Interesting data on KC (Kansas City, St. Louis: city hall, homes, neighborhood)

[zach_33]

The center of the country is generally losing ground to the coasts. Access to international trade and travel are undoubtedly part of it as society becomes more global, more interconnected. Denver and nashville are exceptions. Denver, in particular, benefits from being the closest outdoorsy city to california. Check the migration figures and i’m guessing its half california expats moving there over the last decade. Idk what people see in nashville- my trips there i am mostly struck by how bad traffic is for a second tier city. Chicago is struggling mightily, although it will take a while for it to fade into second tier status. Kc is similar to milwaukee, cincy, st louis, memphis, cleveland, indy.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by zach_33

The center of the country is generally losing ground to the coasts. Access to international trade and travel are undoubtedly part of it as society becomes more global, more interconnected. Denver and nashville are exceptions. Denver, in particular, benefits from being the closest outdoorsy city to california. Check the migration figures and i’m guessing its half california expats moving there over the last decade. Idk what people see in nashville- my trips there i am mostly struck by how bad traffic is for a second tier city. Chicago is struggling mightily, although it will take a while for it to fade into second tier status. Kc is similar to milwaukee, cincy, st louis, memphis, cleveland, indy.

Memphis has fallen to at least a 3rd tier city. Neat enough place to visit, but that city is really struggling.

[Tominftl]

Don’t know most times which Kansas City people are talking about.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by Tominftl

Don’t know most times which Kansas City people are talking about.

Huh? There is only one Kansas City that is "talked about". Kansas City, Missouri. If you are confused on the whole KC,MO / KC,KS thing, just don't. KCK is basically a suburb. It's part of the Metro KC area, but whenever anybody talks about KC or 99% of its attractions, its "downtown" etc, it's nearly a given that yo are talking about Kansas City, MO.

[zach_33]

Originally Posted by kcmo

Memphis has fallen to at least a 3rd tier city. Neat enough place to visit, but that city is really struggling.

The drive from downtown to Graceland is pretty depressing. This story about the movement of poverty from city to suburb in Memphis was written over ten years ago, its a fascinating essay:


https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...ystery/306872/


The pattern is playing out elsewhere across the country, including Kansas City.

[MrIndependent]

Originally Posted by kcmo

Lots of airports are in the middle of nowhere. Ever fly into Denver, Dulles etc? If it were located south of the metro, planes would still fly over nothing as they approach from the south to avoid flying over developed areas. Most people don't even look out the window when landing and those that do, who cares? Also, depending on where you are flying from, you often get a pretty nice view of the downtown area or at least the northland suburbs. It's only when you land from the north or west that you don't see anything although the north is kind of cool with smithville lake.

And your idea of KCK makes zero sense. Unless you plan to tear down several thousand houses, where would it go? Way the hell out by the speedway or more likely west of the speedway? That's more in the middle of nowhere than its current location.

And again, if you leave KCI and head to the city, you are in developed areas basically as soon as you leave the airport and it's pretty densely suburbanized just a few miles to the south. And it's actually a really nice suburban area too with lots of retail etc all just minutes from KCI. Even if you live in JoCo, I don't know why you would take 435 to KCI. When I went to KCI when originating in JoCo, I would always take 35 to 635 to 29. From Lees Summit, I would take 470 to 70 to 29 or maybe 435 to 152 to 29. The entire time I lived and KC, I think I was on that rural stretch of 435 between Liberty and KCK like twice and they were likely both times to just see what is out there. Absolutely nothing. Don't take 435, it takes longer, it uses way more gas and there is nothing along the route such as basic services in case you need them. Plus, it makes KCI feel like it's 50 miles outside of the metro and it's just not.

The much bigger problem is the actual terminal. Now that is where the airport becomes embarrassing when you walk off the plane and into something that looks more like a greyhound bus terminal than an international airport. And that is finally being addressed, although a bit too late. KC missed the boat on having a major airport simply by keeping the current terminals too long. And the new terminal is a bare bones, not interested in being more than a regional airport terminal. It has nothing to do with the location of the airport.

Are you kidding me? That's a lousy comparison. KC is not Denver and is not DC. Those cities are 1 or 2 tiers above. In fact, Denver's airport is at least connected by rail to the city. Dulles will eventually be on the Metro line.

At this point, it's obviously too late to move the airport's location. But like I said earlier, IF I HAD A MAGIC WAND, I would not keep the airport where it is currently. I would put it in KCK.

The issue is not what do arriving travelers see while looking out the plane window. The issue is regarding options for getting into the city from the airport.
You know what mid-sized peer city did a great job with their airport? Indianapolis.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by MrIndependent

Are you kidding me? That's a lousy comparison. KC is not Denver and is not DC. Those cities are 1 or 2 tiers above. In fact, Denver's airport is at least connected by rail to the city. Dulles will eventually be on the Metro line.

At this point, it's obviously too late to move the airport's location. But like I said earlier, IF I HAD A MAGIC WAND, I would not keep the airport where it is currently. I would put it in KCK.

The issue is not what do arriving travelers see while looking out the plane window. The issue is regarding options for getting into the city from the airport.
You know what mid-sized peer city did a great job with their airport? Indianapolis.

Denver was not 1 or 2 tiers above KC in the 1970's when MCI was built in its present location.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by MrIndependent

Are you kidding me? That's a lousy comparison. KC is not Denver and is not DC. Those cities are 1 or 2 tiers above. In fact, Denver's airport is at least connected by rail to the city. Dulles will eventually be on the Metro line.

At this point, it's obviously too late to move the airport's location. But like I said earlier, IF I HAD A MAGIC WAND, I would not keep the airport where it is currently. I would put it in KCK.

The issue is not what do arriving travelers see while looking out the plane window. The issue is regarding options for getting into the city from the airport.
You know what mid-sized peer city did a great job with their airport? Indianapolis.

Please tell me how putting the airport in KCK changes ANYTHING about it for the better. Maybe if you tore down the fairfax industrial district? Is that what you are talking about? I mean, that's not even worth discussing since that's not even remotely an option. The only realistic place you could put the airport in KCK is west of 435. How is that better?

And it's not a lousy comparison. DI a and IAD are far from the city. Indy has a great nice new terminal, but it's not exactly in a great area nor easily accessible. Indy's airport is no better located in that metro than KCI is in metro KC. The location of KCI is fine and it wouldn't be better if it were clear out in KCK or Bonner Springs. It would give Kansas something else to leverage STAR bonds though to pay for more crap in the middle of nowhere.

[VietInKC]

KCI is fine where it is. It does seem like the middle of nowhere but it's not that far away from Downtown KC especially considering I-29 doesn't see much traffic. Unless you travel for business every week/month or something like that, I really don't understand why a location of the airport is such an issue to make the commute a concerning problem especially considering KC's lack of real traffic. There's I-435 right by too for the outer suburbs.

[jayhonk]

The only thing KCI lacks is a rail line to the Plaza.