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.
If you moved to KC long after Barnes, you have no idea how bad that area of downtown was. The vast majority of the money spent on the P&L district was not to build the restaurants and nightclubs. It was used to acquire extremely blighted structures and surface parking lots, relocate and rebuild underground utilities, remove and rebuild streets, traffic signals, streetlights, landscaping, build parking garages (which also serve Sprint Center and other downtown venues).
Basically work that needed to be done anyway. KCMO completely removed and rebuilt a large portion of its downtown, a part of Downtown that had not been touched in many decades that had nothing but half used parking lots, haunted houses and vacant structures. KC actually had haunted houses that were used one month out of the year in the middle of its downtown central business district, I don't think people realize just how bizarre that is for a major metropolitan city to have such a poorly looking and performing area in the middle of a downtown. There would likely be no Sprint Center, no renovated Midland Theater, no grocery store, no renovated President Hotel, no Kauffman Performing Arts Center and much of the renovated and proposed projects (condos, hotels etc) that have occurred in the area would not have happened.
KCMO invested in a MAJOR downtown infrastructure project and an entertainment district was then constructed on this new portion of downtown. Whether you like or support the P&L district or not (yes it caters to tourists and suburbanites, big deal), that project single handedly saved downtown from being the only major city save Detroit to remain a complete disaster into the 2000's.
Yes, it was expensive, but the money was well spent.
And once again, I will never EVER understand why a project like the P&L district gets so much negative attention by locals while suburban greenfield projects like Village West and Prairie Fire which get FAR more public money that goes strait to the actual developers rather than urban infrastructure improvements are completely justified. I will never understand KC area residents mentality.
Yada yada yada. More of the same mantra from kcmo - Missouri good, Kansas bad. *yawn*
If you moved to KC long after Barnes, you have no idea how bad that area of downtown was. The vast majority of the money spent on the P&L district was not to build the restaurants and nightclubs. It was used to acquire extremely blighted structures and surface parking lots, relocate and rebuild underground utilities, remove and rebuild streets, traffic signals, streetlights, landscaping, build parking garages (which also serve Sprint Center and other downtown venues).
Basically work that needed to be done anyway. KCMO completely removed and rebuilt a large portion of its downtown, a part of Downtown that had not been touched in many decades that had nothing but half used parking lots, haunted houses and vacant structures. KC actually had haunted houses that were used one month out of the year in the middle of its downtown central business district, I don't think people realize just how bizarre that is for a major metropolitan city to have such a poorly looking and performing area in the middle of a downtown. There would likely be no Sprint Center, no renovated Midland Theater, no grocery store, no renovated President Hotel, no Kauffman Performing Arts Center and much of the renovated and proposed projects (condos, hotels etc) that have occurred in the area would not have happened.
Downtown KC became a ghost town back in the 1970s. There was little activity in the 1980s, to say nothing of the 1990s or 2000s until the Power & Light district went up. The main problem with downtown KC is that the growth pattern of the metro (with the big exception of the airport) moved dramatically to the south and southwest. These trends started in the 1920s. The development of the Plaza into an alternative urban business area (it was already a shopping area starting in the 1920s) kicked into high gear during the 1980s, and at the same time the College Boulevard/ Corporate Woods part of JoCo became the primary business area for the metro.
Yes, there is the border war, etc., but those are the facts on the ground, and I don't see them changing. Businesses will not voluntarily flock to downtown KCMO. It is way too far north for the current center of population and especially the concentration of GDP in the metro area. It does have good transit, and government plus the Kemper and Hall families have kept some vibrancy there.
Elsewhere on these boards I have pointed out that the KC downtown is roughly 20 miles from the main suburban business areas. This is much farther than most successful metros. In fact, it is reminiscent of San Francisco and San Jose -- and they function almost as non-dependent metros, each with greater population to boot.
It is possible that the KC metro will function as a bi-polar metro, where some activity happens in the downtown-Plaza corridor and some activity happens in the College Blvd corridor. But that is the best outcome. Downtown will not in the next 50 years re-emerge as the primary business district.
To get back OT, this is why I envisage -- as a possible not probable eventuality -- the use of New Century for some commercial flights, in the way that Ontario operates flights for the Inland Empire (who wants to drive all the way to LAX if you live in Riverside). If downtown KC is too far north, KCI is really too far north.
Downtown KC became a ghost town back in the 1970s. There was little activity in the 1980s, to say nothing of the 1990s or 2000s until the Power & Light district went up. The main problem with downtown KC is that the growth pattern of the metro (with the big exception of the airport) moved dramatically to the south and southwest. These trends started in the 1920s. The development of the Plaza into an alternative urban business area (it was already a shopping area starting in the 1920s) kicked into high gear during the 1980s, and at the same time the College Boulevard/ Corporate Woods part of JoCo became the primary business area for the metro.
Yes, there is the border war, etc., but those are the facts on the ground, and I don't see them changing. Businesses will not voluntarily flock to downtown KCMO. It is way too far north for the current center of population and especially the concentration of GDP in the metro area. It does have good transit, and government plus the Kemper and Hall families have kept some vibrancy there.
Elsewhere on these boards I have pointed out that the KC downtown is roughly 20 miles from the main suburban business areas. This is much farther than most successful metros. In fact, it is reminiscent of San Francisco and San Jose -- and they function almost as non-dependent metros, each with greater population to boot.
It is possible that the KC metro will function as a bi-polar metro, where some activity happens in the downtown-Plaza corridor and some activity happens in the College Blvd corridor. But that is the best outcome. Downtown will not in the next 50 years re-emerge as the primary business district.
To get back OT, this is why I envisage -- as a possible not probable eventuality -- the use of New Century for some commercial flights, in the way that Ontario operates flights for the Inland Empire (who wants to drive all the way to LAX if you live in Riverside). If downtown KC is too far north, KCI is really too far north.
First off, I never said it would ever re-emerge as the primary business district of the metro. There will always be more job growth in the suburbs for the foreseeable future and that is a trend with nearly every American city. I have never questioned that trend. Although one must keep things in perspective. While areas like Southern JoCo now have more office space than Downtown KC, you are also comparing a geographic area probably 100 times the size of downtown. Downtown and especially the Downtown/Plaza corridor is still the highest concentration of jobs in the metro even if it's not the largest. But all this has little to do with my quoted post above. I was simply defending why KCMO subsidized the P&L district, so I'm honestly not sure what the point of your reply was.
I agree, downtown KC will continue to lose its percent of metrowide jobs. But, it doesn't have to be as bad as it's been. KC's downtown is doing much worse than most cities when it comes to maintaining urban core jobs while many cities have seen some modest return to the central city.
As far as suburban population skewing SW. I just don't agree that residential growth in JoCo has played a huge role. Most of JoCo is still only a 20-30 minute drive downtown and while the population of suburban JoCo is close to 600k, It's balanced out well with Northland (over 350k) and eastern Jax (over 400k). I Know most people in KC tend to ignore the economic and commuting numbers of the MO side suburbs, but all the business moving to JoCo have actually triggered much longer commutes for a large number of metro area residents. Company X moving from Downtown KC to JoCo might put itself much closer to 25-40% of its employees, but just made things worse for another 25-45% of its employees. The suburban population of metro KC is actually pretty evenly disbursed around downtown, except maybe west. Many cities are MUCH more lopsided than KC. St Louis for example.
And as far as the OP, I just don't see it. Unless KC reached a population of 4-5 million, there is not going to be a second commercial airport in metro KC. If you fly a lot, you might look someplace other than 167th and Roe, at least for the next 50-60 years
Downtown KC became a ghost town back in the 1970s. There was little activity in the 1980s, to say nothing of the 1990s or 2000s until the Power & Light district went up. The main problem with downtown KC is that the growth pattern of the metro (with the big exception of the airport) moved dramatically to the south and southwest. These trends started in the 1920s. The development of the Plaza into an alternative urban business area (it was already a shopping area starting in the 1920s) kicked into high gear during the 1980s, and at the same time the College Boulevard/ Corporate Woods part of JoCo became the primary business area for the metro.
Yes, there is the border war, etc., but those are the facts on the ground, and I don't see them changing. Businesses will not voluntarily flock to downtown KCMO. It is way too far north for the current center of population and especially the concentration of GDP in the metro area. It does have good transit, and government plus the Kemper and Hall families have kept some vibrancy there.
Elsewhere on these boards I have pointed out that the KC downtown is roughly 20 miles from the main suburban business areas. This is much farther than most successful metros. In fact, it is reminiscent of San Francisco and San Jose -- and they function almost as non-dependent metros, each with greater population to boot.
It is possible that the KC metro will function as a bi-polar metro, where some activity happens in the downtown-Plaza corridor and some activity happens in the College Blvd corridor. But that is the best outcome. Downtown will not in the next 50 years re-emerge as the primary business district.
To get back OT, this is why I envisage -- as a possible not probable eventuality -- the use of New Century for some commercial flights, in the way that Ontario operates flights for the Inland Empire (who wants to drive all the way to LAX if you live in Riverside). If downtown KC is too far north, KCI is really too far north.
And why would it?
Ever?
It is fascinating to watch so much time and energy cast to the four winds by a zealous few trying to turn the clock back to 1910.
I agree with you about New Century. 30 years ago I worked a stone's throw from the south end of runway 36, but I probably wouldn't recognize the area today outside of a few key buildings. Anyway, it makes all the sense in the world as a southern alternative as the metro grows south - just as SNA did as the LA population center moved further from LAX.
First off, I never said it would ever re-emerge as the primary business district of the metro. There will always be more job growth in the suburbs for the foreseeable future and that is a trend with nearly every American city. I have never questioned that trend. Although one must keep things in perspective. While areas like Southern JoCo now have more office space than Downtown KC, you are also comparing a geographic area probably 100 times the size of downtown. Downtown and especially the Downtown/Plaza corridor is still the highest concentration of jobs in the metro even if it's not the largest. But all this has little to do with my quoted post above. I was simply defending why KCMO subsidized the P&L district, so I'm honestly not sure what the point of your reply was.
I agree, downtown KC will continue to lose its percent of metrowide jobs. But, it doesn't have to be as bad as it's been. KC's downtown is doing much worse than most cities when it comes to maintaining urban core jobs while many cities have seen some modest return to the central city.
As far as suburban population skewing SW. I just don't agree that residential growth in JoCo has played a huge role. Most of JoCo is still only a 20-30 minute drive downtown and while the population of suburban JoCo is close to 600k, It's balanced out well with Northland (over 350k) and eastern Jax (over 400k). I Know most people in KC tend to ignore the economic and commuting numbers of the MO side suburbs, but all the business moving to JoCo have actually triggered much longer commutes for a large number of metro area residents. Company X moving from Downtown KC to JoCo might put itself much closer to 25-40% of its employees, but just made things worse for another 25-45% of its employees. The suburban population of metro KC is actually pretty evenly disbursed around downtown, except maybe west. Many cities are MUCH more lopsided than KC. St Louis for example.
And as far as the OP, I just don't see it. Unless KC reached a population of 4-5 million, there is not going to be a second commercial airport in metro KC. If you fly a lot, you might look someplace other than 167th and Roe, at least for the next 50-60 years
I don't disagree. Sorry if the tone came off as argumentative.
It's a distant possibility regarding commercial air traffic at New Century, and if it does happen it won't be next year or even this decade.
My feeling about downtown KC is that the southward population trends (both southwesterly toward Olathe and also southeasterly toward Lee's Summit) have made the 435 corridor more viable than downtown. It's too bad, and I don't really think it can be changed except over many decades. I just drove around Beacon Hill today (due east of Hallmark) and there are vast, nearly empty areas within 2 miles of 12th and Main. It's really astonishing. One or two houses per block.
I look at Chicago or Atlanta or Boston and see much more viable downtown areas. All of which also have sprawl and suburban office parks (all metros also notably larger). Downtown KC does not seem able to climb into that tier of cities, and I think part of the cause is that the growth is too far to the south. Mayor Wheeler indicated that part of the reasoning for KCI's location (although planned before him) was to counterbalance the southward sprawl, even though Northland sprawl ensued. Plus TWA had its maintenance base there.
St. Louis is an interesting test case -- there the growth is all about West County, which has a more disjointed suburban feel as well. St. Louis downtown may be an even worse basket case.
Lots of assuming here that the trends of the last 50 years will be the trends of the next 50. people were making that same mistake back then too.
The idea that the march to the exurbs or in KCs case, that the population shift generally SW (though that's certainly less pronounced than most JoCo crowers realize) is somehow inexorable, or almost predetermined is a particularly shortsighted and unimaginative one.
If you moved to KC long after Barnes, you have no idea how bad that area of downtown was. The vast majority of the money spent on the P&L district was not to build the restaurants and nightclubs. It was used to acquire extremely blighted structures and surface parking lots, relocate and rebuild underground utilities, remove and rebuild streets, traffic signals, streetlights, landscaping, build parking garages (which also serve Sprint Center and other downtown venues).
Basically work that needed to be done anyway. KCMO completely removed and rebuilt a large portion of its downtown, a part of Downtown that had not been touched in many decades that had nothing but half used parking lots, haunted houses and vacant structures. KC actually had haunted houses that were used one month out of the year in the middle of its downtown central business district, I don't think people realize just how bizarre that is for a major metropolitan city to have such a poorly looking and performing area in the middle of a downtown. There would likely be no Sprint Center, no renovated Midland Theater, no grocery store, no renovated President Hotel, no Kauffman Performing Arts Center and much of the renovated and proposed projects (condos, hotels etc) that have occurred in the area would not have happened.
KCMO invested in a MAJOR downtown infrastructure project and an entertainment district was then constructed on this new portion of downtown. Whether you like or support the P&L district or not (yes it caters to tourists and suburbanites, big deal), that project single handedly saved downtown from being the only major city save Detroit to remain a complete disaster into the 2000's.
Yes, it was expensive, but the money was well spent.
And once again, I will never EVER understand why a project like the P&L district gets so much negative attention by locals while suburban greenfield projects like Village West and Prairie Fire which get FAR more public money that goes strait to the actual developers rather than urban infrastructure improvements are completely justified. I will never understand KC area residents mentality.
This is a great and informative post and completely accurate. Kay Barnes was an awesome mayor and because of what she and her administration did to transform downtown ... well, that's the reason downtown is on such a roll today. If it weren't the the P+L district and Sprint Center package, downtown simply wouldn't be where it is today. That was the spark. I think that spark is also responsible for the amount of improvement and development we're seeing in midtown, the River Market, on the west side, and in Union Hill/Longfellow/Beacon Hill. Downtown truly is so much different today than it was pre-Power and Light/Sprint Center and the turn around of the entire urban core has been tremendous.
Had a relevant conversation last night on a flight to KCI. Husband-and-wife passengers seated near me who relocated from California to KC in the 2000s. Live at 159/ Nall. Have zero reference to KC's historical boundaries, etc.
Both travel for work extensively (>100k miles annually, about what I travel). Both are part of companies where there is a core group of 50-100 heavy travellers. All or nearly all of their travelling co-workers live in what I used to call "frontier" Johnson County -- that is, greater than 25 miles from downtown KC (and >40 miles from KCI).
If this trendline continues, then in the next decade, there will be commercial service at New Century or at a yet-unbuilt-airport somewhere south of 135th street. I simply do not see KCI maintaining its commercial air monopoly over the region when a large plurality (if not majority) of its users are concentrated in a clustered work/ live location almost 50 miles away. Some airline will start service to New Century because the customers will demand it.
^ disagree. Look at other cities. Even from South JoCo, KCI is not that far away due to an uncongested freeway system and considering it's only at about half capacity and the KC market is ranked in the mid 30's market size, the idea of another commercial airport in KC is a complete pipe dream.
Denver's airport is super far from the front range sprawl of I-25. Denver has a very busy airport and a million more people. They are not getting another commercial airport. StL airport is not that close to most of the metro other than North County. Cincy's airport is clear out in Kentucky while most of suburban Cincy is on the opposite side of the metro. I can go on and on.
Doing business in JoCo and having to drive to KCI will remain the norm in KC for my lifetime as well and my kids lifetimes, period.
Plus, there is a good chance that the Northland (which is already 75% of the size of JoCo) will rival or even exceed JoCo in growth over the next generation. You have to remember most of the growth in JoCo occurred in just a few decades while the Northland has only been growing at extreme rates for less than ten years. At the very least, the gap will continue to close.
Personally, I see just the opposite. People are not going to want to office at 200th and Nall and not only be 90 minute from KCI, but an hour or two from anything in KC. People will not want to live that far from places and it makes no sense to do so in KC when there are so many other options. JoCo growth to the south will not stop, but it will slow considerably. KC is not Houston or Atlanta (talk about long drives to airports). If JoCo wants to continue to grow at the rate it has, there is only one way it will be able to. Start growing back north and building infill projects using transit oriented development (not easy with zero transit there), mixed use etc. This is why the Galleria project at 435 and 69 has resurfaced. Too bad it resurfaced as the same old 1980's college blvd sprawl that is so prevalent in JoCo. A Chipotle at the base of an four story apartment building next to an office park is not mixed use.
I do think that the city should reconsider the Richards Gebaur site if/ when the current-location KCI redevelopment plans fall through.
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.
