Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Both are great cities , one is a stand alone : and the other is a Under Somebody Wings City: if you are a homebody sort of person Kansas City is custom made for you , but if you are a "go" sort of guy or woman then its Sacramento hands down...theres just too much in California to see and to do.
Kansas City really does have some fine culture. As for the surrounding areas, I think people often underrate the beauty of Kansas landscape. Eastern Kansas is really not as flat as a pancake... My favorite spot to visit is the Flint Hills that run through Manhattan to the south. And I love the Konza. In the end some people will chose Sacramento because Kansas will always be "fly over country". Personally I like the empty space, and I'm a sucker for Midwestern storms...they are a sight to behold...if you're not in the basement.
You could stack KCMO-Kansas up against a lot of cities on the east coast , and have KCMO-Kansas come out on top "Amenities Wise" Listed Below are the cities that it doesn't beat....
Boston NYC Philly Wash DC Charlotte Atlanta Miami and maybe Tampa St. Pete would have a shot.....
Here are a couple of new panos of Sacramento took while in town:
One of the ugliest downtowns with truly mediocre architecture for a city with some 500,000 people, especially for the capital city for 38 million people. Look for the foothills. You can't see them, because they are too far.
You could stack KCMO-Kansas up against a lot of cities on the east coast , and have KCMO-Kansas come out on top "Amenities Wise" Listed Below are the cities that it doesn't beat....
Boston NYC Philly Wash DC Charlotte Atlanta Miami and maybe Tampa St. Pete would have a shot.....
I would agree with all that but not sure about Charlotte. I think KC offers more than Charlotte, but Charlotte has come a long way and is closing the gap.
I have never heard somebody describe KC as KCMO-Kansas. That's interesting. I guess you basically mean the metro area? KCMO has suburbs in both KS and MO and MO has far more to do as a state than Kansas, so I was just curious as to what you mean by that.
I'm still not sure which city I would chose. It's still a tossup. I think KC is pretty far above Sac as a stand alone city, but KC has Topeka and St Joe while Sac has mountains, the bay, the ocean and real long flights to the rest of the country haha.
Both are nice cities though. They should move the A's to Sac, not San Jose.
One of the ugliest downtowns with truly mediocre architecture for a city with some 500,000 people, especially for the capital city for 38 million people. Look for the foothills. You can't see them, because they are too far.
That's your opinion. I agree that many of the post war state buildings are horrendous. But the Victorian architecture and the grand homes in East Sac and Land Park are absolutely gorgeous. In fact, I often think of Sacramento as California's New Orleans, which makes sense considering the river, Old Sac and the Jazz Jubilee along with the slower pace of life compared to CA's other cities. Yes, I've spent time in New Orleans, I love that city.
I dont see how any of the architecture in the foothills can match what we have in the central city which is full of character. Everything in Folsom and Roseville is stucco stucco stucco.
I would agree with all that but not sure about Charlotte. I think KC offers more than Charlotte, but Charlotte has come a long way and is closing the gap.
I have never heard somebody describe KC as KCMO-Kansas. That's interesting. I guess you basically mean the metro area? KCMO has suburbs in both KS and MO and MO has far more to do as a state than Kansas, so I was just curious as to what you mean by that.
I'm still not sure which city I would chose. It's still a tossup. I think KC is pretty far above Sac as a stand alone city, but KC has Topeka and St Joe while Sac has mountains, the bay, the ocean and real long flights to the rest of the country haha.
Both are nice cities though. They should move the A's to Sac, not San Jose.
AMEN TO THAT! I grew up as an A's fan. I'd love to see them up here.
Funny, growing up in SF (being the odd A's fan), I was always afraid that the A's would leave Oakland and move to Sac (since there were always rumors about the A's leaving for Sac or SJ). I always hoped that if they leave, it would be to SJ, which would only be 45 minutes away.
Funny that today, I'm wishing they'd leave for the opposite direction!
AMEN TO THAT! I grew up as an A's fan. I'd love to see them up here.
Funny, growing up in SF (being the odd A's fan), I was always afraid that the A's would leave Oakland and move to Sac (since there were always rumors about the A's leaving for Sac or SJ). I always hoped that if they leave, it would be to SJ, which would only be 45 minutes away.
Funny that today, I'm wishing they'd leave for the opposite direction!
yea, can you imagine a MLB park just north of Old Sac in that underdeveloped area? It would transform downtown and push the entire city up a tier.
^
Not happening. Sacramento is stuck in its mediocre ways of thinking. The city for the past decade has tried to build a new arena for the Sacramento Kings. Sacramento does not have the corporate base, no Fortune 500 companies to support a major league baseball team.
^
Not happening. Sacramento is stuck in its mediocre ways of thinking. The city for the past decade has tried to build a new arena for the Sacramento Kings. Sacramento does not have the corporate base, no Fortune 500 companies to support a major league baseball team.
MLB is the most difficult first tier Major League Sport Team to get , followed by NFL , NBA and NHL...you have 81 home games a year in MLB and they demand a higher Disposable Income Average for the league to even consider a Metro Area....Sacramento can't even keep the KINGS , they are hanging on with a wing and a prayer as it is now......The San Francisco 49'ers are already moving to SJ and Oakland A's are likely to be moving soom , and that would give SJ (NFL....MLB...NHL....MLS)
^
Not happening. Sacramento is stuck in its mediocre ways of thinking. The city for the past decade has tried to build a new arena for the Sacramento Kings. Sacramento does not have the corporate base, no Fortune 500 companies to support a major league baseball team.
The past year has shown that the city of Sacramento has what it takes to build an arena, the problem is that we have a bunch of snakes AKA the Magoofs as partners.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
