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.
Who CARES what any other city is doing? Are we trying to keep up with the Joneses? Are we high school kids trying to copy the cool kids so we can be cool too? It's not a competition.
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.
The biggest issue for Kansas City is that while maybe 20 years ago it was probably comparable to its "peers" in Cincinnati and Indianapolis, today those cities are at least 10-15 years ahead of Kansas City when it comes to urban development. A second major issue that I don't think is getting enough attention, but deserves to, is the state of the city's school system. If they could just figure out a way to fix the schools in the urban core, I'm sure that young millennial families would be more interested in moving to the city.
The biggest issue for Kansas City is that while maybe 20 years ago it was probably comparable to its "peers" in Cincinnati and Indianapolis, today those cities are at least 10-15 years ahead of Kansas City when it comes to urban development. A second major issue that I don't think is getting enough attention, but deserves to, is the state of the city's school system. If they could just figure out a way to fix the schools in the urban core, I'm sure that young millennial families would be more interested in moving to the city.
Yea, the schools are an issue for sure, but just how much, I'm not sure. Most cities have terrible central city public schools. It's debatable how bad they are compared to KCMO, but it really seems like many cities are able to gentrify decaying neighborhoods at a rapid rate despite the schools. Even in cities where the schools are notably better than KCMO's, the areas of the city that are being revived tend to have schools that will be in just as bad of shape as KC's. I really think it's the chicken before the egg and the only way to fix the schools is to first see a substantial in migration of younger people with kids. As more and more people move into areas, more and more take a chance with the public schools and the schools slowly improve.
This has not really happened in KCMO yet. You would think that Brookside would have good public schools, but Brookside is an established area where most residents probably gave up on the KC schools long ago. So even if Brookside had neighborhood schools again, it would take a huge grass roots effort for the community to get behind the schools and give them a chance again.
Regardless, I'm not sure that catering to families is really what KC needs to concentrate on. There are way too many alternatives for families for central KC to really be a player right now. KC needs to concentrate on getting young people without kids and empty nesters. KC's west 39th Corrridor is sort of what I'm talking about. KC should have that on a much larger scale by now in many other areas of midtown. Again, it's happening, but it's slow. Armour Blvd, Broadway etc are showing signs of being vibrant enough in 5-10 years to warrant new construction.
Who CARES what any other city is doing? Are we trying to keep up with the Joneses? Are we high school kids trying to copy the cool kids so we can be cool too? It's not a competition.
Seems that way, doesn't it?
If other cities can efficiently herd their people back toward 1880, why can't Kansas City?
If other cities can efficiently herd their people back toward 1880, why can't Kansas City?
It's not "herding" back to 1880. There's sustainable development and unsustainable development. It's pretty well documented that unchecked sprawl is unsustainable. With the rise in fuel prices, people in many other areas don't want to spend significant amounts of money on fuel + significant amounts of time in traffic, so urban infill development has become more popular.
Maybe one of the biggest supporting factors in KC's sprawl is the fact that KC has a rather large, rather delay free regional freeway system (for a city its size). Heck, it's a more extensive system than Phoenix has (and Phoenix has over twice the population). Therefore, people in Phoenix don't like sitting stuck on the I-10 in heavy traffic in the morning (and are choosing to live in infill development). Whereas in KC you can live further out as traffic congestion isn't as bad.
Who CARES what any other city is doing? Are we trying to keep up with the Joneses? Are we high school kids trying to copy the cool kids so we can be cool too? It's not a competition.
It's always a competition. If you are not trying to be better, you are losing...
KCI is a joke and people from out of town think it's a rinky dink piece of crap. It looks dated and provides no unique experience. Cities should be focusing on marketing themselves as providing many unique, exciting experiences as possible and it must manifest itself into most things like infrastructure (airport, public trans)...because that's what moves the needle. We should be focusing on building a city that will attract smart, creative people.
Also, the people who shape opinions and culture in this country do not live in KC...they live on the coasts. When they come to KC, the airport is the first thing they see...trust me, in it's current iteration it makes us look bush-league. Also, it sucks for business travel.
It's always a competition. If you are not trying to be better, you are losing...
KCI is a joke and people from out of town think it's a rinky dink piece of crap. It looks dated and provides no unique experience. Cities should be focusing on marketing themselves as providing many unique, exciting experiences as possible and it must manifest itself into most things like infrastructure (airport, public trans)...because that's what moves the needle. We should be focusing on building a city that will attract smart, creative people.
Also, the people who shape opinions and culture in this country do not live in KC...they live on the coasts. When they come to KC, the airport is the first thing they see...trust me, in it's current iteration it makes us look bush-league. Also, it sucks for business travel.
KCI's terminal isn't THAT bad. It's just not ideal if there are flight delays or if passengers are using it as a "thru" facility for connections. The problem is that the terminal is so narrow that all of the "services" are outside of security because it's not large enough to have everything inside security. My home airport (PHX) has Terminal 2 which is not any better than KCI in terms of facilities and Terminal 3 which is -slightly- better. The problem is that the world isn't in a vaccum and there are several smaller and or comparatively sized cities that have significantly better airport terminal infrastructure.
BNA (Nashville), RDU (Raleigh), IND (Indianapolis), AUS (Austin), ONT (Ontario, CA), MCO (Orlando) CVG (Cincinnati), and PIT (Pittsburgh) have significantly nicer airport terminals than KCI. Yes, I know that CVG and PIT were former hub airports (which KCI will never be) but the point I'm trying to make is that KCI's peer airports have better terminal facilities.
It's always a competition. If you are not trying to be better, you are losing...
KCI is a joke and people from out of town think it's a rinky dink piece of crap. It looks dated and provides no unique experience. Cities should be focusing on marketing themselves as providing many unique, exciting experiences as possible and it must manifest itself into most things like infrastructure (airport, public trans)...because that's what moves the needle. We should be focusing on building a city that will attract smart, creative people.
Also, the people who shape opinions and culture in this country do not live in KC...they live on the coasts. When they come to KC, the airport is the first thing they see...trust me, in it's current iteration it makes us look bush-league. Also, it sucks for business travel.
I have read comments from people inside and outside of Kansas City who LOVE KCI because of its convenience in getting in and out. Most people don't go to the airport to eat or shop. But again, who cares what anyone from out of town thinks, including the people on the coasts? They are welcome to their opinions and "culture," but we are not New York and we are not LA; we have a different culture. I'm not choosing what to wear based on the latest New York fashions and we don't need to make changes to our airport based on what everyone else is doing or everyone else likes, either.
I'd much rather fly in and out of KCI than LAX. LAX is horrible. If they aren't worried about their airport, why should we worry about KCI? In fact, I have a trip to California planned and I am purposely NOT flying into or out of LAX.
What Denver is doing with their Union Station is pretty impressive, it actually was open, they just closed it to turn it into a modern functioning inter modal transportation hub.
Now Denver's union station has nothing on KC's as far as size and architecture. KC's union station is one of the most amazing historic structures in the US. But it's barely used as a transportation center, the science center needs to be rebuilt and properly funded and it could use another major cultural attraction (like the museum at prairie fire opening up at 395th and Metcalf or wherever.) But Union Station KC still brings in many high quality traveling exhibits (hopefully those don't start going to overland park now) and I know they have a lot of office space and are in the black now. But it's still pretty underutilized by the public for the sq ft it has and barely used for transit purposes, which may somewhat improve with the streetcar line.
Also, the area around Denver's Union Station has transformed from mostly parking lots and empty lots to dozens of new construction infill. It's becoming nearly built out. LoDo (Which is sort of like the Crossroads) was completely gentrified and all the old industrial buildings were renovated long ago.
Just saying that while KC's union station is impressive, it could and should be a more focal point of activity and there should be more new construction development around it by now, just like there should be more development around the PAC and Sprint Center by now.
Constructive criticism man. Why people take these types of ideas so personally. KC has lot of greats things about it, but there is nothing wrong with improving the things that can be improved.
I don't even care that much about KCI now. If I still lived there, trust me, I would be MUCH more involved in replacing that freaking terminal just like I was involved with most other civic projects because it's a pathetic excuse for an airport for a large metropolitan area but KC will do what it wants. I don't use that airport much anymore (certainly would never make a connection there haha).
Union Station is definitely underutilized, but what can you do it? It's a large train terminal in a country with a lack for it. I think how they're handling it is fine, and hopefully the light rail (and even more the future light rail expansion further south will make it a bit more lively in its interior, but I don't think turning it into a glorified bus stop will do that. And as for new development around it, where? Into the Liberty Memorial land or Crown Center? The area is pretty well developed and vibrant now a days. Especially the Crown Center Area and fully occupied and utilized Crossroads. Theres no need to redevelop it, it would be changing something that isn't mildly broken.
Unlike KCI, KCI is crap and whats happening is definitely a long time overdue. I will say the general public does seem to know this, and want it to change. The 75% number being thrown around was in response to the question would turning it into a single terminal airport be a favorable solution. Not rather it should be left alone. Other responses in the same survey showed that the vast majority of respondents did find the Airport severely outdated and at the very least in need of renovation.
People will come around to the single terminal idea, especially when it gets backing from airlines.
It's not "herding" back to 1880. There's sustainable development and unsustainable development. It's pretty well documented that unchecked sprawl is unsustainable. With the rise in fuel prices, people in many other areas don't want to spend significant amounts of money on fuel + significant amounts of time in traffic, so urban infill development has become more popular.
Maybe one of the biggest supporting factors in KC's sprawl is the fact that KC has a rather large, rather delay free regional freeway system (for a city its size). Heck, it's a more extensive system than Phoenix has (and Phoenix has over twice the population). Therefore, people in Phoenix don't like sitting stuck on the I-10 in heavy traffic in the morning (and are choosing to live in infill development). Whereas in KC you can live further out as traffic congestion isn't as bad.
You are no doubt very young and, if that's the case, you have been spoon fed this now very familiar load of crap from birth. Young people today don't dare march out of step with this dogma for fear of instant scorn by their peers, so they collectively accept wearing a straight jacket of restriction and restraint of their lifestyle choices and personal freedom. Sad as it is, I get that. And I count my blessings every day....that I was allowed to grow up free....to think and express my own thoughts....and to act on them.
Suburban growth has never been unchecked, but rather driven by overwhelming demand of people free to make choices that improve their lives. That's the way America (used to) work....before the upside-down alternate reality of "progressive" ideology infiltrated and poisoned our public schools. Now you march backward obediently, leaving America's best years....America's peak years....in your rear view mirror (sorry, an automobile reference).
I'd better footnote and modify that last sentence. Because I quickly realized that those best years are in my rear view mirror, not yours. 'Cause you never saw them....and have never felt the excitement of a young person starting out with the world at their fingertips and the universe as the limit.
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.
It's not a competition.
