What Kansas City needs to improve on... (St. Louis, Independence: theatres, college)

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by skrazzle

I don't think many residents of KC know what KC has to offer.

I honestly think if there is a lack of people at certain things KC has its cuz KC needs better PR in its own city.... just seems to me a lot of people don't realize what is out there....

Originally Posted by RjRobb2

I agree, many people don’t know what is out there. One of the problems is that KC is so spread out, that when you travel to certain areas it is like you have travelled to entire other city.

Although I agree that many, if not most, people in KC are pretty freaking clueless about what KC offers, I totally disagree that the reasons for that are that the area’s attractions are not marketed or they are too spread out.

Short of walking up to people’s front door and coming into their living rooms with maps and brochures about area’s attractions, I’m not sure what else can be done to market the area’s attractions that won’t be ignored. If you don’t know about the Liberty Memorial, the Nelson, the Negro Leagues Baseball Museum, the College Basketball Experience etc, then chances are, you just don’t care to know.

I know people that couldn’t find the Sprint Center or Union Station. In general, people are just utterly clueless and live under a rock or with some sort of tunnel vision because I simply can’t comprehend it. My kids know more about KC and its attractions and landmarks than 80% of metro area adults and probably 99.9% of metro area kids under the age of 16.

KC is just KC. People love to rip on local attractions they don’t even know anything about. They love to rip on how they are funded or how they compare to other cities even though again they know nothing about them. Rather than seek out the area’s attractions, people drive to St Louis and talk about how great St Louis is, even though we have the same amount and quality of attractions as St Louis.

I also disagree that our attractions are any more spread out than any other major city. I would even argue that most of our attraction are in a pretty compact area of the urban core of only about 4 square miles. The stadiums, zoo and worlds of fun are a bit further out, but KC is no different than any other city, they just have different attractions in different locations.

St Louis for example. Where is Six Flags, the Zoo, the Science Center, Anheuser Bush, Grants Farm, MO Botanical Gardens, Magic House, the Art Museum? All over the place. They are more spread out than KC’s are. Six Flags alone is 3 times as far from the city as WOF. They have the stadiums and union station and the arch downtown sure, but they have many others that will require some major driving.

The problem in KC is not lack of marketing or locations of attractions. It’s the ridiculous inferiority complex that if it’s in KC, it must not be any good and if it’s in KCMO it for sure has to be screwed up.

That’s too bad because as I say all the time. KC stacks up very well with most major cities, many much bigger than KC, when it comes to attractions, museums and general metropolitan culture. When will more KC area residents see this? I’m not sure they ever will. Try to entertain your family in Houston, OKC, or Phoenix without playing golf. I love Phoenix, but unless you are there for spring training or golf, it’s one boring city. Houston is huge, not much to do there for the size of it. Denver, St Louis, Minneapolis etc all compare to KC very well.

I would guess the average person from Omaha knows more about KC than the average person from KC. The average person from KC knows where the newest suburban shopping center is.

[thriftylefty]

I think the light rail need to be bigger and bolder, like out east when I visit Belmar NJ or Philly and find people who work in NY, I think people thought the sole pupose of light rail was so The rich people's "help" could get to work in JOCO, KC is big , almost too big Land wise, I once drove from Red Bridge to the airport doing 60 miles an hour in the middle of the day, you cant do that any where else .

[JackieB23]

Originally Posted by thriftylefty

I think the light rail need to be bigger and bolder, like out east when I visit Belmar NJ or Philly and find people who work in NY, I think people thought the sole pupose of light rail was so The rich people's "help" could get to work in JOCO, KC is big , almost too big Land wise, I once drove from Red Bridge to the airport doing 60 miles an hour in the middle of the day, you cant do that any where else .

I never supported light rail in KC, as attractive as it is, because I don't think KC has the population density to make it financially feasible. Everybody is just too spread out for it to economically make sense.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by JackieB23

I never supported light rail in KC, as attractive as it is, because I don't think KC has the population density to make it financially feasible. Everybody is just too spread out for it to economically make sense.

KC IS way to spread out, and it will hurt the metro area in the long run as the population growth continues at very low densities for the most part. The sprawl problem for a city of its size is horrible.

[TabulaRasa]

Originally Posted by skrazzle

I think it was around April but I could be wrong... I was just very disappointed. There were several exhibits closed too.

I was last to the zoo in April or May, nothing was out, nothing was open, and I thought it was all-around terrible, a real waste of money. The "in season" admission was in effect, which might have been understandable if there had been a variety of exhibits open. I literally saw some birds, a tiger, and two orangutans. I think I may have seen something from a distance in the Africa exhibit, but from so far away I couldn't tell for sure. I've been to considerably smaller communities with much nicer zoos (that are free). It can be done. I'm overall a champion of KC's amenities, but the zoo is nothing to brag about, to say the least. It's too bad, the setting is so nice.

[TabulaRasa]

Originally Posted by kcmo

St Louis for example. Where is Six Flags, the Zoo, the Science Center, Anheuser Bush, Grants Farm, MO Botanical Gardens, Magic House, the Art Museum? All over the place. They are more spread out than KC’s are. Six Flags alone is 3 times as far from the city as WOF. They have the stadiums and union station and the arch downtown sure, but they have many others that will require some major driving.

Several of those things, the zoo, the Science Center, the art museum, aren't all over the place, they're in Forest Park, along with about a trillion other cool amenities and attractions...theatres, greenhouses, a rowing lake, the grand basin, gardens, opera house...one of the coolest things about St. Louis is Forest Park and how so many attractive features are accessible in one beautiful area (that is served by public trans).

I'm not a native of either KC or STL, and have no personal stock in a pissing contest regarding which is cooler (I prefer KC overall, and don't find it or its amenities inferior or soemthing to apologize for, I think it's a great city), but I honestly do think that STL DOES have quite a bit in terms of tourist and resident-friendly amenities that really isn't spread out. For the record, I also definitely don't think that things are so spread out in KC that it makes anything truly inconvenient to get to. Maybe I'm just spoiled having lived in places where you really can't get from one end of town to the other without committing at least an hour to the process due to infrastructure and traffic. Getting to and fro from KC's attractions really isn't prohibitive. I DON'T live right at Kauffman, big deal? I can still get there in minutes. MINUTES.

I would guess the average person from Omaha knows more about KC than the average person from KC. The average person from KC knows where the newest suburban shopping center is.

This is often the case with urban areas, in my experience...the locals take things for granted. I grew up rurally, and became an urban dweller in adulthood. Growing up where I did, going into the city was an event, and a time to take advantage of the great things it had to offer. I didn't ease out of that mentality when I became an urban resident after finishing college. A day off work was an opportunity to explore my city. It still is. In every city I've lived in, I've make it a point to take advantage of local amenities..."what the tourists do," and every time, I've run into loads of locals in my day-to-day life who either haven't EVER been to something, or not for years. Familiarity breeds apathy and disinterest. If you figure "Oh, I live here, I can go there ANY time," odds are, you won't go there anytime, you'll never make it a priority, and it will be one of those "I should" things. People need to take advantage of the resources they've got at their fingertips, no matter where they live, but in the big picture, remarkably few do. It's easier to complain.

[thatguy1]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

KC IS way to spread out, and it will hurt the metro area in the long run as the population growth continues at very low densities for the most part. The sprawl problem for a city of its size is horrible.

Heck yeah it is. Every year I go from Omaha to Table Rock Lake and it seems to take forever to get through KC. Basically it starts from Platte City(north) to Raymore(south) (going in my direction).

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by burgerflipper

Heck yeah it is. Every year I go from Omaha to Table Rock Lake and it seems to take forever to get through KC. Basically it starts from Platte City(north) to Raymore(south) (going in my direction).

That is why I hope the new P&L district is a success in order to entice more people to move out of the suburbs and into the urban core. The collapse in oil prices yet again are not making people question the viability of very low density suburban areas. Energy costs are bound to increase yet again in the future, and KC will be at a disadvantage. I don't forsee KC getting light rail going very soon either.

[thatguy1]

Originally Posted by GraniteStater

That is why I hope the new P&L district is a success in order to entice more people to move out of the suburbs and into the urban core. The collapse in oil prices yet again are not making people question the viability of very low density suburban areas. Energy costs are bound to increase yet again in the future, and KC will be at a disadvantage. I don't forsee KC getting light rail going very soon either.

It's going to cost them a fortune! It would take a fed grant to get that going.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by burgerflipper

It's going to cost them a fortune! It would take a fed grant to get that going.

Ya, it would take a lot of federal $$$$. I doubt if KC would ever consider light rail regardless, though.