Photos of the KC area. Urban KCMO housing and suburban Overland Park

[luzianne]

Originally Posted by Tiger Beer

There is actually something wrong with both pictures.

The BOTTOM ONE is simply a corporate structure. Basically office buildings...looks like it could be anywhere, as a lot of grass and water next to it. SO you'd basically drive there...work in a cubicle...and then drive back out...nowhere nearby to eat lunch or shop or do errands or do much of anything. That lake looks incredibly corporate and dull and lifeless as well - no boats, no one enjoying it, just something to view from a cubicle window with nothing happening in it.

.

Actually there are a LOT of places nearby to eat, shop and do errands - just right across the street actually.

[kingd]

These are excellent photos. What I love about KC is that the architecture and topography are so varied which lends itself to a very interesting cityscape. Because of the hills, you can have an excellent city view even if you live in a single story house!

I think because of the Plaza, with its funky Moorish architecture serving as inspiration to try something new, developers have been willing to try different styles and use more unorthodox materials such as stucco, stainless steel, concrete, etc. I live in Chicago, a city known for its architecture. However, the residential vernacular in "the neighborhoods" here lack the variety of styles and a more daring execution of design that you see peppered throughout KC's urban core. This is true of vintage buildings as well. Too often you find new construction, retro-style three flats that look like nothing more than a classic early twentieth century three-flat on steroids (three and six flats are three story apartment buildings with three or six units with the short side facing the street and are to Chicago what cape cods are to Prairie Village—they are the dominate housing type everywhere in the city). It's red brick, blond brick, or tan brick and now this purplish fakey looking brick. The back and sides of the buildings are often really ugly CPU (cinderblock). Generally these buildings are conservative in style and borrow heavily from the 1910s and 1920s 3/6 flat design. Many larger condo buildings are equally uninspiring.

This repetitive style, coupled with the relentless street grid and pancake flat terrain often make the city seem mind-numbingly monotonous. Not that there isn't good and varied residential design here, both old and new, but it is found more in the towers and townhomes downtown and much rarer in other neighborhoods where low rises and three and six flats relentlessly dominate.

That all said, the one thing that struck me while viewing the pictures, as it does whenever I’m back in Kansas City, is the lack of pedestrians in virtually every photo. That’s the thing about KC, you see so few people or pedestrians and if you do, they are merely making their way to a parking lot. It is so eerily quiet everywhere with the possible exception of the Plaza. Even Westport and downtown are anemic in this regard. To me, having lived in Chicago for 14 years in very vibrant pedestrian heavy neighborhoods, the lack of “feet on the street” makes the place seem so sleepy and lethargic, like there is zero vibe of the human kind. I know the Power and Light district is helping bring back a better pedestrian environment, but the current state is nowhere what a big city should be. Light rail would go a long way I suspect.

Further, there is a noticeable lack of first floor retail in rehabbed and new construction buildings. Including shops on ground floors would contribute to creating more vibrancy. Moreover, there is a strange practice in the core of not orienting the entrance door of retail and restaurant establishments so they are accessible from the actual sidewalk they front (a couple examples: entrances to restaurants in the Freight House building are in the rear on a big surface parking lot and drugstores and office supply stores on Main in midtown offer only side entrances from the parking lot).

I grew up in the shadow of Corporate Woods and College Boulevard in Overland Park where all the “suburban pictures” were taken. This was the 70s and 80s when these office buildings went up. They drained downtown KC of office tenants and life, but launched OP to “Edge City” status which Time Magazine even profiled in a cover piece on the then new concept. While built on the misguided sprawl model and the quest to accommodate the automobile, Johnson County, and Overland Park in particular, are among the best planned suburban communities I’ve seen around the country. It’s a very Orange County, California type place, and of course car oriented and chain everything which is why I moved downtown to Quality Hill before moving to Chicago.

I love the vibe of Kansas City and the beautiful boulevards and neighborhoods, but it has to up the energy/pedestrian factor considerably before I’d consider moving back. It doesn’t have to be Chicago or New York, but give me some semblance of a teaming city.

[Samantha S]

Originally Posted by kingd

I love the vibe of Kansas City and the beautiful boulevards and neighborhoods, but it has to up the energy/pedestrian factor considerably before I’d consider moving back. It doesn’t have to be Chicago or New York, but give me some semblance of a teaming city.

To each his own I guess. I'm in Chicago this whole month. We're having fun, it's a great city, and it's definitely a different lifestyle. But I will be glad to get back home to my slower-paced, suburban JoCo digs!

I also like KC and the metro area just the way it is. I wish people would stop trying to make it or wish it into something that it isn't and never will be. There's only one Chicago, as it should be.

[kingd]

Originally Posted by Samantha S

To each his own I guess. I'm in Chicago this whole month. We're having fun, it's a great city, and it's definitely a different lifestyle. But I will be glad to get back home to my slower-paced, suburban JoCo digs!

I also like KC and the metro area just the way it is. I wish people would stop trying to make it or wish it into something that it isn't and never will be. There's only one Chicago, as it should be.

I guess you missed my point. As I mentioned, KC doesn't need to be Chicago or any other city. Every city is unique and wouldn't it be boring if they were all alike? I love KC the way it is too, but isn't there always room for improvement? What I'm saying is that the central city is low on the energy factor with regard to pedestrians milling about which makes the place seem sleepy. Not putting retail on the ground floor of buildings (which they used to do in KC) renders the areas around them residential only, resulting in no pedestrian life. It didn't used to be this way--KC's core used to be very vibrant in this regard. Feet on the street are what give cities, large or mall, energy. Look at downtown Lawrence: very lively and vibrant pedestrian environment.

Also, so oftern people have this impression that downtown Chicago (Michigan Ave, etc. and immediate areas around and on the Lake) is all Chicago is about. Most of us live in less dense and intense leafy neighborhoods that are more like small villages within the city. Even in these areas many don't own a car because they dont' need one, and if they do, they still leave it at home and do the every day errands on foot at the shops, resturants, drug stores, you name it that are always found within an easy walk in the business districts that serve each neighborhood. I left KC because it didn't offer this type of lifestyle basically anywhere, as did many people I know.

[Samantha S]

Originally Posted by kingd

Also, so oftern people have this impression that downtown Chicago (Michigan Ave, etc. and immediate areas around and on the Lake) is all Chicago is about. Most of us live in less dense and intense leafy neighborhoods that are more like small villages within the city. Even in these areas many don't own a car because they dont' need one, and if they do, they still leave it at home and do the every day errands on foot at the shops, resturants, drug stores, you name it that are always found within an easy walk in the business districts that serve each neighborhood.

Yeah, I know, I'm sitting in one of those areas of Chicago as I type this. I am two blocks from the Blue Line and have walked and used the transit system quite a bit. If I HAD to, I could do without my car. But getting around is much easier WITH my car and I don't find it much different from KC in that regard. (Although the 3-street intersections took some getting used to! I honked at another driver the other day, I am becoming quite the Chicago driver! )

I also would not like getting around Chicago AT ALL in bad weather (walking to the train, waiting for the bus OR driving.) And Chicago winters are MUCH more harsh than KC winters.

To each his own.

City life has been fun for a short time and the weather here has been great for July! But it's not what I would choose long-term in either city.

The urban lifestyle itself I don't find much different in KC vs Chicago, it's just that Chicago has it on a much larger and broader scale. If you WANT an urban lifestyle, then Chicago beats KC hands-down.