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.
You obviously know nothing about Cincy, my aunt lives on the Kentucky side of Cincinatti in a very nice Leawood Type Suburb, it's far from a garbage heap, plus Covington has this cool riverfront area with restaurants, shops, etc.
The Illionis side has many nice suburbs like Alton, O' Fallon (Thier is an O' Fallon on the MO side as well) and Belleville
KY and IL play second fiddle to OH and MO in the Cincinnati and Saint Louis metros. Vast majority of the population is on the OH and MO side. The other side is tolerated because only a small portion of the population lives on that side. There is only the illusion of "cooperation" because the main city is able to dominate those other areas and force them into submission.
In KC, KCMO wants to dominate the entire area and they hate it that Johnson County is so successful with jobs and population growth.
Also I must say that this whole idea that Johnson Countians don't have any "KC spirit" is I think largely unfounded. I have noticed kcmo says this quite frequently. There is no basis for this. Old money families in Mission Hills, Leawood, Prairie Village, Fairway, and Mission Woods invest a lot of money in KCMO, whether it be the Plaza, Crown Center, downtown, midtown, and other places in KC. Ordinary families in Johnson County spend a lot of money consuming goods and services in KCMO.
The only thing they don't do is pay Missouri income taxes because they don't freaking live in Missouri. They live in Kansas and pay Kansas taxes. You want to tax them in both states.
They also don't support public transit because Johnson County is built for cars and everyone there has a car. They don't have any need for transit.
Also I must say that this whole idea that Johnson Countians don't have any "KC spirit" is I think largely unfounded. I have noticed kcmo says this quite frequently. There is no basis for this. Old money families in Mission Hills, Leawood, Prairie Village, Fairway, and Mission Woods invest a lot of money in KCMO, whether it be the Plaza, Crown Center, downtown, midtown, and other places in KC. Ordinary families in Johnson County spend a lot of money consuming goods and services in KCMO.
The only thing they don't do is pay Missouri income taxes because they don't freaking live in Missouri. They live in Kansas and pay Kansas taxes. You want to tax them in both states.
They also don't support public transit because Johnson County is built for cars and everyone there has a car. They don't have any need for transit.
You're trying too hard to use logic and rational thinking here. Posters like kcmo use exaggerations and will even say things they know are completely false if it helps make the point that they wish were true. You really can't "debate" anything with people who refuse to even attempt perspective.
It's unfortunate because it defeats the purpose of the board which (I thought) was to be a place for people to get information.
On the other hand, people who want to know what KC is like should know that there is a lot of resentment and bashing that goes on. I so often hear about how JoCo looks down on KC and yet just above someone is telling me I shouldn't post here because I live in JoCo. As though I have no right to voice my views. It's laughable, but it does get old.
I try to point out posts that I think are misleading so that others reading them can at least hear another viewpoint and make up their own minds. The JoCo haters (and the KCMO haters as well) will never be assuaged.
They also don't support public transit because Johnson County is built for cars and everyone there has a car. They don't have any need for transit.
Total nonsense. Every large city must have a good transit system to be well regarded. With the rapidly aging population of JOCO I don't think everyone will be wanting to drive everywhere all the time. This is where higher density, walkability, and a more highly consolidated amenity package is key. JOCO wants nothing to do with transit or to be linked with future transit plans in Kansas City. Period.
I don't use transit much, but when LOUISVILLE, KY (a metro with one million fewer residents than KC) has a superior transit system that goes directly to the Airport, World Tradeport, Downtown, and the Suburbs you know KC has an ENORMOUS PROBLEM.
I agree with kcmo. I think the new JoCo suburbs look substantially different than those in St. Louis and Chicago -- I have lived in the suburbs of both those cities within the last decade and they have much more in common with each other than either do with Kansas City.
And I totally agree about the streets and trees aspect, but the houses really are different too. St. Louis' and Chicago's nicer homes (both new and old) tend to be brick and in the American traditional style while Kansas City has much more stucco and is heavily influenced by Spanish.
Probably the first thing I noticed when experiencing the joco suburbs the first time were all the Spanish tiled roofs. I've never really seen that on such a massive level in the Midwest.
That is because Chicago and St. Louis are what I like to call "Midwest core cities." KC is not really Midwestern, but more Western as a whole when it comes to social, cultural influences, economic influences, and architectural influences. KC didn't ever have as strong of a foundry economy like the true Midwest core cities. That generally explains the lack of brick houses in the past several decades in the KC metro. Instead, the cheapest housing exteriors like T-111, subgrade vinyl, batten board, hardy plant, etc predominate that weather horribly in KC's climate. Stucco also weathers horribly and cracks all over the place with freeze/thaw cycles. It should not be used as in exterior construction PERIOD given the humid continental climate of KC. Also, I strongly agree regarding the street layout of JOCO as well. It has a very strong bias toward the southern and western part of the US, and looks almost NOTHING like most suburban areas in the Midwest- particularly east of the Mississippi River.
Last edited by GraniteStater; 08-26-2010 at 08:25 PM..
Total nonsense. Every large city must have a good transit system to be well regarded. With the rapidly aging population of JOCO I don't think everyone will be wanting to drive everywhere all the time. This is where higher density, walkability, and a more highly consolidated amenity package is key.
You've made this statement before. I'm not saying you are completely wrong, but I just can't see it. I'm trying to picture an elderly person who can't drive preferring instead to walk 2-3 blocks to the grocery store and then back again with bags of stuff. To walk 2-3 blocks to the post office or the library or whatever. That's a lot of walking for old folks. Are we going to widen the sidewalks and make room for all of the motorized scooters? And then where shall we park all of those???
Higher density living for the elderly makes sense in terms of assisted living. Just not for the reasons you list. And even in those cases, shuttles seem to work pretty well.
Quote:
JOCO wants nothing to do with transit or to be linked with future transit plans in Kansas City. Period.
JoCo wants a return on any investment they might make in a transit system. I haven't seen any plans that didn't involve JoCo dumping large sums of money into a system that would mainly benefit KC, MO and likely never be of much benefit in JoCo. Even the bus routes in JoCo are rarely used. It's just not a priority for people so efforts to throw money at it are not met with great applause.
Quote:
I don't use transit much, but when LOUISVILLE, KY (a metro with one million fewer residents than KC) has a superior transit system that goes directly to the Airport, World Tradeport, Downtown, and the Suburbs you know KC has an ENORMOUS PROBLEM.
And I just don't see this "ENORMOUS PROBLEM" of which you speak. There are shuttles to and from the airport for people who don't want to spring for a cab. There seem to be plenty of busses running in the "urban core". People seem to be able to get where they need to go with little effort.
The distance between main points of interest in KC just isn't great enough to substantiate a need that isn't already being met.
I think it would be great to have a light rail line between the airport and downtown and maybe even incorporate the Plaza and Crown Center. But such a line would first have to show some return on the investment in MO before you could get JoCo excited about adding to it.
KCMO to JoCo: "Give us money! We will build this for ourselves and it will be great! Then you can spend more of your money later to add to it. Don't worry! We have a fabulous track record for judicial spending!"
JoCo to KCMO: "Uhhhh .... no. You get things started and we'll see how it goes. If it works out for you and people use it, then maybe we will spend money to expand it."
You've made this statement before. I'm not saying you are completely wrong, but I just can't see it. I'm trying to picture an elderly person who can't drive preferring instead to walk 2-3 blocks to the grocery store and then back again with bags of stuff. To walk 2-3 blocks to the post office or the library or whatever. That's a lot of walking for old folks. Are we going to widen the sidewalks and make room for all of the motorized scooters? And then where shall we park all of those???
Have you never seen a working new urbanism development?
You have excellent amenity packages like patio homes, neighborhood stores in a clustered area, corner eateries, etc. The point being, clustered amenities would appeal to an older demographic that prefers or can't drive as far. Walk 2-3 blocks? No. How about have most amenities that a certain demographic of the population needs within a 5 block driving radius. That would make a lot more sense and would be a model to build on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samantha S
Higher density living for the elderly makes sense in terms of assisted living. Just not for the reasons you list. And even in those cases, shuttles seem to work pretty well.
No, a far greater amount of options exist than that. However, zoning, creatively planned neighborhoods, new urbanism, localism, and sustainability could fare much better if KC had some vision that does not rely on the black & white centralized zoning model.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samantha S
JoCo wants a return on any investment they might make in a transit system. I haven't seen any plans that didn't involve JoCo dumping large sums of money into a system that would mainly benefit KC, MO and likely never be of much benefit in JoCo. Even the bus routes in JoCo are rarely used. It's just not a priority for people so efforts to throw money at it are not met with great applause.
JOCO would not even consider transit and you know it. Missouri will likely tackle transit issues alone with all the metro counties in Missouri and not care what JOCO thinks about it. And one would have a very short memory if gas prices suddenly surge rapidly upward again. The K-10 connector has already been a big success. The issue is the built environment that is already so sprawly that not even a smaller scale regional bus network would work. So, JOCO should just follow the LA sprawl model, but it will all be coordinated with all roads meeting at right angles!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samantha S
And I just don't see this "ENORMOUS PROBLEM" of which you speak. There are shuttles to and from the airport for people who don't want to spring for a cab. There seem to be plenty of busses running in the "urban core". People seem to be able to get where they need to go with little effort..
The issue is a lack of transit options for business travelers who must get from the airport all the way down to the urban/suburban southside of the metro from the airport, etc. They are basically forced to get a cab for $80 one way or rent a car. This is just one example of why many dislike KCI airport. The transit network between all areas of the metro and the airport lacks linkages, period. I got a bus ride to Louisville International Airport one time and it cost me $1.50 one way for about a 20 mile ride. Now you know why i see it as an enormous problem when I use that comparison.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samantha S
The distance between main points of interest in KC just isn't great enough to substantiate a need that isn't already being met...
[/quote]
Once again, the problem arises from a bifurcated built environment stretching across state lines. It is the built environment itself that has morphed over time into a sprawling mess that leads to large inefficiencies in landuse and therefore lends itself more poorly to transit-particularly a few years down the road when the impacts of peak oil will be more widely felt. KC will likely be even further behind the curve by that time when it comes to that issue, though.
Have you never seen a working new urbanism development?
You have excellent amenity packages like patio homes, neighborhood stores in a clustered area, corner eateries, etc. The point being, clustered amenities would appeal to an older demographic that prefers or can't drive as far. Walk 2-3 blocks? No. How about have most amenities that a certain demographic of the population needs within a 5 block driving radius. That would make a lot more sense and would be a model to build on.
So how does that benefit the people who can't drive?
Quote:
JOCO would not even consider transit and you know it.
Yeah, I thought I agreed with that. At this point, there is no reason to.
Quote:
Missouri will likely tackle transit issues alone with all the metro counties in Missouri and not care what JOCO thinks about it.
Which is what they should do.
Quote:
The issue is a lack of transit options for business travelers who must get from the airport all the way down to the urban/suburban southside of the metro from the airport, etc. They are basically forced to get a cab for $80 one way or rent a car. This is just one example of why many dislike KCI airport. The transit network between all areas of the metro and the airport lacks linkages, period. I got a bus ride to Louisville International Airport one time and it cost me $1.50 one way for about a 20 mile ride. Now you know why i see it as an enormous problem when I use that comparison.
Quote:
Once again, the problem arises from a bifurcated built environment stretching across state lines. It is the built environment itself that has morphed over time into a sprawling mess that leads to large inefficiencies in landuse and therefore lends itself more poorly to transit-particularly a few years down the road when the impacts of peak oil will be more widely felt. KC will likely be even further behind the curve by that time when it comes to that issue, though.
I understand what you're saying. It's not nearly as convenient as some other cities are for travelers. And sure, there's always room for improvement. I just disagree that it's the enormous problem that you make it out to be.
<shrug>
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.
