Why KC's Lack of Traffic Isn't So Great (Kansas City, St. Louis: 2015, employment)

[chicago2kc]

Originally Posted by kcmo

For the record, I personally wouldn't want KC to have Chicago or LA type traffic. Heck, KC wouldn't know what to do with Austin or Nashville type traffic.

But is it asking to much to have more than six cars and six pedestrians around the entire downtown area? KC could use a little more urban congestion for sure. Nothing that would even cause delays, just somewhat busy streets and sidewalks to make it feel like people actually live and work there. I know lots of people live and work in urban KCMO, but it always feels so empty compared to other similar sized cities.

Agreed. As I mentioned, horrible traffic isn't good either. I'm just saying that the emptiness (and things often are truly empty whether downtown or on the freeways) is not a good look for a city. My worry is that it's likely is a symptom of underlying problems.

[chicago2kc]

Originally Posted by the topper

Lack of job growth and smaller population are contribution to low traffic flow in KC.

The lack of job growth is one of things I worry about. Our population is similar to Austin or Nashville. But because those cities are truly growing, they have more traffic volume. I guess I kind of see traffic as a barometer of whether a city is a "growth" city or a "stagnant" city.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by chicago2kc

The lack of job growth is one of things I worry about. Our population is similar to Austin or Nashville. But because those cities are truly growing, they have more traffic volume. I guess I kind of see traffic as a barometer of whether a city is a "growth" city or a "stagnant" city.

KC has always been a slow growth city. People always point to Cleveland or St Louis and say they are doing well because they are growing faster than cities in the rust belt.

KC should be growing at about twice the rate it grows, not quite a fast as Denver or MSP or Austin, but faster than it currently grows.

And even though KC has seen increased urban residential growth, job growth in the urban core is still pretty much non-existent. KC is still a very suburban oriented metro where suburban office parks rule. But the metro is so spread out that even that is hard to see with office parks spread all over hell connected by un-congested freeways where most of the congestion is actually caused by construction and traffic volume. Johnson County is trying to make their freeways look like they have the population of Dallas or Houston, they are totally overbuilding them for the population that will ever use them so that people never so much as tap the brakes during rush our and all other times, they are 500% under capacity.

Then you go to the other extreme where I-70 in Missouri looks so old and run down.

[rwiksell]

Originally Posted by kcmo

KC has always been a slow growth city.

Not to nitpick, but it has not always been a slow growth city. For example, in 1880 the population was 55,000, and in 1890 it was 133,000. That's 238% growth over a decade.

Other decades have seen fast growth too, but not as fast as this, and not recently, of course. But it isn't fair to say "always".

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by luzianne

Where have you seen a half empty arena? Royals? That's the only thing I can think of, but that's not surprising when you consider the number of games a baseball team plays vs the number a football team plays. I would think it would be the norm for MLB stadiums, although there might be a few that are always sold out.

Isn't it fascinating to, once again, see reality turned on its head? Whereby the KC metro's wonderful low-density layout, providing vastly superior life quality, is ripped 5 ways to Sunday for not being the nightmare that most other metros of equal or greater size are?

Unmentioned so far is the biggest KC bonus of all....smart, independent people who know better! Know better than to join or even pretend to place any value on emulating the misery loves company hipsters in Boston, DC, or San Francisco. Keep up the good work, KC.

[87112]

To tell you the truth this thread has made me want to see KC for myself. Its quite easy to see maddening traffic as I live in Seattle.

[GraniteStater]

I'll be in Seattle region this June for a trip/vacation, I'll report back on the traffic situation there.

[CrownVic95]

Originally Posted by 87112

To tell you the truth this thread has made me want to see KC for myself. Its quite easy to see maddening traffic as I live in Seattle.

It's wonderful....as long as your visit is sometime from October - April.

[chicago2kc]

Originally Posted by CrownVic95

Isn't it fascinating to, once again, see reality turned on its head? Whereby the KC metro's wonderful low-density layout, providing vastly superior life quality, is ripped 5 ways to Sunday for not being the nightmare that most other metros of equal or greater size are?

Unmentioned so far is the biggest KC bonus of all....smart, independent people who know better! Know better than to join or even pretend to place any value on emulating the misery loves company hipsters in Boston, DC, or San Francisco. Keep up the good work, KC.

Except that your POV expressed many times in this forum that KC is better left as a backwater hick town isn't doing it any favors. The smart people -- those with college educations -- are leaving KC faster than they're arriving.

Kansas City Leaders Grappling With Troubling Trend: Brain Drain

As I said before. It's not about the traffic itself. It's about what the lack of traffic says about the city. You can boast all you want about KC's hohum-ness being a virtue. But that's the best way to become the next Detroit, Cleveland or Toledo.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by rwiksell

Not to nitpick, but it has not always been a slow growth city. For example, in 1880 the population was 55,000, and in 1890 it was 133,000. That's 238% growth over a decade.

Other decades have seen fast growth too, but not as fast as this, and not recently, of course. But it isn't fair to say "always".

Yes, it was quite the boom town into the 1930's. I was talking about more recently though. I think the biggest thing that hurts KC now is there is almost nothing headquartered there. KC has very few fortune 500 companies and when you don't have companies based in the city (especially in the central city), then you don't have that civic pride that comes with that. You don't have companies that actually care enough to want to make a difference in the city. They just set up in suburban office parks and go about their business. It didn't used to be that way. There used to be a lot more corporate pride in KC. All that is really left is Hallmark and they are a much smaller company now (and yet they are still more involved in KC civic endeavors than just about every other much larger company in town).

And it continues to get worse and mergers continue to happen. When a merge happens, who gets the new HQ? The city that happens to be the most desirable, the most vibrant etc. A HQ generally wants to be in a city that has a lot going on or a city that people want to move to. KC is just not that city on a national scale and is not a pull for anybody beyond the rural 200 mile radius of it. And so the cycle continues. Jobs continue to migrate to far flung suburban office parks, corporations continue to choose other cities over KC when placing important HQ offices or after mergers or acquisitions. Downtown KC can't really get any solid traction without a much larger corporate presence.

The residential and hotel boom you see now in urban KC will end prematurely or slow greatly. The writing is on the wall. It's just not sustainable with nearly all the economic corporate activity in KC in the suburbs and no corporate civic pride to bring jobs back to the urban core.

For the record, I think KC is a nice city with tons to offer. But it will continue to slip in rankings and size among American metros due to slow growth and it will eventually drop down from a "major league city", to more of a top level minor league city (will fall out of top 30 metros when at one time it was a top 20 metro) in the next 20-30 years or so.