Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Geez dude really? I guess we should all thank you, bravo for all your dedication.
Sarcasm aside, you are welcome. I'm not ashamed to say I was a part of much of the initial efforts to get a lot of different things going in KC in the early 90's even though many of them have yet to materialize. It's people with civic passion that not only make things happen, but the bigger issue of convincing others that things need to happen. In KC that was most of the battle. If you want to put me down for that, I don't care because I (along with many others) went against the grain and did what we could to spark interest in the city again.
Lots of people should be thanked for their efforts but most will never be recognized for their accomplishments. Mayor Barnes probably being the biggest example of this.
But yea, I feel like I did dedicate a lot of my time and effort to: Union Station renovation, Liberty memorial renovation, 18th and Vine and the Museums at Vine, Brush Creek, the KC Zoo, a new Paseo Bridge, the Sprint Center, nearly all the transit proposals (chastain, city backed, regional commuter rail, max, bistate buses etc), riverfront park, the casino locations and proposals, bike lanes, kcmo police and fire station rebuilds, downtown airport renovations, a downtown baseball stadium and more. I did get involved in them all some way or another. Did I personally make them happen. No, but I did my part to try to make them happen. Sorry if that offends you...
Oh and being involved could mean as little as sharing a post on FB about something that could benefit the community. I'm always talking about the proposed light rail lines in Maryland for example voicing my support of the projects. This is something that most people just don't do. Every little bit helps and people should not be ashamed to have civic passion.
Maybe kcmo and menver should hang out and find new ways to insult KC and it's residents more since they are obviously experts on what's going on here.
Hey Menver, I have several friends too that hate flying into DIA because it actually is freaking out in the middle of nowhere. And you know what, I'm sooooo excited for your little Union Station opening up....you know we have one too and it's bigger than yours...haha.
Only difference is, we actually have people and TRAINS in our Union Station. Do your frends also hate KCI since it's about the same distance from downtown KCMO as DIA is from downtown Denver? Or does flying into a glorified bus station make it all better?
I grew up in KC and I wish it had progressed into something better. It seemed like a lot was built in the 80s in KC, but then progress slowed. I'm very impressed with the new P&L District and Kaufman Center. There's a start But I remember friends out in JoCo laughing at the P&L District saying they'd never step foot in it (you know, downtown is dangerous!) and they said it would fail. But the same people are "amazed" by all the "progress" in south JoCo when a new strip mall or chain restaurant opens up. It makes little sense to me. I still don't get the "small town/anti-urban" attitude in most of the KC metro area.
KCMO, you actually bring something to the table, though. You talk about ways KC can improve, what it's doing that is positive and negative and where it can go if all things go well. Do some people get too sensitive about criticism? Yes, of course they do, but again I've seen a lot of your posts and you also don't shy away from talking about the positives about the place.
Denverian doesn't do any of that. He just talks about how great it is to be out of KC. How much the airport sucks, how much downtown sucks, how much it hasn't changed in 30 years, how much Denver is awesome and KC sucks. He reminds me of your friend that moves away but calls you every weekend to tell you about how awesome his life in (insert city name here) is going, like you're supposed to be jealous.
I love KC and don't plan on moving away any time soon. Do I wish the entire metro would work together and get things done, like the airport, transit, business, etc., to make this city as well-known and popular as it should be? Yes, and in the long-term I hope this happens, and I'm excited to be a part of it and watch it move forward. But on a day-to-day basis, KC is awesome, and unless you're a grass is greener on the side person in general, you should have no excuse not to enjoy your time in this city.
So don't read my posts. I know many people who left KC and don't care for it. If you happen to fit into the small town, conservative mentality that prevails in metro KC, then I'm sure it's a lovely place to live.
If you happen to fit into the small town, conservative mentality that prevails in metro KC, then I'm sure it's a lovely place to live.
That would be weird, since that's not what KC is like...maybe where you lived in Lenexa in the 80s was, but even KC isn't defined by Johnson County any more than Denver is Douglas County. (and for the record, there's nothing "small town" about JoCo, and its less conservative than Douglas County by a few orders of magnitude...)
It really isn't what KC is like. I'm sorry you had such a crappy time while you lived here, and again, I'm glad you enjoy it in Denver. I have friends in Denver, they seem to like it. They also seem to like coming back home. Just like the poster above me said, the Kansas City I live in sure doesn't seem like a small town, conservative place.
That would be weird, since that's not what KC is like...maybe where you lived in Lenexa in the 80s was, but even KC isn't defined by Johnson County any more than Denver is Douglas County. (and for the record, there's nothing "small town" about JoCo, and its less conservative than Douglas County by a few orders of magnitude...)
DougCo is the only conservative stronghold in the Denver metro area. The other 6 counties all voted for Obama in the last two elections. Not that his thread has anything to do with politics. But I think the overall conservative attitude is quite strong throughout metro KC. Plaza to Downtown is the only real urban, liberal area. And I think parts of far NE JoCo trend liberal. KC is just more "Bible Belt" than Western cities. And that's fine, if that's what you prefer in your city.
It really isn't what KC is like. I'm sorry you had such a crappy time while you lived here, and again, I'm glad you enjoy it in Denver. I have friends in Denver, they seem to like it. They also seem to like coming back home. Just like the poster above me said, the Kansas City I live in sure doesn't seem like a small town, conservative place.
I grew up there. It wasn't crappy to grow up there, but just isn't what I wanted in my adult life. There are MUCH worse places that KC that I could live. Anywhere in the South comes to mind. But my hell is another person's heaven I wouldn't even want to live anywhere rural in Colorado or California.
My plan is to move back to LA or San Diego, eventually. That's where I feel most "at home". Denver isn't perfect.
I don't know that I would call KC overly conservative in a bible beltish way. I mean it's a bit more religious than the DC area. Compared to here, KC has churches everywhere, some huge ones especially in the suburbs and it just seems like more people were more involved with churches in KC compared to here where it seems like very few go to church regularly, but it's not nearly as in your face as it is in places like OK, TX etc.
Colorado is in the top tier of liberalism (with places like Washington, Oregon, Vermont etc), which I would personally prefer because I don't get into religion. You can easily live in KC and not be bothered by overly religious people though, although that may depend on the part of the metro you live in to some extent.
When I call KC "conservative", I'm mostly talking about people there just having a more conservative view on everything, not necessarily being more religious such as not wanting a lot to change, not wanting to spend money on anything, a metro area that still leans pretty anti-urban, pretty much still stuck in the 1980s (or 1960's with the airport).
When you travel as much as I do, you can see how cities are different from each other culturally. KC is not alone, there are some other cities that are similar. A lot of people like these things about KC. That's why KC is often called a giant small town. For me, it's always been one the of the things I disliked about KC. I find small town culture to be overrated . I prefer to be a part of a fast changing city that is constantly evolving and updating and competing and trying to improve the QOL. KC does this to some degree, but at a very slow pace and is generally at least a decade behind most other cities. I would attribute KC being conservative as one of the main reasons for KC's rather slow pace of urban growth while still experiencing robust suburban growth. And the type of development in KC's suburban areas is for sure 15 years behind what you see in most cities now with almost no transit oriented development, true mixed use etc. It's basically the same thing the city was building in the 80's (only further out) and people there are fine with that. That's what I mean by conservative.
I don't know that I would call KC overly conservative in a bible beltish way. I mean it's a bit more religious than the DC area. Compared to here, KC has churches everywhere, some huge ones especially in the suburbs and it just seems like more people were more involved with churches in KC compared to here where it seems like very few go to church regularly, but it's not nearly as in your face as it is in places like OK, TX etc.
Colorado is in the top tier of liberalism (with places like Washington, Oregon, Vermont etc), which I would personally prefer because I don't get into religion. You can easily live in KC and not be bothered by overly religious people though, although that may depend on the part of the metro you live in to some extent.
When I call KC "conservative", I'm mostly talking about people there just having a more conservative view on everything, not necessarily being more religious such as not wanting a lot to change, not wanting to spend money on anything, a metro area that still leans pretty anti-urban, pretty much still stuck in the 1980s (or 1960's with the airport).
When you travel as much as I do, you can see how cities are different from each other culturally. KC is not alone, there are some other cities that are similar. A lot of people like these things about KC. That's why KC is often called a giant small town. For me, it's always been one the of the things I disliked about KC. I find small town culture to be overrated . I prefer to be a part of a fast changing city that is constantly evolving and updating and competing and trying to improve the QOL. KC does this to some degree, but at a very slow pace and is generally at least a decade behind most other cities. I would attribute KC being conservative as one of the main reasons for KC's rather slow pace of urban growth while still experiencing robust suburban growth. And the type of development in KC's suburban areas is for sure 15 years behind what you see in most cities now with almost no transit oriented development, true mixed use etc. It's basically the same thing the city was building in the 80's (only further out) and people there are fine with that. That's what I mean by conservative.
I live in Phoenix (been here for around 13 years) and my fiance is from Johnson County. We are considering moving to the Kansas City area when our children reach school age (as the most of the non-charter public schools in Arizona are abysmal and I think it's important for children to experience changes of seasons). However, a lot of the features I dislike about the Phoenix area seem to be similar to issues that Kansas City is facing. I think, in actuality, Phoenix is starting to make some more progress in certain areas (faster) than Kansas City.
For example, outside of some distribution center / warehouse developments and some expansion of existing office parks, much of the commercial growth in Phoenix (in conservative Arizona) has been concentrated along the light rail line (that everyone was seemingly opposed to but most are warming up to). There have also been numerous high rise apartment / condo projects pop up all along the light rail line as well. If KC can get over the "hump" of the anti-rail crowd, a rail line could really be a catalyst for infill development (like it is here in Phoenix).
I guess if transit oriented and infill development can flourish in a sprawling metropolitan area with a legislature that is almost a mirror image of the Kansas legislature in the middle of the desert, I don't see why it can't flourish in Kansas City. It's kind of nice to be able to take the light rail to a play, a college sporting event, a baseball game, a basketball game, or a museum (and lot of people that never thought that they'd do that are embracing it).
If you look at the Phoenix area, the area that is growing the least right now is the "fringe" areas. The core is doing quite well, actually (although they did have the foresight to build a light rail line, the airport, the baseball stadium, the basketball museum, the theaters, and the museums) in the urban core. The Coyotes NHL team isn't working precisely because it's located on the edge of suburbia.
I was quite impressed and Kansas City has a lot of valuable assets to work with. From my oberservations, a rail line on from downtown along Broadway to the Plaza and then down Shawnee Mission Parkway to Metcalf and then from along to 135th St. would be a nice catalyst for redevelopment and infill development. A 2nd line could run from downtown along Broadway to E 31st St. and then east on E 31st St and Stadium Drive. to Arrowhead Stadium. A 3rd line could run from downtown west along W 12th St, Central Ave, and then North on 7th St in KCK to State Ave and then W on State Ave to Village West. The 4th line could essentially follow Missouri Route 9 and I-29 from downtown to KCI.
The advantage of this is that you develop "growth corridors" and the ends of the line could all be extended or branched off of, if need be. You can then feed these lines with BRT.
I live in Phoenix (been here for around 13 years) and my fiance is from Johnson County. We are considering moving to the Kansas City area when our children reach school age (as the most of the non-charter public schools in Arizona are abysmal and I think it's important for children to experience changes of seasons). However, a lot of the features I dislike about the Phoenix area seem to be similar to issues that Kansas City is facing. I think, in actuality, Phoenix is starting to make some more progress in certain areas (faster) than Kansas City.
For example, outside of some distribution center / warehouse developments and some expansion of existing office parks, much of the commercial growth in Phoenix (in conservative Arizona) has been concentrated along the light rail line (that everyone was seemingly opposed to but most are warming up to). There have also been numerous high rise apartment / condo projects pop up all along the light rail line as well. If KC can get over the "hump" of the anti-rail crowd, a rail line could really be a catalyst for infill development (like it is here in Phoenix).
I guess if transit oriented and infill development can flourish in a sprawling metropolitan area with a legislature that is almost a mirror image of the Kansas legislature in the middle of the desert, I don't see why it can't flourish in Kansas City. It's kind of nice to be able to take the light rail to a play, a college sporting event, a baseball game, a basketball game, or a museum (and lot of people that never thought that they'd do that are embracing it).
If you look at the Phoenix area, the area that is growing the least right now is the "fringe" areas. The core is doing quite well, actually (although they did have the foresight to build a light rail line, the airport, the baseball stadium, the basketball museum, the theaters, and the museums) in the urban core. The Coyotes NHL team isn't working precisely because it's located on the edge of suburbia.
I was quite impressed and Kansas City has a lot of valuable assets to work with. From my oberservations, a rail line on from downtown along Broadway to the Plaza and then down Shawnee Mission Parkway to Metcalf and then from along to 135th St. would be a nice catalyst for redevelopment and infill development. A 2nd line could run from downtown along Broadway to E 31st St. and then east on E 31st St and Stadium Drive. to Arrowhead Stadium. A 3rd line could run from downtown west along W 12th St, Central Ave, and then North on 7th St in KCK to State Ave and then W on State Ave to Village West. The 4th line could essentially follow Missouri Route 9 and I-29 from downtown to KCI.
The advantage of this is that you develop "growth corridors" and the ends of the line could all be extended or branched off of, if need be. You can then feed these lines with BRT.
Great post. Thank you.
Just as you have done here and basically what I have always done. It's quite okay to discuss topics about how a city is failing in certain areas while respecting its qualities and accomplishments at the same time. The reason I'm so passionate about KC becoming more is because I know it has the potential and the bones to do so. It's just missing the leadership (central city and regionally) to get it done. And right now it's still missing the demand from the locals because too many of the locals are where cities like Denver were 25 years ago when they didn't want light rail or care about Downtown.
I honestly think a lot of people in KC are stuck in some sort to time warp and they just don't realize how behind the city is in many ways. What's crazy is KC is still making all the same mistakes it has made in the past that most other cities have learned from and are not still making. Sure you can point to a few rustbelt cities and say KC is doing as well or better than those. But even that is debatable. Have people in KC been to Pittsburgh or Cincinnati or Baltimore lately? Those cities make KC seem pretty sleepy and quiet right now and when I say things like that, it really irritates people, they don't want to hear it because there are a dozen people in Mill Creek Park and KC is finally building one 25 story building. It's great that KC is coming around, and maybe it's about to be where many cities were 10-15 years ago. I think the developer of the new lowrise apartments in the west crossroads mentioned that KC might be where Indy was ten years go, might. Indy is not exactly a boom city either, but they have been building several times the urban housing units that KCMO has.
I'm not slamming KC, I'm just being a realist. KC is still very much stuck in the 1980's and still throwing up all over itself with mostly spread out and often subsidized and zoned out sprawl. The central city is absolutely not getting the attention it should be getting by now especially several years after so many major civic projects have been built (Sprint Center, Convention Center, P&L District, Performing Arts Center etc). The local business community is all but ignoring downtown KC while pushing further and further southwest into the suburbs. I honestly can not think of a single city with less corporate support for downtown than KC right now even though KC is a better city than a lot of the others out there. Today's KC biz journal is flat out depressing because it maps out KC's largest private companies, nearly all of which are now southwest of KCMO in JoCo. Downtown has become an afterthought, barley a blip on the map. Most cities still have a thriving CBD with expanding corporate HQs etc.
So it's great to talk about the arts center, but I'm going to ask why the area around it hasn't changed and there is freaking free standing Denny's across the street. Sprint Center, same deal, not even a single proposal since it opened? The area around Union Station? Washington Park and other areas should have at least some ideas or proposals by somebody by now. Downtown KCK looks the same as it did in 1970.
Meanwhile, museums are opening at 135th Street, the metro still is super excited about the Village West area, subsidized convention hotels are opening up clear out along K-10 and there is ZERO real talk about any sort of real transit system that will cross the state line between the two most populated counties in the metro.
That last one is a big one. Zero talk. The streetcar is better than nothing, but it's not going to get it done. That streetcar should be just small part of a much larger regional plan that should at least in the design stages by now. Streetcars are for neighborhoods anyway because they are very slow and don't move a lot of people. Streetcars compliment light and commuter rail rather than replace them (see seattle and portland and soon St Louis). You bet there should be light rail down broadway on to shawnee mission parkway and down to 435. Then maybe the "gateway" project in mission wouldn't be the joke it has become and actually might be the awesome high end mixed use urban project that it was originally envisioned.
So yea, what you see even in sprawling cities like Dallas and Houston and Phoenix and Charlotte is just not happening in KC. Even in cities like Dallas, there are so many tower cranes that they clutter the city skyline. Forget booming downtowns like Denver, Austin, Miami, Seattle, San Diego etc. And it doesn't look like there is much of anything even in the pipeline for most of KC outside of more the same old 1980's sprawl and a few central city projects just to keep things interesting.
You have to ask why in order to try to figure out how to fix it but when you bring this stuff up about KC, you are called a hater for not liking KC just the way it is. What else can you do.
KC is a nice city and they have really improved from the mess it was once in , but it's still very far behind the times when it comes to most fairly common urban and suburban development trends today and the gap is only going to widen over the next several years because most cities are seriously ramping up suburban TOD projects and major urban infill right now at a much faster pace than KC.
Last edited by kcmo; 05-09-2014 at 10:28 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But I remember friends out in JoCo laughing at the P&L District saying they'd never step foot in it (you know, downtown is dangerous!) and they said it would fail. But the same people are "amazed" by all the "progress" in south JoCo when a new strip mall or chain restaurant opens up. It makes little sense to me. I still don't get the "small town/anti-urban" attitude in most of the KC metro area.
. I prefer to be a part of a fast changing city that is constantly evolving and updating and competing and trying to improve the QOL. KC does this to some degree, but at a very slow pace and is generally at least a decade behind most other cities. I would attribute KC being conservative as one of the main reasons for KC's rather slow pace of urban growth while still experiencing robust suburban growth. And the type of development in KC's suburban areas is for sure 15 years behind what you see in most cities now with almost no transit oriented development, true mixed use etc. It's basically the same thing the city was building in the 80's (only further out) and people there are fine with that. That's what I mean by conservative.
