Kansas, Missouri battle over companies

[KCPowercat]

Some do. Tivol lives on the plaza, stowers has a olace in the same building, carl peterson lived on the plaza, forsee did live on Ward, commerce kemper lives on ward.....to name a few

[chrizow]

Some do. Tivol lives on the plaza, stowers has a olace in the same building, carl peterson lived on the plaza, forsee did live on Ward, commerce kemper lives on ward.....to name a few

also, doesn't r. crosby kemper live in roanoke?  

and sly james lives in hyde park!  when is the last time we had a mayor who lived in the urban core?

[KCPowercat]

Pretty sure funk did didn't he?

[brewcrew1000]

Funkhouser lived in the Core, like around Ward Parkway.

Chiefs live in the core too
Scott Pioli lives on the plaza on like 49th and Central, and Chief Jon Mcgraw lives in that huge high rise on 31st and SW Trafficway.  Interestingly a lot of the young chiefs like Bowe, Tyson Jackson, Dorsey and a few others all live out in Lees Summit

[chrizow]

Pretty sure funk did didn't he?

brookside i believe - more city than briarcliff (barnes) and gregory/blue ridge (cleaver), but i meant in "the city" which i would imagine stops just south of the plaza.  downtown, midtown, NE, east side, etc.

[beautyfromashes]

I'm having a hard time telling whether you're being obtuse.  If you ignorance is not merely rhetorical, you could start with Missouri's constitution:

That all constitutional government is intended to promote the general welfare of the people; that all persons have a natural right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the enjoyment of the gains of their own industry;... and that when government does not confer this security, it fails in its chief design.

The best way that the state government can fulfill the intended purpose of promoting the welfare of the people is to promote quality job creation.  

You never really answered my question, acutely in what areas should the state government be spending funds that would better improve the quality of life of it's citizens?  oh, and thanks for the book suggestion.  never heard of this fellow Locke. &&&&

[KCPowercat]

Chriz....yeah you are right.

[chingon]

then how do you explain the popularity of cities like SF, chicago, seattle, etc. with both singles and families?  

Isn't SF famous for having the smallest percentage of children of any city? More dogs than kids comes to mind. I would imagine Seattle is pretty similar, other PNW cities seem pretty DINK/single/gay-heavy. Chicago just lost 200K people and I would bet a dollar to a donut that that loss is concentrated in the bungalow belt, as families bale for the outerring exurbs.

That said, I think your larger point stands. KC isn't awesome enough to make up for its flaws in the minds of its citizens or suburbanites. But my experience is that's a problem you run up against in Cincy, Indy, StL, Omaha, etc. The state line problem is not.

[chingon]

Metro KC =  anti-urban.  Period.

I'm on board with your futile, one-man crusade against corporate poaching. But, man, I know you've seen the same census numbers as everyone else:

Metro everywhere-in-the-midwest = anti-urban. Across the board. Period.

The question is what can be done by cities to attract and keep good jobs without giving away all the monetary benefits of having and keeping good jobs.

[rxlexi]

With respect to attracting young people, KCMO simply doesn't compete with coastal cities and places like Chi, Denver, Dallas.  Downtown is certainly becoming a better option.  No doubt.  I'm living evidence.  I moved downtown and so have many of my friends.  That said, I just don't think KC is a currently a destination city for young professionals outside of the midwest.  Which is fine.  We just need to focus on retaining the local talent (KU, MU, KSU, UMKC) and attract regional talent (NU, OU, OSU, ISU, etc.)  There are a lot of great colleges in this region.  

yes.  excellent, pragmatic post.  KC needs to be (and is on the right track, IMO) THE regional destination city for young folks and college grads from KS/Neb/AK/IW/MO.  I don't even know that "retaining" existing talent is necessarily the most important thing; midwestern cities will always face some youthful native migration to the coasts etc. Rather, creating a place that consistently attracts new talent from the greater region in large numbers should be a primary goal moving forward.

I also think Chrizow is absolutely correct; schools are as much a non-issue to KCMO right now as any huge, important problem can be.  This city needs to focus all of its energy on being THE most desirable place for 1) regional business and 2) young people first, and then worry about the massive and solution-less chase towards recreating an urban middle class "great public schools" utopia that hasn't really existed in US society for 30 years.  As he mentions, look at Chicago's urban successes.    

When KCMO can't even pull in the vast majority of the region's young, single residents and status hungry companies (two groups for which an urban environment arguably holds great appeal), why would we expend limited resources to tackle an exponentially more difficult target group (suburban families, where we are competing with affluent, non-minority cities with the resulting appealling schools and crime rates)?  First you target the low hanging fruit, and win that battle.  THEN go for the hard stuff.

[beautyfromashes]

The only people pushing the, 'let's get the young people' koolaid are single people looking for prettier people to hit on at the bar.

[KC-wildcat]

The only people pushing the, 'let's get the young people' koolaid are single people looking for prettier people to hit on at the bar.

Well sure.  What's wrong with that??  hah.  While the primary reason, definately not the only reason. 

[Highlander]

Read my post on the previous page.  Businesses choose to set up shop in downtowns/CBDs in cities all over the world for straightforward business reasons, no incentives necessary.  Kansas City's downtown fails to attract businesses because it fails to offer the benefits that other cities' CBDs provide.

Get to work.

Such as?  I've been to a lot of US cities and KC has everything 90% of them have except for a better functioning public transportation system.  But when it comes to a CBD with nice residential in the area:  check, we have it.  Nice entertainment options?: check, that is there too.  Schools?:  Well, a little short there but most other cities suffer from the same issue, hence, the plethora of private schools.  I just do not see where downtown is severely lacking in amenities.  It has all the amenities of many other booming CBD cities like Denver, albeit on a much smaller scale, and more than many cities like Houston's downtown which has a much larger business presence downtown than KC and the amenities (while arguably there) are so poorly executed that they have no real benefit.

I think Kansas Citians, for the most part, just think collectively in suburban terms, hell even many efforts to get something going in the urban core look like suburban appendages into the city (Midtown marketplace, East Village).  The urban lifestyle in KC has always been the choice of a select few rather than the place to be.   

[pash]

.

[FangKC]

The central city near downtown has lost a lot of housing in past decades that was never replaced.  That needs to become a greater priority.

[Highlander]

The central city near downtown has lost a lot of housing in past decades that was never replaced.  That needs to become a greater priority.

When the demand comes, the housing will come.  KC is experiencing a vicious cycle, business leaves the city center and that same business is what drives the housing and entertainment demand in the city center.  At the moment, KC can't even get a built-for-purpose condo in the core built.  Some rehabs but housing price won't support new construction.  Frankly, I think one of the main drivers for urban gentrification is need for cutting commute time (it certainly is where I live) and KC is just way too easy to get around even if offices are in south Johnson County and workers are in Blue Springs.  It's probably always going to easy but it may soon, however, become pretty costly. 

[aknowledgeableperson]

True, but it's the companies that are the primary reason other downtowns are more desirable.  They want to be there in the first place.  Where in KC, most would rather opt for a suburban office park.

or for Crown Center/Union Station area or the Plaza area.  Yes, I know the KCMO government and many others may say CC/US is downtown but that was a political statement to get State of MO redevelopment dollars for "downtown areas" in the state.  In many of the old maps of "downtown KCMO" it stopped north of the railroad tracks.  And when CC was first built many of its first occupants were from downtown.  Of course, the Plaza is the Plaza.  Within KCMO there are other choices that employers just might find more attractive than downtown but still have that "urban feel".  And KCMO has plenty of "suburban office park" space.  Just look at Ward Parkway area south of 79th St and the area around 435 & Holmes, plus what is along I-29 around the airport.

But what is happening in KC is not unique. Recently read that for almost every metro area in the US the percentage of jobs within 10 miles of the metro's downtown area is decreasing compared to the rest of the metro area.  And in another article it was stated there are 400,000 jobs within a 5-mile radius of the Dallas airport.  Granted, there are some young professionals who want to work in an urban environment but given some of the evidence it would appear that number would be in the minority.

What all of this has to do with incentives I don't know.  I am just following the last few pages of this topic.  And for me I have come across a new term - Aerotropolis.  An interesting topic.  Maybe something KCMO could have focused on with its economic incentives instead of some of the past projects.  Be anearly player in the game instead of being the late player it was with downtown redevelopment.

     

[pstokely]

I think your wrong, young people are starting to move into KCMO and it's catching on, one of our advantages to coastal cities and places like Chicago/Denver is that we have very low costs of living.  I really think the Urban Core is on the rebound, places like Hyde Park are seeing a lot of turnaround with Mac Properties, a lot more people are living downtown and the River Market is starting to become somewhat vibrant now.

unfortunately, low cost of living = low number of unmarried 20 and 30 somethng singles. People in low those kinds of places get married early. Small town where people get married at 19 have very low costs of living. Places where people don't get married until their late 30s (if it all) have high costs of living. People who want to get married and star families early seem to choose places with low costs of living

[pstokely]

The only people pushing the, 'let's get the young people' koolaid are single people looking for prettier people to hit on at the bar.

they're tired of hitting on the same people they dated in high school

[pstokely]

I think Kansas Citians, for the most part, just think collectively in suburban terms, hell even many efforts to get something going in the urban core look like suburban appendages into the city (Midtown marketplace, East Village).  The urban lifestyle in KC has always been the choice of a select few rather than the place to be.   

Are those in Clay, Cass, Platte, or Eastern Jackson County as anti-urban the Johnson County? In those in KCK don't seem interested in any of regional cooperation? They might as well build a wall on State Line Road