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.
Let's look at where KC went wrong in the direction they took and how they have corrected or corrections needed. KCI-wrong location, city grew southwest to Kansas, wrong terminals-horrible mistake in building thin three terminals. Stadiums, wrong location again, should have been downtown, two stadiums built in a sea of parking lots. Getting rid of the second largest streetcar system. Growth in the suburbs and no concentration of building up downtown or the city.
Let's look at where KC went wrong in the direction they took and how they have corrected or corrections needed. KCI-wrong location, city grew southwest to Kansas, wrong terminals-horrible mistake in building thin three terminals. Stadiums, wrong location again, should have been downtown, two stadiums built in a sea of parking lots. Getting rid of the second largest streetcar system. Growth in the suburbs and no concentration of building up downtown or the city.
I don't think the location of KCI has been a huge deal at all. I have already said this many times, where where else would you put it? If you had put it out east, I think it would have slowed growth in the eastern metro. (Lee's Summit etc). Nobody wants to live near an airport (which tend to be very industrial type areas) or under flight paths. The airport is only 20 minutes from the core of the city. The reason the Northland has taken so long to develop is because after KCI went in, the city didn't add the infrastructure needed to support suburban development up there. Country unimproved roads, no sewers, no public water etc. Now that the city is doing adding that infrastructure and the area is booming. The city thought by annexing all that land and not making it a priority to develop, it would have kept suburban development from happening. It actually backfired and helped push growth to Kansas. Had KCMO not annexed the northland and kept it undevelped for so long, it would probably be built out by now as Liberty, Gladstone, Parkville etc would be much larger suburbs today and would have annexed and developed the norhtland much faster. The city has learned that it needs to develop the Northland and it's rapidly developing now.
Here is my list not in any order:
1. Not fixing KCI. Now the terminals is a totally different story than the location of the airport. The city should have cut its losses the day TWA announced they were leaving for St Louis. The design of TWA was a failure and out of date the day it opened. KCI could have been a major airport for the central part of America. Many airlines knew the location of KCI in was perfect. KC is by far the most centralized major city in the states. That's why so many airlines tried to make KCI a hub, but one of the main reasons none of those airlines could make it work was the airport terminals. I still think that if KC had replaced KCI with a single terminal in the 80's or early 90's, the airport would have grabbed a lot of the flights that Denver got instead. With KC's regional population of several million that use KCI and the central location, KCI could and probably should still be a major hub today, even after all the airline consolidations. KC is not like Pittsburgh or Cincy where there is another city two hour away so they lost their hubs when the airlines consolidated. It could have been the major airport between the Rockies and upper midwest. Denver (as usual) had more vision and built a world airport terminal and the rest is history. I still think KC will be better off with a new terminal even though they pretty much missed their big opportunity.
2. Not passing the two major city backed light rail starter line plans in the 90’s. The first one was a very basic line from the River Market to the Plaza. It was pretty far along in preliminary planning and design, had a very good shot of being mostly funded by the federal government. Mayor Cleaver basically killed it calling it "touristy frou frou" for not going to the east side. Had that line been built, the city would probably have several expansions by now, including the east side. The other plan came later after the city reversed the Clay Chastian plan that passed a vote. The city put out a well thought out starter system that was to go from south of Gladstone to Swope Park with two lines south of downtown (one to the plaza and another along 71). It failed. Again, had the city passed that, it would have put KC in a totally different league of cities. It would have connected downtown to the plaza, connected the east side to northland jobs, and there would likely be expansion to the suburbs or into Kansas by now. Instead the city is just now getting a streetcar line that only goes 20 blocks.
3. Not building a new ballpark downtown rather than renovating. The county spent nearly as much on renovating Kauffman Stadium as it would have cost to build new. Had the stadium been built in the east crossroads district, it would have basically connected Downtown to Crown Center. There would be a lot more private development in the crossroads more like what you see in LoDo (Denver) or Gaslamp (San Diego). It could have had fountains and the unique scoreboard just like Kauffman. But it would have created a critical mass of activity, vibrancy and development that KC still lacks today.
4. Building Sprint (and now Cerner) in suburban campuses. Sprint was based in Kansas (westwood), but over half of their office space was in KCMO before the campus was built. They even occupied most of downtown’s tallest building. KC is not a big enough city to have its largest companies all in the suburbs. Microsoft can be in a campus in suburban Seattle and be okay because Seattle has so many other companies downtown. But KC has only has a few opportunities to build up a large corporate office environment downtown like you see in Dallas, Atlanta, Denver, Charlotte, Nashville, Pittsburgh etc. Sprint + Cerner downtown would have added around a dozen 45 story buildings downtown. That would actually put KC more in line with most metros with how many people work downtown vs suburban jobs. Even with Sprint and Center in 6-8 million sq ft of office space downtown, KC would still have a huge and majority of its white collar jobs in the suburbs. The KC skyline would be three times bigger (similar to has much Denver has changed). Even just one of them (Sprint or Cerner) would have put KC into the next level of cities.
5. Not passing the bistate cultural tax that would have funded regional arts, sports and cultural attractions on both sides of the state line. Passing that tax would have gone a long way in uniting the metro as one and getting more people to realize that everybody in metro KC needs to think differently. It would have likely made both states think twice about all the poaching and made companies think twice about moving around the metro mostly leaving the city. If you look at how this unites places like Denver and the Twin Cities where the entire region comes together for regional needs rather than competing across the metro. Had it passed, it’s likely that another tax for regional transit and trails would be in place by now funding a regional and comprehensive transit and bike trail system with light rail, express buses, levee trails, commuter rail etc.
6. Moving too much of KCMO section 8 housing to Southeast KCMO. As KCMO was forced by the feds to tear down high rise “projects”, the city put way too many of those units in single family homes in suburban southeast KCMO in areas like Loma Vista, Ruskin and Hickman Mills. That area was actually a fast growing area up till the 1980’s but after crime and property blight that was caused by so many homes being bought out by the city and uses for public housing as well as suburban apartment complexes that went section 8, white flight took off like a rocket.
7. Not taking control of the KCMOSD. The district that serves urban KCMO should have been dissolved after the desegregation efforts failed and the feds gave control of the district back to the district. The KCMOSD should be run like a business, instead, it's run by locally elected morons and race is still a huge issue (which is why even areas like Brookside don't have good public schools despite having the demographics that would normally have good schools.). The city has very little control over the KCMOSD. It needs to be like a normal district (no more elected school board) and or dissolved / broken up into suburban districts. The problem with breaking it off into suburban districts is that it will scare some people to Kansas suburbs vs Missouri suburbs. Suburban white people don't want anything to do with urban kids even if it's a minor percent. This was a real threat in the 1980's and is what caused so much white family migration to Johnson County. People thought (or were told by real estate agents) places like Lee's Summit and NKC were going to be forced to degeg with urban KCMO even possibly forcing suburban kids to be bused to city schools and so they chose Kansas districts to avoid it. The state line really made dealing with the schools difficult, but something could have been done by now even if it does hurt the MO suburbs a little.
Some smaller KCMO mistakes.
Not building a new arena before everything hit rock bottom with Kemper. Kemper was built in the wrong place and after 20 years of it doing absolutely nothing for the west bottoms, the city should have built a new arena downtown quicker than it did and made the kemper arena area into a agricultural destination. Fort Worth, Houston, Denver, Las Vegas, Louisville, San Antonio, OKC etc all have much larger ag events (rodeos etc) than KC does. KC should embrace its cow town history, build up Kemper and the American Royals into an ag destination and built a new arena downtown 10 years earlier.
Taking so long to build a major downtown convention hotel. They city has needed a convention more than almost any other city, yet almost every other city that needed one less than KC has built one while KC is still trying. Why did the city expand bartle, build the ballroom, build the p&L district etc if they are not going to build that final piece that is needed to attract conventions?
Choosing the Flamingo Hilton Casino (now the crappy Isle of Capri) rather than going with some of the much bigger casino development proposals that would have anchored the north side of the Missouri River (Harlem) with much bigger destination type casinos with large hotels etc.
KCK also missed a huge opportunity of a generation by not putting at least some of the STAR bonded development by the speedway downtown instead. There is no reason why the Tbones, Sporting KC, some retail, apartments and office space couldn’t have thrived in new development in at Kaw Point in KCK. The city could have done both the speedway and downtown with all those incentives. I think if that would have happened, you would see a streetcar connecting downtown KCMO to downtown KCK, new lofts going up on Strawberry Hill, Cerner might be in the EPA building or the EPA would have never left. KCK really messed up in my opinion putting all their eggs out in Bonner Springs.
^ That's pretty immature. This "kcmo" guy is the best poster on this forum. He knows his stuff. I have shared the sticky at the top of this forum many times to show people out here that KC is not some backwater town. You can learn from past mistakes.
You should look at other city forums where its okay to discuss topics like this.
I would add not developing the riverfront to the list. Here in Pittsburgh you would not believe how popular all the riverfront walkways and trails are.
Last edited by brooksider2brooklyn; 02-10-2016 at 07:22 AM..
Let's look at where KC went wrong in the direction they took and how they have corrected or corrections needed. KCI-wrong location, city grew southwest to Kansas, wrong terminals-horrible mistake in building thin three terminals. Stadiums, wrong location again, should have been downtown, two stadiums built in a sea of parking lots. Getting rid of the second largest streetcar system. Growth in the suburbs and no concentration of building up downtown or the city.
Nearly all of these are grossly misinformed. kcmo replied ably above, but I have a few things to add.
KCI's location - It's perfect. (Design bad, location good.) You never want to put a major airport in the most affluent part of the metro. Although it would have been nice if you didn't have to drive all the way around it to access it when coming from the south. The way they set up the interchanges there with 435 and 29 can be very confusing, even to locals. Other than that, see kcmo's post above.
Stadiums - Perfect for Arrowhead, Bad for Kauffman. (Well, actually Kauffman itself is fine, but if they had built it downtown originally, it could have done a lot to stem the catastrophic decline of that district.) As for the NFL, every stadium is surrounded by a sea of parking. And in our case it's great, because it facilitates our tailgating culture, and doesn't swallow up a huge section of valuable urban real estate for the sake of 10-15 events per year.
Streetcar - Every city except San Francisco got rid of their streetcar system. (And SF's was just there to be iconic and touristy. Call it "frou frou" if you will.) What was city hall supposed to do, prop up the system with billions of dollars for decades on the off-chance that culture would do a 180 eventually? And even now, with people all about streetcars, 90% of that original system would be underused today if it remained in place.
Suburbs - I'm actually sort of with you on this one. Except I don't blame Kansas City for it. The KC metro grew the same way every peer metro grew, with very few exceptions. It was just part of post-war American culture, and if KC had pushed back too hard, it would have just stagnated. It's terribly unfortunate, but not a local error by any means.
^ That's pretty immature. This "kcmo" guy is the best poster on this forum. He knows his stuff. I have shared the sticky at the top of this thread many times to show people out here that KC is not some backwater town. You can learn from past mistakes.
You should look at other city forums where its okay to discuss topics like this.
I would add not developing the riverfront to the list. Here in Pittsburgh you would not believe how popular all the riverfront walkways and trails are.
Yes, yes, and yes.
What the eff has taken so long with the riverfront?
^ That's pretty immature. This "kcmo" guy is the best poster on this forum. He knows his stuff. I have shared the sticky at the top of this forum many times to show people out here that KC is not some backwater town. You can learn from past mistakes.
You should look at other city forums where its okay to discuss topics like this.
I would add not developing the riverfront to the list. Here in Pittsburgh you would not believe how popular all the riverfront walkways and trails are.
Thanks and so true. You must be able to discuss topics (good and bad) to improve a city. Beating dead horse is how you force change. Had people not beat a very dead horse in the early 2000's, KCMO would still be a dead horse. KC was freaking embarrassing just 15 years ago and I was saying much of the same stuff. I would complain that Denver was building skyscrapers while KC had empty parking lots and haunted houses downtown. KC has gotten better, but it still has a long ways to go. I'll keep pounding on the horse, but it's too bad more people don't join in.
Nearly all of these are grossly misinformed. kcmo replied ably above, but I have a few things to add.
KCI's location - It's perfect. (Design bad, location good.) You never want to put a major airport in the most affluent part of the metro. Although it would have been nice if you didn't have to drive all the way around it to access it when coming from the south. The way they set up the interchanges there with 435 and 29 can be very confusing, even to locals. Other than that, see kcmo's post above.
Stadiums - Perfect for Arrowhead, Bad for Kauffman. (Well, actually Kauffman itself is fine, but if they had built it downtown originally, it could have done a lot to stem the catastrophic decline of that district.) As for the NFL, every stadium is surrounded by a sea of parking. And in our case it's great, because it facilitates our tailgating culture, and doesn't swallow up a huge section of valuable urban real estate for the sake of 10-15 events per year.
Streetcar - Every city except San Francisco got rid of their streetcar system. (And SF's was just there to be iconic and touristy. Call it "frou frou" if you will.) What was city hall supposed to do, prop up the system with billions of dollars for decades on the off-chance that culture would do a 180 eventually? And even now, with people all about streetcars, 90% of that original system would be underused today if it remained in place.
Suburbs - I'm actually sort of with you on this one. Except I don't blame Kansas City for it. The KC metro grew the same way every peer metro grew, with very few exceptions. It was just part of post-war American culture, and if KC had pushed back too hard, it would have just stagnated. It's terribly unfortunate, but not a local error by any means.
Agree 100% with all of this. I don't get the "should have kept the streetcars" thing anyway. There is a big difference between modern streetcars and what KC (and every other city) had in the 1920's. No, I don't think we should have ripped it up, but it happened, all across America. It entire system would have had to be rebuilt by now to be more refined and functional. Modern rail is very different now, even streetcars.
BTW, I don't see why anybody but people from Platte City etc would take 435 all the way to KCI.
If driving from KS, take 35 to 635 to 29. or 435 to 152 to 29.
If from the city you take 29 all the way.
If from the Mo side suburbs you take 70 to 29 or 435 to 152 to 29.
Taking 435 all the way around to KCI takes forever and it's extremely rural, no places for gas, food etc on the way if you need it. I don't know why people do it.
Thanks and so true. You must be able to discuss topics (good and bad) to improve a city. Beating dead horse is how you force change. Had people not beat a very dead horse in the early 2000's, KCMO would still be a dead horse. KC was freaking embarrassing just 15 years ago and I was saying much of the same stuff. I would complain that Denver was building skyscrapers while KC had empty parking lots and haunted houses downtown. KC has gotten better, but it still has a long ways to go. I'll keep pounding on the horse, but it's too bad more people don't join in.
Actually we shouldn't even be using the phrase "beating a dead horse". Because the meaning of that phrase is "continuing to make a point that everyone has already agreed with and stopped caring about awhile ago." You don't have to dig very deep into this forum to see that these issues are still quite divisive and controversial. The horse is very much alive, my friend.
BTW, I don't see why anybody but people from Platte City etc would take 435 all the way to KCI. If driving from KS, take 35 to 635 or 435 to 152 to 29. If from the city you take 29. If from the Mo side suburbs you take 70 to 29 or 435 to 152 to 29.
Why would people from Platte City take 435? They hop on 29 and they're there. And anyone who lives in Olathe, Lenexa, Shawnee, Western WyCo, and Lawrence or points west are going to use 435. Look back at the map and tell me I'm wrong.
In high school I lived near Shawnee Mission South, and we would usually take 435 all the way to the airport, because it was actually a toss-up in terms of travel time. Yes, 69-to-35-to-635-to-29 was shorter, but it wasn't faster. However, I think that's improved, because my parents who still live there have started taking the 635 route more lately.
I know a tunnel under the east-west runway would have been expensive, but I feel like they could have made up for it by putting I-435 N where Hwy 152 is, and ran I-29 around the west side of the airport, instead of the east side. Then 90% of airport visitors would arrive at the terminals through the tunnel. And let's be honest, it will be a long time before I-435 N, in its current location, will have enough non-airport traffic to be worthwhile.
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.
