KC urban core population density.

[flyingember]

Guess because of annexations the post office has not changed what a location is called. Had family living in Gladstone but it had a KC address. Guess it was served by a PO located in KC.

Post office name and city name don't have to match

64150-8 covers areas a large area north of the river regardles of town name or post office location. For example, USPS calls 64152 primarily a KC zip code but it has a Parkville post office.

https://tools.usps.com/go/ZipLookupResu ... 64152&zip=

[flyingember]

When Jim Sheridon was researching where to build his first frozen custard shop back in the late 90's the densest place in KC was 75th and Metcalf.

Sad really.

Highly doubt that. Actually no possible way. But it may have had the highest density of high income.

I'd believe it. that part of JoCo has small homes built like parts of KC. The blocks are designed tight with little wasteful winding and there's 20 homes per block.

At that time I bet the area had 99% occupancy too.

[earthling]

64124 and 123 are 33% foreign born..

http://www.city-data.com/zips/64124.html#b
http://www.city-data.com/zips/64123.html#b

Races in zip code 64124:
Hispanic or Latino population: 5,067
White population: 3,300
Black population: 2,579
American Indian population: 1,013
Asian population: 1,172
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population: 0
Some other race population: 141
Two or more races population: 398


First ancestries reported:
Other groups: 7,634
Liberian: 1,001
Subsaharan African: 884
Senegalese: 659
German: 653
Sudanese: 518
American: 388
Irish: 367
Italian: 364
Other Subsaharan African: 280
English: 243
Swedish: 232
French (except Basque): 148
Somalian: 146
Yugoslavian: 144
Other Arab: 138
Arab: 134
Iraqi: 131
Ethiopian: 119
European: 113
Hungarian: 102
British: 100
Polish: 98
Dutch: 95
African: 90
Arab: 75
Scandinavian: 75
Danish: 56
Scotch-Irish: 56
Norwegian: 55
Russian: 48
Turkish: 48
Northern European: 42
Welsh: 42
Belgian: 39
Lithuanian: 35
French Canadian: 34
Greek: 34
Czech: 32
Scottish: 24
Eastern European: 16
Swiss: 9

Races in zip code 64123:
Hispanic or Latino population: 5,097
White population: 3,812
Black population: 1,944
American Indian population: 203
Asian population: 1,467
Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population: 112
Some other race population: 192
Two or more races population: 534


First ancestries reported:
Other groups: 7,310
German: 966
American: 592
Irish: 388
English: 285
Italian: 271
Swedish: 149
Subsaharan African: 115
African: 112
Scotch-Irish: 109
Polish: 104
Iraqi: 103
Dutch: 97
British: 80
French (except Basque): 74
Arab: 72
European: 56
Danish: 53
Norwegian: 46
Arab: 45
Turkish: 41
Northern European: 35
Belgian: 33
French Canadian: 29
Greek: 29
Czech: 27
Welsh: 23
Somalian: 20
Eastern European: 13
Swiss: 8

[FangKC]

I live in 64123, and I can attest that it is very racially-mixed. On my block, there are a mix of white, hispanic, asian, and black.

29 houses

16 white households
6 hispanic households
4 asian households
3 black households

Of the 29 households, 12 have children; 11 houses are inhabited by single adult occupants. Three houses are occupied solely by seniors. Three houses are occupied by co-habitating younger adults without children. Two of the households with children appear to be multi-generational households with grandparents, parents, and children.

None of the houses on the block are vacant, or abandoned.

Twenty-one houses appear to have been built before WWII; eight appear to have been built after WWII.

This speaks to the decline of population density in the City south of the river. It isn't just the number of vacant houses, or cleared parcels in the central city that caused the decline. Of 29 houses on my block, twelve are inhabited by one adult.

So you have a situation where almost half of the existing houses on my block are occupied by one adult. That is a fairly significant thing to observe when discussing population decline. It's not just that people fled for the suburbs. It's that the remaining houses--that had several people living in them in the past--now have only one person occupying them. Some are aging seniors, but mostly it's single adults.

This is why I think it's important for the City, in its' redevelopment (and repopulation) of the central neighborhoods south of the river, consider the need for more dense housing options on existing vacant land.

This includes:

Smaller houses on narrow lots.
Townhouses.
Rowhouses.
Low-rise apartment buildings.
High-rise apartment buildings.
Duplexes.
Allowances for existing houses on large lots to add carriage houses or separate-building rental apartments on the property. I'm not advocating sub-dividing larger houses into apartments. Instead, the City should allow more mother-in-law dwellings, carriage houses, or apartments over garages.

The City needs to recognize the large number of single adults that occupy housing in KCMO now. I think I read from the last census that the majority of households in KCMO are those without children.

The other thing to recognize is that those households with children are not as large as in the past. You don't see parents with four-to-eight children as often. The norm is around two children.

These two factors also have affected the population decline, and density, in older parts of the City, and metro.

[flyingember]

another part on density is getting modern services focused on families.

day care
elementary schools
parks and playgrounds

notice how many suburban neighborhoods are right next to those three items yet are miles from grocery stores.

you can build the housing but without those attributes in the neighborhood too you'll never get tons of families and thus density. a family of 4 can live in a 2 bedroom apartment. but you won't see four roommates in a 2 bedroom home in the same way.

this fundamental need is going to hold downtown's population back and why the star did a big piece about a school (despite it being the 5th elementary school downtown). this is one area that the city needs to be flexible, provide money to make it happen and then figure out the park space.

every downtown park should have a playground and green space needs to be designed into the downtown plan en mass

[FangKC]

But again you are neglecting the change in demographics. Fewer residents have children now. Many homes are occupied by single adults.

To rebuild the population with these demographic trends--south of the river, the City must focus on building higher density housing options.

[Zorobabel]

I guess it's a 'chicken or egg' kind of question. Personally, I believe that the state of public education in KCMO is one of the primary reasons for depopulation south of the river. From my own experience, I noticed in Chicago that the neighborhoods that the so-called young professionals were flocking to in my industry (IT) generally had moderately-performing public schools and very strong magnet schools nearby. They may have been young and single, but they also didn't want to have to move to the suburbs just to have a kid. In my opinion, I think the current solution--relying on a few decent charter schools and busing the students off to outlying school districts--will be very damaging to the prospects of encouraging population growth in the urban core. Time will tell.

[earthling]

But again you are neglecting the change in demographics. Fewer residents have children now. Many homes are occupied by single adults.

To rebuild the population with these demographic trends--south of the river, the City must focus on building higher density housing options.

^Agreed. Occupancy of/and housing density has more relevance to city core health than population density. A household with one or 2 dinks will have more disposable income to support the surrounding amenities/retail than a family of 5, which would tend to spend money in a grocery store than restaurants. But either way, schools need to be fixed and not ignored. Did the new downtown school open yet? It's not affiliated with KCSD.

Also agree that reducing crime helps. Downtown population grew as crime diminished.

[pash]

.

[Zorobabel]

Crime is the only issue.

Why do you think KC hasn't seen the large decline in violent crime that has occurred in most major American cities over the last 25 years? Are the police just that bad, or what? It's something I've never really understood.

[grovester]

Is there a crime problem in the RCP? I'm thinking it's been relegated to a specific area on the east side.

[FangKC]

I do think crime is a bigger issue in parts of KCMO than schools. Many people would return to the central city if they felt safe there.

I remember when I was looking for a house to buy, I would see these renovated arts and craft bungalows in the real estate ads, that were great deals money-wise, and looked like great houses, but I wouldn't buy in that particular neighborhood because of crime statistics.

I think drops in crime have lagged in KCMO because the KCPD was late in the game in employing better methods to prevent and deal with crime.

I do see some Darryl Forte doing some positive things. He's doing more community-based policing, and using technology to target high crime spots. I think he's changing how the police department interacts with neighborhoods. These are techniques other cities have used to drastically reduce crime.

A large number of the crimes in KCMO happen in a 40-square block area--and mostly at night. Much of it is black-on-black crime, and has to deal with gangs and drug activity. While this crime happens in that area, it stains the perception of surrounding neighborhoods for several miles.

I'd like to see the KCPD rent spaces in two or three buildings in this 40-block area, and use them as temporary bases in which to get police walking beats regularly, and use "show of force" demonstrations where police inundate these blocks at random times. NYC used this technique quite effectively in the early 1990s, and it made a huge difference in my neighborhood at the time.

Crime can go down dramatically. Washington DC used to be called the "murder capital." Things have changed dramatically.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11 ... -1963?lite

http://www.justicepolicy.org/news/4587

[Highlander]

Crime can go down dramatically. Washington DC used to be called the "murder capital." Things have changed dramatically.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11 ... -1963?lite

http://www.justicepolicy.org/news/4587

Washington DC is undergoing unprecedented gentrification. A significant amount of poverty has been displaced into the inner rings of burbs. I'd like to see that kind of gentrification in KC because that is really what it would take to make the core more viable but it really only moves the crime problem further outboard.

[flyingember]

on crime vs schools

We've looked at places downtown we liked. Those homes near Oak in the river market were decent for one example.

Crime is what would drive my insurance rates up and made me not move to near the plaza when I was single. i wasn't worried about the crime itself but I couldn't afford to live there because of it. I stayed with someone on the Paseo overnight (in 49/63) few times and everything was fine.

School are what's keeping me away now. We need good daycare now and good schools in a few years.

I can and do live north the same distance from downtown as someone from UMKC is and have good schools.

[chaglang]

Crime is the only issue.

Why do you think KC hasn't seen the large decline in violent crime that has occurred in most major American cities over the last 25 years? Are the police just that bad, or what? It's something I've never really understood.

I appreciate that crime can be looked at in several different ways.
As someone that grew up in NE I'm used to it.
Reality: the rest of America is not used to it.

Police? No, it's the entire system, it's so bad that we don't even think analytically about it any longer.
The entire system doesn't rehabilitate or keep criminals locked up, so they are out in the public.
24/7/365 there are perhaps 10,000+ violent criminals on the streets of KC.
From shitting in your yard to stabbing someone to raping any potential victim solely on the whim of opportunity.

A perfectly charming, dirt-cheap bungalow that needs a little work isn't on the radar for the vast majority because they've analyzed reality and will not allow themselves to live in the American urban environment.
Even though this site makes fun of them, these people are only making educated and intelligent choices for their family.
Yes, you'll always have a few crazies in the general public, but for the govt system to allow so many depraved people to live openly, most of whom are on the govt dole is sickening.

I want the city to come back more than anyone.

I've analyzed suburbia and will not allow my family to live in that environment. Years ago I made an educated and intelligent choice not to be afraid of bogeymen. In the intervening 20 years, no one has shit on my lawn, or stabbed or raped me or anyone I know. I have, however, gotten to know some fantastic people, lived in beautiful houses, and done it all without a credit card or a whiff of short-term debt. And if you are savvy enough, you can afford private schools on top of all that. What am I missing here?

Through my suburbanite friends, I've found that fear and conformity make for an expensive way of life. The schools had better be good, because they're all drowning in debt and clinging to Dave Ramsey seminars like life rafts.

It's nice that you want the city to "come back". However I doubt you want it to come back more than people who actually live in the city.

[flyingember]

I've analyzed suburbia and will not allow my family to live in that environment.

that's an equal stance to someone who refuses to live in the city.

one does not analyze suburbia any more than they analyze the city.

[longviewmo]

I've analyzed suburbia and will not allow my family to live in that environment. Years ago I made an educated and intelligent choice not to be afraid of bogeymen. In the intervening 20 years, no one has shit on my lawn, or stabbed or raped me or anyone I know. I have, however, gotten to know some fantastic people, lived in beautiful houses, and done it all without a credit card or a whiff of short-term debt. And if you are savvy enough, you can afford private schools on top of all that. What am I missing here?

Through my suburbanite friends, I've found that fear and conformity make for an expensive way of life. The schools had better be good, because they're all drowning in debt and clinging to Dave Ramsey seminars like life rafts.

It's nice that you want the city to "come back". However I doubt you want it to come back more than people who actually live in the city.

We need more people that think this way. Sadly, for most to come back, it will take better public schools. Not just better schools in the urban core. We need better ones in ALL of the Jackson County part of KC. People are moving away from districts like Raytown, Center, Hickman Mills and even Grandview because of the perception that the schools suck. Stopping the rush away from the inner-ring probably isn't a bad idea to keep the core intact.

Also, for what it's worth, the deer shit in my yard in quite a bit. I guess that's what I get for living on acreage in the suburbs.

[phuqueue]

Curious whether there are any citations for "10,000+ violent criminals" roaming the streets of KC at any given moment, "tens of thousands" of incidents of lawn shitting and violent crimes, "99.9% of KCMO police officers" living north of the river, etc. Mind you I'm not that curious since I've already got a hunch about the answer, but I'm a little curious.

[chaglang]

Curious whether there are any citations for "10,000+ violent criminals" roaming the streets of KC at any given moment, "tens of thousands" of incidents of lawn shitting and violent crimes, "99.9% of KCMO police officers" living north of the river, etc. Mind you I'm not that curious since I've already got a hunch about the answer, but I'm a little curious.

Bingo. I'm curious about how the "urban core" is being defined. And how the crimes that happen there are taken as representative of KCMO as a whole.

[chaglang]

I've analyzed suburbia and will not allow my family to live in that environment.

that's an equal stance to someone who refuses to live in the city.

one does not analyze suburbia any more than they analyze the city.

Some of that was snark, but of course one can analyze cities or suburbs. There are hundreds of books that do just that.