KCRag Forum

I wish he'd properly come through KC so we could show him around a bit.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCJpQ9uNPLY

Haha fuckin Chuck.

Demosthenes wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCJpQ9uNPLY

Haha fuckin Chuck.

He fell before he made his point! I'm assuming he was going to say, "Look, two out of three lanes are shut down and the street functions just fine. Get rid of all these through lanes!"

Seriously though, it is frustrating when the Midland has vehicles parked all over. Especially if that street is ever converted to two-way. This is why we (used to) have alleys, no?

Here is your chance to give praise or throw tomatoes at Mr. Marohn. He is speaking as part of the KC Library series on January 30th.
https://www.strongtowns.org/eventspage/ ... as-city-mo

On the same night, Peter Kageyama is speaking in Overland Park.
http://www.fortheloveofcities.com/in-the-media/
http://forwardop.org/save-the-date-imagine-tomorrow/

Great city making overload, all on one nite!

beautyfromashes wrote:This is a guy trying to badmouth the city and pump up his own superlative laced, nothing vision to win some consulting work. Best to be avoided and ignored.

I stand by my assessment from six years ago.

AlbertHammond wrote:Here is your chance to give praise or throw tomatoes at Mr. Marohn. He is speaking as part of the KC Library series on January 30th.
https://www.strongtowns.org/eventspage/ ... as-city-mo

On the same night, Peter Kageyama is speaking in Overland Park.
http://www.fortheloveofcities.com/in-the-media/
http://forwardop.org/save-the-date-imagine-tomorrow/

Great city making overload, all on one nite!

Let's hear your thoughts on one of these presentations after you attend!

Lots of people at the Strong Towns event. Filled up the large auditorium in the basement of the plaza library.

He didn't really talk about KC much, just development patterns in general. There were a couple of slides before Chuck got the mic about how KC had grown so much in physical size without much growth in population size, delivered by some library people or something.

Chuck just talked about how suburban development was unproductive and subsidized and the true development costs are hidden, that sort of thing. He is a fan of small stuff that provides high ROI, not a fan of big signature projects or tax incentives. Talked about how we (American cites) were all doomed to become Detroit anyway. Talked about how poor neighborhoods often subsidize the rich, that seemed to unsettle some people, lol. Nothing he said would surprise anyone who has read his blog.

Interestingly, it sounded like there were some anti-airport people there. Someone asked him what he thought about our airport and he was a bit surprised at the question, but said it served his needs, he just got off the plane and into a car. Several people clapped (20-30 out of hundreds) and he responded by saying he wasn't aware of any controversy. Idiots. Does not relate to Strong Towns philosophy at all, but many anti-airport people would attempt to draw a correlation. I think some of the people who asked questions were anti-city government cranks. One guy asked about subsidies and how they can get city government to listen, etc.

Also interestingly, most people drove. Makeup probably would've been different if he did it downtown instead, but I guess you don't preach to the choir.

Chuck= the Donald Trump of development.

beautyfromashes wrote:Chuck= the Donald Trump of development.

He can be provacative, but I'm not sure I'd go that far.

Also, wouldn't Donald Trump be the Donald Trump of development?

I went to the Peter Kageyama event in OP. His talk was very good. In some ways, relating to the StrongTown message of focusing on small initiatives that have high relative return. "Return" in his talk was social, not monetary, but they go hand-in-hand.

The Chuck talk looked like a good one. You guys are holding out....what else did you come away with after the presentation?

https://www.facebook.com/strongtowns/po ... 4657161603

“Investing in infrastructure that will last 40, 50 more years is the correct use of debt. Just as people know that a mortgage is good debt as you invest in property to secure your family’s home and future.” Sorry, but no. That's not correct.

There are two correct uses of debt for local governments. The first is cash flow when temporary expenditures exceed momentary revenues. You have to have a great understanding your balance sheet for cash flow debt. KC does not.

The other is for self-extinguishing investments, spending that will be retired by the new wealth created. To pull this off, you need to know your profit margins (profit is an accounting term, not a synonym for greed), development assumptions, and other associated costs so as to aggressively monitor your investment return. Again, KC does none of this.

Like most American cities, KC is confusing their insolvency problem for a simple cash flow problem. They are really fragile and this will end badly, but it's likely they will blame whatever shock coincides with their downfall instead of the billions in unproductive promises and debt they accumulated along the way.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics ... 99864.html

KCMO is making some strategic decisions: New sources of revenue, protecting the general fund, boosting reserves. Other than Twin Creeks -- which they claim will be denser than the average Northland tract -- have we made any other big sprawly investments? Okay, there was that TIF'd Costco...

Chuck remembers the Rag tiff, by the way.

Chuck is back tonight. He just spoke over lunch to the Chamber of Commerce crowd...many of which are not interested in his kool-aid. I think many are starting to get it, though. Mayor James did not seem to understand it. Mayor Alvey is fully on-board.

Here is Chuck's public talk tonight:
https://www.kclibrary.org/signature-eve ... oods-first

Wednesday night is another worthy talk from Monty Anderson on small scale development. He is excellent!
http://www.incrementaldevelopment.org/events/kclecture

Great presentation tonight. Mayor Alvey, some former council people, Dave, and Matt where in attendance.

Matt asked about Kansas City’s large amounts of lowdensity suburbs/farm fields. Response:Kansas cities and other cities don’t talk about deannexation but it’s an important conversation that will need to be had.

#1 Paraphrase: “Modern suburbs aren’t designed to evolve”. Makes sense why we see such strong NIMBYs now.

They also talked about how rich / poor flu flopping to/from the suburbs is a hugeeee problem no one sees coming.


On top of that..... it sounds like there are going to be more of these meetings

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 10:14 pm
#1 Paraphrase: “Modern suburbs aren’t designed to evolve”. Makes sense why we see such strong NIMBYs now.

I don't completely agree with this though there's truth to it.

There's a number of projects turning lower density areas over into denser suburban centers. Downtown OP and Gladstone for example. Lenexa built their city center. The idea is not universally liked, the Antioch and 435 project has been fought all the way, but it doesn't take much for a suburban center to change. Most just aren't.

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 10:14 pm
They also talked about how rich / poor flu flopping to/from the suburbs is a hugeeee problem no one sees coming.

Not sure I follow this?

TrolliKC wrote: ↑Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:48 am

normalthings wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 10:14 pm
They also talked about how rich / poor flu flopping to/from the suburbs is a hugeeee problem no one sees coming.

Not sure I follow this?

We're seeing increased evidence of people of means moving into urban areas and pricing out existing residents who are then forced to seek housing in the burbs...basically.

smh wrote: ↑Wed Sep 12, 2018 8:53 am We're seeing increased evidence of people of means moving into urban areas and pricing out existing residents who are then forced to seek housing in the burbs...basically.

In many ways, I think this is a positive progression. Traditionally in our city, the core has held the unbalanced burden of caring for those in need. By diversifying the economic demographics of the city we should be better able to influence change and give opportunity for families in need. Of course, the difficulty is not moving to wholesale change. You don’t want to displace entire people groups due to them being priced out of an area, either urban or suburban.