|
|
| |
Kansas City lUG completed our first train show a couple weeks ago. We had a
10ft by 15ft layout which I think was a complete sucess. We were invited back
next year, so if your around, join us.
Warning there are several very big overall pictures.
Pictures:
http://www.brickshelf.com/cgi-bin/gallery.cgi?f=207381
Let us know what you think.
Matthew Rausch
-Remove .diespamdie. to email
|
|
| |
Yet another article discussing Legoland KC today.
"One day after Olathe officials rejected a proposed deal to build Legoland and
other attractions in the north part of the city, both the city and developers
said they were willing to continue discussions.
The developers said they would consider an alternative site suggested by the
city at the Great Mall of the Great Plains. Mall owners could not be reached
late Wednesday. The previous suggested site is a mile west of the Kansas 10
interchange with I-435."
The KC Star article:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/local/15291366.htm
|
|
| |
In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Matthew Rausch wrote:
> City council results:
>
> NO, but fix the plan and come back.
>
> From the article:
> Among the problems: The proposal does not include a guaranteed revenue stream to
> pay for $64.3 million in bonds developers want the city to issue; public
> participation would exceed the 50 percent limit the city had asked for; and
> there was no dedicated revenue source to pay for the city police and fire
> protection to serve the development.
>
> Also, the Olathe mayor says he is excited about the possibility, but they city
> will not pay that amount without the guarantees.
Everything the City Council is asking for seems quite reasonable. If Legoland
can't make it work, then maybe it just wasn't meant to be there.
|
|
| |
What about the other amusement parks in the kansas city area? both past and
present? Like Jeepers, Fairyland, and Worlds Of Fun.? Why does anyone think
having Legoland on the door would make it work? What about Worlds of fun?
|
|
| |
City council results:
NO, but fix the plan and come back.
From the article:
Among the problems: The proposal does not include a guaranteed revenue stream to
pay for $64.3 million in bonds developers want the city to issue; public
participation would exceed the 50 percent limit the city had asked for; and
there was no dedicated revenue source to pay for the city police and fire
protection to serve the development.
Also from the article:
But Tim McKee, executive vice president of economic development for the Olathe
Chamber of Commerce, said it appears chances were growing slim that the project
would come to Olathe.
Article:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/15283340.htm
From local talk radio:
RED Development the company which is developing the "O-Zone" complex including
Legoland says the deal is not dead and they are planning to return with a
modified financing package.
Also, the Olathe mayor says he is excited about the possibility, but they city
will not pay that amount without the guarantees.
|
|
| |
In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Gerhard R. Istok wrote:
> My whole take on this is that it is NOT Lego driven, but developer driven. If
> it goes thru, then the taxpayers of Kansas will be paying for this.
I agree with you, but as long as Legoland is not owned by Lego, it is an
amusement park like any other, and developers are going to use it as the draw
for retail, hotels, other tourism, etc. and since it will increace the tax base
enormously, the developers will expect taxpayers to pick up the tab.This should
not come as a surprise, since any Legoland not located in one of the major USA
metropolis (something that would cost exponentially more than the KS deal) is
going to have to come as a package deal with the above mentioned types of
entities to make it a success.
I applaud Legoland parks for using creative financing to bring parks where the
might not otherwise be located.
|
|
| |
My whole take on this is that it is NOT Lego driven, but developer driven. If
it goes thru, then the taxpayers of Kansas will be paying for this. But if it
fails in the end, it could affect the reputation of Lego... the product.
I am leary about this.
Just my opinion.
Gary Istok
|
|
| |
Legoland KC is supposed to be presented to the Olathe City council tonight. It
looks good except the current plan has tax payers paying 2/3 the cost. I don't
think people will be real excited about putting up this amount.
This has been discussed on local talk radio today ad nauseum. And their general
consensus is against the government financing.
From the article:
Two-thirds of the estimated cost of the proposed project would come from state
and city tax incentives and direct subsidies from Olathe. The breakdown of the
public financing:
•tax-increment financing bonds, $5.9 million.
•transportation development district bonds, $47 million.
•city-issued bonds, $64.3 million.
•STAR bonds, $556 million.
The article in Kansas City Star:
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/business/15275009.htm
The Olathe mayor has released a statement that the city will not put up any
money.
|
|
| |
Any AFOLs in the Kansas City area, we have a chance to display at this year's
Greater Kansas City Model Railroad Expo at Union Station on Septmber 23rd and
24th. Set up is Friday the 22nd. I have reserved a layout area of 12 ft by 20.
Currently I only have one other participant, but if anyone is in interested we
have room on our layout. Our layout consists of 3 loops, one which will support
8 wide trains.
Please let me know as soon as possible if you are interrested in joining us or
have any questions.
Layout:
http://www.brickshelf.com/gallery/missourilego/Layouts/GKCMRE/union_station_-_sept_24.gif
Thanks,
Matthew Rausch
-Remove .diespamdie. to email
|
|
| |
In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Mark Chan wrote:
> In lugnet.loc.us.ks, Mark Papenfuss wrote:
> > I think on their (LLCA's) best day more people are standing in line for
> > Space Mountain at Disneyland than for all the rides at LLCA combined.
> >
> >
> > But hey - if they have a promobrick program then it can't be all that bad ;)
> >
> > Mark
> > http://www.promobricks.com
>
> I'd rather go to an amusement park where I wasn't standing in line for hours.
> Standing in line is not my idea of a fun vacation - especially with short
> attention span 4-12 year olds.
The glory of fast-passes fix that for the more popular rides such as SM ;)
But the rides at LLCA move slowwwwwwwwww. They have very low per-hour capacity
that brings everything to a very slow crawl. And it is only worse when LLCA cuts
down on the number of workers staffing the rides and/or not even running all the
already-slow cars (think the new dragon ride that only has half of it open even
at most of the "busy" times)
> If Legoland purposely cuts off attendance each day to insure small lines, charge
> a high gate fee, and can still make a profit,
But they do not cut off attendance and I (would hope) the high ticket cost is
because of the expense of the area - but I have no idea why it is so highly
priced.
> I heard once that LLCA was struggling financially, so
> maybe the model needs some fine tuning - and maybe the new operators have
> already tuned it enough where they have confidence in opening a new LL in Kansas
> City.
They said the talks were on before the buyout with TLC. But yes, they would have
to have confidence to open a new park wherever it may be.
> Don't worry though - I'll make sure to get you some promobricks when it opens :)
> (nice website btw)
Thanks :)
Mark
|
|
|
