Kansas City vs. Columbus (live, best, state, better)

[Weaubleau]

I posted something in the Columbus forum where I stated Columbus was the most boring city over 500,000 population in the country, and someone said " that's funny coming from KC" and I thought about doing a comparison of the two cities: Off the top of my head:

KC has the edge:
Urban Feel
City Neighborhoods
Pro Sports
Cultural Amenities: Nelson Atkins Art Museum and Kauffman Center are world class, WWI museum is national class, nothing in Columbus approaches these.
Ease of travel/congestion
Friendliness of people
Of course BBQ, but I also think the food scene in general
Weather 9 months of the year Sept-May
NASCAR

Columbus has the edge:
Summer weather Jun-Aug
Zoo
Better University Influence of OSU /Better College Sports
Better Golf

I think this makes KC a clear winner, but what are everyone's thoughts? I have not really seen these two cities compared, as they are at the opposite ends of the Midwest and don't have a great deal of "cross pollination" between the two.

[SonnyDaze]

I prefer KC despite being much more familiar from Columbus. Both cities have a lot to offer however and I think the objective difference between the two is relatively small.

I think KC benefits from not having any other major metros within a few hours of it while Columbus is often overshadowed by Cleveland and Cincinnati.

[kcmo]

I am very familiar with Columbus and obviously know KC very well. I would say they are more similar than they are different, but KC definitely has more amenities and has a more mature and established feel to it. KC feels more like a "legit" large city I guess.

Columbus does have more urban recreation than KC (like almost every city in country).

Columbus also has a major university, something KC really lacks.

I find the locals in Columbus to be more blue collar than KC. KC is a very white collar city.

While Columbus has less to do in their metro than KC does, it's very close to several major cities, so you can easily drive to all sorts of amenities in Cleveland, Cincy, Pitts, Louisville, Indy etc.

But as far as how the cities compare alone, I think KC just has a sophisticated feel to it and I would prefer to live there over Columbus.

[ClevelandBrown]

This is one I can chime in on since KC is a city I definitely enjoyed way more than I thought I would. I was actually expecting it to be more of a comparison to Cleveland, but after visiting, to me it seemed like it was more Columbus-like with a little mix of Cincinnati (where as St. Louis is the more accurate comp to Cleveland).

Both KC and Columbus have a nice intact core that is as vibrant as much larger cities. In Columbus, it's the area from German Village, working north into downtown, then into Short North and ending at Ohio State (which would be Columbus' pseudo uptown area).

In KC, you got River Market/Columbus Park, going into downtown, then down to Westport and then the UMKC area.

Both those areas are similar, though downtown KC is more alive then downtown Columbus. On the flip side, the Ohio State area is no comparison to UMKC. After that, German Village and Short North are comparable in amenities and urbanity to Westport and River Market. It's close, but I'd give KC a slight edge for its true urban corridors.

Outside of those areas, the cities are very similar. There is a lot of detached housing density and some car-oriented commercial corridors. Both have more blight than what I think most people would expect (yes, both cities while not true rust belt, do have some decrepit areas). Neither city has much public transit, though KC has the small street car (ala Cincinnati in Over-the-Rhine) and I would say KC's bus transit is better (Columbus' is notoriously bad).

Cultural amenities would also go to KC, another area where it is probably more similar to Cincinnati. The Columbus Zoo is one of the best in the country, but it is way out there in Delaware County, which isolates it from Columbus' other amenities.

Sports just depends on whether you like college or pro. Personally, I'm more of a pro fan, so I'd vote KC. But Ohio State football is pretty much a pro sporting event in terms of atmosphere. Plus, both the Chiefs and Royals play in the middle of nowhere where as Ohio Stadium is on the OSU campus and is within walking distance to all the bars/restaurants on High Street.

Not that this is a huge factor, while both airports are probably similar (I've never flown out of Columbus though, so just assuming they offer similar destinations), Columbus' is more connected to the city where KC's is way out there away from the city.

Overall, I think Columbus is generally overrated and KC is generally underrated, but they both offer a nice pretty compact urban core and are more similar than different. I'd give a slight edge to KC, but it's not a huge gap. And a lot may depend on your age. If you're early 20s, I could see Columbus being better due to Ohio State. Where if you are mid-20s or older KC offering the better vibe.

[Jayhawker434]

Anecdotal story here but a friend of a friend lives in Cbus and is from KC. She said Cbus is great but if you aren't into tOSU than you are a bit of an outlier.

KU while nowhere even remotely close to Buckeye football does have elite college basketball and is only about 20-40 minutes from KC. Big 12 Basketball Tournament is in KC and, of course, KC has the Royals, Chiefs and Sporting KC. I always find it strange when people list having a better zoo as a big +. I mean, I'd definitely prefer a great zoo to a mediocre zoo but how much time do you spend at the zoo each year? 4 hours?

I'd love to visit Cbus and go to a tOSU game.

[Marv95]

If not for the crime rate and the bipolar weather KC would destroy Columbus. I'm all for size but that sometimes come with a price(traffic). Also the Chiefs own any sports team from there pros or collegiate.