boom in commercial retail/services along the corridor. However, the potential for new residential development, especially in the southern or Kansas City portion of the Highway 350 corridor in addition to higher density residential development along the corridor in Raytown, supplemented with mid-size office and/or light industrial uses, would increase the local market for consumer goods and services.

Considering the above analysis, the following is a summary of the suggested key recommendations and positioning strategies for the Highway 350 Corridor.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 10 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · The demand for automobile-related retail and service uses (e.g. auto sales, auto repair shops, tire and battery businesses, auto parts shops, etc.) remains strong, and those businesses should continue to be accommodated in the corridor.

· The potential to ³capture´ through commuter traffic for retail sales and services does exist, and presents a viable, but limited, strategy. However, realistically this market is limited to a number of very select types of uses, such as convenience stores, fast food restaurants, day care centers, banking facilities, etc. While this certainly presents one component of a market positioning strategy for the corridor, it cannot be the primary component.

· An increasing aging population and concentration within easy walking distance of the Highway 350 Corridor could present market opportunities for certain neighborhood retail and personal services, particularly of the pedestrian-friendly convenience variety.

· The current composition of businesses along the Highway 350 Corridor reflects a void in several retail/service and other categories, including quality sit-down restaurants, specialty shops, apparel, home furnishings, and public gathering places. Young families and the older segments of the population (over 55) should be considered as primary consumer targets. Some examples of specific uses targeted to these markets could include bookstores, health food stores, fitness center, coffee shops, farmers market, hobbies/ceramics, and nursery/landscaping supplies.

· A strategy for focusing neighborhood retail and other uses, resulting in mixed-used centers, at selected ³nodes´ should be a major objective of the Highway 350 Master Plan within the Raytown portion of the corridor. These activity ³nuclei´ should be developed at strategic intersections or points along the corridor. To be successful these neighborhood and community retail and mixed-use centers need to provide improved vehicular and pedestrian traffic linkages and provide better convenience than competing retail corridors.

· Consideration should be given to the establishment of public facilities along the Highway 350 Corridor in the City of Raytown that would serve as public gathering places and destination attractions, and which in turn would have synergistic or ³spin-off´ monetary effects on other businesses in the corridor. Examples include a community center, senior citizens center, library, or even City-owned and operated facilities such as City Hall.

· The potential for ³big-box´ retail and/or anchored community shopping centers is most likely limited to the far north end of the Highway 350 Corridor in the I-435 interchange/63rd Street/Blue Ridge Boulevard area considering the current location and distribution of such centers within the market area and the limited depth of most sites in the central portion of the corridor. The potential would be increased if a suitable redevelopment site could be identified at one of the strategic ³nuclei´ points previously described. This would require a developer with big box tenants specifically targeting the

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 11 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 local market and offering local consumers advantages in location and convenience compared to other big box anchored centers in the market area.

· It appears there may be a potential for smaller-scale Class ³%´ office space and mixed office/light industrial (flex-uses) within the Highway 350 Corridor, most likely within the central portion of the corridor in the City of Raytown.

· Larger-scale office and light industrial/distribution uses appear to have some potential for development at selected locations in the southern portion of the Highway 350 Corridor between Noland Road and the I-470 interchange. Considering the recent development of the Summit Woods Crossing ³power center¶ and other existing and proposed commercial development near this interchange, additional commercial development could result in an over-saturation of the commercial retail market in this area. A hotel near the Highway 350 and I-470 interchange could also be a consideration for this southernmost area.

· Considering the success of ³Jessica¶s Estates´ and composition of local area demographics, it appears there is a potential market for additional senior housing and similar housing in the Highway 350 Corridor. Likewise, since the City of Raytown is substantially built out with limited undeveloped land available for residential development, the Highway 350 Corridor can provide opportunities for higher density housing which can serve as ³nodes´ for mixed-use developments. The addition of higher density housing within the corridor¶s ³core area´ of the Raytown corridor segment could form an anchor for ³mixed use´ development, and also enhance market demand for retail goods and services.

· There is a need for move-up moderate and higher-end priced single-family housing within the Highway 350 Corridor market area. Housing in several price range categories should be developed, including the lower moderate range ($100,000 to $125,000); moderate range ($125,000-$175,000); and higher-moderate range ($175,000-$250,000). Additionally, higher end housing ($250,000.00 +) should continue to be developed in the corridor (as it is in the Kansas City Southeastern segment). The area along the southern portion of the corridor, south of the Raytown city limits and continuing south of Noland Road to I-470, appears to be a logical area for development of this type. The rough terrain and lack of infrastructure have restricted development in this area. Residential development within this area could be a precursor to new commercial development in the Raytown portion of the Highway 350 corridor as the market for commercial goods and services would be expanded.

· For corridor planning purposes the following space/land use allocations would be reasonable. These estimates of future development and redevelopment absorption within the Highway 350 Corridor are based upon the market analysis conducted as part of this assignment. The estimates assume a range of possible capture rates (percentages) applied to known levels of development within the Highway 350 market area in recent years (as explained below for each type of use). It also assumes that urban design and traffic improvements are in place or underway to accommodate and encourage new investment

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 12 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 and development. The estimates are given as ranges due to the cyclical market and economic factors that typically influence real estate development and redevelopment.

1. For retail commercial uses 70,000 - 225,000 square feet of space over the next five years (140,000 to 450,000 square feet over a ten year horizon). This estimate is based upon a capture rate of 3.5% to 12.5% applied to the average 380,000 square feet of retail space that has been developed each year in the market area over the past six years. 2. For office uses 25,000 - 100,000 square feet of space over the next five years (50,000 ± 200,000 square feet of space over a ten year horizon). This estimate is based upon a capture rate of 3% to 12% applied to the average 150,000 square feet of office space being absorbed annually in the market area over the past five years. 3. For light industrial and office/flex space uses 50,000 ± 200,000 square feet of space over the next five years (100,000 ± 400,000 square feet over a ten year horizon). This estimate has been the most challenging to quantify because the industrial/flex space configurations are not generally recorded separately in development data and most of this type of space is build-to-suit projects. However, the estimate given here assumes a fairly generous capture rate of 10% to 40% applied to the estimated 100,000 square feet developed annually (the availability of sites in the Highway 350 corridor also influenced this capture rate). 4. For residential uses 75 ± 250 units over the next five years (150 ± 500 units over a ten year horizon) within the corridor and areas immediately adjacent to it. The lower end of this estimate is based on a capture rate of 20% of the average 60 units per year being developed in the local market. It is also recognized that there is potential for even greater residential development (probably higher-end, lower density) in those areas beyond and adjacent to the second tier of properties near the corridor.

Vision, Goals, and Objectives

Through public input, and Steering Committee guidance, a vision statement for the future of the corridor was defined. It will serve as the foundation for current and future strategies and actions related to the corridor. The 350 Highway/Blue Parkway Corridor should be:

A vibrant regional corridor, where the long-term vitality for prosperous commerce with livable surrounding neighborhood, is achieved in a continuing partnership among the residential, business and governmental sectors that leads toward attaining a safe and efficient transportation corridor and the highest quality of life.

The following goals help form the foundation for the future of the corridor:

I. Goal: Enhance the long-term vitality and attractiveness of 350 Blue Parkway Corridor as a quality mixed-use environment.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 13 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 II. Goal: Enhance the potential for prosperous commerce and quality living within the 350 Blue Parkway Corridor.

III. Goal: Provide a safe, efficient and cost-effective transportation system

The Corridor Plan

The Corridor Plan consists of three plans with associated recommendations for each. The plans are: the Land Use Plan; the Transportation Plan; the Aesthetics Plan. It is important to note that all of the plans work in conjunction with each other.

The Land Use Plan

The land use plan develops strategies to deal with land use issues. A proposed land use plan was developed as well as a plan identifying development and redevelopment opportunities.

The existing land use plans by the governing jurisdictions are concerned with land use only within their own boundaries. Because of this, a simplified, high level look at a cross- jurisdictional plan for future land use development throughout the corridor was needed. The benefits of this are: · When adopted by the jurisdictions, the plan would be an agreement on basic land use direction along the corridor · Cohesive and inter-jurisdictional · Creation of a unified, cohesive plan that can be supplemented by the jurisdictions in detailed area plans · Allow for µbig idea¶ concepts

Additionally, Smart Growth principles were used as a foundation for development of the land use plan. These principles coincide with the information gathered from the public input meetings, and the market positioning strategies. Details of Smart Growth principles may be found at www.smartgrowth.org.

Land Use Plan Recommendations

The following recommendations were developed for the proposed Land Use Plan:

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 14 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Integrate varied residential housing types into corridor as complementary and buffer uses to mixed use nodes and general commercial business along corridor. · Redevelop existing housing to compete in an open market. · Target existing businesses that are assets along corridor. Provide opportunities for site/building upgrades. · Consolidate vacant to underdeveloped properties and bring to highest, best use standard. · Develop updated zoning ordinances for the corridor.

Development and Redevelopment Recommendations

There are current areas of opportunity along the corridor ripe for development or redevelopment, or areas ready for development and redevelopment once other land use, transportation or aesthetic strategies are developed. A series of key strategies was developed to encourage capitalizing opportunities in the corridor.

· Develop Mixed-Use Nodes to extend the activity level and increase the walkability and connectivity of land uses surrounding neighborhoods, and the transportation system. · Redevelop large, outdated, and under developed existing properties. · Consolidate smaller vacant properties into larger, contiguous properties. · Rehabilitate and redevelop individual business sites on narrow or restricted properties. · Redevelop neighborhoods that have inadequate utilities, sidewalks, streetscape, and outdated housing. · Develop corridor guidelines to allow for the redevelopment of multiple ownership properties. · Develop key infrastructure and utilities for properties undeveloped because of lack of infrastructure. · Provide for the utilization of incentive and creative financing solutions to assist in the redevelopment of properties, upgrading of existing properties, and redevelopment of neighborhoods. · Create a Corridor Plan Organization to guide redevelopment efforts, assist in developing funding sources, and implement the plan.

Housing & Residential Development Recommendations

Addressing the housing issues in the study area is critical to the success of the plan. Housing is integral to the success of commercial, retail and open space development. The large tax generators (commercial and retail) require housing in close proximity to be successful. New commercial developments require not only rooftops, but rely heavily on other demographic indicators of the income and potential dollars available for the purchase of goods and services. There for, it is critical to have healthy neighborhoods, with quality housing stock, and housing choices for different levels of income.

Existing Housing Recommendations

· Rehabilitate existing homes (within plan area)

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 15 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Provide programs for the implementation of rehabilitation. Options include: · CDC, CHDO programs (use of HOME funds) · Chapter 353 tax abatement · Purchase/rehab/resale program (homebuilders) · Redevelopment authority (LCRA) · First time homebuyers program · Community Improvement Districts, Neighborhood Improvement Districts · Spin-off improvements from commercial Tax Increment Financing projects

New Housing Recommendations

· Finding and packaging sites for new development · Fill gap in lack of move up housing · Target markets · Move-up housing · Young families · Seniors over age 55

Commercial/Retail/Industrial/Other Recommendations

The commercial, retail, and industrial developments are the real tax generators for the municipalities. Infrastructure requirements (transportation, utilities, etc.) and consumer and workforce needs, contribute to the viability of these uses in the corridor. The health of these uses is vital to the health of the corridor. Additional commercial, retail and industrial issues to be addressed:

· Because no single market niche is identified in the corridor, focus on: · local market, not regional or sub-regional market · capturing commuter traffic for retail/services viable but limited strategy · create strong environment for developer interest (good developer/zoning process)

· Encourage the development of market gaps in the corridor. Apparent gaps in the market include: mid-size office home furnishings farmers market light industrial fitness center hobbies/ceramics quality sit-down restaurants specialty shops health food stores apparel bookstores sporting goods nursery/landscaping supplies music stores entertainment

· Because of the existing strength and historic significance of auto related uses and services in the corridor, they should continue to be accommodated. All auto related uses and services should be redeveloped to upgraded standards of site planning, architecture, landscape and aesthetics. These standards should be developed and included in the new design guidelines for the corridor. Additional used car lots should be discouraged.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 16 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 The Transportation Plan

The Transportation Strategies explore the existing transportation framework, existing access to properties, safety, and proposes modifications to each to create a safer, higher quality transportation corridor that can be shared by the adjacent home and business owners and commuters alike.

Similar to the Land Use Strategies, the Transportation Strategies are long term in nature. Because of the complexity, size, cost, long timeline, and disruption to the corridor for the proposed major transportation strategies, these strategies will be the most difficult to implement. They are large in scale, and have many regulatory layers to navigate for a project to come to fruition. Despite this, the potential positive impact to the corridor on adjacent property owners, safety, access, land use, and aesthetics warrants short and long term focus.

Transportation Recommendations

Five major transportation improvements are proposed in this study. They are (from west to east):

1. Interchange enhancement at Blue Ridge and 350 Highway / Blue Parkway. Add ramp access to make Blue Ridge a full interchange. Because of limited property availability, geometric requirements, and existing ROW, a single point interchange is proposed as a possible solution at this intersection. 2. Realignment of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway at wide median separation east and west of Raytown Road. Realign west bound lanes to run parallel to east bound lanes with narrow median. Realign Raytown Road to create a non-skewed, four way intersection. Utilize the vacated land for redevelopment. 3. Realignment of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway at wide median separation east and west of Westridge Road. Realign west bound lanes to run parallel to east bound lanes with narrow median. Realign Westridge to create a non-skewed, four way intersection. Utilize the vacated ground for redevelopment. 4. Rail Bridge at Knobtown. Widen or remove rail-bridge west of Knobtown to allow for additional lane and storm sewer improvements. 5. Realignment of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway west of Bannister Road. Realign east bound lanes to run parallel to west bound lanes with narrow median to reduce accidents in this area. Utilize the vacated ground for redevelopment.

These projects have the greatest potential positive impact on the transportation system in the corridor. These projects will also require significant efforts in planning, design, funding and implementation. Additionally, there will be significant additional study required for these proposed major improvements to become reality.

Additional Transportation and Infrastructure Recommendations

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 17 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Significant additional transportation improvements are recommended in the study. They include:

· Intersection improvements. · Incorporation of multi-modal transportation into the planned transportation improvements. · Managment of access along corridor. · Development of local sanitary sewer in non-sewered areas within study boundary (Little Blue Valley). · Development of storm sewer utilities for non-sewered areas in Raytown and Knobtown areas. · Development of Curb and Gutter for the Raytown Segment, both on 350 Highway/Blue Parkway, and adjacent neighborhoods. Develop these improvements with the new storm sewer utilities mentioned above.

The Aesthetics Plan

One of the key opportunities of the Corridor Plan, is the potential to develop and implement aesthetic improvements along the corridor. These will typically have a shorter time frame, with easier implementation, require less funding, cause less corridor disruption, and provide early visible changes and beautification that elicit public understanding and reaction.

The Aesthetics Plan addresses the enhancement of the following:

Bridge Enhancement: Utilize existing bridge structures as gateways for major enhancement opportunities. Issues: · Existing bridges are utilitarian. · All bridge locations (63rd Street, Blue Ridge Rail bridge at Knobtown, Bannister) represent key gateways in the study area.

Recommendations: · Utilize existing bridges as structure for applied enhancements. · Locate funding sources for enhancements of bridges and roads. · Each bridge is unique, design should be unique for each one. · Railbridge at Knobtown should be widened and enhanced or removed . · Blue Ridge and Knobtown are primary opportunities. · Tie into streetscape and landscape enhancements. · High cost, high impact enhancement. · Funded through primary public and incentive sources.

Curb, Gutter, & Storm Sewer: Add curb, gutter, and storm sewers in urban segments of corridor and neighborhoods. Issues: · Urban roadway section has ditches and shoulders.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 18 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Existing storm drainage issues at several places along corridor. · Would stimulate access management issues discussion and study. · Would be a publicly funded effort.

Recommendations: · Curb and gutter only urban section, from Blue Ridge to Knobtown. · Provide for regional detention in median near 75th Street. · Do full access management study with improvements. · Install in phases - as a part of streetscape projects. · Provide for storm improvements at Knobtown rail bridge. · Add in neighborhoods to improve conditions. · Develop phasing plan, if needed. · High cost of construction, high visual impact potential.

Gateways & Monumentation: Use gateway and monumentation enhancements to mark important intersections, corners, thresholds and municipal boundaries. Issues: · No enhancements of existing gateway areas. · Several import primary gateways (municipal boundaries). · Node gateways exist at 63rd, Blue Ridge, Raytown Road, Knobtown). · Cost would be a mix of public, incentive and individual developer. · Need general design guidelines. · Medium cost, high impact

Recommendations: · Develop primary gateways with streetscape design. · Reserve areas at intersections for gateway landscape and markers. · Incorporate pedestrian, landscape, crossings, into gateways. · Allow for different design of secondary gateways on developer property, but have general guidelines for materials and requirements. · Design primary gateways initially so they are ready for construction as soon as funding becomes available. Utilize designs for fund-raising. · Primary gateways are the responsibililty of the Corridor Plan Organization and Cities. Can be in dedicated tracts and right of way. Secure ample property/easements based upon designs. Make dedication of property/easements for primary gateway areas a requirement of new development or redevelopment of an adjacent property. · Secondary gateways and monumentation are the responsibility of the developer and are on developer property adjacent to right-of-way. · Develop and construct early in corridor redevelopment to provide enhanced aethetics for a relatively low cost, short time frame, and high aesthetics enhancement.

Intersection Enhancements: Increase visual character and quality of corridor Identify and mark thresholds and gateways to areas/sub areas.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 19 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Issues: · No current intersection improvements. · Skewed intersections add to clutter. · Should be done with streetscape. · Cost could be shared with individual developer and public. · Should be a part of overall streetscape design. · High cost, high impact

Recommendations: · Develop high impact intersection improvements at nodes. · Develop and construct as part of streetscape improvements. · Make developers responsible for corner improvements.

Landscape/Streetscape/Amenity: Increase visual character and quality of corridor.

Issues: · Lack of landscape in medians. · Lack of roadway/streetscape landscape. · No coordinated or unifying elements. · Lack of landscape on private property. · Lack of public spaces and amenities. · Low level of maintenance of public spaces

Recommendations: · Revise landscape ordinance/guidelines for new development and redevelopment. · Develop detailed coordinated landscape masterplan. · Develop coordinated streetscape/walk/amenity plans with landscape masterplan. · Increase general level of landscape maintenance in corridor.

Lighting: Increase safety (vehicular, pedestrian, and personal) and provide increased aesthetic value through the use of a unified lighting palette. Issues: · Little existing lighting in roadway. · Lighting only at MoDOT minimum. · Most lighting is on private property. · Some very dark areas in developed part of corridor. · Haphazard collection of lighting · Utility lighting only, without aesthetic quality.

Recommendations: · Develop master plan for increased lighting safety and aesthetics. · Develop a balanced plan that recognizes cars, pedestrians, and businesses have different safety and aesthetic needs (scale). · Develop as an integral part of the streetscape/landscape plan.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 20 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Include in demonstration block project. · Should be easily maintained, quality modern lighting system.

Sidewalks / Trails: Provide safe, accessible sidewalks, crossings and trails to allow pedestrians to use transportation systems. Issues: · Few walks and crosswalks along highway. · No safe crossing or refuge areas. · Speed, and volume of cars on roadway increases danger. · Majority of cost would be on public side. · Few internal neighborhood connections. · No pedestrian connections to open space or amenities.

Recommendations: · Pedestrian activated signals. · Provide refuge points at crossings. · Crossings that are in scale and noticeable for vehicular traffic. · Clearly identifiable crossing areas. · Provide walks along roadway, but buffered from danger. · Provide sidewalk connections to and through neighborhoods.

Signage: Reduction of signage clutter and development of reasonable signage standards

Issues: · Quantity of existing signs. · Speed of roadway tends to require larger signage for readability. · Could take long time to implement. · Cost would be on individual developer. · Need fair design guidelines. · Encourage restrictions on expressway sections.

Recommendations: · Revised signage ordinance/guidelines including: · Lower height signs. · Signage area related to architecture. · Gradual removal of old signs through redevelopment. · Fair guidelines - balance business/aesthetics, sign material quality and type restrictions.

The Implementation Plan

The heart of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan is the Implementation Plan and its execution. The Implementation Plan provides a roadmap of what are the next steps, who will be responsible for those steps, and when will those next steps be taken.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 21 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 There are six key items to be addressed in the Implementation Plan. The success of the project will be determined, in large part, by how successfully these items are implemented and addressed not only initially at project start-up, but over the life of the implementation of the Corridor Plan. The six items are:

· Policy · Creation of a Corridor Plan Organization · Development of a Marketing and Communications Plan · Detailed Planning and Engineering Study of the Plan Recommendations · Securing Funding · Successful Construction of Funded Improvements

These key items can be addressed as milestones that lay ahead for the Corridor Plan. These are illustrated on the following chart. Additionally, the entity(s) responsible for that milestone, and the recommended start date are also indicated:

350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan ± Key Milestones Plan Milestone ± Responsibility ± Recommended Start Date ± Next Steps? Who? (End date undetermined) When? Approve Final Corridor Plan Client Team Members Nov 06¶ Document Adoption of Corridor Plan as Participating Jurisdictions ± Following Approval of Policy KCMO, Raytown Corridor Plan ± Dec 06¶ Modifications of local Participating Jurisdictions ± Following Adoption of ordinances and plans to be KCMO, Raytown Corridor Plan ± Jan 07¶ consistent with the Plan Creation of organization to Participating Jurisdictions, Following approved shepherd project private entities, citizens ordinance and plan chnages - Second Quarter 07¶ Initial Corridor Plan Participating Jurisdictions, Following approved code Organization funding to private entities, citizens changes - Second Quarter begin project set up 07¶ Available Funding Analysis Corridor Plan Organization - During development of Marketing and Communications Plan ± 2nd Quarter 07¶ Development of Marketing Corridor Plan Organization ± Following creation and and Communications Plan initial funding of Plan

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 22 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Organization ± 2nd or 3rd Quarter 07¶ Development of next phase Corridor Plan Organization ± Following creation and of planning and engineering With jurisdiction assistance or initial funding of Plan studies support Organization ± 3rd or 4th Quarter 07¶ Evaluation, approval, and/or Corridor Plan Organization ± Following development of continued development of With jurisdiction assistance or next phase studies next phase planning and support - 4th Quarter 07¶ engineering studies Develop demonstration Corridor Plan Organization ± Following approval by projects/blocks With jurisdiction assistance or Leadership Committee of support next phase engineering studies ± Jan-08¶ Develop funding plan for Corridor Plan Organization ± Following development of approved next phase projects With jurisdiction assistance or next phase studies and demonstration blocks support - 4th Quarter 07¶ Secure funding for next Corridor Plan Organization ± Following development of phase projects and With jurisdiction assistance or funding plan for next phase demonstration blocks support projects ± 1st Quarter 08¶ according to funding plan Begin implementation and Corridor Plan Organization ± Following securing of construction of initial With jurisdiction assistance or funding for next phase project/demonstration support projects ± 4th Quarter 08¶ block(s) Continued development of Corridor Plan Organization ± During life of project ± On- planning and engineering With jurisdiction assistance or going studies support On-going review, approval, Corridor Plan Organization ± During life of project ± On- and implementation of With jurisdiction assistance or going developed Corridor Plan support recommendations On-going capital Corridor Plan Organization ± Following installation of improvements funding, With jurisdiction assistance or initial project/demonstration design, and construction support block(s) ± On-going

On-going Marketing and Corridor Plan Organization ± During life of project ± On- maintenance With jurisdiction assistance or going support

Vital to the success of the redevelopment plan is the creation of a Corridor Plan Organization to champion the plan, organize daily implementation of the plan, and be steward to the vision of the corridor plan. A combination of board, advisors, task forces and ad hoc committees is

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 23 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 recommended. A permanent office should be established as a funded, free-standing entity. Professional staffing should be charged with daily operations.

The Plan proposes some very large scale transportation and aesthetic improvements to the corridor. It is necessary to have a realistic view of these improvements, their complexity, their cost, and their ease of implementation.

The transportation improvements are large scale and long range. The key proposed transportation improvements are complex, and require state and federally mandated studies. Additionally, the high cost in dollars of the improvements will require the use of municipal, state, and federal funding, and incentive based funding sources to be successful. This will add to the complexity and time required to secure funding for those improvements. At the current time, no commitment in funding has been made by any of the municipal, state, federal, or private entities for the next phase of the Plan.

The key, short range, opportunity of the Plan, is the development of aesthetic improvements along the corridor. These visible changes in architecture, site planning, landscape, maintenance, signage, bridges and gateways can have a dramatic impact on the overall sense of the quality of the 350 Blue Parkway environment.

Because of the specific nature of these types of improvements, their relatively modest size, and medium to low complexity, aesthetic improvements can have a shorter time line, easier implementation, may require less funding, cause less corridor disruption, and provide early visible changes and beautification. These early successes help drive public perception that change is occurring and increase private investors confidence in the future viability of the area.

This private investment in the area is critical to the success of the redevelopment plan. The plan has to be funded to be implemented, and in order to reach the vision, the goals and the objectives stated for the redevelopment of the corridor, a great infusion of financial resources must occur in the area.

It is important to understand that in a redevelopment area, there is never enough public monies to fund the entire plan. The plan will only be successful if private development is encouraged, incentives are made available, and private investment sees opportunity in the redevelopment area. The public monies should be used in ways to encourage private investment. And the creative packaging and use of incentives and public/private partnerships will have to be utilized to leverage the public monies for additional funding opportunities.

Implementation of the Corridor Plan will require commitment and coordinated efforts among public, private and voluntary organizations and individuals and the Corridor Plan Organization. It will also require policy commitments and human and financial resources dedicated to the project over an extended period of time. But, this commitment will be rewarded with a revitalized corridor with new living, working, shopping, and playing opportunities.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 24 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Summary of Project Purpose

What is the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Study? The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Study is a redevelopment and economic development study for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. It is a joint effort by the City of Raytown, Missouri; the City of Kansas City, Missouri; the Missouri Department of Transportation; the Mid-America Regional Council; citizens and business owners, to develop a plan for the economic rejuvenation and redevelopment of the corridor in the study area. The study area is approximately ½ mile wide along 350 Highway / Blue Parkway from I-435 south to I-470.

The study was developed in five (5) phases: Phase I ± Existing Conditions and Market Analysis Phase II - Alternative Concepts Development Phase III± Final Development Plan Phase IV± Implementation Plan and Final Report Phase V ± Zoning Ordinance Update (Raytown)

What is this report?

This is the final plan report for the overall 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Study. This report includes a summary of the study process, a summary of the existing conditions report, the market positioning strategy, the corridor vision, goals, and objectives, the corridor land use, transportation, aesthetic, and implementation strategies.

What has led up to the development of this Study?

The City of Raytown, Missouri; the City of Kansas City, Missouri; the Missouri Department of Transportation; the Mid-America Regional Council; citizens and business owners realized that it was important to understand the issues that surround the economic, transportation and quality of life issues that surround the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway corridor today.

In late 2001 and 2002, a tremendous effort of cooperation between municipal and agency officials and staff, business owners and concerned citizens, began. This group, the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Client Team, directed their efforts toward developing a study for defining, analyzing and addressing the issues of the corridor, and identifying potential funding for the anticipated study.

The Client Team made a commitment to pool their resources, solicit others for donations, and collectively hire a team of professional consultants to further study, define, and address the corridor issues. After a competitive proposal and interview process, the Consultant Team was selected by the Client Team and began the project.

A Steering Committee was formed to act as a sounding board for the development of the Study. Through their guidance, the input gathered at public workshops, and interaction with the Client

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 25 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Team, the Consultant Team has assembled this final report for the study, The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan.

What is the result of the Study?

The study will provide a guidebook for the economic revitalization and redevelopment of the corridor. Through the coordinated efforts of the municipal, agency and private interests, a unified vision for the future of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor may be championed and accomplished, for an economic, safety and quality of life benefit.

HISTORY, REGIONAL CONTEXT AND PLANNING AREA

History of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway

The origin of the route that eventually became 350 Highway / Blue Parkway can be tied to the beginning of the Santa Fe Trail, which opened sometime during the late 1820s. The trail crossed the route that became 350 Highway / Blue Parkway near what we call today Blue Ridge Boulevard. The Trail increased the number of people coming into Jackson County, as this area was the final "jumping off" point for settlers and adventurers heading west.

350 Highway / Blue Parkway began its life as a Missouri State Highway in 1927 and was initially named 50 F.A.P. (Federal Aid Primary). Built upon Old 50 F.A.P., 350 Highway / Blue Parkway was commissioned between Interstate 435 and Interstate 470 when 50 F.A.P. was moved to the south of the Metro Area along Interstate 435 and Interstate 470. In 1979, 50 F.A.P. was officially re-designated as Missouri Route 350. The total length of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway is 8.28 miles long.

Location of Corridor Study Area Within the Region

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor study area is located in southeastern Jackson County, Missouri, and crosses three jurisdictions: Kansas City, Raytown, and Lee¶s Summit. The Corridor¶s northwest tip is situated within Kansas City, southeast of I-435, and lies eight miles from the City¶s downtown (vicinity of I-70/I-35 interchange). Crossing through Raytown, a first ring suburb of Kansas City, the Corridor¶s southeast tip extends into Lee¶s Summit and lies 14 miles from Kansas City¶s downtown.

Major landmarks around the Corridor include Truman Sports Complex to the north; Longview Community College to the south; Truman Medical Center Lakewood to the east; Unity Village to the southeast; and Swope Park to the west.

Other regional jurisdictions surrounding the Corridor include Raytown and Independence to the north; Raytown, Grandview and Lee¶s Summit to the south and southeast; Blue Springs to the east; and Kansas City to the west and east.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 26 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Corridor Study Area Boundary

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor begins at the I-435/350 Highway / Blue Parkway interchange vicinity in Kansas City (northeast tip) and runs southeast for six miles, ending at I- 470 in Lee¶s Summit (southeast tip). The actual outlines of the study area¶s outer parallel boundaries are delineated by a network of roads, side streets, and other physical markings throughout the Corridor. (Refer to map, pages 28 -29)

The Corridor¶s outer study area boundary running parallel to 350 Highway / Blue Parkway on both sides is 1/4 mile wide from the highway¶s centerline, resulting in a 1/2 mile swath from end to end of the study area.

Governing Plans of Jurisdictions

For Kansas City, a governing plan centerpiece is the FOCUS Kansas City Plan (Forging Our Comprehensive Urban Strategy). FOCUS is Kansas City's Comprehensive and Strategic Plan for the next 25 years. This project is a unique partnership between the City of Kansas City and its citizens to develop an action plan the community can support for the 21st century.

In Raytown, the city¶s Comprehensive Plan guides present and future growth and development and serves as a primary governing plan for this jurisdiction.

Growth and development within Lee¶s Summit is also guided by the city¶s Comprehensive Plan that sets forth a long-term vision for the city¶s land use pattern, infrastructure provision, and community well-being.

Adopted Plans of Jurisdictions

The adopted plans of the jurisdictions below that relate to the Corridor study area are as follows:

City of Kansas City, Missouri Little Blue Valley, Area Plan 13. Longview Area Plan 29. Winchester Land Use and Development Comprehensive Plan for the Sports Plan. Complex Area.

City of Raytown The Raytown Area CHAT Report (Aquila Community Housing Assessment Team).

City of Lee¶s Summit Unified Development Ordinance.

MARC Long Range Transportation Study Metro Green MARC¶s Creating Quality Places Program: Successful Communities by Design.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 27 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r

Project Boundary E. 59th St. Blue Ridge Blvd.

I - 435 Matchline Southeast

Baptist Church

Aquila

YMCAYMCA

James Reed Rd. E. 75th St. RaytownRaytown Rd. Rd.

Raytown Corporate Limits

Kansas City E. 67th St. E. Gregory Blvd. Corporate 63rd Street Limits 63rd Street KCMO Northwest Segment Raytown Segment

NORTH 0 500 1000 2000

LEGEND: Project Boundary 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Roadway Corporate Limit Line

Corridor Boundary Map - Northwest 1 of 2 January 12, 2007 2000 1000 500 0

NORTH LEGEND: Project Boundary 350 Highway / BlueParkway Roadway Corporate Limit Line

I - 470 - I

Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Corporate Summit Lee's Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas

Noland Rd.

E. Bannister Rd. Bannister E.

Project Boundary Project Brickyard Rd. Brickyard KCMO Southeast Blue Valley- Little Segment KCMO SoutheastUpland - Segment January 12, 2007 January 12, CorridorBoundarySoutheast 2 of Map - 2 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r

Noland Rd.

Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas Raytown Corporate Limit Corporate Raytown High School Raytown South

Westridge Rd.

E. 83rd St. 83rd E. E. 75th St. 75th E.

atchline Northwest atchline M Existing Conditions Summary

This section is a summary of the full existing conditions report, µ350 Highway / Blue Parkway - Existing Conditions Report¶, dated October 4, 2004.

INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE

The existing conditions report was the initial report in the overall 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Study. The report includes a summary of the study process, a summary of the public participation and visioning process, and the market analysis and market positioning strategy for the corridor area. It also describes the existing land use, transportation and infrastructure conditions along the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. It illustrates the physical opportunities and constraints within the study area. It was used as the guide for the direction of the alternative concept and final designs for redevelopment of the corridor.

The public input, the visioning process, and the market positioning strategies are summarized in the following section beginning on page 16, and will not be included in this section.

For the existing conditions report, the corridor was divided into four distinct territories: The Northwestern KCMO Territory, The City of Raytown Territory, The Southeastern KCMO Territory, and The City of Lee¶s Summit Territory.

The report studied the Urban Design, Aesthetics, Zoning, Land Use, Topography, Public Facilities, and Parks and Open Space, as well as infrastructure and transportation. Four key elements were identified as determining factors in the existing character, condition, and resultant issues of the corridor:

1. The Route ± The roadway itself is the major contributing factor for the existing character and nature of the corridor. The initial design complied with accepted standards of the times. The routes expansion to a 4 lane divided highway, put into place more modern standards, new Development Within Corridor Median lanes were separated from the original lanes creating developed land in the median, and numerous intersections.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 30 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 The route also carries a high volume of traffic. In 2002, the Average Daily Traffic ranged between 10,000 to 22,000 vehicles per day. The heavier volumes were found at the western end of the corridor, near I-435, and the lightest traffic volumes were found at the eastern end of the corridor near I-470.

The route is a state highway and not a local street, so the expectation for a large portion of drivers is one of convenient, fast, access to Downtown Kansas City or back home to the suburbs. This causes numerous conflicts in balancing the efficiency of the commuter traffic, with the viability, ease of access, and safety of the surrounding commercial and local traffic.

The changing nature and function of the roadway also contributes to character of the corridor. On the west, the corridor is a standard controlled access urban expressway. In Raytown, the road functions as an accessible commercial corridor. To the east, in the Little Blue River Valley, the road functions as a rural expressway, and further east to Lee¶s Summit, functions as an urban expressway again. This is significant change of use, of function, of character Expressway Adjacent to Unity Village in only 8 miles of corridor.

2. Age ± The age of the roadway itself, the age of the municipalities and their location in the development of Greater Kansas City (Raytown is a first ring suburb with all the assets and challenges that come with it), contribute to an aged corridor in need of revitalization and redevelopment. Few undeveloped areas exist in the corridor. Those that do are undeveloped because of lack of Commercial Nature of Corridor Within Raytown infrastructure.

Age is contributing to the overall aesthetic character and quality of the corridor as well. Older buildings in need of rehabilitation are abundant, as are signs, each competing in size and color to be recognized by the tremendous amount of traffic that travels the corridor each day. Overhead lines are abundant. Additionally, numerous outdated and Competing Signage

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 31 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 outmoded parcels do not have modern site layouts, lot sizes, storm drainage systems, landscape, or facades. This contributes to an overall feeling of the corridor being dated and not modern.

3. Boundaries ± The corridor itself has along its length, 5 separate jurisdictions, KCMO, Raytown, Lee¶s Summit, Unity Village, and MoDOT, the owner of the road way. Each of these has its own set of regulations, codes, guidelines, and agenda for the corridor. These boundaries manifest themselves in the corridor in the form of land use and development decisions that are made along the corridor. Each is governed by its own guidelines. This contributes to an uncoordinated and wildly divergent view of the nature and function of the corridor.

Additionally, as described above, the function and character of the road changes along its length. Generally those changes occur at the municipal and jurisdictional boundaries.

4. Infrastructure ± A significant factor contributing to the existing character of the corridor is the existing infrastructure. Significant portions of the Little Blue Valley area have not developed because of lack of sanitary sewer. Other parcels closer to the eastern boundary of Raytown have not developed because of this as well. Additionally, lack of storm sewer and storm water detention are significant issues in the Raytown and the Knobtown areas. Lack of Stormwater Detention

The corridor also lacks significant non-vehicular walk/trail/connection infrastructure.

These key factors contribute greatly to the existing nature and character of the corridor. They represent challenges, but also opportunities for the development and redevelopment of the corridor. A full discussion of the existing conditions may be found in the Existing Conditions Report.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 32 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Project Public Input

SUMMARY OF CITIZEN INPUT PROCESS

The corridor plan reflects the input received at workshops, public meetings, meetings with individual property owners or developers interested in the area, and review by the Steering Committee, and the many hundreds of individual conversations held over the course of the project. The information received during the public input process was used to assist in formulating the Corridor Vision, Goals, and Objectives. This then became the framework for the development of the Land Use, Transportation and Aesthetic Strategies as well as the Implementation Strategy.

A main focus of the public input was a series of public forums, information meetings, and workshops. There were several public meetings during the project:

350 Highway / Blue Parkway Highway Issues Forum - June 26, 2002 (Pre-Consultant Selection) Issues Identification Workshop - March 26, 2003 (Pre-Consultant Selection) Corridor Plan Kick-off Meeting - January 22, 2004 Visioning Workshop - February 26, 2004 Existing Conditions & Transportation Open House- May 25, 2004 Transportation, Land use & Aesthetics Concepts Open House -Feb 3, 2005 Transportation, Land use & Aesthetics Final Plans Open House - Sept. 12, 2005 Implementation Plan Presentation - October 27, 2005

A detailed summary of specific input can be found in the Existing Conditions Report.

The comments gathered can be organized in three broad categories: Vision and Aesthetics, Land Use and Infrastructure, and Implementation and Financing. Each of these categories is addressed in sections of this report.

Key input on Vision and Aesthetics: · A Vision is needed to help guide the future development of the corridor. · The Vision should try to knit the community together instead of divide it as it currently does. · Safety is a key issue in the corridor. · One organization is needed to tie the entire corridor together. · The aesthetic appearance of the corridor needs to be updated and improved.

Key input on Land Use and Infrastructure:

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 33 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Utilize the existing framework as a starting place. · Develop guidelines for future development. · Update and upgrade existing look of corridor. · Roadway does not function well for Raytown. · Infrastructure should be extended to areas without it.

(this space left intentionally blank)

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 34 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Corridor Vision, Goal and Objectives

Developing a Framework of Understanding for the Corridor

INTRODUCTION

This section describes a framework of understanding for the project and outlines the proposed vision, goals, objectives, and measurable actions for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. These were developed based upon direct input from the public, the Client Team, and The Steering Committee.

A vision statement provides a broad statement about the overarching desires for the direction of the project. It is necessarily a ³big picture´ statement and can be thought of as a statement of ³If I could do anything I would do«´, and is fleshed out by the goals and objectives.

The goals begin to lay the foundation for the path to fruition of the vision statement. The goals group major categories of issues together as a way to focus on them. They define the ³what we want´. They are further defined by the objectives and the measurable actions.

The objectives define the ³how we get there´ for the goal. They contain detailed information for the attainment of the goal.

The measurable actions are the yardstick by which the progress of the project are measured. They are real. They are quantifiable. And usually they define specific projects, big and small.

The visioning process is usually pyramidal in shape, with the broad vision statement at the top, with the handful of goals below that, with numerous objectives under each goal, and finally the measurable actions under each objective. The pyramid increases in detail and complexity the each step farther down from the top.

The Vision Statement, Goals, Objectives and Measurable Goals developed for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor are as follows:

VISION

The vision statement reflects what the community desires to become with regard to the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor, and serves as the foundation for current and future strategies and actions.

A proposed vision statement is as follows:

A vibrant, mixed use community corridor, uniquely sensitive to natural features and aesthetic appearance, where long term vitality for prosperous commerce and surrounding neighborhoods,

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 35 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 is achieved in a continuing partnership between the residential and business sectors, through effective implementation of strategies and actions, that lead toward attaining the highest quality of life possible.

GOALS

The four (4) goals listed on the following pages help to form a foundation for the future of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. Through these goals, a general framework is established for the plan's more specific objectives and measurable actions listed under each goal.

Goal: Enhance the long term vitality and attractiveness of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor as a quality, mixed use environment.

Objectives

(1) Promote an efficient and compatible land use pattern that establishes community focal points throughout the Corridor.

(2) Strengthen aesthetic quality and a sense of identity for the community through development tools that: foster harmonious site planning, architectural and landscape design for new development, and encourage aesthetic improvements at existing business locations.

(3) Maintain the diverse visual character of the natural landscape by encouraging protection of sensitive and unique environmental features and views of special significance, and integrating them as key amenities of future development.

(4) Provide for a diversity of innovative housing types including creative designs that are responsive to changing population needs and compatible with surrounding neighborhoods.

Measurable Actions (Corridor Aesthetics):

(1) Develop corridor overlay district(s);

(2) Enhance landscape requirements;

(3) Enhance signage requirements;

(4) Develop architectural design guidelines (tied to development incentives);

(5) Identify Corridor Gateway monumentation sites;

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 36 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 (6) Promote underground utilities (reduce overhead power lines);

(7) Modify corridor transportation (traffic) controls (color, signage, etc.); and,

(8) Develop corridor banner system.

Goal: Enhance the potential for prosperous commerce.

Objectives

(1) Provide for necessary commercial and public services to meet future population needs and protect prime sites from inappropriate development.

(2) Ensure that the level and type of business uses are compatible with the scale and character of established neighborhoods and other adjacent land uses.

(3) Focus neighborhood mixed-use centers/retail/other uses at selected ³nodes´ within Raytown.

(4) Develop a business and residential community partnership in the Corridor to carry out a comprehensive implementation strategy and undertake marketing efforts.

Measurable Actions (Economic Development)

(1) Encourage new commercial development;

(2) Reduce vacant commercial space; (increase occupancy rate of existing commercial space);

(3) Accomplish redevelopment of obsolete commercial building(s);

(4) Increase corridor employment;

(5) Increase corridor retail sales;

(6) Increase corridor property assessments;

(7) Increase corridor market area housing development;

(8) Develop and implement a corridor marketing program; and,

(9) Utilize available development incentives (TIF, 353, etc.).

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 37 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Goal: Enhance public facilities and services to maintain a high quality of life and to encourage infill development.

Objectives

(1) Support enhancements, as necessary, to existing utility systems and leisure facilities;

(2) Promote safe pedestrian access to commercial and public services and natural amenity areas from nearby neighborhoods and employment centers;

(3) Establish public facility gathering places; and,

(4) Accommodate auto-related businesses and services along the corridor.

Measurable Actions (Infrastructure)

(1) Improve storm drainage;

(2) Encourage sanitary sewer extension to vacant land by developers; and,

(3) Consolidate small land parcels into larger sections to facilitate development.

Goal: Provide a safe, efficient, and cost effective transportation system.

Objectives

(1) Ensure proposed land uses and densities along the Corridor are controlled so that the smooth flow of traffic on 350 Highway / Blue Parkway is not disrupted.

(2) Limit the number and properly locate direct access to 350 Highway / Blue Parkway and connecting streets, minimizing the number of new signalized intersections along the Corridor.

(3) Develop collector/local/frontage roads as new development occurs to help relieve the increase in traffic generated by growth in the Corridor.

(4) Encourage pedestrian activity.

(5) Encourage transportation patterns in light of the MetroGreen trail system.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 38 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Measurable Actions (Transportation)

(1) Modify intersections to increase both capacity and safety on the corridor;

(2) Realign lanes to reduce extra-wide medians and open up new areas for development;

(3) Enhance capacity for cross-traffic;

(4) Provide for pedestrian and bike traffic;

(5) Increase utilization of mass transit; and;

(6) Identify Committee funding sources and schedules.

(this space left intentionally blank)

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 39 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Market Positioning Plan

The following market positioning strategy is abbreviated from the full report included in the Existing Conditions Report. It contains the introduction, the assets and limitations of the corridor, and the market strategy.

The Market Positioning Strategy was utilized to help guide development decisions during the plan process.

INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE

The purpose of this section is to provide a summary of the market analysis and positioning strategy for the redevelopment of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor in the City of Raytown and adjacent areas in Kansas City between I-435 and I-470. The demographic and economic data, real estate trends, and competitive corridors information described herein has been used to evaluate the corridor¶s redevelopment potential and to suggest to the planning team the mix and scale of uses that the corridor could support. It should be noted that while the market area defined includes portions of Kansas City as well as the City of Raytown, much of the focus of the report is on Raytown simply because that community encompasses the corridor¶s commercial core. However, data and references to the ³Market Area´ in tables and text incorporate information from both jurisdictions unless broken out separately.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor consists primarily of commercial strip development, with a substantial portion of uses comprised of auto-oriented businesses. This corridor is representative of the highway-oriented strip developments that became the norm in urban and suburban areas during the advent of auto commuter traffic in the post-World War II era. Commercial development along the corridor is typically shallow in depth (usually less than 300 feet deep). Residential development, mostly modest single-family homes, generally flanks the commercial development with little or no buffer or transition uses in between.

With the passage of time and the introduction of new types of commercial development (e.g. single-anchored neighborhood and community retail centers, regional shopping centers, retail power centers, big-box retail) many older strip commercial areas have become physically and functionally obsolete, out-of-fashion, and no longer remain competitive with the more modern commercial centers. For example, the composition of goods and services offered in many commercial strip areas has changed, often to lower quality merchandise coupled with less variety and choice of selection. In addition, many retail and service businesses formerly oriented to the local market have abandoned these commercial strips, and have been replaced by businesses oriented to the passing vehicular traffic (e.g. service stations, auto dealerships and auto service/repair, fast food restaurants).

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 40 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 350 HIGHWAY / BLUE PARKWAY CORRIDOR: MARKET ASSETS AND LIMITATIONS

Raytown and the immediate surrounding market represent an older inner-ring suburb, east of Kansas City, Missouri. The area directly to the east of Raytown (The Little Blue Valley) was skipped over during suburbanization because of the lack of infrastructure investments and flood control. East of the Little Blue Valley, the development of the suburbs continued with Lee¶s Summit.

An evaluation of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor in a local and regional context reveals a number of assets and, also, limitations related to its current status and potential for development and redevelopment. These assets and liabilities include the following:

- Assets of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor include: o Direct connection to downtown Kansas City. o Connecting link between two interstate highways (I-435 and I-470). o Centralized location in an area circled by an interstate highway system. o A high volume of commuter traffic flowing from employment centers to suburban housing developments. o Location on the fringe of a major growth area. o Large expanses of vacant, developable land in the southern portion of the corridor in Kansas City. o Reasonably priced land and development sites. o Local economic development policies that encourage development. o A relatively high concentration of housing density (rooftops) flanking the central portion of the corridor that represents a market for neighborhood retail and service commercial uses.

- Limitations of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor include: o Rough terrain and absence of infrastructure for the majority of the undeveloped areas in the eastern portion of the corridor in Kansas City, primarily east of Noland Road. o Arterial function and traffic flow/speed on 350 Highway / Blue Parkway limits capturing through-traffic and creates a ³pedestrian unfriendly´ environment. o Awkward vehicular circulation at strategic intersections with 350 Highway / Blue Parkway within the City of Raytown (e.g. Blue Ridge Boulevard, and Raytown Road and 75th Street). o Preponderance of excessive curb cuts, limited lot depth and small parcels fronting 350 Highway / Blue Parkway in the commercial district in Raytown. o Intense competition for consumer expenditures from other corridors. o Discontinuities between businesses and functions served along the corridor in Raytown. o Absence of true ³nodes´ or ³nuclei´ of business and activity centers. o Lack of growth and only moderate purchasing power with stagnant household income growth within the surrounding market area.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 41 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 MARKETING ANALYSIS/STRATEGY

The market positioning strategy for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor involves myriad related combined strategies for successful implementation. Successful development of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor will involve both new development, and redevelopment of existing developed parcels. New development is more likely for the Kansas City portion of the corridor where larger tracts of undeveloped land exist. Although there are a few vacant undeveloped parcels along the corridor in Raytown, any extensive future new development will most likely involve the redevelopment of existing developed parcels.

The redevelopment of existing developed parcels will involve a number of actions prior to their actual development. These actions will entail the following: (1) consolidation or aggregation of existing parcels to form larger parcels; (2) utilization of special redevelopment tools for land acquisition and financing mechanisms; (3) establishment of special zoning districts, such as Planned Districts, Mixed-Use Districts, or Special Overlay Districts, with comprehensive development and design guidelines and regulations.

No single specific ³market niche´ has been identified for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor in this analysis. A ³market niche´ represents a focused, targeted portion of a consumer market. Examples of ³market niches´ are those commercial areas, which focus or specialize on specific consumer markets, such as life style, entertainment, recreation, specialty retail, etc. A number of factors establish limitations on the creation of a specialized ³niche´ in this corridor. These factors include the location of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor relative to other ³market niches´ which have been established in the area; the function of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway as an arterial roadway; and local and market area demographics. However, these same factors provide direction for how to focus and position the corridor¶s future development vis-à- vis its competition.

This analysis has concluded that the primary market focus for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor will be the local market, not a regional or sub-regional market. Local and area-wide demographics and development trends have determined the current and, to some degree, the potential market. An aging population, modest household purchasing power, and stagnant household income growth pose limitations for any robust boom in commercial retail/services along the corridor. However, the potential for new residential development, especially in the southern or Kansas City portion of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway corridor in addition to higher density residential development along the corridor in Raytown, supplemented with mid- size office and/or light industrial uses, would increase the local market for consumer goods and services.

Considering the above analysis, following is a summary of the suggested key recommendations and positioning strategies for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor.

· The demand for automobile-related retail and service uses (e.g. auto sales, auto repair shops, tire and battery businesses, auto parts shops, etc.) remains strong, and those businesses should continue to be accommodated in the corridor.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 42 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · The potential to ³capture´ through commuter traffic for retail sales and services does exist, and presents a viable, but limited, strategy. However, realistically this market is limited to a number of very select types of uses, such as convenience stores, fast food restaurants, day care centers, banking facilities, etc. While this certainly presents one component of a market positioning strategy for the corridor, it cannot be the primary component.

· An increasing aging population and concentration within easy walking distance of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor could present market opportunities for certain neighborhood retail and personal services, particularly of the pedestrian-friendly convenience variety.

· The current composition of businesses along the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor reflects a void in several retail/service and other categories, including quality sit-down restaurants, specialty shops, apparel, home furnishings, and public gathering places. Young families and the older segments of the population (over 55) should be considered as primary consumer targets. Some examples of specific uses targeted to these markets could include bookstores, health food stores, fitness center, coffee shops, farmers market, hobbies/ceramics, and nursery/landscaping supplies.

· A strategy for focusing neighborhood retail and other uses, resulting in mixed-used centers, at selected ³nodes´ should be a major objective of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Master Plan within the Raytown portion of the corridor. These activity ³nuclei´ should be developed at strategic intersections or points along the corridor. To be successful these neighborhood and community retail and mixed-use centers need to provide improved vehicular and pedestrian traffic linkages and provide better convenience than competing retail corridors.

· Consideration should be given to the establishment of public facilities along the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor in the City of Raytown that would serve as public gathering places and destination attractions, and which in turn would have synergistic or ³spin-off´ monetary effects on other businesses in the corridor. Examples include a community center, senior citizens center, library, or even City-owned and operated facilities such as City Hall.

· The potential for ³big-box´ retail and/or anchored community shopping centers is most likely limited to the far north end of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor in the I-435 interchange/63rd Street/Blue Ridge Boulevard area considering the current location and distribution of such centers within the market area and the limited depth of most sites in the central portion of the corridor. The potential would be increased if a suitable redevelopment site could be identified at one of the strategic ³nuclei´ points previously described. This would require a developer with big box tenants specifically targeting the local market and offering local consumers advantages in location and convenience compared to other big box anchored centers in the market area.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 43 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · It appears there may be a potential for smaller-scale Class ³%´ office space and mixed office/light industrial (flex-uses) within the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor, most likely within the central portion of the corridor in the City of Raytown.

· Larger-scale office and light industrial/distribution uses appear to have some potential for development at selected locations in the southern portion of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor between Noland Road and the I-470 interchange. Considering the recent development of the Summit Woods Crossing ³power center¶ and other existing and proposed commercial development near this interchange, additional commercial development could result in an over-saturation of the commercial retail market in this area. A hotel near the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway and I-470 interchange could also be a consideration for this southernmost area.

· Considering the success of ³Jessica¶s Estates´ and composition of local area demographics, it appears there is a potential market for additional senior housing and similar housing (e.g. attached villas) in the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. Likewise, since the City of Raytown is substantially built out with limited undeveloped land available for residential development, the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor can provide opportunities for higher density housing which can serve as ³nodes´ for mixed-use developments. The addition of higher density housing within the corridor¶s ³core area´ of the Raytown corridor segment could form an anchor for ³mixed use´ development, and also enhance market demand for retail goods and services.

· There is a need for move-up moderate and higher-end priced single-family housing within the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor market area. Housing in several price range categories should be developed, including the lower moderate range ($100,000 to $125,000); moderate range ($125,000-$175,000); and higher-end range ($175,000-$250,000). The area along the southern portion of the corridor, south of the Raytown City Limits and continuing south of Noland Road to I-470, appears to be a logical area for development of this type. The rough terrain and lack of infrastructure have restricted development in this area. Residential development within this area could be a precursor to new commercial development in the Raytown portion of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway corridor as the market for commercial goods and services would be expanded.

· For corridor planning purposes the following space/land use allocations would be reasonable. These estimates of future development and redevelopment absorption within the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor are based upon the market analysis work conducted as part of this assignment. The estimates assume a range of possible capture rates (percentages) applied to known levels of development within the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway market area in recent years (as explained below for each type of use). It also assumes that urban design and traffic improvements are in place or underway to accommodate and encourage new investment and development. The estimates are given as ranges due to the cyclical market and economic factors that typically influence real estate development and redevelopment.

1. For retail commercial uses 70,000 - 225,000 square feet of space over the next five years (140,000 to 450,000 square feet over a ten year horizon). This estimate

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 44 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 is based upon a capture rate of 3.5% to 12.5% applied to the average 380,000 square feet of retail space that has been developed each year in the market area over the past six years. 2. For office uses 25,000 - 100,000 square feet of space over the next five years (50,000 ± 200,000 square feet of space over a ten year horizon). This estimate is based upon a capture rate of 3% to 12% applied to the average 150,000 square feet of office space being absorbed annually in the market area over the past five years. 3. For light industrial and office/flex space uses 50,000 ± 200,000 square feet of space over the next five years (100,000 ± 400,000 square feet over a ten year horizon). This estimate has been the most challenging to quantify because the industrial/flex space configurations are not generally recorded separately in development data and most of this type of space is build-to-suit projects. However, the estimate given here assumes a fairly generous capture rate of 10% to 40% applied to the estimated 100,000 square feet developed annually (the availability of sites in the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway corridor also influenced this capture rate). 4. For residential uses 75 ± 250 units over the next five years (150 ± 500 units over a ten year horizon) within the corridor and areas immediately adjacent to it. The lower end of this estimate is based on a capture rate of 20% of the average 60 units per year being developed in the local market. It is also recognized that there is potential for even greater residential development (probably higher-end, lower density) in those areas beyond and adjacent to the second tier of properties near the corridor.

The configuration and locations of these uses should conform to the previously described strategies and be consistent with the overall corridor design concepts.

Over the period of implementation of the Corridor Plan, it will be necessary to evaluate and update the market strategy to current market conditions. This should occur at a minimum every five(5) years, or sooner in a significant development change occurs in the corridor within that period.

The positioning strategies are the starting point for the recommendations incorporated into the plan in the Land Use, Transportation, and Aesthetics Plans.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 45 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Corridor Plan

Based upon the existing conditions review, the public input process, the visioning and goal setting process, and the market positioning strategy, the corridor plan is developed. The plan provides recommendations that target available opportunities along the corridor and provide potential ways to capitalize on these opportunities.

In order to define the available opportunities, it is necessary to understand the segments of the corridor and their character. The opportunities available are created by the character and nature of the different segments of the corridor. There are four distinct segments of the corridor, each defined by their use, location, and municipal boundary.

KCMO Northwest Segment

This segment begins at the I-435 and 350 Highway/Blue Parkway interchange in the northwest of the study area, and ends at the Blue Ridge Boulevard bridge. This is approximately the joint city limit line of Kansas City, Missouri and Raytown, Missouri. The following describes the use and character of this segment of the corridor:

Use ± Urban Expressway

What characterizes an Urban Expressway?

· High speed travel ( intended to move large volumes of traffic, quickly ) · Open character ( because of wide ROW, grading and clear zones ) · Commuter oriented ( caters to moving vehicles quickly and efficiently ) · Cuts through surrounding land use ( limiting connections and therefore conflicts ) · Access is highly controlled (in order to reduce conflicts and secure higher speeds ) · Minimal standards for lighting ( because majority comes from autos)

Existing Character of the Segment

§ Front door to KCMO & Raytown § Good views to KCMO § High speed on roadway § Few road cuts to adjoining properties § Good full access interchange (grade sep.) at 63rd Street § Highway lighting standards (lnt. only) · 2 ± lane each way east 63rd median divided

rd · 3 ± lane each way west 63 Existing Character ± KCMO Northwest Segment median divided § Newly upgraded roadway (pavements, barriers, bridges, etc.)

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 46 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 § Shoulders/swale drainage § Very few billboards little visual clutter along roadway § Very open and stripped down § Engineered straight side slopes § Divorced from surrounding land use § Feels like typical urban expressway through city § Little vegetation/landscape § Not great demand for other trans modes along roadway, crossings more important

Overall Opportunities

· Redevelopment opportunities near Blue Ridge - 63rd Street · Needs upgraded aesthetics/landscape that is maintainable ± for improved image · Control access/signage regulations for future protection of segment · Gateway opportunity for both Raytown and KCMO

Raytown ± Central Segment

This segment begins at Blue Ridge Boulevard bridge, the near the joint city limit line of Kansas City, Missouri and Raytown, Missouri. It ends just east of Westridge Road, adjacent to the joint city limit line of Kansas City, Missouri and Raytown, Missouri. The following describes the use and character of this segment of the corridor:

Use ± Urban Parkway/Commercial Corridor

What characterizes a quality Urban Parkway/Commercial Corridor?

· Sidewalks on both sides · Street trees - formal style · Planted median · Ornamental lighting · Grass areas are mowed as turf · Curb & gutter, subsurface drainage · Underground utilities · Signage control · Slower design speed · Enhancements (shrubs, groundcover, etc.) at key intersections · Can cater to mix of uses with access along roadway (Commercial, Residential, Industrial) and commuters

Existing Character of the Segment

· Mixed commercial/urban artery · Rolling grades · Multiple signalized intersections

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 47 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Lanes, shoulders and ditch drainage · Alternating commercial/residential frontages · Primary commercial corridor ± retail , service and auto · Shares use as commercial corridor with commuters (L.S.) · Community leadership on corridor (Aquila, school, FBC, car dealers) · Mish-mash of architectural styles ± in various degrees of up keep · Little aesthetic quality in arch/landscape/site planning · Too many oversized signs · Multiple access drives (at least 1 each parcel) ± wide access drives · Little connection to surrounding parcels and neighborhoods · Highway lighting (intersections) & parcel lighting (commercial) · Narrow depth commercial typical & odd triangle parcels · Multiple unsignalized intersections ± full access · Newly overlaid ± 1 grade separation (Blue Ridge) · Overhead utilities ± a lot of overhead clutter that is visually obstructive and objectionable Existing Character of Raytown Segment Overall Opportunities

· Should actively pursue both development (new) and redevelopment opportunities at the same time. · Most difficult segment · Challenge is mix of community vs. commuter · Needs land use for future that can address hard issues of existing business/future potential · Most ³urban´ segment ± can be different than rest · Needs aesthetic improvements & controls · Integration of residential and commercial uses is important at nodes · Consolidation of parcels is important for new development and redevelopment

KCMO Southeast Segment (Valley Segment - Westridge to Bannister Road)

This segment just east of Westridge Road, adjacent to the joint city limit line of Kansas City, Missouri and Raytown, Missouri. It ends at Bannister Road. The following describes the use and character of this segment of the corridor:

Use ± Rural Highway

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 48 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 What characterizes this as a Rural Highway?

· Medium to High typical speeds ( collector for surrounding area and through traffic ) · Less density along roadway ( uses are on larger parcels and are more spread out ) · Some controlled access ( less dense development along route allows more access) · Landscape and trees are planted in a natural/scattered manner (planted or existing material) · Lower maintenance levels ( rural character allows for longer grass, undergrowth, etc. ) · Safety lighting only at critical intersections ( most roadway lighting is from autos ) · Shoulder rather than curb & gutter ( few piped storm utilities, wider clear zones because of speed, cost ) · Roadway follows topography closely ( vertical and horizontal )

Exisiting Character of the Segment

· Western edge blends right into Raytown - No sense of separation between · One signalized intersection (Noland Road) · 2 Lanes, shoulders and ditch drainage - fits character of surroundings · Western and eastern edges are upland before drop into valley · Rail bridge at Noland Road restricts flow at Noland Road intersection · Rail bridge and line limits development

directly west of Noland Road Existing Character of KCMO Southeast Segment - Knobtown intersection · Primary use as corridor for commuters (L.S.), arterial to residential in the valley · Deteriorated areas around Noland Road · Development is sporadic - concentrated at Noland Road and adjacent to river · Some uses in Knob town have been described by public as objectionable · Highway lighting (intersections) & some parcel lighting (industrial/commercial) · Rural in character · Landscape character is pleasant and an asset · Abundance of greenway/parks/trails/active recreation opportunities - but not connected together to surroundings

Overall Opportunities

· Great visual character and setting - capitalize on this segment¶s uniqueness · Consolidation of vacant undeveloped property for development use is important

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 49 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Redevelopment opportunity at Noland Road/350 Highway / Blue Parkway - viewed as a priority project by public · Most "rural" segment - can be different than rest · Roadway realignments could open up larger contiguous developable parcels · Overall landscape/streetscape and lighting themes should be carried through this section for continuity, but should be reflective of uniqueness of corridor · Connect recreation/trails/open space assets. Preserve land for planned Metro Green trail. · Rail Bridge west of Noland Road - Modifications based upon future use (rail, trail, gateway) · Significant development opportunities along the segment

Existing Visual Character East of Knobtown

KCMO/Lee¶s Summit Southeast Segment ( Upland Segment - Bannister Road to I-470)

Use ± Urban Expressway

What characterizes an Urban Expressway?

· High speed travel ( intended to move large volumes of traffic, quickly ) · Open character ( because of wide ROW, grading and clear zones ) · Commuter oriented ( caters to moving vehicles quickly and efficiently ) · Cuts through surrounding land use Existing Character of KCMO/Lee s Summit Upland Segment (limiting connections and therefore ¶ conflicts ) · Access is highly controlled (in order to reduce conflicts and secure higher speeds ) · Minimal standards for lighting (because majority comes from autos)

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 50 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Exsiting Character of the Segment

§ Front door to Little Blue Valley, Knobtown, Unity Village and Lee¶s Summit § High speed on roadway § Few road cuts to adjoining properties § Good full access interchange (grade seperated.) at Bannister Road § Highway lighting standards (interchanges and signalized intersections only) § Shoulders/swale drainage § Very few billboards little visual clutter along roadway § Roadway depressed from surrounding land use § Feels like typical urban expressway through city § Vegetation / landscape at edges of ROW of highway.

Overall Opportunities

· Development opportunities near Bannister Road · Typical urban expressway · Needs upgraded aesthetics/landscape that is maintainable ± improved image · Control access/signage regulations for future protection of segment · Gateway opportunity for both Raytown and KCMO

There is one overall impression of the corridor. The segments of the corridor are different. They are different because of the different function and mix of uses along the roadway, and of the roadway itself. This difference is one of the greatest assets of the corridor. It creates the myriad opportunities available.

The Corridor Plan is divided into three major categories: Land Use Plan, Transportation Plan, and Aesthetic Plan. Those plans are in the sections following. It should be noted that for the sake of understanding and clarity, the Land Use, Transportation, and Aesthetic Plans are separated as individual components in this report. In implementation and practice, these components are deeply intertwined, each one affecting, to varying degrees, each other.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 51 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Land Use Plan

INTRODUCTION

The Land Use Plan explores land use, development and redevelopment along the corridor. Land Use Plan is long term in nature, trying to effect an overall change to the very fabric of the corridor. Theses changes, in type, pattern, and style of use, are depicted in the proposed land use plan. Additionally, development and redevelopment opportunities are depicted as well.

The Land Use Plan tries to encourage development and redevelopment of existing and undeveloped properties to a new standard of use, design and quality. When put into practice, the new standards and guidelines should be adopted parts of City Code, requiring developers and land owners to live up to those new standards. But, because of the ability of municipally mandated land use changes to occur only on properties owned by the municipality, or properties sold, developed, or redeveloped, it is critical to have a plan that enables the municipality to not only capitalize on those private development changes as they occur, but encourage them as well.

Thus the Land Use Plan recommendations are used to help guide elected officials, city staff members, and decision makers through their evaluation processes when new development proposals are presented.

LAND USE

The existing land use for the study area is shown on the combined Existing Land Use Plan (Refer to map, pages 53 -54). This plan defines current land use of the different municipalities. This is the baseline for future land use changes shown in this report.

One of the key components of the Corridor Plan was to develop a new, corridor wide, land use plan. The existing land use plans by the governing jurisdictions are concerned with land use only within their own boundaries. They do not address common issues together. Additionally they are parcel specific, so they do not necessarily look at the bigger picture of corridor wide land use issues.

Because of this, a simplified, high level look at a cross-jurisdictional plan for future land use development throughout the corridor was needed. The benefits of this are: · When adopted by the jurisdictions, the plan would be an agreement on basic land use direction along the corridor · Cohesive and inter-jurisdictional · Creation of a unified, cohesive plan that functions as a high level framework that the jurisdictions may then supplement with more detailed area plans · Allow for µbig idea¶ concepts

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 52 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007

t Southeas Matchline 2000 Raytown Rd. 1000 500 0 NORTH

Vacant Commercial Public/Semi-Public Single Family Residential Two Family Residential Multi-Family Residential E. 75th St. 75th E. RAYTOWN LAND USE

RAYTOWN CORPORA TE LIMITS KANSAS CITY CORPORATE

LIMITS E. Gregory Blvd. Gregory E. Public Safety/Emergency School Single Family SingleGround Family Common Spectator Sports Townhouse Utilities Non-Residential Vacant Vacant Residential

James Reed Rd.

E. 59th St. 59th E. E. 67th St. 67th E. Blue Ridge Blvd. January 12, 2007 January 12, Existing Land Use2 Map - Northwest1 of Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r Institutional Light Industry Multi-familyUnits 5+ Horticultural Hotel/Motel Office Recreation Other Park Paved Parking PermanentSpace Open KCMO NorthwestSegment RaytownSegment

Project Boundary 63rd Street 63rd Cemetery Church Commercial Non-Office Condominium Condominium Common Ground Driving Duplex Garage Golf Course Agricultural LEGEND KANSAS CITY LAND USE 2000 1000 500 Commercial Industrial Office Single Family Residential Vacant 0 NORTH

LEE'S LEE'S SUMMIT LAND USE

LEE'S SUM MIT CO RPORATE LIMITS RPORATE CO MIT SUM LEE'S KANSAS CITY CORPORATE LIMITS CORPORATE CITY KANSAS Public Safety/Emergency School Single Family SingleGround Family Common Spectator Sports Townhouse Utilities Non-Residential Vacant Vacant Residential

Noland Rd.

E. Bannister Rd. Bannister E. Project Boundary Project

Institutional Light Industry Multi-familyUnits 5+ Horticultural Hotel/Motel Office Recreation Other Park Paved Parking PermanentSpace Open Brickyard Rd. Brickyard KCMO Southeast- Little Blue Valley Segment KCMO SoutheastUpland - Segment January 12, 2007 January 12, ExistingSoutheastMap Land Use2 - of 2 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r

Noland Rd. Agricultural Cemetery Church Commercial Non-Office Condominium Condominium Common Ground Driving Duplex Garage Golf Course

KANSAS CITY LAND USE

KANSAS CITY CORPORATE LIMITS CORPORATE CITY KANSAS RA YTO WN CO RP ORATE LIMITS ORATE RP CO WN YTO RA

Westridge Rd.

Vacant Public/Semi-Public Single Family Residential Two Family Residential Multi-Family Residential Commercial

E. 83rd St. 83rd E. E. 75th St. 75th E.

atchline Northwest atchline M LEGEND RAYTOWN LAND USE Through design charettes with the Client Team and Steering Committee, and based upon the opportunities identified in the market positioning strategy, the Land Use Plan was developed.

Smart Growth principles were used as a foundation for general planning efforts. These principles coincide with the information gathered from the public input meetings, and the market positioning strategies. Some of these principles applied in this plan are: -provide a range of housing opportunities and choices -create walkable neighborhoods -have community/stakeholder collaboration -create distinctive/attractive communities with strong sense of place -make development decisions predictable, fair, cost effective -create a mix of land uses -preserve open space/farmland/natural beauty/critical environmental areas -provide a variety of transportation choices -direct development towards existing communities -promote compact building design

The Proposed Land Use Plan (Refer to map, pages 56-57) identifies the proposed future land use development for the study area.

The following recommendations were developed for the proposed Land Use Plan:

· Create a simplified, study area-wide land use plan, that is cross-jurisdictional. · Create and/or reinforce mixed use activity nodes at major intersections. · Surround activity nodes with residential uses for local support, provide capture areas for local and commuter traffic. · Create walkability within each node. · Form multi-modal connections between and through uses in study area. · Redevelop existing, outmoded commercial properties along corridor. · Provide infrastructure to Little Blue Valley to stimulate residential move up and higher end residential uses. · Integrate varied residential housing types into corridor as complementary and buffer uses to mixed use nodes and general commercial business along corridor. · Redevelop existing housing to compete in an open market. · Target existing businesses that are assets along corridor. Provide opportunities for site/building upgrades. · Consolidate vacant to underdeveloped properties and bring to highest, best use standard. · Develop updated zoning ordinances for the corridor.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 55 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r t

E. 59th St. Project Boundary Blue Ridge Blvd.

I - 435 Matchline Southeas

Baptist Church

1 Aquila 2 3 YMCA

James Reed Rd. Raytown R

Raytown Corporate Limits

Kansas City d E. 67th St. E. Gregory Blvd. Corporate . 63rd Street Limits KCMO Northwest Segment Raytown Segment Proposed Land Use Plan Redevelop existing, outmoded commercial properties along corridor. Node # 1 - 63rd St. NORTH 0 500 1000 2000 Develop mixed use nodes at major intersections. Capitalize on full acces interchange. Redevelop struggling existing LEGEND: Provide infrastructure in Little Blue Valley to kick off residential retail center to be a mixed use hub. Redevelop existing drive in/swap Estate/Large Lot Residential move up and higher end housing. meet to a higher, better use, despite being undermined. Redevelop existing housing to allow it to compete in an open market. Single Family Residential Node # 2 - Blue Ridge Blvd. Target existing businesses that are assets along corridor. Provide Multi-Family Residential opportunities for site/building upgrades. Add value to development by taking advantage of viewshed to downtown, Consolidate vacant to underdeveloped properties and bring to highest, proximity of I-435, and surrounding office uses. Buffer or redevelop Mixed-Use Residential/Commerci best use standard. existing warehousing to reduce visual impact to node. Increase tax base of municipalities. Mixed-Use Office/Commercial Provide pedestrian connectors. Commercial Node # 3 - Raytown Rd. Try to connect downtown to south of MO 350 and provide high Office access to MO 350 (more arterial character). Improve marginal Industrial/Warehousing commercial and create confluence and define area as a node. Public/Institutional

Open Space

Corporate Limit Line Proposed Land Use Map - Northwest 1 of 2 1 Development Node January 12, 2007 2000 1000 Estate/Large Lot Residential Residential Multi-Family Mixed-Use Residential/Commercial Mixed-Use Office/Commercial Commercial Office Industrial/Warehousing Public/Institutional Open Space CorporateLine Limit Development Node Single FamilyResidential 500

0 I - 470 - I 1 NORTH LEGEND: Unity Village

Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Corporate Summit Lee's Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas

Noland Rd.

E. Bannister Rd. Bannister E. Project Boundary Project

Node # 5 - Knobtown. 5 - Node # Node470/ # 6 - Colbern/Bannister redevelopment at Noland Rd/MO 350. Take advantagerecreation of amenities with higherdensity residential. greenway. Providecommercial with support high-densityresidential Node # 4 - Westridge 4 - Node # node definitionnorth of350. Thisa compact node. becomes MO is Take advantage or eliminateTakeor advantageor confluenceby convertingtrail to (RR) a Given transportation goals to alignsouth, 350 E & W togetherthe to East of Westridge, transitionfreeway/expressway. to from arterial Create commercial activity to support higherdensity residential. Transportation improvements. Regional commercial node. Brickyard Rd. Brickyard KCMO Southeast- Little Blue Valley Segment KCMO SoutheastUpland - Segment 5 January 12, 2007 January 12, Proposed Land Use2 Map - Southeast2 of Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r

Noland Rd.

Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas 4 Limit Corporate Raytown High School Raytown South

Westridge Rd.

E. 83rd St. 83rd E. E. 75th St. 75th E.

Redevelopexisting, outmoded alongcorridor. properties commercial at majornodes intersections. Develop mixed use Provideinfrastructureresidentialto valley to kick off move up housing. move up and higher end Redevelop existing housingmarket. it to allow to compete in open an ProvideTargetalongassets existing businesses corridor. that are opportunitiessite/building for upgrades. Consolidate vacant to underdevelopedand bring to highest, properties best use standard. Increase taxmunicipalities. base of Provide forconnectors. pedestrian Proposed Plan Use Land

atchline Northwest atchline M Land Use Categories

The Proposed Land Use Plan defines ten (10) land use categories:

Estate/Large Lot Residential± those uses focused on single family dwelling at 2 units to the acre or less (gross). Including estates, farms, and other large lot single family living units.

Single Family Residential± those uses focused on attached and detached single family dwellings of above 2 units to the acre in density. Allowable density should be determined by several factors: proximity to other uses, availability of transportation infrastructure, accessibility, access to utility infrastructure, surrounding zoning, intent of the land use plan.

Multifamily Residential - those uses focused on multifamily dwelling units. Allowable density should be determined by several factors: character, layout and massing of buildings and units, impact on surrounding uses, proximity to other uses, availability of transportation infrastructure, accessibility, access to utility infrastructure, surrounding zoning, intent of the land use plan. Multifamily uses are intended to be used as a transition between more intense uses (commercial, industrial, mixed use) and single family uses. The fit, buffering and relationship to existing residential uses should be studied High Quality Multi-Family Residential Development before approval of any multifamily uses.

Mixed-Use ± Residential± those uses focused on the mix of commercial and residential uses together with minor office uses allowed as an integrated development.

Mixed-Use ± Office± those uses focused on the mix of commercial and office uses together with minor residential uses allowed as an integrated development.

Commercial - those uses related to commerce, including retail, service oriented commercial, hotel and motel, shopping, auto and repair.

Office± those uses focused on office as a primary use without a commercial component, including office and professional office, doctors and medical office, funeral homes, etc.

Industrial / Warehousing± those uses focused on manufacturing, warehousing and shipping of goods and services. Includes warehousing, storage units, industrial manufacturing, and machining.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 58 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Public / Institutional± those uses focused on the public good, municipal facilities, institution, and public education. Includes city offices, utility facilities, hospitals, churches, public schools, etc.

Open Space± those uses dedicated to parks, recreation and trails. Includes city parks, ball fields, preserved open space, trails, golf courses, etc.

Node Development

One of the key components of the land use plan is the development of mixed use nodes at significant crossroads or intersections. These nodes are indicted on the Proposed Land Use Plan, (Refer to map, pages 56 -57) and are located at:

Node # 1 - 63rd St. Node # 2 - Blue Ridge Node # 3 - Raytown Rd. Node # 4 - Westridge Node # 5 ± Knobtown (Noland Road) Node # 6 - 470/ Colbern/Bannister Example: Town Center Mixed Use Node

The mixed use nodes are placed at key transportation intersections, where commercial uses dominate, but also where second tier office and second and third story office and residential uses could extend the activity level of the area. Additionally, these mixed use nodes function as gathering spots for civic uses, public uses, and public transportation systems developed now and in the future. Example: Node Development at major transportation intersection

DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT

There are current areas of opportunity along the corridor ripe for development or redevelopment, or areas ready for development and redevelopment currently, and once other land use, transportation or aesthetic strategies are developed. A series of key strategies was developed to encourage capitalizing opportunities in the corridor:

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 59 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Consolidate smaller vacant properties into larger, contiguous properties. · Rehabilitate and redevelop individual business sites on narrow or restricted properties. · Redevelop neighborhoods that have inadequate utilities, sidewalks, streetscape, and outdated housing. · Develop corridor guidelines to allow for the redevelopment of multiple ownership properties. · Develop key infrastructure and utilities for properties undeveloped because of lack of infrastructure. · Provide for the utilization of incentive and creative financing solutions to assist in the redevelopment of properties, upgrading of existing properties, and redevelopment of neighborhoods. · Create a Corridor Plan Organization to guide redevelopment efforts, assist in developing funding sources, and implement the plan.

Land Development and Redevelopment Areas

The Land Development and Redevelopment Areas on the Development and Redevelopment Opportunities Plan (Refer to map, pages 61-62) indicate potential project locations for development or redevelopment. The plan indicates an approximate area, whether assemblage of properties is necessary and type of property, and a list of suggested uses in the proposed project area. Site analysis will be required to determine compatibility of use, density and other development issues specific to the development or redevelopment area.

Housing & Residential Development Recommendations

Existing Housing Recommendations

· Rehabilitate existing homes (within plan area) · Provide programs for the implementation of rehabilitation. Options include: · CDC, CHDO programs (use of HOME funds) · Chapter 353 tax abatement · Purchase/rehab/resale program (homebuilders) · Redevelopment authority (LCRA) · First time homebuyers program · Community Improvement Districts, Neighborhood Improvement Districts · Spin-off improvements from commercial Tax Increment Financing projects

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 60 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r t

Project Boundary E. 59th St. Blue Ridge Blvd.

I - 435 Matchline Southeas

Baptis H H C H Church D Aquila I F G J D B K A F E YMCA H H James Reed Rd. Raytown Rd. E. 75th St. Raytown Rd.

Raytown Corporate Limits

Kansas City E. 67th St. E. Gregory Blvd. Corporate 63rd63rd Street Limits KCMO Northwest Segment Raytown Segment Land Development and Redevelopment Areas

A Development Area E Development Area I Redevelopment Area: Median Assemble vacant and single home owner properties. Assemble large vacant property. Assemble large number of properties from existing NORTH 0 500 1000 2000 Suggested uses: Suggested use: businesses, school district, corporations. - Residential LEGEND: - Residential Suggested uses: - Commercial, retail Project Boundary B Redevelopment Area F Redevelopment Area: West Gateway 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Assemble vacant and commercial properties. Redevelop both sides as front door. J Redevelopment Area: Mixed Use Nodes Roadway Suggested uses: - Property is generally assembled with existing Redevelop nodes of mixed use activity including: Corporate Limit Line - Commercial, mixed use office, public retailers and vacant car dealers - Civic/governmental transportation access point. Suggested uses: Key Development Opportunity Strategies - Commercial, retail - Housing - increased urban density 1. Develop Mixed-Use Nodes to increase the walkability and - Transportation/multimodal hubs, connectivity of landuses, surrounding neighborhoods, and C Redevelopment Area (park and ride, etc.) the transportation system. Assemblage/partnership of existing developed retail, G Rehabilitation and Infill Redevelopment Area: Narrow Depth West multifamily, vacant, and mined properties. No assemblage. Get program to assist existing owners upgrade 2. Redevelop large, outdated, and under developed existing K Development Area Suggested uses: facilities, accept new landscape, signage site planning, access properties. No assemblage required. - Mixed use town center recommendation. Infill outdated or outmoded sites. Suggested use: Suggested use: 3. Consolidate smaller vacant properties into larger, contiguous - Mix of medium/high density residential - Existing commercial uses, infill commercial/office - Commercial properties. - Redeveloped retail commercial town center - Community/civic center H Residential neighborhoods under redevelopment plan for 4. Rehabilitate and redevelop individual business sites on - Office neighborhoods. narrow or restricted properties. Rehabillitation and infill. Assist homeowners with program for 5. Redevelop neighborhoods that have inadequate utilities, D Development Area rehabilitation. Upgrade to quality and types of housing stock is sidewalks, streetscape, and outdated housing. Assemble vacant and single home owner properties, needed. redevelop existing motel property. 6. Develop corridor guidelines to allow for the redevelopment Suggested uses: of multiple ownership properties. - Commercial and mixed use frontage Development & Redevelopment Opportunities Map 7. Develop key infrastructure and utilities for properties Northwest 1 of 2 undeveloped be cause of lack of infrastructure. January 12, 2007 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r Noland Rd.

E. 75th St.

Northwest Westridge Rd.

M Unity HO Village Matchline

N L R L Q

Raytown South Noland Rd. M H High School P

Brickyard Rd. Project Boundary

E. 83rd St. Kansas City Corporate Limits Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Raytown Corporate Limits Kansas City Corporate Limits E. Bannister Rd. I - 470 KCMO Southeast - Little Blue Valley Segment KCMO Southeast - Upland Segment Land Development and Redevelopment Areas H Residential neighborhoods under redevelopment plan for neighborhoods. O Development Area: Little Blue Valley Villa/Townhomes Reclaim quarry. Rehabillitation and infill. Assist homeowners with program for NORTH 0 500 1000 2000 rehabilitation. Upgrade to quality and types of housing stock is needed. Suggested use: - Residential LEGEND: L Redevelopment Area - Neighborhood Commercial Project Boundary Redevelop as multiple ownership under guidelines for corridor redevelopment. 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Suggested uses: P Development Area Roadway - Commercial, light industry Assemble 5-6 large properties of vacant, and reclaim quarried property. Corporate Limit Line Suggested use: Key Development Opportunity Strategies M Development Area: Little Blue Valley Residential - Commercial/retail Assemble vacant or large lot single home property. 1. Develop Mixed-Use Nodes to increase the walkability and connectivity of landuses, surrounding neighborhoods, and Suggested use: Q Development Area the transportation system. - Market rate single family housing Suggested use: - Develop neighborhood commercial at interchange 2. Redevelop large, outdated, and under developed existing N Redevelopment Area: Knobtown properties. Assemble property from existing retail business, office, and vacant property. R Development Area Suggested use: 3. Consolidate smaller vacant properties into larger, contiguous Suggested use: properties. - Neighborhood/village mixed use center - Attached villas/townhomes 4. Rehabilitate and redevelop individual business sites on narrow or restricted properties.

5. Redevelop neighborhoods that have inadequate utilities, sidewalks, streetscape, and outdated housing.

6. Develop corridor guidelines to allow for the redevelopment Development & Redevelopment Opportunities Map of multiple ownership properties. 7. Develop key infrastructure and utilities for properties Southeast 2 of 2 undeveloped be cause of lack of infrastructure. January 12, 2007 New Housing Recommendations

· Identification of potential sites for new development · Fill gap in lack of move up housing · Target markets · Move-up housing · Young families · Seniors over age 55

Commercial/Retail/Industrial/Other Recommendations

· Because of the existing strength and historic significance of auto related uses and services in the corridor, they should continue to be accommodated. All auto related uses and services should be developed to upgraded standards of site planning, architecture, landscape and aesthetics. These standards should be developed and included in the new design guidelines for the corridor. Future development should be consistent with the recommendations of the ³Aesthetic Plan.´ Additional used car lots should be discouraged.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 63 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Transportation Plan

INTRODUCTION

The Transportation Plan explores the existing transportation framework, existing access to properties, safety, and proposes modifications to each to create a safer, higher quality transportation corridor that can be shared by the adjacent home and business owners and commuters alike. These proposed modifications are depicted in a series of plans and diagrams, following.

The Transportation strategies were developed based on comment from public input sessions, the advisement of the Client Team and Steering Committee, the development of the proposed land use plan and the opportunities identified from the existing conditions analysis.

Because 350 Highway / Blue Parkway is a State of Missouri Highway, it is under the jurisdiction of the Missouri Department of Transportation. It is owned, and maintained by MoDOT, and access is granted or denied by their authority. Historically, MoDOT¶s focus has been on moving traffic as efficiently and as safely as possible. In recent years, concern for the interconnectivity of land use and aesthetic considerations and transportation issues has emerged, enabling the creation of studies such as this, where transportation, land use, and aesthetics are deeply intertwined.

Similar to the Land Use Plan, the Transportation Plan recommendations are long term in nature. Because of the complexity, size, cost, long timeline, and disruption to the corridor for the proposed major transportation strategies, these strategies will be the most difficult to implement. They are large in scale, and have many regulatory layers to navigate for a project to come to fruition. Despite this, the potential positive impact to the corridor on adjacent property owners, safety, access, land use, and aesthetics warrants short and long term focus.

The Transportation Plan should be used to help guide MoDOT officials, elected officials, city staff members, and decision makers in designating projects for potential funding and support, and through their evaluation processes when new development proposals are presented for the corridor.

Because of the significance of the roadway and its impact on the corridor, the majority of the transportation strategies are focused on it and the major intersections along its length.

Roadway ± East of Bannister Road

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 64 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 BACKGROUND

As described in the existing conditions summary, the roadway itself is the major contributing factor for the existing character and nature of the corridor. The roadway itself is the major contributing factor for the existing character and nature of the corridor. The initial design complied with accepted standards of the times. The routes expansion to a 4 lane divided highway, put into place more modern standards, new lanes were separated from the original lanes creating developed land in the median, and numerous intersections.

Another defining feature with tremendous impact on safety, and impact to the surrounding land use is the way the highway cuts diagonally across the urban grid. This divorced the grid on the north side from the south side, creating skewed intersections, and odd shaped lots adjacent to the roadway.

There also is significant change of use, of function, of character in the eight (8) miles of corridor in the study. On the west, the corridor is a standard controlled access urban expressway. In Raytown, the road functions as an accessible commercial corridor. To the east, in the Little Blue River Valley, the road functions as a rural expressway, and further east to Lee¶s Summit, functions as an urban expressway again.

Rail Bridge ± West of Noland Raod APPROACH

During evaluation of the existing conditions, the roadway was analyzed for function, use, safety concerns, access, and aesthetics. Several issues became clear:

The roadway has differing functions along its length. It is an expressway at the west and east ends, and an urban parkway in the middle. It balances business and commercial uses in the middle with the through put of the commuter traffic along its length.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 65 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 The roadway itself has limited direct impact to the surrounding uses in the KCMO portions of the parkway. In these segments, access is limited, and the roadway is grade separated from the uses. The greatest impact of the roadway itself is to allow easy and convenient access to the interstate roadway system. In the Raytown segment, the roadway is the primary commercial corridor for the City. It is not grade separated from the surrounding uses, and all properties have access on the roadway. This creates conflict between the two primary users of the roadway: Commuters versus Community.

In order to operate efficiently and to the benefit of all parties, the roadway has to balance the interests of its commuter function (efficient, safe, high speed, through traffic), with the community function of the Raytown core (main commercial service & tax generating corridor in the City). Additionally, it is the most visible part of Raytown to rest of KC Metro, and represents the gateways to and from Kansas City and Raytown for many users. The recommended improvements made to the roadway will have the greatest impact in the Raytown segment of the corridor.

It is easy to understand that what is good for commuters, may not be what is good for the community. It became obvious that it is necessary to balance the commuter and community needs where necessary along the roadway. Key components to balance: safety, intersections (signals, geometries, etc.), reasonable access for all parcels, incorporation of multi-modal transportation where possible and safe, and aesthetics.

Safety

Safety issues in the corridor are the number concern for the public. Safety issues are many and varied, but are made significantly more complex because of the commuter vs. community issue illustrated above. Recommended approaches to balance these issues include:

· Address accident hot spots. · Regulate speed through reduction where necessary, and enforcement of existing limits. · Modification of cross-section could address safety, access, infrastructure and aesthetic issues in segments where it would be beneficial. (Raytown segment, Knobtown area) · Remove flow restrictions, if possible, at Rail Bridge at Knobtown and half access at Blue Ridge. · Provide dedicated circulation routes for non-vehicular modes of transportation to navigate corridor safely. Provide circulation internal to development, connected to existing neighborhoods and adjacent properties. Providing safe crossings of the highway and intersections is critical.

Intersections

Intersections were also of great concern to the public. The issues identified include safety, ease of navigation, time spent waiting, and ability to negotiate safely as a pedestrian. Approaches to address these concerns include:

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 66 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Narrow median at major signalized intersections. · Modify to a 4-way movement instead of 8-way (modification of wide median separated skewed intersections) · Curb & gutter · Reduce unsignalized, full access intersection · Alternate intersections geometry · Coordinated signalization · Continuous right hand movements · Modify for safety 1st, use 2nd, access 3rd, and aesthetics 4th · Multi-mode incorporated in to normal flow of intersections · Safe bike/walk crossings · Planned bike lane (crossings) · Pedestrian walks ± safe distance

Access

Access has a tremendous impact on the existing roadway. It is controlled on the east and west end of the corridor, but in the Raytown segment, and in Knobtown, access to the roadway exists for all properties. Access is critical for the viability of the commercial uses in Raytown, and the future redevelopment potential of the Knobtown area. But the abundance of uncontrolled access points along the roadway length also creates numerous conflicts with safety concerns. A thoughtful and reasonable approach should be taken with any proposed access management plan. Approaches to address access management are:

· Base access management upon new land use plan. · Create shared access points/drives. · Redevelop larger continuous parcels to get consolidated access to redevelop areas. · Install curb & gutter. · Provide dedicated turning/accel./dual lanes. · Understand property owner issues. · Provide alternatives to modification of access.

Multi-Modal

The development of the corridor as a multi-modal system was also found to be important. The auto, public transportation (bus, light rail, etc), pedestrians, and bikes all would have to find a common ground if their development is to be included in the corridor. There are major safety conflicts in mixing modes with the existing roadway along the corridor. The following approaches are used to address those issues:

· Safety is key. · Utilize curbing to delineate for safe pedestrian areas. · Utilize crosswalks, of contrasting material, with pedestrian activated signals, to decrease pedestrian crossing conflict with vehicles.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 67 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Provide for accessible new public transportation facilities in mixed use node areas. · Incorporate existing public transit system into developments along corridor. · Provide buffering, setback for comfort and safety. · For bikes & pedestrians ± safe crossing is key, parallel travel is less important.

Aesthetics

The aesthetic approach is detailed in the Aesthetics Plan, beginning on page 82.

TRANSPORTATION PLAN

Through design charettes with the Client Team and the Steering Committee, and based upon the strategies identified in the market positioning strategy, the Transportation and Infrastructure Plan, and Major Proposed Transportation Improvements Plan was developed.

Major Proposed Transportation Improvements

The Major Proposed Transportation Improvements Plan (Refer to map, pages 69 -70) identifies the five major transportation improvements proposed in this study. Additional improvements and their location are detailed on the Transportation and Infrastructure Plan (Refer to map, pages 72 -73).

The five major projects identified are (from west to east):

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 68 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007

t Southeas Matchline * * 1 1 Baptist Church YMCA

Raytown Rd. 2000 Aquila 1000 500 0 2

NORTH LEGEND: Corporate Limit Line Existing 350 Proposed Realignment350 of Proposed MajorTransportation Project Area Widening of Rail Bridge Interchange EnhancementAdded - toRamp Full Access Access Project Boundary E. 75th St. 75th E.

Raytown Corporate Limits

Kansas City Corporate Limits

1 * Blvd. Gregory E.

James Reed Rd.

narrow median narrow median to reduce the accidents vacated in this area. Utilize 4. Rail Bridge4.Knobtown.at Widen or removeof rail-bridge west Knobtown to allow for additional lane and storm sewer improvements. Realign east bound lanes to run parallel to west bound lanes with ground for redevelopment. 5. Realignment5. of350 Highway/ Blue Parkway westRoad. of Bannister

E. 59th St. 59th E. E. 67th St. 67th E. Blue Ridge Blvd. Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r January 12, 2007 January 12, Concepts2 Northwestof - 1 Major Proposed Major Proposed Improvement Transportation KCMO NorthwestSegment RaytownSegment

Project Boundary 63rd Street 63rd

I - 435 Parkway.Add ramp access interchange. to make Blue Ridge a full Because property of limited availability, requirements, geometric and run parallel to east bound lanes Raytown with narrow median. Realign Road the vacated to create a non-skewed, four way Utilize intersection. to run to east parallel bound lanes with narrow median. Realign the Westridge to create a non-skewed,Utilize four way intersection. vacated ground for redevelopment. The five major projects identified are (from east): west to a single ROW, proposedexisting point interchange is as a possible this intersection. solution at Realignment2. of350 Highwaymedian / Blue Parkway wide at separationand eastRaytownRoad. west of bound Realign west lanesto land for redevelopment. Realignment3. of350 Highwaymedian / Blue Parkway wide at separation east and west of Westridge Road. Realign west bound lanes Major Transportation Recommendations Major Transportation 1. Interchange1. enhancement Blue Ridge and 350 Highwayat Blue / * * 1 1 2000 1000 500 0

NORTH LEGEND: Project Boundary Corporate Limit Line Existing 350 Proposed Realignment350 of Proposed MajorTransportation Project Area Widening of Rail Bridge Interchange EnhancementAdded - toRamp Full Access Access I - 470 - I Unity Village

KCMO SoutheastUplandSegment -

Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Corporate Summit Lee's Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas 5

Noland Rd.

E. Bannister Rd. Bannister E. Project Boundary Project

4. Rail Bridge4.Knobtown.at Widen or removeof rail-bridge west narrow median to reduce the accidents vacated in this area. Utilize Knobtown to allow for additional lane and storm sewer improvements. Realign east bound lanes to run parallel to west bound lanes with ground for redevelopment. 5. Realignment5. of350 Highway/ Blue Parkway westRoad. of Bannister Brickyard Rd. Brickyard KCMO Southeast- Blue Little Valley Segment 4 * Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r January 12, 2007 January 12, Major Proposed Major Proposed Improvement Transportation Concepts2 Northwestof - 1 3

Noland Rd.

Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas Raytown Corporate Limit Corporate Raytown High School Raytown South

Westridge Rd.

E. 83rd St. 83rd E. E. 75th St. 75th E.

The five major projects identified are (from east): west to Parkway.Add ramp access interchange. to make Blue Ridge a full Because property of limited availability, requirements, geometric and Realignment2. of350 Highwaymedian / Blue Parkway wide at run parallel to east bound lanes Raytown with narrow median. Realign Road the vacated to create a non-skewed, four way Utilize intersection. land for redevelopment. to run to east parallel bound lanes with narrow median. Realign the Westridge to create a non-skewed,Utilize four way intersection. vacated ground for redevelopment.

existing ROW, a single ROW, existing point interchangeproposed is as a possible this intersection. solution at separationand eastRaytownRoad. west of bound Realign west lanesto Realignment3. of350 Highwaymedian / Blue Parkway wide at separation east and west of Westridge Road. Realign west bound lanes Major Transportation Recommendations Major Transportation 1. Interchange1. enhancement Blue Ridge and 350 Highwayat Blue /

atchline Northwest atchline M These projects have the greatest potential positive impact on the transportation system in the corridor. These include safety improvement, visibility improvements, access improvement, and additional adjacent redevelopment opportunities.

These projects will also require significant efforts in planning, design, funding and implementation to accomplish. Additionally, there will be significant additional study required for these proposed major improvements to become reality.

Transportation and Infrastructure Recommendations

The proposed Transportation and Infrastructure Plan (Refer to map, pages 72 -73) identifies the key strategies for transportation improvements in the corridor, including the Major Proposed Transportation Improvements. Significant additional transportation improvements are recommended. They include:

· Intersection improvements. · Incorporation of multi-modal transportation into the planned transportation improvements. · Managment of access along corridor. · Development of local sanitary sewer in non-sewered areas within study boundary (Little Blue Valley). · Development of storm sewer utilities for non-sewered areas in Raytown and Knobtown areas. · Development of curb and gutter for the Raytown Segment, both on 350 Highway/Blue Parkway, and adjacent neighborhoods. Develop these improvements with the new storm sewer utilities mentioned above.

ACCESS MANAGEMENT

As indicated previously, access management is an important component in the study of the roadway and its safety, land use, aesthetic and economic viability. Access management is the management and control of interchanges, intersections, and crossings, driveways and access points along a roadway. It is used to prevent or limit future conflict points or in areas where significant conflict exists and where changes are recommended to occur.

Providing access management for new or undeveloped roadways is relatively simple. Recognized standards have been developed for the design and construction of these facilities and they can be easily applied. Retrofitting an existing roadway with numerous driveways and cross streets to a new roadway standard is unrealistic and in most cases not even possible. Therefore, a standard of reasonableness should be applied in identifying access management opportunities on 350 Highway / Blue Parkway.

Guidelines

The Missouri Department of Transportation has access management guidelines that are applied to their roadways based upon type of roadway. A graphic depiction of the relevant guidelines

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 71 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007

t Southeas Matchline U K J Baptist Church YMCA Raytown Rd. 2000 Q Aquila 1000 G 500 M U 0 N I NORTH LEGEND: Project Boundary 350 Highway / BlueParkway Roadway Corporate Limit Line

R E. 75th St. 75th E. T H U Raytown Corporate Limits

Kansas City Corporate Limits H E Realign existing westbound350(after lanes Highway proposed majorrealignment is completed) to connect to 75th as local road. Majorroad and infrastructure changes at primary node.Significant studyand for the realignment redesign will be required. Reduced speedRaytown limit - entire 35 segmentto mph. Regionaldetention stormcreate as facility - amenity. Pipedstormutility on roadway. Burialoverhead of utilities. Stormguttersin neighborhoods. utility,curbs & U N R S T Q M B

Blue Ridge Blvd. E. Gregory Blvd. Gregory E.

A James Reed Rd. C

E. 59th St. 59th E. E. 67th St. 67th E. Blue Ridge Blvd. C - Curb & gutter - Piped storm drainage - Realign 'Y' intersection Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r Curb & gutterimprovements for roadway - urban section. Realignmentwestboundof 350, eastbound southtoparallel 350. Applicationaccessof managementprinciples reduce to dangerous accessof points,ease increase safety,increase and ingress/egressconsolidation - & Curb intojoint drives. gutter in urban section. Realignmentlocalof arterial(Raytown Road)to as closeto a degree90 intersection as possible. Road extensionadjacent toAquilaold 350 to to connect eastboundintersectionSignalized350 realignment lane. at access from YMCA. Newly signalized intersection. Modifyroad. existing westboundaccess lane to outer I J H K L E G January 12, 2007 January 12, Transportation2 Infrastructureof & 1 NorthwestPlan - KCMO NorthwestSegment RaytownSegment

Project Boundary

63rd Street 63rd 63rd Street 63rd - Remove access to(SE Wal-Mart from 350 corner) access from vacant autoshowroom- Remove (SE corner) - Add ramp at SE Blue Ridgeof Blvd. corner interchange - Singlepointinterchange (see concepts) diamond - Narrow w/ roundaboutconcepts) (see Short range options:Short range options: Long range - Landscape street trees - Median pavers - Ornamental lighting Sidewalks/crosswalkssignalized- at intersections - Park & ride Connect- to neighborhood walks) (trails, - Connectretail/mixed to area use Potential to bring changes urban together. lanesTransition from expressway to urbanIntroduction parkway. of and curb drainage. Interchange enhancements. I - 435 Streetscape enhancements. Multimodal transportation node. Transportation & Infrastructure Recommendations & Infrastructure Transportation A B C D 2000 1000 500 0

NORTH LEGEND: Project Boundary 350 Highway / BlueParkway Roadway Corporate Limit Line I - 470 - I Unity Village KCMO SoutheastUplandSegment - AA

Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Corporate Summit Lee's Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas FF X Utilizeexisting sectionshoulder with from Bridge,RiverLittleeast to I-470. Blue Implementreach sanitaryto sewer plan developmentnotareas currently served. improvementsbridge.sewerStorm rail at Affordablein base material for projects corridor. Sanitary sewerdevelopment is needed to open development opportunities in valley. Bike and pedestrian connectionsand to needed through valley. Y

EE FF

Noland Rd. BB CC DD GG FF

W Rd. Bannister E. Project Boundary Project BB

GG Brickyard Rd. Brickyard Z - Curb & gutter - Access managementand of intersection redevelopmentarea - If bridge remains redo a rail line, bridge to accomodate storm drainage lane improvements - If bridgeis removed,it opens up greaterredevelopment potential area and Noland Road KCMO Southeast- Blue Little Valley Segment DD Vacate or utilize existingutilize Vacate or converted350 eastbound/westbound ROW Utilizeconverted 350 roadway as internal developmentdriveas much as possible, depending onuse. Redevelop Knobtown,NolandMO Road and 350 transportation elements. Rail bridge- choke point roadway/storm for water. Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r AA X Y Z AA

Noland Rd. GG EE CC January 12, 2007 January 12, Transportation2 of Infrastructure2 & SoutheastPlan - V Y W X O

G Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas Raytown Corporate Limit Corporate Raytown High School Raytown South T P H

Westridge Rd. - Curb & gutter - Piped storm drainage

Curb & gutterimprovements for roadway - urban section. Realignment ofwestbound 350,south to parallel eastbound 350. Application ofaccess managementprinciples to reducedangerouspoints, access increase safety, ingress/egressofconsolidationand - increase ease into jointgutter drives.Curbsection. in urban & Realign WestridgeRoad at Highway 350 to as intersectionclosea 90 degree as possible. Connect existing westboundor landroad to local use changes. vacate based future land Burialoverhead of utilities. gutterimprovements.Curb & Realign 350eastbound, northparallel to be with westbound350. E

E. 83rd St. 83rd E.

E. 75th St. 75th E.

T E P V H G O W Transportation & Infrastructure Recommendations & Infrastructure Transportation

atchline Northwest atchline M S L are included, (Refer to map, pages 75 -76). These guidelines are applied as is possible to new roadways and redeveloping existing MoDOT roadways to manage their efficiency and safety.

These guidelines can not be applied across the board on existing roadways. But they may be used as a tool to indicate potential conflicts on an existing roadway. This was done for the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway corridor.

The Roadway Access Analysis Map (Refer to map, pages 77 -78), indicates the location of the existing driveway locations on the roadway. It also indicates the number of access points per mile for individual segments of the roadway. Additionally, the map indicates the severity of potential conflicts based upon the rule of thumb:

0-9 access points per mile = conflicts are few, access is managed

10-20 access points per mile = numerous conflicts exist, access should be better managed.

21+ access points per mile = significant conflict exists, resulting in significant reduction in safety, efficiency and ability to navigate access to properties. Access needs to be managed to reduce the conflicts.

The application of this standard to the roadway indicated the Raytown Segment has significant conflict, as high as 74 access points/per mile adjacent to the Raytown Road intersection. This indicates the need to develop alternatives to the existing access of the roadway to reduce potential conflicts. This is supported by the traffic accident data analyzed in the Existing Conditions Report.

In addition to simply looking at the number of drive locations in a segment, the intersection offsets recommended in the guidelines were applied to those driveways. Based upon the amount of overlap of suggested offsets for access points, it again becomes very clear that 350 Highway / Blue Parkway does not meet the standards as described in the guidelines. Again, significant access conflicts exist on the Raytown Segment of the corridor.

Because of the magnitude of the issue, and the detail required to explore property specific issues along 350 Highway / Blue Parkway, preparing an access management plan is not within the scope of this study. However, because it is tied very closely to the land use, transportation and aesthetics issues described in this report, Conceptual Access Management Techniques are presented as a starting point for addressing access management in the corridor, (Refer to map, page 79). Developing a detailed access management plan for the corridor should be an important next step for the redevelopment of the corridor.

The Transportation Plan proposes both major and minor improvements to the transportation and infrastructure system. These improvements, in safety, access, incorporation of multiple modes of transportation, utilities and sewers, will have great positive impact on the corridor.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 74 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007

acln Southeast Matchline

d t

d i b

c s

(

d b

(

w a

s t

t i

s t c i

c d s

i e n

b a

a 4 4 0

t - '

. s

i s

i s d i y s - 4d 4 0 ' a m a y 4 4 0 w s - ' e .) 2 w y v in / e a .) i 1 w in r m i v ) r e m n. d d v i e d i d m n t r e e n s d t d

4 4 0 e e e - ' s

n ty s e g min.)

e a w s te d

e e

g t g

wg u g

w e s

e ( u

) e

) t s

. e g . g

n s

n g n

v i i b i w u e

i s s (

m t

s r o e b

d ( r

e d d c

t e d s n

eb e

s (

n iz t a

e t

l n e

g a s

e i

s a

n d g t

s g n

e u i i

s s a

Baptist

( g t

n Church w s i

d e t s g

g e u

in w e s

t b s (

e YMCA

s b e - 4 4 0 ' 2000

. c s

ro i y

n a

c m a w t

d 2 e i .) / v in d e 1 i - 4 4 0' z r m y s Raytown Rd. i l d a a d e 4 4 0 w n n - ' e .) 4 4 0 t y s- 4 4 0 ' ins - ' g e v y i s a s i y r am e w s e a w e .) d d

n g w e .) 4 4 0 w n

v i ) e n s - '

e Aquila

t i . v i e g n t y

r min i

v u 4 4404 0 ma e e ' ' r

i - - e

d md s s s w

r s 4 b y y d d ) e 4 0 ( - ) '

w . d de a a e e s .

n e n e y

t t n g i

n e w w 4 4 0 vt a

i - ' w i n e

e c s ) )s

e e e m

t . . t r

y wg s

m n in in

b e e a ) e 0 u 4 4

s v v d

a d e . - ' e

i i e e 4

. d t m wm in -s 4 0 '

r r s e s v

i g e y e i b w s in ) g (

d e . 4 4 0 t ya

e d d d d - ' w m

g n r a 4

t s e 4 0 g

i t w - ' 1000

m v e w

e e y s s

u i d e

d c

n g n a w y )

s m 4 0 eu .

t r t e 4 4 4 0 e

s ) - ' e

2 - ' n e a .n

b e i

s s

e u v

e n ( w s

e e n

s s d b

/ d y i t a

y v w ( i g

s )

e t m g . w

b a

1 e e i r ( e a )

e e

n s s

e e e

i e m i .

n g r t

t v w d

g c i w d d n

c i

e e v

g )

d u

e e

n m

w r . ) d

u e e . i e 4 4 0 s n

c n m- '

a n

n r s

g g

t t i eg s

v d b t a

n i t

s d w e v

i n y ( e i s

( d t dt - 4 4 0' u u i e e e a

m g t

r r e m a s s d

i t

e s

n g

e d

s s e

s t s w y u i b b e w

d d ne ( ( s d d c

d t ae 4 0

t e 4

e g

s -) '

s e n . e

e b s

g g

e n e e w n(

n u s w y

t i a

e t v

e g

n c i e )

t a w e .

s 500

i e s

e i

b e s

n m n s r

( i

w g

g c

d v u w

i e a

s a g

e d

e )

e e

t e

n m

d w .

e 4 0 e g

- 4 ' r s b s

s n

i i

t ( s c s

v e s

g t

d d

u b d

e n g

w y i d

w ( s

n t

o a e m

t r e 4 4 0 d b

a g

e e

( - '

r n s c s

t w s 4

0b t

u 4 d

e (

- d 'c u s e y n

e )

c e . s e

d e

s s a

a n s y e e

b n

b n (

c 4 4 0

v ( i 4

w a 4- 0 t ' a

- ' g c i e s

n s w e i

d s t

m e d

e y)

e s s

r wy . n

i a g

a g d

e t

c n ) 4

c a

e i . - 4 w 0 ' e

d v d s

e i u

i ns4 4 e 0

n n w - t '

i g

z wv y s

m i

r e s s

i a ) 0 i d

n ea ) . g

a ( y . w

l er t m n e

d ds a n i

i s

v i g

i t

4 4 0 s e v w e

i d s b

d - ' 4 4 0

a d

i d r ew ms .) -( ' u n em e

r y c s e t e )n

n ee . ye

a i n

n d v d 4 s

d t n 4b a0 e

d i - ' ( si

v c g s a

g w m w i 4 4 0

r e t ' i e

e y w n -

n s m

e e

r ) s s e i

n eg

t t t d a . )

d e y .a

e d

n c

s t

d e de i a n

v u e e s g i

w s

w e i s v i

n i d g

r e s tm .) w

e 4 4 0 n b

a g e m t

w e - ' e n r

e t

t ( n e s )

t i . v d s e

d g

u i

e s d y e

g d n

e i

g i w

s a d

u m v

w e s 4 0

e r e

e 4i 4 0 b

c - ' '

n g t

( - e e g m

t s e t n w

s s r e

b d

d n y t

g y(

u e

e )

e u e

w d . e s g a a a d

e e

t s

w s n e

t c i

s 4

n b 4 0 4 4 0

ws v

t ( ' ' t - - e

t w e e i i

g n

(

c e sn s d e

u ) m 4 e

e e e y).r t 4 0

e . y - '

s a

e e

u e

g n

t a a w

s n s

i i g

b v s d a c w d y e v s

(

s e

i i i 4 4 0 4 0

t g

b t - 4' NORTH

( w w a

d - '

mm g

t s e e

s n

r r e s

i ) 4 4 0

g y

. . ) d - ' u

e a e y .

a w t w e

t e

c n

i d d d d a n s

t i a g i

s )

v s g

w y i 4

b v e e c

4 s 0 . s s n

( - ' i i i

e e w b a n

s w ( d

n n m m

t i 0

u v 4

n a

m r r 4

e t y ) - '

t e

e . )

i e

) e t e w .s

. s e

a ne m

d s d

e d t d r yn

e b s

n c i )

s v e

( i

2 i . d s v c g

i w i a

i w b n e e n

d d

d i (

m n / m

e n re e n v) m e .) 4 4 0

e g

t r i.t nw - '

d a m it e

ma 1 c n

d r e s )

n e t

d g d i . u

v s d e e

e t e g

w d y

s i s

w i e s n

t c n

t a i

d d d i

e v s

g m

t s e e d

e b a g

s t r

n ne i s e (

e t e

e g t t we m 4 0 u 4

r a - ' e

u d s

e d n

e t

g g

e s )

g s e e te .

w w s

u s s y i

b e d d n

g (

c i 4 4 0

n e t t ( g

e v s d g s g a

e - '

t e

w i e 4

u ( - e4n s0'

n m

e u

t w

e rs y e

e u e e s t g

s e

0 a g

w y a

( t

c w )

s s .

e d e du

b b

2 e s

a g

i g t (

( n

n n t w

s 3 v i d

e s

e i 4 4 0 b

, a

w t

e ) e u

e a g n e g (

e - . ' u 4

g 4 0

t t m

1 w r s.) n - '

e s

n s

c i s

y e s

u i

b v

n g

e b i - g t

w y

i d s ( a ( i

v d d n

n d

s i r ams

b g t

e s a

(

e e

w m a

e e

r n

s t

nd wd s

k u e t

c )

b s s

e a

e . i

o d i g )

d ( .

d d

e t

n s

n i e

a b s

c 4 4n 0

r v n s - ( ' i

t i

e i e v

t g d

s n

n t

e e i

c r t m t e

y e

e s m

u s s e

r a

a i

b i

e t

s d d n

d c

e d

g s

e w s

d b d

e a w (

n n

d e t

n t e )

et . a g e

n t

a a w nt

d u 4

e g i 4 0

i - s '

v i

w c 4 r s g

i t s 4 0

s -d ' e

b s g m n

g d t r y s

e ( u e y

e a

- u

d e t e e d a s

e 4 4 0

t b - ' 4

w ( g

s 0 i 4

w s - '

e c g d

b w ) s

a n e w ( y . g m t

e y )

t e nn ) . t a n.

i g

e v ai n

mc 0 i u 4 e

n e v 4i

s w d -t '

n u

c i

e m wsn

r s

t ) s

e b y . m

e e n (

s r s ) e d

a .

e d b e n t

de a (

e v a i n d s

g dt i g e 0

i v i 4 4

e w w

g e e - ' i d

ms s

n i

r c e m

u t t ) d eg

w c . y n r

s n tn

e d a

w d s

t ( i n

v u d

e e d

i a s

0 e w a

e e s m e e b s

n r t i

t ( )

2 e n e . e t s d

b e ni

d d e d g 4 3 s i

e v 4 0 e

, w - ' . g

i s s

w e 4 4 0

1 g t i c - '

e n my

e r e

g tt s e

- n a

u y

e d

g d

s e

m a a w

g s

s t w 4

w 4 0 b

c e s - ' s

g t

( ) e

n w i s. e

k b e g t d

2 t ( yn

e ) u

a e e v . i

/ e u

g a

i e

e s

w n

c i

s 4 4 0

1 b v m a

e w s '

i r c -

g t e ( b

n s

me (

t r )

b n d y .

d a e e

e a n e

d g a

s i d w v t

s e

n s i i b

n c ( w

s g t e t i

n r m d 4

a n en .)- 4 0 '

e a

D t i e

e s s

d da yin

) v s

e t c

d s s e i i

. b

e s e a( d i

n r m

n d

n e t

i e e - 4 4 0 ' a w g

e d

w d t s

e 4)4 0 s

g - . '

c y

i g t

m m w e sa n

yd i

e v

n n

t e g

i t u

e a

d n wa m

u t

e r s e

sg w ) ) b

w e s . . i

e ( in 4 0

s 4

e d d ) n md - ' b g

t i e e

t ( d. s v e

e i t ei n y v u

e e m

e n

s rsc t

i g a

e m s

r c

ge db wd e s g

t w (

g n d )

ud ee t . g e

e t u e

n a e n

s e t v t i

g ( i d e b n s

t i

e g ( s d n m

u 0 w r

b e a g

2 s e e

s d e t d

u 4

3 s

e 4 0 i

, e e - '

( g e

e d

n n w s s

1 t y b

g 4 4 0

a t

c ( - '

s g w

- t a

e s s

i g y u

g n s w

a d e

c e u

s ) 4

e . 4 0

k b e - '

n ( a

i wn n s s

g i

b v

a w y a

e ( )

e i .

s t a

g m

e t n

s i e r v s

c i

i w d

u e s n

b rc d med .)

s a

o D e n 4 t

n d d v ( i - 4 0 '

t s s

r i i t d

a ee m y

n e i

i s a

c t d

dc d

d e e

n w s e

d e )

e a e .

n t

e g t n

s i e v

UGGESTED MIN.)

i i e t d g

m g s m

z .) w r

i e u e

t e

in g

l n d d

s 0 u 4 4 b e m g ( - '

e e

w s

a d n

s t

e y b g t

e ( a

n e

t c s

s e w ) 4 4 0 g

n . - '

s i

e n s

i w e e c )m b

e a .

( d y

g n en 4 4 0 t

tg i a - ' s v s

e i

g a i w s s

t e y 4 e mg

u t w

r c - 4 0 ' g s n

s i sa .) d e

g n b

d d u y

( u e w n

a i

e a v s

s e t i )

s b e . n

( (

e s m 0

t w i n 4 4 e g r

0 v d i - ' e .) s

e e i c d

in 2 s d n my

c r i

w v a

n e s 3 e i

t , n d

r d m w t

s 1 a

a 4

g t ) 4 0

e e

w e e . - '

o - n d s

t d

s ns

t i

g t iy r v d

b e s i e s 4 4 0

e a- '

n s

c u e

i t r m

. k s

i w

s y

e e w e

e b s d d

a ( a ) D 4 4 0 e g

t - n. '

d e

g e s

e e w m i w e n v

y u

a e i t )

e g t

b c a .m g

e r s 2 w n

r b s

n i

(

v u

e w

n t i d

/ g d

e a m

e )

r et . b

1 - u

a e(

s e n

t i v n d c ti

d g s

i w d

e b n

( m

a d r e e g

t s a

n c n.) Raytown

e i 4 0

t d t 4

e d n m - ' e u

n e

ds s e 0 i 4 4

c - '

e e s d a

e t s s y

e t

n n

m s g y( a

t s

e w

e i e

e a a Corporate Limits d

t w g e 4 4 0

e t

g - '

n s

g g

ws s )

i e w c .

u u d

w e y

e ) n

e e e n

st .

g va i

t ( i s n

v b i

( u

e e w m

e 0 w i r 4 4 0 m s

e '

r s )- g e

2 t . b s 1/2 MI. BETWEEN SIGNALIZED 1/2BETWEEN MI. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS d d d(

b c n

w 3 d d yi Kansas City

v u 4

. , e i a e - 4 0 '

i t 1 e n m s

r es t b

a y

n w ( c

- t t

e e a

d s d n )

e s . m i Corporate e e s s d

a n

b e w i

v e 4 4 0 t

k n c i .)- ' e

2 tes s e i

rn m n INTERSECTIONS (S

d g y

e a i vw e

/ s

a Limits

i g d a 4

w d t 4 0 g

1 e t m - '

r s s

t w

g e y d u

b n e

n d e d .) 4 4 0

u t a - '

w ns

b i

n v e ( e

a s y

i s w b n g t

t ( ma t )

a r ee .

i e e

e u e n

e w - 4 4 0'

s s

d v c d i

s s

i d i )

b e c g . e

w ( y

r e e m n

n a

n v a i g

e t

t D t e i

d a g d

w s

w 4 4 0

r t m - ' u

e i e

c s

d s g

t e s)

m e i . n

n d d d y

b t n

( i

v u a 4 e

n i a - 4 0 '

e t e

s s

n s m

r s w i

b t w y

( d 4 e

e 4 0

c ) e e - '

t d a . e d g s s e

n in y

e v w g e u e

e c i a a

w n e )

et t m .

r s g

n t b

s n

w i w (

vg i e

w a

d s d d )

i u .

t t e e 4 4 0

e - '

g m

t n

r s e e

i s i

e v d

b n

e c

( y u i

e d t d

n m

g r a

w s b e e

b s e 4

( w d - 4 0' t

n g t

c t d s

s ) e e i

e y . e

n e d

e u

e s n a in

a t

c vg

c s

w i b

e t

n w

e e ( m

t r s

i s g

n ) d

a e .

g e t u d w d n

e e

s i

v i

a c i g t es d

n t

g 4 4 0 n m

( - '

r w t u

e s

g t s

e y

e d t d s s i

s a i

( c

e e

e n n w

D t e

b )

a e ( .

c g

s t

w in

e vs

g t

e i d

a r m

u e

g s 4

w 0

d i d 4 s - '

a d b

( s

t g

t ye

n a t i e d u e

e ws b s

e ( .)

e n

e a

e v i

i t s c g

mi w r d

d g

d a

e s

n i s

t d b

e ( s e

e e c

w a

g t

s i

u e

b (

s i E. Gregory Blvd. Gregory E. d

James Reed Rd.

E. 67th St. 67th E. E. 59th St. 59th E. Blue Ridge Blvd. SPACING Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r January 12, 2007 January 12, Proposed Access Guidelines2 - Northwest1 of AT-GRADE INTERSECTION 1/2 MI.AT-GRADE BETWEEN CROSSINGSMIN.) (SUGGESTED KCMO NorthwestSegment RaytownSegment

Project Boundary LEGEND:

63rd Street 63rd 63rd Street 63rd

I - 435 Application ofMoDOTAccess ManagementGuidelines to Corridor Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r

1 / 2 m i. b e t w Noland Rd. e en a 1 t - / 2 gr m a d i 1/ 2 mi.b e e . b tw e e c e n s t ig n r o w aliz s e ed s e c r in n o g a s s s t in ( - E. 75th St. g s g s u r (s g a u g d g g e e e s c Westridge Rd. s t r t e b e e o e s ta nc tw ee d d Di n m s m ed m s ia i in n in n . b g ) e .) 1/ a nc e b e tw s 1/ 2 k is ta ee n 2 m m s D m ( i. i. b - ed s b e ia u et t n ce b et w 1, n w w st a e e 3 b g e Di n 2 e e e m a g n e e d 0 Unity k e 1/ a n ia s e b 2 t s n ( s an c e tw m - i b s - ist e e n i g g t D m . b r n e a u 1 e e a , e d t w d a k g 3 ia atchline Northwest l 2 d e e iz s g n b e c - e 0 n e w ee n m e a r 1 t weet en d ( a 1/ 2 t o d ,3 be b dr r s s k - i i v i s e t n m g c w2 eee n e v e u s i. r s t ewt e e n c edet w e n e e Village b r c w e n e d a i eb 0 t d r g s t w e g . - M e o e n br gi egds er w t w e n n b n ) t d w eee b ig uv rt e di v e t w e de n d 1 w g s t e nt wdae e( ane u vs e iv d a b e r d g , e e be c c e et r etcs sd ( e me a b tivwreeene 3 e s s n b c gi s( t r ews e m y e e tiwv m dn e c e n ggge ssvnt euge si vg wg t e wy w ecen e b ee r d 2 n i e n us i g edu t e w i t cd e s b e i r s r ( n c a a us i a e d e a d i n n s e n g et w v i 0 a o s e t cges as( u wg s m ad as b n urgi gg eset e w i e v t e b e g w e n t t etsd s m w a m . a c d n t a nc tw u t n ng ( t gdeg t ( m y . y e vu c d a e ( - s t ee e d us d( eg y ) - a s ge set w e g i s u s i y ) - t s en m g sa s b a r i d n c ( n g e. t w D s n m g t ii s a s i a i a s in e st ( t wue e ngm y e s r v s m e n s i s g e de e ) d ( t i m 4 n s t aw uw ny d a a i e g ( w eee d ( y . n s 4 gi s e b a s it rw e e a d u n d wt e e n s d e d . y . u d t es n i t si dmn d i te c n d d i s ) .- ) a i t ( b( e v s r md y a s r i s i ) - - 4 s e a n g g e eb d ge s t i w n s 4 t b i r y e n b n rg i e n s ) - ( d ms s e . e v i m v 4 d c ) i v

u e ui t i y e . - n i g

s d 4 e s w e e v d . 0 i e s n

s a d 4 c ) w- c b t n e e e e a e . 0 s n g t s wd n c s ) - 4 i g e e

e ) - i d c . e t g t 4 n g e s

( e t c m nu s 4 t w i e

r b r ( ' d d e . e d e s 4 g e s

w y a ) - w g t 4 g t n n 4 n i r g es ' a s a b e w d4 s u d e ) - o e v g n gsg t 4 d t . g

e i u e 4 a u m

i ( 4 a

ee v i d 0 s d s

k a ) - a

w n e u a n 0 a

s u e s m 4 .

d 0 y t t 4 c a s ( s 4

d d e e a 4

e t 0 s t ee

s c s m m m y ) t e e e s 4 i w n

( ' ( wb n r g t i 0 t

s g t n t w d m y . s 4 n y '

i e ( ' s

g g e s w ) i 4 e d

- y 0 e d t s 4 n - - ' e

g i g m e r u v gd e s i 0 i s n i s b r

n b a s i 0 i

u d d ' . i n 4 n

1 i s a e a i i s i s v c ) '

r t v a t n 0 e

e s m s 4 d - d g e n .

( '

a , i g es m d . d 0 e

n t w -

3 c t e ( y e d ' ) . c n g e . 0

w ee s y ) - )

s 4 -

d '

s t n i 4 ge s - . w gue s s d ) ' t

e d n a g i t e w a n s i d n g e m

e 2 . s i ) 4 t b r n s ' u d

( u d m 4 4

t ( 4 a ) i 0 a a d a . 4 s c s e e 0 v s d y . m

m - 4 t (

t s ( ) m i 4

e i ) - 4

0 y n r c i y '

u d e(s s n s 4 s

o w 4 i g ee 0

ce b e g n s t w n i i s 0 n t w g ei t 0 n 4 a e d n s. i '

s .

st e m u d e d n 0 - ) b r ) '

i n a 4

D s g s u d a i . d . ' m 4 '

t m v ) -

- ( e ) . ' i e e g 4

n d in s c y e 0 ) i w e e i i e 0 4 g a s n g n s g s w 4

t n t 4

n e.e e d g e ' bw n r u d ' e e

s t t d e . w n4 ) d 4 t

b e i a ) a s 0 e d

( e e t wb e en r i v t ( - m b r

e s 0 e d v y 0 i d e c ' v

s a b n gr es e w s 4 i e

c i t i t n ' e

u k e eg v e s ' c g s e 4 s m n eeg uw ettewen edn w e g e st w g c taw u stn de ed d d a d . n g e

- a e t es(e w m ) - u b r r 0 d i w e e n n b wgegsebn t e wr e e n a i t wy e e n d a a g 1 et n d et t us (e deet d i vt w emdeivn ev dw e e t ( s m

eae e i y t r n 4 e , b t rw bns s i b r e a r edbn e s eee d ' y 3 . e i t c d c c ib m e i i r t w n i v m r s e b v e i ( r e ve e sy n ev s i w b e e i i

) en g sg t w e wd n 4 s 2 s en d ing g s tge eg t ew ce e. bv e e t re di v n s w eec e i c d v c u u i d . d ) - i r

t t n e au a c d n s egcae s b wv i e d . g s g e s g e s e t 0 e n d t a w e ts s w t n ) wa- g e i w e e0 g c e n sg n t e g ea s n v ) - e t n t t n m g mt m w4 e e s e w

e b d ru n d gd e s u( w( du( g. ad ec u n y gd g t i t y ae e ' a v ga e a u ) y s 4 gc e s d b e r s as s s s a - d a u t w. ( a n em d 4 t i u t ms d t i m t mi ( i a g4 a ge s a s ( ( i ( s i n t) w

e c v ea s i y ta n y s n ms y u n s s gd y e m 4 t e e m ( s 4 a s y( u ad

w sesn e t w ( s s d i 4 m t g t i i i 0 y c n e g i u de i d d i s y . i t . s( . a s m s a e s n s n s n ) s - n

b u r w i ) -i y mi

e e g s 4

n ) - t (

w a t d i i0 n

t n g e g i s s n s 0 i n d ' . y

e i dt eu s d d v a d . d s . i . s i

n a r m d 4 ) n - s

- - 4 4 - i

( ) ) ) d'

b a 0 . . t cis g d e y . i ) n s ' w e e s ( v e s m d - . ) -

) - t n . g 4

i n i yw 4 4 4 t 4

4 4 - e c d) s e g ee n s ' d ) . 4 b r i u di ) 4 -

e s d a w n s 4

i 0 4

n g t a 4

s s . 0

4 e e e g 4

n ne e e v et m ) 4 w w ene 4

u ( - t d t n 4

d a d e d . y 4 e e d d a 4

' c ) '

r r t 0

- ' 0 r s 0 b i r t e s s 4

( w m i 4

i n i g e 0 v v i i 0

v g t e y n s 4

v '

4 0 ' '

e e e u '

e e e s d i 0

w a n 4

t i e d a . '

s d '

w ds n 0 e s ee '

t w m ) -

t gt se s w w 4 ewb ege t ( r '

tg ne t d

g e i y . 0 ewu edue nd s dd v '

e w e e a ad i ) - m 4 t di n r a 0

ees m m dmi e a n s c '

b(n ri y rv y m e e e s 4

w dn g y w 4 d v t i y . ' rgi d i eve ) i n i i -

euis r n se nds w s n v 0 g n 4 ggess t ei v e as u te.se . w m 4

( g e) t d . w. .

- - )e ' g e a y 0 s d ) ) - ) tue w dm - ge st w a ina 4 s d e m 4 y s 4

d a im y 4 4 '

m na s.y 0 i 4

m y 4 ) - 4

n in s 4 .y s '

i )

s0 - 4

n i . 0 0

n ) s. - 0

. ) -

' ' 4

- ' ) . ' 4

) - 4

4 0

4 4

0 4

' 0

' ' Raytown South High School

Noland Rd.

Brickyard Rd. Project Boundary

Kansas City Corporate Limits E. 83rd St. Raytown Corporate Limits Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Kansas City Corporate Limits E. Bannister Rd. I - 470 KCMO Southeast - Little Blue Valley Segment KCMO Southeast - Upland Segment

MEDIAN BREAKS DRIVEWAY SPACING

NORTH 0 500 1000 2000

DISTANCE BETWEEN MEDIAN BREAKS - DISTANCE BETWEEN DRIVEWAYS - 1,320' (SUGGESTED MIN.) 440' (SUGGESTED MIN.)

Proposed Access Guidelines - Southeast 2 of 2 January 12, 2007 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r

1 access point / 5475 ft 3 access points / 3980 ft 30 access points / 3280 ft 57 access points / 4090 ft 101 access points / 8280 ft 1 access point per mile 4 access points per mile 48 access points per mile 74 access points per mile 64 access points per mile

Project Boundary I - 435

E. 75th St.

E. 59th St.

Baptist Church * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * ** *** * * * * * * * ** * * * * * * * *** * * *** Aquila * * * * * * * * * * * * ** *** * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * *** * **** ** * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * * * t * * Blue Ridge Blvd. YMCAYMCA

James Reed Rd. RaytownRaytown Rd. Rd. Matchline Southeas

Raytown Corporate Limits

Kansas City E. 67th St. E. Gregory Blvd. Corporate 63rd Street Limits KCMO Northwest Segment Raytown Segment Description

This map indicates the location of the existing driveway locations on the NORTH 0 500 1000 2000 roadway. It also indicates the number of access points per mile for LEGEND: individual segments of the roadway. Additionally, the map indcates the Project Boundary severity of potential conflicts base upon the rule of thumb: Corporate Limit Line 0 - 9 access points/mile 10 - 19 access points/mile 0-9 access points per mile = conflicts are few, access is managed. 20+ access points/mile Access Point * 10-20 access points per mile = numerous conflicts exist, access should be better managed.

Roadway Access Analysis Map - Northwest 1 of 2 January 12, 2007 * 2000 1000 500 0

NORTH 0 - 9 access points/mile points/mile10- 19 access points/mile20+ access Access Point LEGEND: Project Boundary Corporate Limit Line I - 470 - I Unity Village

Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Corporate Summit Lee's Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas * Noland Rd.

18 points access / 9775 ft 10 points access mile per

E. Bannister Rd. Bannister E. Project Boundary Project * * * * * * * * * * *

* Brickyard Rd. Brickyard * * * * * * KCMO Southeast- Little Blue Valley Segment KCMO SoutheastUpland - Segment * Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r *

Noland Rd. * Roadway Access2 Analysis2 of Map - Southeast 2007 January 12, * * 8 access points / 4220 ft 10 points access mile per * significant reduction in safety, efficiency and to navigate ability access to properties. Access needsto

* Limits Corporate City Kansas Raytown Corporate Limits Corporate Raytown * conflicts. the reduce to managed be managed. better be should * * * * * * * High School * Raytown South * * * * * ** * * *

Westridge Rd. * * * * 0-9 access points per mile = are few,access is managed. conflicts 10-20 access points peraccess = numerous conflicts mile exist, 21+ access points in per = mile significant resulting conflict exists, * * *

* St. 83rd E. roadway. It also indicates for the number of accessper mile points Description This map indicates the location of the existing driveway locations on the individual segments of the the maproadway. indcates the Additionally, severity severity conflictsof potential base upon the rule of thumb: * Northwest Matchline * * * * * * 101 access points / 8280 ft 64 points access mile per * ** * * * * ** * * Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r

Consolidation / Sharing Drives Backage Roads

Backage Road

Property Line Access Drives On Rear Of Lots

Property Line Consolidated / Shared Driveways Existing Roadway Existing Roadway @ Shared Property Lines Existing Driveways Controlled Access On (2 Per Property Removed) Existing Roadway

Internal Property Connections Additional Turning Lanes (With Consolidated Drives)

Property Line

Property Line Cross Access In Deceleration Right Existing Roadway Existing Roadway Parking Lots Hand Turning Lane Consolidated / Shared Acceleration Lane For Right Access Drives Out Turn Onto Roadway

Conceptual Access Management Techniques January 12, 2007 The transportation and land use recommendations address µbig picture¶ issues, ideas and solutions. These µbig ideas¶ are typically associated with a longer term goal and larger amounts of required funding to come to fruition. The next corridor plan component, the Aesthetics Plan, provides recommendations that could be implemented in a shorter time frame and at relatively less expense than the land use and transportation recommendations.

(this space left intentionally blank)

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 80 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Aesthetic Plan

INTRODUCTION

One of the key opportunities of the Corridor Plan, is the ability to develop and implement aesthetic improvements along the corridor. These will typically have a shorter implementation time frame, with less project complexity, require less funding, cause less corridor disruption, and provide early visible changes and beautification that elicit positive public understanding and reaction. The Aesthetics Plan provides recommendations for these improvements.

CORRIDOR AESTHETICS CONTEXT AND OPPORTUNITY ҏ The existing corridor has many aesthetic challenges, and they are different in each segment. The KCMO Northwest segment, an urban expressway segment, is lacking in quality aesthetics (landscape, streetscape). The Raytown segment is challenged the most because of the aging commercial character of the segment, the lack of landscape and streetscape, and lack of infrastructure in certain areas. The KCMO Southeast ± Little Blue Valley segment is generally the most attractive segment of the corridor. Its rural character and low density of development preserves much of the existing wooded hills and river valley. The real challenges are the existing development at Knobtown, and the industrial development adjacent to the river, and the general lack of landscape enhancement along the highway near Bannister Road. Like the KCMO ± Northwest segment, the KCMO Southeast - Upland segment is an urban expressway, lacking landscape, interchange, or streetscape aesthetics.

These challenges also represent opportunities to make significant change in the corridor. Because the attention to quality aesthetics in the corridor is so slight, making aesthetic improvements should have a dramatic affect on creating the perception that the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor is a quality environment.

The areas of aesthetics that were analyzed in the corridor were architecture, site planning, streetscape and landscape, gateways and monumentation, icons. The context of each of these, and the opportunities available are presented below.

Architecture

Benefits of quality Architecture:

The benefits of quality architecture are many. Quality in architecture consists of many factors. From measurable factors like the quality of materials, longevity of materials, quality of the structural, environmental, wall and roofing systems, to objective factors like design style, massing, colors, and material usage.

From a community stand point, high quality architecture reinforces the sense that the community is a desirable place to live, work, conduct business, or shop. It elevates property values and increases the tax base of the area. Additionally, quality architecture can encourage

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 81 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 human social interaction, assist in creating safer neighborhoods, and be simply aesthetically pleasing.

From a commercial and office standpoint, the quality of the architecture often is an indicator of the types of businesses that are in operation in that location. Often, retailers Example: Quality Architecture ± Civic Buildings demand a level of quality in the architecture that matches the goods they are selling and their clientele. The quality of the architecture is a major factor in the classification of office space, i.e. Class A, B, C or D.

From a residential standpoint, quality architecture, at all home price levels is invaluable. Quality architecture can help a home hold its value over time, can help the home remain attractive in the for sale market, and help the home become a positive investment for the home owner. It also tends to be an indicator of the quality, stability and safety of the neighborhood.

Context

· Major areas with old, outdated, commercial buildings and facilities. Example: Quality Retail Development Examples: Brywood Center, 63rd Street Drive-In, Wal-Mart Center, numerous small retail parcels in Raytown, Knobtown.

· New high quality facilities and quality older facilities provide an anchor and set a standard for new high quality development. Examples: First Baptist Church, Aquila, YMCA, Retail Sites along corridor, Unity Village.

· Aging housing stock exists in need of rehabilitation and upgrades, along with upgrades to neighborhood infrastructure and streetscape.

· Generally, older buildings along the corridor are showing age of materials Existing Aquila Class A Office Building and construction.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 82 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Architecture Opportunities

· Use the new development of modern, high quality buildings on assembled properties will raise the visual quality of the corridor.

· Use design guidelines and revised code requirements for new and rehabilitated buildings and facilities to ensure enforceable levels of high quality design, construction materials, and maintenance. Existing Brywood Retail Center

· Provide standards for upgrading existing buildings and facilities (including residential). Provide implementation plan to assist property owners with incentives for rehabilitation and redevelopment.

Site Planning

Benefits of quality Site Planning:

Quality site planning has many benefits. Some are: the safe access and navigation of a site, regardless of the mode of transportation; the integration of parking, drives, access points, and building access; the sighting of buildings, parking areas, drives, etc, to take advantage of the natural site features; reduction of site development costs; proper use of local utilities; creative Example: Quality Site Planning integration of building, and sensitive impact on surrounding landscape, streetscape and environment. property, uses and natural systems; enhancement of architecture; increase in overall quality of the environment.

Context

· Major areas with old, outdated, outmoded, narrow depth, wedge shaped lots.

· Parking lots on older wedge-shaped, shallow lots are close to 350 Highway / Blue Parkway lanes and shoulder. Safe backing and internal circulation is difficult in many cases.

Existing Site Planning in Raytown Segment The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 83 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Multiple , uncoordinated, access points for each parcel and wide driveways create confusion and result in 'seas of pavement' along frontage of 350 Highway / Blue Parkway.

· Open ditch drainage, shoulders, and no curbs create a non-urban edge condition. Generally, the edge condition looks unkempt, or unmaintained in an urban condition (Raytown). In rural and expressway segments, ditch and Existing commercial sites in Raytown shoulder roadways fit character.

· Buildings are generally pushed as far back on the existing commercial lots as possible, with parking lots in front. Buildings and sites tend to be divorced from roadway and adjacent parcels.

· Lack of vehicular and pedestrian connections to adjacent parcels and sites along the highway.

· Lack of large acreage, assembled property to allow for modern development patterns to emerge.

ҏSite Planning Opportunities

· Consolidate small, narrow, or odd shaped lots and redevelop according to new codes and guidelines.

· Provide ample stacking in and out of parcels for safe internal circulation and access.

· Coordinate and consolidate where possible, access along 350 Highway / Blue Parkway, to reduce confusion for drivers, increase safety for highway, provide safer access to parcels, Example: Integrated site, building, parking and landscape both in and out. facilities.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 84 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Curbs and storm sewers in urban area will better define edges, provide for a cleaner, more maintained edge, and generally look more visually appealing, in addition to controlling run-off and drainage.

· Maintain ditch and shoulder in rural and expressway segments. Maintain ditches and right of way in a more manicured condition.

· Buildings arrangements on development sites should be reconfigured to better utilize the building mass for design objectives.

· In areas where a slower traffic speed would be desirable (Raytown Segment), provide a better visual and physical connection along the highway, push the building facades up Example: Well integrated site plan with building. to highway, with no parking in between. Place parking behind, screened by building and landscape, so the architecture and landscape are the visual aesthetic, not the parking lots.

· Make and reinforce internal vehicular and pedestrian connections between adjacent parcels and sites along the highway.

· Use design guidelines and code requirements for new and redeveloped sites to ensure enforceable levels of high quality design, construction materials, methods, and maintenance.

· Provide standards for upgrading existing parking, access, utilities, etc. Provide implementation plan to assist property owners with incentives for rehabilitation and redevelopment.

ҏStreetscape and Landscape

Benefits of quality Streetscape and Landscape:

The benefits of quality streetscape and landscape to the community are: it makes the community look better and more attractive; it increases quality of life; it helps buffer objectionable views; it enhances quality views; it enhances the pedestrian environment Quality landscape plantings and streetscape

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 85 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 around buildings; it provides environmental relief to issues of pollution, sun and heat, rain and run-off, and snow.

The benefits to commercial and other development are: enhancement of development to reinforce the quality of a shopping, office or other environment; enhancement of site and architecture; provide relief from environmental issues; increase the market position of the development.

The benefits to residential include: increased property value; buffering, screening or enhancement of views; relief from environmental factors; enhancement of character of home or neighborhood; enhancement of architecture.

Context

· Lack of streetscape treatments in urban areas. Quality landscape plantings at development gateway · Lack of corridor landscape plantings in expressway and rural roadway segments.

· Lack of individual site landscape plantings, screening of service areas, buffering to adjacent non-compatible uses, parking lot screening, aesthetic site landscape, signage and monumentation landscape plantings.

· Lack of defined turf or landscape edges adjacent to roadways and existing development. Bare soil, rocks, and litter from motorists and commercial uses create a general visually unappealing experience in urban areas of corridor.

· Existing highway right of way level of maintenance needs to be improved. (frequency, etc.)

· High quality existing mature plant material is in and adjacent to corridor, especially in the Southeast Kansas City / Lee's Summit segments.

· Existing lighting is oriented to vehicular transportation safety only. Lack of aesthetic and pedestrian lighting for evening use.

· Lack of safe, continuous, attractive, pedestrian and bicycle connections along and across the corridor.

· Numerous competing commercial signs of random materials, sizes and levels of quality and maintenance in urban areas of the corridor. This visual clutter is confusing, and greatly detracts from the visual quality of the corridor.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 86 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Overhead power and utility lines add to the visual clutter of the corridor.

Streetscape and Landscape Opportunities

· Provide a coordinated landscape experience throughout the corridor that elevates its visual appeal and quality.

· Capitalize on the unique landscape character of the corridor segments: o Northwest Kansas City: Expressway - Large scale plantings and massings ± scale for commuters and basic aesthetics. o Raytown: Urban Commercial Corridor - More detailed scale plantings., Coordinated with lighting, paving and sidewalks, amenities, gateways, to create a streetscape experience. Front door visual Landscape and pedestrian environment well integrated into experience of commercial district. corridor. o Southeast Kansas City / Lee's Summit - Rural route in Little Blue Valley - naturalized plantings, informal plantings to enhance general driving experience, and to frame views. Upland segment - Expressway - Large scale plantings and massings ±scale for commuters and basic aesthetics.

· Create design guidelines and code modifications that are enforceable to provide a level of quality and expectation for new development and redevelopment.

· Use design guidelines and code requirements for new and redeveloped sites to ensure enforceable levels of high quality design, construction materials, and maintenance.

· Provide standards for upgrading existing parking, access, utilities, etc.

· Provide implementation plan to assist property owners with incentives for Streetscape improvements in narrow right-of-way

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 87 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 rehabilitation and redevelopment.

Gateways and Monumentation:

Benefits of quality Gateways and Monumentation:

The benefits of quality gateways and monumentation to the community are: creates a sense of place and arrival into area; welcoming to visitors; opportunity to reinforce quality of the community.

The benefits to development are: the creation of an identity for the development that is recognizable in the marketplace; for marketing, signage, wayfinding, and branding, reinforce quality of the development. Development Gateway Monumentation Context

· Should announce and reinforce a sense of arrival and entrance to an area.

· Should set the stage for the quality of an experience or environment.

· Should be created at important crossroads, intersections, bridges, overpasses, etc. especially where existing topography, views, natural features, man-made features, or surrounding uses can enhance the sense of crossing a threshold.

Gateway Opportunities Existing Gateway at Blue Ridge Bouleveard and 63rd Street

· Blue Ridge Boulevard Bridge

· Raytown Road

· Rail Bridge at Noland Road

· Bannister/Colbern Road Bridge

Icons: Gateway Enhancement opportunity ± Blue Ridge Boulevard Bridge Benefits of quality Icons:

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 88 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 The benefits of having quality icons in the community are: reinforces the sense of place; reinforces the quality of the area; potential to be socially, economically, civically, beneficial to surrounding area.

Context

· Are places, areas, or objects that allow someone to fix that place, area, or object and its context in his or her mind.

· Stand out from their surroundings (positive or negative) through design, or lack thereof.

· Represent their surroundings (good or bad) in the public experience of a place.

· Are varied, including civic buildings (town hall, courthouse), memorials, museums, shopping districts, large or distinctively designed buildings, historic districts, stadiums, amusement and water parks, natural areas, landscape areas.

· Can be economic draws.

· Can be positive or negative.

Existing Icons:

· 63rd Street Drive-In Screens/Signs

· Brywood Center

· Teetering Rocks Links Golf Course Existing Icon ± Unity Village

· Raytown South High School

· Railroad Bridge at Noland Road

· First Baptist Church

· Knobtown

· Little Blue River

· Unity Village

Existing Icon ± First Baptist Church

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 89 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Icon Opportunities:

· Redevelop existing negative icons in corridor including: o 63rd St. Drive-In o Brywood Center o Rail bridge at Noland Road o Knobtown

· Upgrade character (landscape, pedestrian connections, storm sewer, edges, curbs and gutters) of existing icons.

· Provide visual/physical connectivity to existing positive icons; reinforce presence of existing positive icons through new Existing negative Icon: Knobtown development or redevelopment.

· Create new icons that function as civic or town centers, neighborhood draws, places to be, shopping and business draws, places of high quality design and aesthetics. · Use existing and new icons as economic, civic, and social draws to the Corridor. corridor

AESTHETICS PLAN

The aesthetic plan defines specific key opportunities, their associated issues, the recommendations, and the location of primary aesthetic opportunities. The Aesthetics Plan, (Refer to map, pages 91-92), indicates the location of key opportunities and their recommended enhancements.

ENHANCEMENT OF KEY CORRIDOR ELEMENTS

The following descriptions summarize the enhancement of key corridor elements. They indicate the type of element, the key opportunities for enhancement, the key issues surrounding enhancement, the recommendations for enhancement, and the location of the opportunity. Additionally, they display photographs of similar conditions and enhancement types.

Bridge Enhancement Key opportunities: Utilize existing bridge structures as gateways for major enhancement opportunities. Key Issues: · Existing bridges are utilitarian.

· All bridge locations (63rd Street, Blue Ridge Rail bridge at Knobtown, Bannister) represent key Bridge Enhancement

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 90 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k w a y C o r r i d o r t

Project Boundary E. 59th St. Blue Ridge Blvd. 63rd Street I - 435 Matchline Southeas

S T R Baptist T Church B I R S O Q O M Aquila N J C GG M F B A N L D YMCAYMCA K O N T H T E R S G P S R James Reed Rd. Raytown Rd. E. 75th St. Raytown Rd. O

Raytown Corporate Limits

Kansas City E. 67th St. E. Gregory Blvd. Corporate 63rd Street Limits 63rd Street KCMO Northwest Segment Raytown Segment

Key Aesthetic Enhancements Opportunities

A Enhance/frame/maintain view to downtown KCMO. F New bridge enhancements recently constructed - set tone N Enhanced pedestrian lighting at crossings and intersections. NORTH 0 500 1000 2000 for quality - design clues to tie streetscape together. B Expressway landscape plantings. Utilize bridge enhancements as first step in streetscape. O Pedestrian scale access along frontage where possible. LEGEND: - Enhanced at interchanges - Potential mid-block pedestrian activated signal for safety Project Boundary - Trees and large shrub plantings G Minor gateway. concerns - Simple, large scale massings - Potential overpass or underpass for pedestrians 350 Highway / Blue Parkway - Maintainable with minor change in current H Utilize aesthetics of new gateway as first step in Roadway Corporate Limit Line maintenance levels upgraded streetscape. P Bridge enhancements to enhance overall corridor quality. I Enhanced maintenance only at interchange. C Lighting enhancements at interchange. Q Major gateway. J Redevelopment of icon. D Streetscape enhancements. R Aesthetic rehab programs for existing residental and commercial - Landscape street trees properties. K Major gateway. - Median pavers - Ornamental lighting L Roadway landscape treatment - streetscape treatment. S Local area streetscape enhancement - function as safe collectors - Sidewalks/crosswalks at signalized - Regular tree spacing on outside of people to 350 corridor. intersections - Shrubs/trees in median - Turf on edges of curbs T When not available on 350, pedestrian routes should follow local E Bridge enhancements. - Pavers at high maintenance areas streets. - Abutment improvements - Lighting enhancements - Cladding of existing structure - Unifying element/banners GG Median regional storm detention/retention - Add tower, icon, structure element - Enhance with clean edges facility, developed as an amenity. - Ornamental railing (landscape, enhancement, fountain) - Make more than utilitarian M Increased overall corridor lighting - safety. Aesthetics Plan - Northwest 1 of 2 January 12, 2007 2000 1000 500 0 BB EE

NORTH LEGEND: Project Boundary 350 Highway / BlueParkway Roadway Corporate Limit Line I - 470 - I FF DD FF EE CC

Lee's Summit Corporate Limits Corporate Summit Lee's Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas - Planting schemetypicalof MoDOTenhanced expressway - Low maintenance - Enhanced at interchanges - Simple, large scalemassings - Street trees - Pavers - Planters - Lighting enhancement - Monumentation/signage AA Transition from rural to urban Transition rural from expressway. Expressway landscapeplantings. Major gateway enhancement. Bridgeenhancement gateway. of part as Streetscape enhancement. Frontage road enhancement node. FF AA BB CC DD EE

Noland Rd.

E. Bannister Rd. Bannister E. Project Boundary Project V Z V Z X

Y Brickyard Rd. Brickyard U January 12, 2007 January 12, Aesthetics2 Plan - Southeastof 2 KCMO Southeast- Little Blue Valley Segment KCMO SoutheastUpland - Segment W CC - Implement- trail plan (MetroGreen) - Create new walk/traillocal planis that to neighborhoods- Connect nodes - Connect to commercial, mixed use Utilizeexisting- infrastructure(streets, as initial framework sidewalks, trails) then fill in gaps Highway 3 5 0 / B l u e P a r k o r w a y i d C o r W L Localarea streetscape of enhancement collectors - function as safe peopleto 350 corridor. Whenavailable not pedestrian on 350, routes shouldstreets. follow local Streetscape on curbed section - #5see ofRaytown segment. Landscape plantings on rural transitionopen, segmentreflectnatural valleyand character.Widershoulder median- - no curbs ditches staysame. the Lightingthe segment. enhancements to this portion of Landscape enhancementat/around Knobtownredevelopment area. uniquenessand reinforce redevelopmentUtilize Knobtown to create of of Little Blue Valley and center Knobtownvillage as a major or crossroad valley. for Connect together to neighborhoods. openareas and space

Noland Rd. DD T Z S U V X Y W M N

T Kansas City Corporate Limits Corporate City Kansas

S S Raytown Corporate Limit Corporate Raytown Q High School Raytown South O D S

Westridge Rd. T R - Regular tree spacing- Regular ontree outside - Shrubs/treesmedianin - Turf on edgescurbs of - Pavers at high maintenanceareas - Lighting enhancements - Unifying element/banners - Enhancewithedges clean Potentialmid-block- pedestrian activatedfor signal concerns safety - Potentialoverpassunderpassor for pedestrians

Roadway landscape treatmenttreatment. streetscape - Increased overall corridorsafety. lighting - Enhanced pedestrian lighting at crossingsand intersections. Pedestrianpossible. scale access along frontagewhere Bridge enhancements to enhanceoverall corridor quality. Major gateway. existingAestheticprogramsrehab for and residental commercial properties.

E. 83rd St. 83rd E. E. 75th St. 75th E. N R

L P N R

M O Q Key Aesthetic Enhancements Opportunities Enhancements Key Aesthetic atchline Northwest atchline M O gateways in the study area.

Recommendations: · Utilize existing bridges as structure for applied enhancements.

· Locate funding sources for enhancements of bridges and roads.

· Each bridge is a unique, design should be unique for each one.

· Railbridge at Knobtown should be widened and enhanced or removed. Major Gateway Enhancement

· Blue Ridge and Knobtown are primary opportunities.

· Tie into streetscape and landscape enhancements.

· High cost, high impact enhancement.

· Funded through primary public and incentive sources.

Where are the Opportunities?: · 63rd Street Blue Ridge

· Knobtown rail bridge

· Bannister Road

Above: Bridge Enhancement Detailing Left: Bridge Support Detailing

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 93 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Curb, Gutter, & Storm Sewer Key Opportunities: Addition of curb, gutter, and storm sewers in urban segments for roadway and neighborhoods. Key Issues: · Urban roadway section has ditches and shoulders.

· Existing storm drainage issues at several places along corridor.

· Would stimulate access management issues discussion and study.

· Could be a joint private/publicly funded effort.

Recommendations: · Curb and gutter only urban section, from Blue Ridge to Knobtown.

· Example: Curb & Gutter Provide for regional detention in median near 75th Application: Raytown Segment, Street. Knobtown

· Do full access management study with improvements.

· Install in phases - as a part of streetscape projects.

· Provide for storm improvements at Knobtown rail bridge.

· Add in neighborhoods to improve conditions. Example: Median Detention Facility · Develop phasing plan, if needed. Application: West of 75th Street

· High cost of construction, high visual impact potential.

Where are the Opportunities?: · From Blue Ridge to Knobtown.

· Storm Sewer in median near 75th Street.

· Storm sewer improvements at rail bridge at Knobtown.

· Storm Sewer Improvements in surrounding neighborhoods. Example: Median Curb & Gutter Application: Raytown Segment

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 94 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Gateways & Monumentation Key Opportunities: Use gateway and monumentation enhancements to mark important intersections, corners, thresholds and municipal boundaries. Key Issues: · No enhancements of existing gateway areas.

· Several import primary gateways (municipal boundaries).

· Node gateways exist at 63rd, Blue Ridge, Raytown Road, Knobtown).

Municipal Gateway · Cost would be a mix of public, incentive and individual Application: Municipal developer. Boundaries

· Need general design guidelines.

· Medium cost, high impact

Recommendations: · Develop primary gateways with streetscape design.

· Reserve areas at intersections for gateway landscape and markers.

· Incorporate pedestrian, landscape, crossings, into gateways. Example: 63rd St. / Blue Ridge Gateway · Application: Primary Gateways Allow for different design of secondary gateways on at Municipal Boundary developer property, but have general guidelines for materials and requirements.

· Design fully primary gateways.

· Develop and construct early in corridor redevelopment

Where are the Opportunities?: · Kansas City / Raytown boundaries

· Knobtown Secondary Gateway Application: New Development Entries, Nodes

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 95 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Major nodes

· Entries to neighborhoods and new developments

Above: Gateway at Commercial Retail Corner Application: New Development Entries, Nodes

Left: Residential Gateways Application: Neighborhood & New Development Entries

Intersection Enhancements Key Opportunities: Increase visual character and quality of corridor Identify and mark thresholds and gateways to areas/sub areas.

Key Issues: · No current intersection improvements.

· Skewed intersections add to clutter.

· Should be done with streetscape.

· Cost could be shared with individual developer and public.

· Should be a part of overall streetscape design.

· High cost, high impact

Recommendations: · Develop high impact intersection improvements at Example: Blue Ridge Intersection nodes. Application: City Lines, Commercial & Neighborhood Intersections · Develop and construct as part of streetscape improvements.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 96 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Make developers responsible for corner improvements.

Where are Opportunities?:

· Primary nodes.

· Entries of large neighborhood areas.

· Entries to large developments.

Example: Development Corner Application: Key Development / Redevelopment Intersections

Examples: Paver Art (Above) & Paving Enhancement (Left) Application: Major Nodes, Residential Neighborhoods, & Crossings

Landscape/Streetscape/Amenity Key Opportunities: Increase visual character and quality of corridor. Key Issues: · Lack of landscape in medians.

· Lack of roadway/streetscape landscape.

· No coordinated or unifying elements.

Streetscape Development Application: Raytown & SE KCMO

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 97 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 · Lack of landscape on private property.

· Lack of public spaces and amenities.

· Low level of maintenance of public spaces

Raytown After Curb, Gutter, Landscape & Raytown Before Signage improvemnts

Median Plantings (Above & Right) & Streetscape Development (Middle) Application: Entire Corridor

Recommendations: · Revise landscape ordinance/guidelines for new development and redevelopment.

· Develop detailed coordinated landscape master plan.

· Develop coordinated streetscape/walk/amenity plans with landscape master plan.

· Increase general level of landscape maintenance in corridor.

Streetscape Development Application: Raytown & SE KCMO

Where are Opportunities?: · Along entire corridor · Medians, street frontages, individual property, gateways, community spaces, intersections

Above: Public Amenity Area Application: Key Nodes (i.e. Raytown)

Left: Commercial Plantings Application: Commercial Side Streets, Private Lots The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 98 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Lighting Key Opportunities: Increase safety (vehicular, pedestrian, and personal) and provide increased aesthetic value through the use of a unified lighting palette. Key Issues: · Little existing lighting in roadway.

· Lighting only at MoDOT minimum.

· Most lighting is on private property.

· Some very dark areas in developed part of corridor.

· Haphazard collection of lighting Pedestrian Scale Lighting · Utility lighting only, without aesthetic quality. Application: Development Interior, Side Streets Recommendations: · Develop master plan for increased lighting safety and aesthetics.

· Develop a balanced plan that recognizes cars, pedestrians, and businesses have different safety and Above: Combination Road & Traffic Lighting aesthetic needs (scale). Application: Little Blue Valley Near Knobtown Left: Urban Section · Develop as an integral Application: Raytown Median part of the streetscape/landscape plan.

· Include in demonstration block project.

· Should be easily maintained, quality modern lighting system. Right: Ornamental Development Lighting Application: Commercial Development

Left: High Volume Road Lighting Application: Raytown Segment

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 99 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Where are Opportunities?: · Focused first at nodes (Raytown Road, Knobtown, etc.)

· Concentrated in Raytown and SE KCMO segments

· Little/no change in expressway (KCMO NW, and far KCMO SE)

Vehicular Scale Road & Walk Lighting Application: Raytown Segment

Sidewalks / Trails Key Opportunities: Provide safe, accessible sidewalks, crossings and trails to allow pedestrians to use transportation systems. Key Issues: · Total lack of walks and crossings.

· No safe crossing or refuge areas.

· Speed, and volume of cars on roadway Pedestrian Signals increases danger. Application: Nodes

· Majority of cost would be on public side.

· Few internal neighborhood connections.

· No pedestrian connections to open space or amenities.

Recommendations: · Pedestrian activated signals. Trail System · Provide refuge points at crossings. Application: Along Little Blue River, Open Space Connector Between Redsidential · Crossings that are in scale and noticeable for

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 100 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 vehicular traffic.

· Clearly identifiable crossing areas.

· Provide walks along roadway, but buffered from danger.

· Provide sidewalk connections to and through neighborhoods.

Trail System Pedestrian Crossing Application: throughout corridor to Application: Nodes & connect park and open space assets Commercial Drives

Where are Opportunities?: · Key Nodes (Raytown Road, Westridge, Knobtown)

· Along frontage aspart of streetscape

· Along residential and collector roads without walks.

· Throughout corridor to connect existing park assets and openspaces together and to neighborhoods. Above: Streetscape Sidewalks Application: Raytown Segment · Little Blue River Trail System as defined by Metro Green Study.

· If rail line at Noland Road can be converted to trail system like Katy trail.

Left: Trail Along Roadway Application: South of Westridge, Little Blue Valley

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 101 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Signage Key Opportunities: Reduction of signage clutter and development of reasonable signage standards Key Issues: · Quantity of existing signs.

· Speed of roadway tends to require larger signage for readability.

· Could take long time to implement.

· Cost would be on individual developer.

· Need fair design guidelines.

· Encourage restrictions on expressway sections.

Signage Example: Raytown Before Signage Example: Raytown After

Recommendations: · Revised signage ordinance/guidelines including: o Lower height signs. o Signage area related to architecture. o Gradual removal of old signs through redevelopment. o Fair guidelines - balance business/aesthetics, sign material quality and type restrictions.

Where are Opportunities?: · Existing commercial areas (primarily Raytown)

· Knobtown Commercial Frontage Signage Application: Brywood Center Between · Expressways Blue Ridge & Westridge

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 102 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Development Signage Application: Jessica Estates, Residential Neighborhoods

The lack of existing aesthetic enhancements in the corridor actually represents a great opportunity to positively change the quality of the corridor in a relatively short amount of time, with assumed lower budget requirements and less impact to traffic patterns or business owners during construction than the land use and transportation enhancements, by creating aesthetic enhancements in the corridor. These enhancements will be very visible to the public, and if well received, will help garner public support for the on-going corridor plan.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 103 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Implementation Plan

INTRODUCTION

The Corridor Plan proposes many recommendations for the future redevelopment of the corridor. Because of the currently limited resources available, the sheer size of the study area, and the complexity of the issues in the corridor, The Corridor Plan is an overall look at the entire corridor area, from a high level perspective.

The Corridor Plan is the first step in the much longer process of redefining and redeveloping the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor. The focus of the plan is on creating a long range vision for the corridor, upon which detailed projects may be implemented as the next steps. Those next steps are the Implementation Plan.

There are six key issues to be addressed in the Implementation Plan. The success of the project will be determined, in large part, by how successfully these items are implemented and addressed not only initially at project start-up, but over the life of the implementation of the Corridor Plan. The seven issues are:

· Project Start-Up · Policy · Creation of a Corridor Plan Organization · Development of a Marketing and Communications Plan · Detailed Planning and Engineering Study of the Plan Recommendations · Securing Funding · Successful Construction of Funded Improvements

PROJECT START-UP

The initial stages of the Implementation Plan are very complex, require objective decision making, and require difficult coordination and daily attention to be successful. Therefore, it is recommended that the participating entities of the Corridor Plan provide initial funding to secure a consultant to organize and manage the key issues illustrated below, until such time as the Corridor Plan Organization may confidently run the daily operations of the implementation of the Corridor Plan.

This consultant should have proven experience in the creation, management, and operations of the key issues proposed Implementation Plan. The consultant should have performed similar work in the last 5 years, and should provide dedicated staff to address the issues of implementation plan start-up.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 104 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 POLICY

A number of the components recommended in the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Plan should be implemented in part through updates or revisions of various approved plans and policies of the affected jurisdictions and entities. These are outlined below.

Approve Final Corridor Plan Document

The first step in moving the Corridor Plan forward is the Approval of the Final Corridor Plan Document by the Client Review Team. Once complete, the Corridor Plan should be adopted as a policy making document.

Adoption of the Plan as Policy

To realize the vision of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway plan, its goals and recommendations should be adopted by the City of Kansas City, and the City of Raytown. MARC and MoDOT should use it as a reference plan for future planning purposes. Widespread support of the implementation effort will be based on the extent to which the actions are incorporated into the long range plans of the participating entitles.

Ordinances and Plan Amendments

Once adoption of the Plan is complete, the City of Kansas City, Missouri, and the City of Raytown, Missouri, should modify their Comprehensive Plans, their Area Plans, Transportation Plans (Thoroughfare Plans), and Ordinances that may be in conflict with the recommendations of this Plan.

The City of Raytown is currently modifying their zoning ordinance to address this issue.

CORRIDOR PLAN ORGANIZATION

It will be impossible for the Corridor Plan to be implemented without an organization, tasked with its stewardship. City staff, business leaders, and stakeholders have too many other daily tasks and concerns to give the Corridor Plan the level of attention it will require for successful implementation. Therefore, a Corridor Plan Organization should be formed to be the day-to-day overseer of the implementation of the Corridor Plan. The creation of that Corridor Plan Organization is the most import initial task for the implementation of the Corridor Plan.

The development of functioning organizational entities and activities resulting in (1) the assembly of human resources, (2) the development of specific strategies for various aspects of the revitalization program and redevelopment projects, and (3) the commitment of public and private capital are essential to the success of the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway effort. To that end, the following organizational steps are recommended

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 105 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Leadership Committee

A Leadership Committee should be formed with representation from key citizens and stakeholders. The Leadership Committee should be charged with developing a long term strategy, including budget, and for securing financial support for implementation from participating entities and other sources. Financial resources should be provided at inception to conduct a leadership retreat which would have as its goal provision of a framework for action and a draft action plan.

The Leadership Committee may take the form of a Board of Directors, but should be comprised of individuals capable of ensuring the project¶s success. The Committee should provide corporate governance, oversight, marketing and resource identification as well as guidance and oversight to an implementation staff, charged with day-to-day operations of plan implementation. Strong multi-year commitments from the initial Leadership Committee are recommended to ensure continuity and focus for the start-up and initial operations of the Committee.

The Leadership Committee should be incorporated in the State of Missouri. The corporation should establish as a separate entity or seek for its own corporate designation 501(c) 3 not-for- profit status to receive funds for implementation of certain aspects of the project.

Advisory Committee

In order to facilitate broad based participation in the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan implementation, it is recommended that the Leadership Committee engage a committee of Advisors for information exchange and discussion of policy alternatives for the project. The corridor-wide membership should include representatives of community groups and organizations interested in community improvement and development as well as residents along the corridor. Members of the Client Team and Steering Committee of this report should also be included. It is further recommended that the majority of the Advisors live or work along the corridor.

Use of Implementation Task Forces in Addition to Leadership Committee & Advisors

The Leadership Committee and Advisors may choose to establish task forces for further planning and implementation in the diverse geographic sectors of the plan area. Mobilization of a large group of advocates along the corridor will increase resources for implementation, bring more unity and multiply the education efforts.

Although one of the major implementation goals is unification of entities, persons and ideas, it is suggested that geographical task forces could provide additional focused energy and ideas for sector-specific implementation techniques. Task forces would not exceed 15 members charged with developing strategies and actions that would supplement work of the Leadership Committee, Advisors and staff. They may be comprised of elected officials, stakeholders,

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 106 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 business leaders, institutional leaders (educational, faith-based, health care) with sufficient diversity to represent characteristics of the sector and with sufficient commitment to ensure implementation. Task Force work would be coordinated by the implementation staff. Corridor- wide ad hoc committees may be formed to address very specific interests. Such committees would contribute to the unity of the effort.

Outside Consultant Assistance

The Leadership Committee may retain the services of outside consultants to address any number of planning, design, engineering, legal, management, and financial issues. These consultants should be hired, funded and answer directly to the Leadership Committee.

350 Highway / Blue Parkway Redevelopment Office

It is recommended that a high quality office, meeting and display space for housing the operation of the various implementation components be established. The facility should provide communications, space for leadership meetings and audio-visual technology. It should also be utilized for facilitation of policy discussions by the Leadership Committee and all participating entities. The office may be a funded, free-standing operation, or may be provided in-kind by a participating entity.

Office Staffing

The participating entities should fund staffing for the implementation office, if they are allowed to by law. In addition to carrying out specific projects, the staff would provide technical assistance to property owners, residents, and groups addressing the various concerns related to the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway plan. The success of the plan implementation will be based on the commitment of funds and qualified staff to oversee the project on a day-to-day basis. An annual statement of goals and timetable for accomplishment of same should be prepared and adopted by the Leadership Committee. Staff will be accountable to the Leadership Committee.

FUNDING ANALYSIS

The Corridor Plan Organization will be charged with performing analysis of required funding for their on-going operations and the recognition, application, and acquisition of funding resources for the implementation of the Corridor Plan recommendations.

Development / Redevelopment Tools for Funding Improvements

There are numerous potential funding tools available for use on the project. These tools are detailed below. It is important to note, the objective of securing funding is to pay for improvements that otherwise would not have a source of funding, and to provide seed monies for

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 107 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 the encouragement of private investment to occur. There will never be enough public funding to complete the recommendations in the plan. For this reason the investment of private dollars is crucial to the success of the plan.

I. REGULATORY OPTIONS*

A. Impact Fees± The development applicant pays a fee as a condition of the City¶s approval of the development. Advantages: 1. No voter approval required as long as the fee is structured to be consistent with Missouri case law related to user fees. 2. Fees only paid by those individuals or areas benefited by the improvement(s). Disadvantages: 1. All fees collected must be spent for improvements that benefit those who pay the fee. 2. Monies must be spent within a ³reasonable´ period of time from the date paid and must be spent on the type of improvements for which it is paid. 3. Amount of the fee collected cannot exceed an amount that reasonably reflects the cost of constructing those improvements needed as the result of the demand created by the new development. In other words, you can¶t collect enough money to improve mile of a major road if a traffic study shows the new development only impacts the demand on a quarter mile of the road. 4. Impact fees are routinely challenged in court by developers.

II. TAXING OPTIONS

A. Excise Tax± A tax levied on a particular activity, measured by the amount of business done or income received. Advantages: 1. Excise taxes are not subject to the benefit or location requirements of impact fees. There need not be a quantifiable relationship between the tax imposed and the demand for public services created by the activity the tax is imposed on. 2. There is no legal limit on the rate of an excise tax. 3. There is no prescribed methodology a city must use to establish the rate of the tax. 4. Funds collected from the tax do not have to be earmarked for a particular purpose. It could actually just be put in the general fund for any valid public purpose. But, from a practical standpoint, cities usually state what the tax revenues will be spent for. 5. Excise taxes can also be imposed in the form of a license tax on ³building contractors´. Disadvantages: 1. Requires the approval of a simple majority in a public vote. 2. Although there is no legal limit on the amount of tax, it can¶t be ³confiscatory´.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 108 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 B. Economic Development Tax± a new sales tax (up to 1%), approved by last year¶s legislative session. Advantages: 1. Sales taxes have been successful in most communities. 2. Sales taxes generate revenues from non-residents. 3. Can use the revenue not only for infrastructure, but operating expenses within certain parameters. After the revenue is used as defined in items #2 & #3 below, remaining funds can be used for almost any economic development- related activity: marking, grants to companies for job training, equipment acquisition, training programs, legal & accounting expenses related to economic development planning and preparation. 4. When imposed within special taxing district such as TIF, CID, or NID, the tax is excluded from the calculation of revenues available to those districts. Disadvantages: 1. Tax must be approved by a simple majority of the voters. 2. No more that 25% can be used annually for administrative (staff & operating) costs. 3. At least 20% must be used for long-term economic development. However, this includes land acquisition, infrastructure for industrial or business parks, water & wastewater treatment facility improvements, streets, public facilities directly related to economic development & job creation, matching dollars for state or federal grants. 4. Need to establish a 5-member, volunteer board that prepares recommendations on projects. However, Council has final decision on how monies spent. 5. Can¶t be used for retail projects.

C. Capital Improvements Tax± a tax levied on all retail sales for the purpose of funding capital improvements. Advantages: 1. Sales taxes have been successful in our community. 2. Sales taxes generate revenues from non-residents. Disadvantages: 1. There is a limit on each authorized CIP tax of up to ½ of a percent. 2. Tax must be approved by simple majority of the voters. 3. If any one tax measure fails at the polls, it cannot be resubmitted to the voters for at least 12 months. 4. Revenue bonds backed by CIP sales tax revenue must be approved by either a 4/7ths or 2/3rds majority, depending on the election date (see G.O. Debt section).

D. Transportation Sales Tax± a sales tax of one-half percent on all retail sales to generate revenues for transportation purposes. Advantages: 1. The same as those for the CIP Tax. 2. Any bonds issued by these revenues do not count against the city¶s debt limit. Disadvantages:

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 109 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 1. Tax must be approved by simple majority of the voters. 2. Proceeds must be used for transportation purposes ± streets, roads, bridges, parking lots, garages, and public mass transportation.

E. Storm Water Control and Local Parks Sales Tax± a sales tax of up to one-half percent on all retail sales in order to provide funds specifically for storm water control or parks, or both. Same basic pros and restrictions as in the two other taxes above.

III. DISTRICT OPTIONS - All of the following are districts formed to create funding mechanisms in order to finance public improvements. An overall advantage to most of these districts is that they can be layered on top of each other and used in the same area ± for example a TDD can be layered on top of a TIF, etc.

A. Special Assessment District ± best used for small projects the City can afford to finance up front. Formation: City draws the district and it is established by Ordinance. Financing: City issues special tax bills to parcels within the district. Payback is within 10 years. Advantages: 1. Not public vote needed. Disadvantages: 1. Not a widely used mechanism in Missouri. The special tax bills issued are not a familiar concept for investors and are not widely marketable, unlike bonds. 2. Only useful if the City can front the cost of the improvement and can wait the 10 years for total repayment.

B. Community Improvement District (CID)± best used when there could be multiple improvements contemplated cover a large area. Formation: Requested by a petition of property owners within the proposed district (more than 50% by both assessed value and by number of owners). City Council has a public hearing . District approved by ordinance. Can be a political subdivision or a not for profit corporation. Financing: If a not for profit, funds raised through special assessments. If a political subdivision CID can also levy real property taxes after approval by a majority of district voters. Advantages: 1. Don¶t need to go to Circuit Court to form the district. And, although the amount of paperwork and the process involved in establishing the district is fairly extensive it¶s easier than a TDD (see below). 2. The district has the ability to construct, reconstruct, maintain, equip a variety of public improvements. 3. The District has several funding sources available. 4. CID¶s, as homes/merchants association, can provide revenue and management services of a flexible basis for residential or commercial areas. Each CID can be custom designed to the needs of each district.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 110 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Disadvantages: 1. Creating a separate entity can cause problems unless a Redevelopment Agreement is used to stipulate exactly what projects are to be done, how long the district will exist, etc.

C. Neighborhood Improvement District (NID)± best used for single improvement projects within a fairly narrow geographical area. Formation: Council designates particular areas of land as a ³neighborhood´ that will benefit from a particular public improvement. Landowners authorize the NID either by a vote or by a petition signed by owners representing 2/3rds of the area. If the election method is used, majority needed for approval follows the same guidelines as for GO Bonds. Financing: Council may authorize issuance of GO bonds to finance construction of the identified improvements. Special assessments against the benefiting property owners go to pay back the bonds. Advantages: 1. Don¶t need to go to Circuit Court to form the district. 2. Requirements to form the district are not as involved as in the CID and the NID is not a separate public entity. 3. City does not need to do an election to issue GO bonds if it pledges current revenue streams to back the bonds in case the special assessments prove to be insufficient to fund repayment. 4. These bonds don¶t count against the City¶s overall debt limit. Disadvantages: 1. A fairly large majority of landowners must approve formation of the district. 2. The City could end up picking up the tab for landowners who default on their payments and for which tax liens prove un-collectable. 3. Amount of debt can¶t exceed 10% of the assessed value of tangible property. (However, it would have to be a huge project to do that). 4. Compared to a CID, the NID financing purposes are limited to specific projects, although the project need not be inside of the district. 5. Only special assessments can be issued.

D. Special Business District (best used in areas with a heavy concentration of commercial businesses) Formation: Requested by a petition of one or more property owners within the proposed district, then approved by a majority of the property owners in the district. City Council appoints a commission or advisory board to recommend how money is spent. Financing: District can levy property taxes (up to $.85 per $100 valuation) and special fees a (a license tax). Can also issue up to 20 year GO bonds with Council approval and a majority vote of property owners (4/7ths or 2/3rds). Advantages: 1. Discretion as to types and amounts of expenditures lies solely with the Council.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 111 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 2. Funds can be used for a variety of ³maintenance and improvement projects´ within the district including new and improved streets. Disadvantages: 1. Any license fees levied can be protested by businesses representing a majority of the total license taxes being collected. 2. Any bonds issued do count against the City¶s debt limit. 3. Would only apply to ³business´ within the area.

E. Transportation Development District (TDD) Formation: Approved by the circuit court after receiving a petition from either at least 50 registered voters, or from real property owners in the proposed district, or by City Council. If the court approves the petition, a simple majority vote by the registered voters or property owners (depending on the type of petition) is needed. Within 120 days of this election, another election is held to elect a board of directors. Financing: Transportation related projects can be funded by special assessments and tolls (no limit), property taxes (up to $.10 per $100), or sales taxes (up to 1%). TDD¶s can issue bonds without a vote of the public. Advantages: 1. The district has a wide range of funding mechanisms available (although the types of mechanisms have to be approved through an election of district members). 2. The TDD is a separate political subdivision with powers of condemnation, power to contract, to lease or purchase property, and to sue (and be sued), can be multi-jurisdictional. 3. Any bonds issued do not count against the City debt limit. 4. Although uses of TDD funds can be limited, if overlaid on a TIF, its revenues are captured by the TIF become ³TIF dollars´ and can be spent with same way as TIF revenues. 5. Projects need not be totally inside of the District funding them. Disadvantages: 1. Since it is a separate political entity, the City would have no control over it unless defined by contract. 2. Procedure for setting up the district is fairly complicated and can take months to approve. 3. Types of projects are approved by the Circuit Court when the district is first formed and cannot be changed unless authorized by the voters and MODOT and the City (depending on the project). 4. Projects must be transportation related ± streets, parking, and ³other´ transportation uses. 5. If the initial attempt to form a TDD fails with the voters, it cannot be resubmitted for 2 years.

F. TIF Districts ³Regular TIF´± best used for retail development or for-sale residential development.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 112 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Formation: Approved by the City Council after recommendation from TIF Commission. Plan is required to meet specific findings, including Blight, as described in state statute. Financing: Revenues are generated through property taxes (100% of real property taxes above the base that was there before a TIF district was formed), and sales & franchise taxes (50% of the new taxes). TIF bonds can be issued based on the revenue stream. Advantages: 1. TIF allows future real property taxes and other taxes generated by new development to pay for the costs of construction of public infrastructure and other improvements required to make the project possible. 2. TIFs can be easily combined with other development tools using cooperative agreements. 3. Provides a way to fund public infrastructure projects the City would otherwise have no means of financing. 4. TIF bonds can be issued without a vote. Disadvantages: 1. Establishing a TIF district is complicated. 2. Projects have to be able to generate enough revenue to pay off the reimbursable costs, either on a pay-as-you±go basis, or by paying off the debt service on TIF bonds.

³MODESA TIF´ (Missouri Downtown Economic Stimulus Act) ± best suited for large projects involving public infrastructure in the central business area of the city. Formation: Similar to a regular TIF, however a Downtown Economic Stimulus Authority must be created to administer the provisions of MODESA within the City. This takes the place of the regular TIF Commission. Financing: In addition to the revenues captured by the regular TIF, the MODESA can capture 50% of the new state sales taxes generated as well as 50% of state income taxes generated by new jobs created within the development area. Advantages: 1. Same as with the regular TIF, plus diversion of state tax monies to the project. Disadvantages: 1. Much more complicated to set up than a normal TIF. Many restrictions on where the district can be formed; on how the state-generated funds can be used (only 10 specific uses defined); and on how the district is to be administered.

³TIF Light´ (Tax Rebate Agreements) best used in retail or other ³sales´ related projects where a TIF isn¶t feasible and public improvements required for project¶s success. Formation: Not actually a district. It is an alternative to a formal TIF. Established as a contract between the developer and the City (although other entities, like the County, could partner in the agreement)

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 113 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Financing: Agreement stipulates what amount of incremental city sales and/or property tax to be captured by the City in order to reimburse City costs for public improvements made in association with a private project. Advantages: 1. No plans or other formalities to follow. 2. Agreement is strictly between the City (and any other public entity that wants to join) and the developer. Disadvantages: 1. Limited revenues available unless other partners agree to forsake their portions of new taxes. 2. Revenues can only reimburse public improvements related to the project.

IV. BONDING OPTIONS A. General Obligation Bonds± bonds issued with the City¶s full faith and credit. Paid by a dedicated amount of property tax. Advantages: 1. Can be used for streets and other public improvements. 2. Tax is usually community wide unless it has been levied under the authority of one of the various districts mentioned above. Disadvantages: 1. Requires voter approval (4/7ths in an April, August or November election), 2/3rds approval any other time. 2. Limits on how much a City can issue based on a set percentage of assessed valuation.

B. Revenue Bonds± bonds issued to finance facilities with a definable user or revenue base. Citizens using the services pay for the financing through rates or fees. Advantages: 1. Revenue bonds can be issued without voter approval (in certain circumstances). 2. Revenue bonds do not count toward the City¶s debt limit. Disadvantages: 1. Unless there is a dedicated revenue source to pay off the bonds, voter approval may be needed to put a property tax, sales tax or other funding mechanism in place. 2. Limits on how much a City can issue based on a set percentage of assessed valuation.

V. CHAPTER 353 REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION A. Allowed by State Law ± to correct blighted conditions and attract new investment in a designated area Advantages:

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 114 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 1. Corporation redevelopment is locally run to address specific area defined in a redevelopment plan and may include provisions for recreational facilities ± 353 includes residential and commercial redevelopment. 2. Offers incentive of abatement of real property taxes for 25 years ± 10 years are 100 percent and the remaining 15 years are at 50 percent. 3. Redevelopment corporation has flexibility within the plan area and within established goals. 4. May be combined with other economic development incentives. 5. Good track record for reversing decline and attracting investment. Disadvantages: 1. Initial detailed planning is required. 2. Major funding may be required for acquisitions to ensure success. 3. Participation in program is largely voluntary.

(* this description of financing options adopted from work originally prepared by Robert Meyers, AICP, planner.)

These tools can and should be used in combination with each other to provide the greatest amount of incentive and assistance that is possible. It is common to utilize multiple funding tools like TIF and TDD together to generate more available funding for large projects. Because each project is unique, a blanket statement of what tools should be used and how is not possible. Each project should be evaluated on its individual funding needs. A legal consultant should be retained by the Corridor Plan Organization and the participating entities to assist them in the legal interaction and availability of these tools.

Additional funding may be sought through grants, in-kind donations, or donations by corporations, businesses, and citizens. Funding of this kind should be acquired through fundraising campaigns and direct outreach to those organizations and individuals. This type of fundraising should be conducted by the Corridor Plan Organization. Additionally, a professional fundraiser should be hired as a consultant to assist in the fundraising effort.

Additional information on development and redevelopment programs available in the State of Missouri and their submission and qualification requirements can be found on the Missouri Department of Economic Development website in the development toolbox section: http://www.missouridevelopment.org/topnavpages/Research%20Toolbox/BCS%20Programs.asp x

Transportation Funding Sources

There are several transportation specific funding sources. Available State of Missouri funding tools for transportation related improvements are listed in the Development / Redevelopment Tools for Funding Improvements section. Additional funding sources include:

STP sub allocated funding is available through MARC for regional needs. These funds can be used toward any public transportation project subject to the priorities of MARC, and MoDOT local program rules and regulations as well as FHWA rules and regulations.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 115 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Transportation Enhancement Funding ± 10% of STP funding to be spent on non roadway items such as bike/pedestrian trails, transit centers, landscaping and aesthetic improvements, etc.

Congestion Management and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding is available for mitigation of congestion such as bike/pedestrian facilities, signal upgrades and synchronizations, etc.

Bridge off system and on system funding addresses bridge needs in the MARC region. The on system (MoDOT system) funding is subject to the MoDOT Planning Framework and the off system funding is subject to MARC regional priorities as well as fed and state regulations.

MoDOT¶s Planning Framework identifies and prioritizes needs and projects district wide with input and decision-making including planning partners such as MARC or regional planning commissions. The prioritized needs and project lists are not fiscally constrained, enabling selection to be done based on priorities and available funding. Any shared costs by other entities is factored in to the process during selection.

Additional funding sources for transportation improvements can come from innovative financing, through the use of transportation corporations, loans from the Infrastructure Bank, and Cost Share programs. Economic development financing tools from the State of Missouri are available as well.

Currently (October 06¶), there are no MoDOT funds available, and the majority of funds are already committed to projects for the next 3-5 years. Following this, funding may become available. The Corridor Plan Organization, and the jurisdictions involved should work closely with MoDOT to determine timelines and qualification requirements for future funding.

City Services and Capital Improvements Programs

Basic city services of primary concern to the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway plan are the provision of capital improvements for infrastructure and regulations to make priority improvements possible. Implementation will require cooperation in Capital Improvements Planning on the part of all participating entities as well as commitments to funding. A firm commitment in capital improvement funding should be secured from all participating entities. It is recommended that a 10-year capital improvements program be approved by participating entities to assist with the following elements of the plan:

Infrastructure Improvements Public Places, Parks and Bikeways Plans 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Infrastructure Plan 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Aesthetic Enhancement Plan Existing Façade Maintenance and Enhancements Plan

MARKETING AND COMMUNICATIONS

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 116 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Identity

The Leadership Committee should undertake development of a visual identity and joint marketing efforts to make the identity visible to the participating entities and along the corridor. One of the first efforts should be directed toward achieving cohesiveness among the corridor entities and creating visibility for the corridor and the project. The identity should include a logo and theme, which will be visible along the corridor and in all communications created by the corporation. The marketing component basically is an economic development campaign.

Communities should be aware that the initial planning effort is complete and that the implementation effort has begun through media coverage and public meetings to discuss the plan and its action timeline. Public education about the process of planning, corridor and neighborhood revitalization should continue to be provided.

A schedule of meetings and events should be held along the corridor to secure volunteer or financial support and unite those who can serve the implementation cause. The events should draw on individuals who have previously been involved in the plan development.

Communications

Three components are recommended for communication within and about the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway area. It is recommended that (1) the Leadership Committee and Advisors schedule at least annual meetings with the community-at-large for the purpose of public education about the process of corridor enhancement and its elements and about corporate progress (a follow-up on the introductory sessions mentioned above) (2) the Leadership Committee establish a newsletter for residents, corridor businesses, stakeholders and interested citizens and (3) routinely provide information regarding activities to the local press. Media representatives should be invited to ³track´ the project, provide a special column for that purpose or introduce special insert sections.

The unifying logo also can be displayed on billboards, utility pole banners or windows of establishments along the corridor. Public events along the corridor are encouraged.

The Leadership Committee, Advisors and staff should join in a series of ³roadshow´ presentations, to be scheduled at organization meetings, churches, schools, etc. to explain about the project. The presentations should be in simple terms and utilize effective graphics. The meetings should be interactive as much as possible. Public feedback should be secured at every opportunity.

Recruitment strategy

A strategy and schedule of recruitment efforts should be developed. Staff will assume the primary responsibility of recruitment of candidates for revitalization. Sections along the corridor may be selected for a ³demonstration block´ of what can be accomplished.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 117 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 NEXT PHASE PLANNING AND ENGINEERING

The initial phase of planning for the corridor is the Corridor Plan. It proposes a new Land Use Plan, a Transportation Plan, and an Aesthetics and Enhancement Plan. The plans and strategies in this Corridor Plan are the guide book for the future improvements. These plans and strategies are defined at a corridor level. A more detailed study of the individual recommendations is necessary.

The next phase of planning and engineering studies will further define, scope, scale, cost, and impact of the Corridor Plan recommendations as specific projects. It is from this next phase, and subsequent planning phases, that specific plans are designed, funded, approved, and built. The criteria for developing plans should be focused as follows:

Development of funded projects Development of studies necessary to qualify for funding Development of the demonstration projects Development of Infrastructure for health, safety and welfare needs Development of high impact ± low cost improvements

The Leadership Committee shall determine what recommendations shall be studied in the next phase of planning and engineering, with advisory committee, staff, and hired consultant assistance.

DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS One of the key components of the Plan is the initial use of Demonstration Projects to facilitate the idea of the early, visible success. Early, visible success is critical to the future implementation of the redevelopment plan. Early demonstrations show the public, private investment, existing business and residents, and potential funding agencies that change is occurring for the better. Developing a series of smaller, manageable, projects that can be completed early helps to build momentum.

The more visible the project or improvement is, the more it will be recognized. The successful completion of the initial project begins to change perception that the area can change and is changing. Often, it is this change in perception that helps trigger the most vital component of all development and redevelopment, private investment.

The Leadership Committee and pubic officials will be presented with multiple projects in the corridor plan area, either from the Corridor Plan, or from private developers. Because of the competition for limited resources, a way to evaluate and compare the priority of projects, as demonstration projects, is needed. The following table should be used for evaluating each individual project. Final scores should be compared to each other to assist in determining which projects to move forward on.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 118 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 The Project Evaluation Criteria Scoring Table, below, should be used to evaluate and prioritize projects. The Attribute is the category to be evaluated. The Scoring Criteria is the range of scoring available for the attribute. The Score is the actual score of the attribute. Scores for the attributes should be added together for a total evaluation score. Lower scores produce a higher priority for the project.

PROJECT EVALUATION CRITERIA TABLE Attribute Scoring Criteria Score

Low to High impact Property Owner Impact (1=Low, 3= Medium, 5=High) Complexity (1=Low, 3= Medium, 5=High) Consultant Fees (1=Low, 3= Medium, 5=High) Cost (1=Low, 3= Medium, 5=High)

High to low positive impact Economic Impact (1=High, 3= Medium, 5=Low) Neighborhood Impact (1=High, 3= Medium, 5=Low) Aesthetic Impact (1=High, 3= Medium, 5=Low) Public Health, Safety, Welfare Impact (1=High, 3= Medium, 5=Low) Recreation, Open Space Impact (1=High, 3= Medium, 5=Low)

Misc. (1=Existing Funding Available / Available Funding 5=No Funding Available) Time Requirement to Implement (1=Short, 3=Medium, 5=Long)

(Lowest total score on comparison of projects equals highest benefit) Total Score

It is nearly impossible to develop evaluation criteria that balance all factors for all unique instances that could occur. In the above table, all attributes are weighted the same in the table. This must be taken into account for evaluation of all projects. For example, cost that is rated as high (5) would offset the benefit of having a project fully funded (regardless of cost)(1). This is very apparently not of equal weight in this case. A fully funded project with other benefits should rate as a high priority project.

This should be kept in mind during comparison evaluation of all projects. The scores obtained from the Project Evaluation Criteria Table should be used as a guideline, subject to full review for specific circumstances unique to the project being evaluated.

Additionally, It should be noted that this evaluation table should not be used to evaluate the major transportation recommendations. Because of the high cost, long time frame, lack of available funding, high impact to residents, but high positive impact to safety, economic impact and aesthetic impact, these recommendations will be evaluated during additional studies required to meet local, state, and federal requirements.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 119 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS

The acquisition of funding sources for the Corridor Plan Implementation will be crucial to its success. There are numerous funding requirements, at different stages of Corridor Plan development. At the current time, no commitment in funding has been made by any of the municipal, state, federal, or private entities for the next phase of the Plan.

During the initial stages of the Implementation Plan, there are two primary funding goals:

1. Funding for the Policy decisions that need to be made. Because of the gap in current funding between approval of the Corridor Plan and the formation of the Corridor Plan Organization, some additional funding will be needed for the time and effort it will take to get the Policy changes and approvals with the jurisdictions involved. These tasks would be conducted by the staff of the jurisdictions involved, and the consultant responsible for this report. The jurisdictions would provide funding for their own portion of the Policy tasks. Refer to Policy section, above, for details of the required tasks. An initial Budget of $40-50,000.00 should be used for these tasks.

2. Funding for the start-up of the Corridor Plan Organization. During the completion of the required Policy tasks mentioned above, the formulation of the Corridor Plan Organization needs to be accomplished. The success of the plan implementation will be based on the commitment of adequate funds to oversee the project on a day-to-day basis. An estimated budget for such activity is $175,000- $250,000 annually. Initially, 75-100 percent of the financial requirements to operate the 350 Highway / Blue Parkway office should come from cities, counties, MoDOT, MARC, and others, if allowed by law, while 0-25 percent should come from other sources, which may include grants, contributions and fund raising events.

Additionally, all incentive programs (TIF, TDD, NID, CID, etc.) approved along the corridor should be required to contribute to the Corridor Plan Organization for operations and implementation of the Corridor Plan. Contributions should based upon current and future plan implementation needs.

Initial financial commitments by all founding entities should be for five years. During that time frame, government funding should be reduced.

The next phase Implementation Plan, will require funding to occur for:

1. Marketing and Communications Plan 2. Next Phase Planning and Engineering 3. Funding Analysis 4. Demonstration Projects/Plan Recommendations

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 120 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 SUCCESSFUL CONSTRUCTION IMPLEMENTATION

Once designed, prioritized and funded, the demonstration projects need to be constructed and maintained. As the capstone to this lengthy process, construction implementation and maintenance of the demonstration projects is the public manifestation of the Corridor Plan. Ultimately, the public will determine the success of the project on the physical development of its recommendations. Timely construction, minimizing construction impact on adjacent property owners, improvements to transportation, and the aesthetics of the improvements will increase the enthusiasm, the positive perception of change, and the economic impact the improvements will have. Additionally, on-going, quality maintenance of the existing corridor and the implemented projects must occur. All project budgets should include an estimate of on-going maintenance cost, timing, and responsible party.

PROPOSED SCHEDULE FOR KEY PLAN MILESTONES

350 Highway / Blue Parkway Corridor Plan ± Key Milestones

Plan Milestone ± Responsibility ± Recommended Start Date ± Next Steps? Who? (End date undetermined) When? Approve Final Corridor Plan Client Team Members Nov 06¶ Document Adoption of Corridor Plan as Participating Jurisdictions ± Following Approval of Policy KCMO, Raytown Corridor Plan ± Dec 06¶ Modifications of local Participating Jurisdictions ± Following Adoption of ordinances and plans to be KCMO, Raytown Corridor Plan ± Jan 07¶ consistent with the Plan Creation of organization to Participating Jurisdictions, Following approved code shepherd project private entities, citizens changes - Second Quarter 07¶ Initial Corridor Plan Participating Jurisdictions, Following approved code Organization funding to private entities, citizens changes - Second Quarter begin project set up 07¶ Available Funding Analysis Corridor Plan Organization - During development of Marketing and Communications Plan ±

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 121 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 2nd Quarter 07¶ Development of Marketing Corridor Plan Organization ± Following creation and and Communications Plan initial funding of Plan Organization ± 2nd or 3rd Quarter 07¶ Development of next phase Corridor Plan Organization ± Following creation and of planning and engineering With jurisdiction assistance or initial funding of Plan studies support Organization ± 3rd or 4th Quarter 07¶ Evaluation, approval, and/or Corridor Plan Organization ± Following development of continued development of With jurisdiction assistance or next phase studies next phase planning and support - 4th Quarter 07¶ engineering studies Develop demonstration Corridor Plan Organization ± Following approval by projects/blocks With jurisdiction assistance or Leadership Committee of support next phase engineering studies ± Jan-08¶ Develop funding plan for Corridor Plan Organization ± Following development of approved next phase projects With jurisdiction assistance or next phase studies and demonstration blocks support - 4th Quarter 07¶ Secure funding for next Corridor Plan Organization ± Following development of phase projects and With jurisdiction assistance or funding plan for next phase demonstration blocks support projects ± 1st Quarter 08¶ according to funding plan Begin implementation and Corridor Plan Organization ± Following securing of construction of initial With jurisdiction assistance or funding for next phase project/demonstration support projects ± 4th Quarter 08¶ block(s) Continued development of Corridor Plan Organization ± During life of project ± On- planning and engineering With jurisdiction assistance or going studies support On-going review, approval, Corridor Plan Organization ± During life of project ± On- and implementation of With jurisdiction assistance or going developed Corridor Plan support recommendations On-going capital Corridor Plan Organization ± Following installation of improvements funding, With jurisdiction assistance or initial project/demonstration design, and construction support block(s) ± On-going

On-going Marketing and Corridor Plan Organization ± During life of project ± On- maintenance With jurisdiction assistance or going support

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 122 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007 Implementation of the Corridor Plan will require commitment and coordinated efforts among public, private and voluntary organizations and individuals and the Corridor Plan Organization. It will also require policy commitments and human and financial resources dedicated to the project over an extended period of time. But, this commitment will be rewarded with a revitalized corridor with new living, working, shopping, and recreation opportunities.

The 350 Highway / Blue Parkway Page 123 Corridor Plan Final, January 12, 2007