U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Which city is better?
St. Louis, MO 79 67.52%
Indianapolis, IN 38 32.48%
Voters: 117. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-21-2011, 09:53 AM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,325,297 times
Reputation: 1524

Advertisements

Each city has its good points and its bad points period, St. Louis has great 18th and 19th century architecture but because of its density tended to stack people right on top of each other where as Indianapolis is spread out, so people have their space. Most people generally lead to having space and not feeling like everyone is sitting on top of you. That's human nature, that's why people nowadays build larger houses, they want the space. So density is so overrated esp. on these boards. The fact remains, if you have a city of 200,000 people any city; and within it's core you had say 50,000 people. You take 20,000 people out of the core and stick them on say the south side, what is your population, 200,000 people. Doesn't matter in that regard where people live in a city, if you have x amount of people, you just have x amount of people period. Where they live is irrelevant for population numbers.

That being said, Indianapolis has been larger than St. Louis since the 1970 census so what St. Louis had way back when is of no concern since St. Louis doesn't have it now and hasn't had it in 40 years. That's like Baltimorians complaining about the colts even though the colts have been in Indianapolis just about as long as they were in Baltimore. Get over it already as it is moot at this point.

As far as style of housing, St. Louis doesn't have a style Indianapolis doesn't have, whether it would be brownstone, row houses, shotgun houses, victorian, colonial and the list goes on and on. Being a larger metro overall may mean St. Louis has more but nothing distinct of any city founded in the 1700's - 1800's in which both cities fall into, that's nothing more than aloof thinking that you have something another city doesn't have. Downtowns I will say are different, Indy is geared more toward business within the square mile (financial district) while St. Louis doesn't give that vibe even at street level as it's older, and it looks older and revolves around the arch just as Indy revolves around Monument Circle. Outside of the financial centers respectively, Indy is more walkable. You have White River State park to the west along with IUPUI and the canal. Just north of the square mile you have a 5 block memorial with well memorials and malls for just hanging out, walking the dog, throwing the frisbee etc that does actually cover 5 downtown blocks. Of course midday everyone is out on monument circle having lunch or what have you. East downtown Indy you have Mass Ave and Lockerbie Square (two of those non-existent historical places everyone thinks Indianapolis doesn't have) and South you have the wholesale district which houses Lucas Oil and Conseco Fieldhouse.


Transportation, well anybody beats Indy as this is a driving town period and IndyGo is a complete joke.

Park wise, Indy is probably better, it has more and Eagle Creek which is the flagship park in the city is 3 times the size of forest park in St. Louis and the 22nd largest municipal park on the planet.

Theatres and Museums I would give the edge definitely to St. Louis although Indy's Museums have made leaps and bounds esp. IMA, but the Children's museum is the worlds largest and ranked best on the planet and has been for quite some time.

Sports, Indy hands down. It hosts sporting events better than anyone, it's a convention city and just has a lot more to offer in terms of sports than St. Louis does. Granted St. Louis does have he big 4 and Indy only has two of the big 4, you thrown in The Indianapolis 500 and Brickyard 400 (1 and 2 most single day attended sporting events on the planet), NHRA championships, actually anything racing, this city loves its racing and all of the amateur sporting events that take place in Indianapolis and it is definitely a world class sporting event city.

Nightlife, the two are about the same really, believe it or not, Indianapolis has a very active nightlife scene, whether it's downtown or Broad Ripple, Fountain Square and St. Louis has a very happening scene as well so it's almost a toss up.

Medicine, really really close but I would have to give the tip of the nose to St. Louis as I think Washington might be slightly better than IU Health but not by much, other than that Indy has a LOT of hospitals esp. downtown with 6 hospitals there alone.

COL well Indianapolis hands down

Crime Indianapolis

One of the things that gets Indy a bad rap, esp. on this board tend to be the people. No, hoosiers aren't bad, they are very friendly but it suffers just like a city like Jacksonville, at over 360 sq miles compared to 61 for St. Louis, this is a big city and most people here tend to stick to what ever part of town they live in as that can be a 40 minute drive (and that's without any traffic) or an hour during heavy traffic to go from one end of the city to its polar opposite. So if you live on the north side, you tend to stay north, you live south, you stay south, east to east and west to west. If you are in center township, you go downtown. So believe it or not, a lot of Indy residents don't know everything there is to do here because well, they tend to stick to their part of town. Me being a transplant and have lived downtown, north and south has been all over this city getting to know it. The average Indianapolis resident even if they've lived here for years couldn't tell you how to get from point a to point b if it's not in their area or downtown but love to put you on 465 . Cities like St. Louis is compact, you can get around easier, the people know where everything is, lets face it at 61 sq miles, that's not big at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-21-2011, 11:32 AM
 
976 posts, read 1,878,108 times
Reputation: 606
Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
Each city has its good points and its bad points period, St. Louis has great 18th and 19th century architecture but because of its density tended to stack people right on top of each other where as Indianapolis is spread out, so people have their space. Most people generally lead to having space and not feeling like everyone is sitting on top of you. That's human nature, that's why people nowadays build larger houses, they want the space. So density is so overrated esp. on these boards. The fact remains, if you have a city of 200,000 people any city; and within it's core you had say 50,000 people. You take 20,000 people out of the core and stick them on say the south side, what is your population, 200,000 people. Doesn't matter in that regard where people live in a city, if you have x amount of people, you just have x amount of people period. Where they live is irrelevant for population numbers.

That being said, Indianapolis has been larger than St. Louis since the 1970 census so what St. Louis had way back when is of no concern since St. Louis doesn't have it now and hasn't had it in 40 years. That's like Baltimorians complaining about the colts even though the colts have been in Indianapolis just about as long as they were in Baltimore. Get over it already as it is moot at this point.

As far as style of housing, St. Louis doesn't have a style Indianapolis doesn't have, whether it would be brownstone, row houses, shotgun houses, victorian, colonial and the list goes on and on. Being a larger metro overall may mean St. Louis has more but nothing distinct of any city founded in the 1700's - 1800's in which both cities fall into, that's nothing more than aloof thinking that you have something another city doesn't have. Downtowns I will say are different, Indy is geared more toward business within the square mile (financial district) while St. Louis doesn't give that vibe even at street level as it's older, and it looks older and revolves around the arch just as Indy revolves around Monument Circle. Outside of the financial centers respectively, Indy is more walkable. You have White River State park to the west along with IUPUI and the canal. Just north of the square mile you have a 5 block memorial with well memorials and malls for just hanging out, walking the dog, throwing the frisbee etc that does actually cover 5 downtown blocks. Of course midday everyone is out on monument circle having lunch or what have you. East downtown Indy you have Mass Ave and Lockerbie Square (two of those non-existent historical places everyone thinks Indianapolis doesn't have) and South you have the wholesale district which houses Lucas Oil and Conseco Fieldhouse.


Transportation, well anybody beats Indy as this is a driving town period and IndyGo is a complete joke.

Park wise, Indy is probably better, it has more and Eagle Creek which is the flagship park in the city is 3 times the size of forest park in St. Louis and the 22nd largest municipal park on the planet.

Theatres and Museums I would give the edge definitely to St. Louis although Indy's Museums have made leaps and bounds esp. IMA, but the Children's museum is the worlds largest and ranked best on the planet and has been for quite some time.

Sports, Indy hands down. It hosts sporting events better than anyone, it's a convention city and just has a lot more to offer in terms of sports than St. Louis does. Granted St. Louis does have he big 4 and Indy only has two of the big 4, you thrown in The Indianapolis 500 and Brickyard 400 (1 and 2 most single day attended sporting events on the planet), NHRA championships, actually anything racing, this city loves its racing and all of the amateur sporting events that take place in Indianapolis and it is definitely a world class sporting event city.

Nightlife, the two are about the same really, believe it or not, Indianapolis has a very active nightlife scene, whether it's downtown or Broad Ripple, Fountain Square and St. Louis has a very happening scene as well so it's almost a toss up.

Medicine, really really close but I would have to give the tip of the nose to St. Louis as I think Washington might be slightly better than IU Health but not by much, other than that Indy has a LOT of hospitals esp. downtown with 6 hospitals there alone.

COL well Indianapolis hands down

Crime Indianapolis

One of the things that gets Indy a bad rap, esp. on this board tend to be the people. No, hoosiers aren't bad, they are very friendly but it suffers just like a city like Jacksonville, at over 360 sq miles compared to 61 for St. Louis, this is a big city and most people here tend to stick to what ever part of town they live in as that can be a 40 minute drive (and that's without any traffic) or an hour during heavy traffic to go from one end of the city to its polar opposite. So if you live on the north side, you tend to stay north, you live south, you stay south, east to east and west to west. If you are in center township, you go downtown. So believe it or not, a lot of Indy residents don't know everything there is to do here because well, they tend to stick to their part of town. Me being a transplant and have lived downtown, north and south has been all over this city getting to know it. The average Indianapolis resident even if they've lived here for years couldn't tell you how to get from point a to point b if it's not in their area or downtown but love to put you on 465 . Cities like St. Louis is compact, you can get around easier, the people know where everything is, lets face it at 61 sq miles, that's not big at all.
wow, that was a lot to take in. you raise some valid points on one hand; on the other you make no sense at all. this sentence in particularly perplexing:

Quote:
As far as style of housing, St. Louis doesn't have a style Indianapolis doesn't have, whether it would be brownstone, row houses, shotgun houses, victorian, colonial and the list goes on and on. Being a larger metro overall may mean St. Louis has more but nothing distinct of any city founded in the 1700's - 1800's in which both cities fall into, that's nothing more than aloof thinking that you have something another city doesn't have.
this is absolutely, unequivocally false. st. louis has a lot of urban housing styles that indianapolis doesn't have because st. louis was built to be a much, much, much, much larger city than indianapolis at a time when cities were built to be urban, pedestrian and transit-oriented places. the only reason indianapolis is "bigger" today is because it annexed its suburbs in the unigov merger. indianapolis is also "bigger" than boston, washington, dc and seattle. it's a bogus classification. how you can possibly suggest that indianapolis has everything st. louis has is utterly ridiculous and completely untrue.

the sports comparison is also strange. indianapolis certainly takes the cake for amateur sports, but for major league there is no comparison. st. louis is an old school big league sports city; indianapolis is not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 12:20 PM
 
Location: East Side, Indianapolis
191 posts, read 169,061 times
Reputation: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smtchll View Post
And you don't think St. Louis has negative stigma? Give me a break. St. Louis probably has a lot more negativity attached to it than Indy. People view Indy as the up and coming city, people view St. Louis as ghetto and dangerous.
I highly doubt that people, especially on a forum like this, give Indy less flack than they do St Louis. St Louis is an old, beautiful and history-rich city and is widely recognized as such on this forum and others. Indy, on the other hand, is called sterile, sprawly, boring and lacking any history. Of course that's all incorrect but then most people who say that have never spent time here, despite what they might claim from the safety of an internet forum.

Indy is regularly one of the most despised cities on City-Data for a myriad of reasons. But that's cool. Ignorance breeds ignorance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 12:25 PM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,325,297 times
Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by slengel View Post
wow, that was a lot to take in. you raise some valid points on one hand; on the other you make no sense at all. this sentence in particularly perplexing:



this is absolutely, unequivocally false. st. louis has a lot of urban housing styles that indianapolis doesn't have because st. louis was built to be a much, much, much, much larger city than indianapolis at a time when cities were built to be urban, pedestrian and transit-oriented places. the only reason indianapolis is "bigger" today is because it annexed its suburbs in the unigov merger. indianapolis is also "bigger" than boston, washington, dc and seattle. it's a bogus classification. how you can possibly suggest that indianapolis has everything st. louis has is utterly ridiculous and completely untrue.

the sports comparison is also strange. indianapolis certainly takes the cake for amateur sports, but for major league there is no comparison. st. louis is an old school big league sports city; indianapolis is not.

It's pretty simple, name ONE style of housing St. Louis has that Indianapolis does not? That should be pretty simple correct? And again, no major us city has anything any other major us city doesn't have. Believe it or not, cities are like sport franchises in the same sports, it's copycat, again aloof thinking that city A has this to offer that city B does not.

Indianapolis and Unigov was formed in 1967 and even before unigov, Indy still took up more space then St. Louis so what's your point? Indianapolis was designed to be a state capital, as that's the ONLY reason Indianapolis was formed to get a state capital more centrally located in the state than Corydon. St. Louis wasn't designed to be a large city, it's an area people flocked to that became a large city, it was designed to be a city based off of the population trends and times of the era. And even if you went back to the old city limits, Indianapolis would still have more people than St. Louis.

Sports, St. Louis has Hockey, Baseball and Football. Baseball and Hockey are now second tier behind basketball and Football. Indy has Football and Basketball. Unfortunately professional sports isn't what just makes a sports town, hence the term SPORTS in sports town. Indianapolis has St. Louis beat, Amateur sports, of course no contest, collegiate sports, again Indianapolis, the greatest spectacle in racing, the Indianapolis 500 which I stated is the largest single day attended event on the planet, and the Brickyard 400 which is the second largest single day attended event. You do realize those two events alone will have more people than St. Louis proper has people and that's just inside the track, that doesn't count the thousands outside the track. On the professional level, Indy doesn't have professional baseball and hockey so sure, St. Louis would be better as Indy only has minor league. Football, as of today, the Colts are better and since St. Louis doesn't have NBA, the Pacers win out no matter how bad they suck so it's a wash for professional sports.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 12:26 PM
 
Location: Fishers, IN
6,495 posts, read 10,795,852 times
Reputation: 4060
Quote:
Originally Posted by slengel View Post


this is absolutely, unequivocally false. st. louis has a lot of urban housing styles that indianapolis doesn't have because st. louis was built to be a much, much, much, much larger city than indianapolis at a time when cities were built to be urban, pedestrian and transit-oriented places. the only reason indianapolis is "bigger" today is because it annexed its suburbs in the unigov merger. indianapolis is also "bigger" than boston, washington, dc and seattle. it's a bogus classification. how you can possibly suggest that indianapolis has everything st. louis has is utterly ridiculous and completely untrue.

the sports comparison is also strange. indianapolis certainly takes the cake for amateur sports, but for major league there is no comparison. st. louis is an old school big league sports city; indianapolis is not.
Other than row housing, which Indy doesn't have much of at all, I would agree pretty much whatever you can find in St. Louis, you can find in Indy. And while I'd have to research it, I believe that the population of the old Indy city limits still exceeds that of St. Louis city.

To the poster to whom you responded, I would say that Forest Park may tip the balance in favor of St. Louis so far as parks go, although Eagle Creek Park here in Indy is very nice.

As for sports, St. Louis is "old school" only with respect to baseball. And I must correct MSA -- St. Louis does not have have the Big 4; it has 3 of the Big 4. The one it lacks -- the NBA -- is present in Indy. But it's clearly true that Indy hosts more big-time sporting events than St. Louis.

We've debated before, and I understand your angle -- St. Louis feels more urban than Indy, undoubtedly because it is a much older city. That's true, but not everybody cares so much about "urban vibe". I've spent a lot of time in St. Louis due to family. I've yet to find much of anything in St. Louis that I can't find in Indy -- at least the things that matter to me. Indy is better than St. Louis in some ways. In others, St. Louis is superior. So be it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 12:32 PM
 
Location: East Side, Indianapolis
191 posts, read 169,061 times
Reputation: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by slengel View Post
wow, that was a lot to take in. you raise some valid points on one hand; on the other you make no sense at all. this sentence in particularly perplexing:



this is absolutely, unequivocally false. st. louis has a lot of urban housing styles that indianapolis doesn't have because st. louis was built to be a much, much, much, much larger city than indianapolis at a time when cities were built to be urban, pedestrian and transit-oriented places. the only reason indianapolis is "bigger" today is because it annexed its suburbs in the unigov merger. indianapolis is also "bigger" than boston, washington, dc and seattle. it's a bogus classification. how you can possibly suggest that indianapolis has everything st. louis has is utterly ridiculous and completely untrue.

the sports comparison is also strange. indianapolis certainly takes the cake for amateur sports, but for major league there is no comparison. st. louis is an old school big league sports city; indianapolis is not.
I agree with both points, especially on the housing points. St Louis has some of the best residential architecture in the US. I love cruising through St Louis' neighborhoods and seeing all there is to see. I know it might make a few Cincinnati residents mad when I say this, but Cincinnati's much touted residential architecture does not hold a candle to St Louis. It's probably one of the best aspects of St Loius.

Indianapolis does not even belong in the same conversation when it comes to comparing housing styles. Indianapolis simply grew too late for such development to occur. Now if you're looking for an American four square or bungalow then we've got that in droves, but for that old-world residential neighborhood vibe...can't find that here. People use this as a way to look down on Indy, but then again they don't know anything about Indy's history to begin with.

On the sports thing, I will go along with that for the most part. St Louis, being an older city, has had much more of a presence in sports at the professional level. That said, I wouldn't trade St Louis' sporting history for our Indy 500, which is arguably one of the most important sporting events in US history. And we've got the NCAA headquartered here which brings all kinds of perks. Add in two professional franchises in Football and Basketball and we're certainly no slouch.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 12:35 PM
 
Location: East Side, Indianapolis
191 posts, read 169,061 times
Reputation: 274
Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
It's pretty simple, name ONE style of housing St. Louis has that Indianapolis does not? That should be pretty simple correct? And again, no major us city has anything any other major us city doesn't have. Believe it or not, cities are like sport franchises in the same sports, it's copycat, again aloof thinking that city A has this to offer that city B does not.

Indianapolis and Unigov was formed in 1967 and even before unigov, Indy still took up more space then St. Louis so what's your point? Indianapolis was designed to be a state capital, as that's the ONLY reason Indianapolis was formed to get a state capital more centrally located in the state than Corydon. St. Louis wasn't designed to be a large city, it's an area people flocked to that became a large city, it was designed to be a city based off of the population trends and times of the era. And even if you went back to the old city limits, Indianapolis would still have more people than St. Louis.

Sports, St. Louis has Hockey, Baseball and Football. Baseball and Hockey are now second tier behind basketball and Football. Indy has Football and Basketball. Unfortunately professional sports isn't what just makes a sports town, hence the term SPORTS in sports town. Indianapolis has St. Louis beat, Amateur sports, of course no contest, collegiate sports, again Indianapolis, the greatest spectacle in racing, the Indianapolis 500 which I stated is the largest single day attended event on the planet, and the Brickyard 400 which is the second largest single day attended event. You do realize those two events alone will have more people than St. Louis proper has people and that's just inside the track, that doesn't count the thousands outside the track. On the professional level, Indy doesn't have professional baseball and hockey so sure, St. Louis would be better as Indy only has minor league. Football, as of today, the Colts are better and since St. Louis doesn't have NBA, the Pacers win out no matter how bad they suck so it's a wash for professional sports.
The bolded part could not be further from the truth. I live here and I'll be an advocate for Indy but I'm not going to sit here and lie.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 12:46 PM
 
976 posts, read 1,878,108 times
Reputation: 606
Quote:
Originally Posted by msamhunter View Post
It's pretty simple, name ONE style of housing St. Louis has that Indianapolis does not? That should be pretty simple correct? And again, no major us city has anything any other major us city doesn't have. Believe it or not, cities are like sport franchises in the same sports, it's copycat, again aloof thinking that city A has this to offer that city B does not.

Indianapolis and Unigov was formed in 1967 and even before unigov, Indy still took up more space then St. Louis so what's your point? Indianapolis was designed to be a state capital, as that's the ONLY reason Indianapolis was formed to get a state capital more centrally located in the state than Corydon. St. Louis wasn't designed to be a large city, it's an area people flocked to that became a large city, it was designed to be a city based off of the population trends and times of the era. And even if you went back to the old city limits, Indianapolis would still have more people than St. Louis.

Sports, St. Louis has Hockey, Baseball and Football. Baseball and Hockey are now second tier behind basketball and Football. Indy has Football and Basketball. Unfortunately professional sports isn't what just makes a sports town, hence the term SPORTS in sports town. Indianapolis has St. Louis beat, Amateur sports, of course no contest, collegiate sports, again Indianapolis, the greatest spectacle in racing, the Indianapolis 500 which I stated is the largest single day attended event on the planet, and the Brickyard 400 which is the second largest single day attended event. You do realize those two events alone will have more people than St. Louis proper has people and that's just inside the track, that doesn't count the thousands outside the track. On the professional level, Indy doesn't have professional baseball and hockey so sure, St. Louis would be better as Indy only has minor league. Football, as of today, the Colts are better and since St. Louis doesn't have NBA, the Pacers win out no matter how bad they suck so it's a wash for professional sports.
i choose not to argue with you because you cannot reason with ignorance. you spew nonsense and more nonsense. st. louis has miles upon miles upon miles of 19th century housing, which indianapolis does not. this is just not up for debate. goodbye.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 01:20 PM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,325,297 times
Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by grmasterb View Post
Other than row housing, which Indy doesn't have much of at all, I would agree pretty much whatever you can find in St. Louis, you can find in Indy. And while I'd have to research it, I believe that the population of the old Indy city limits still exceeds that of St. Louis city.

To the poster to whom you responded, I would say that Forest Park may tip the balance in favor of St. Louis so far as parks go, although Eagle Creek Park here in Indy is very nice.

As for sports, St. Louis is "old school" only with respect to baseball. And I must correct MSA -- St. Louis does not have have the Big 4; it has 3 of the Big 4. The one it lacks -- the NBA -- is present in Indy. But it's clearly true that Indy hosts more big-time sporting events than St. Louis.

We've debated before, and I understand your angle -- St. Louis feels more urban than Indy, undoubtedly because it is a much older city. That's true, but not everybody cares so much about "urban vibe". I've spent a lot of time in St. Louis due to family. I've yet to find much of anything in St. Louis that I can't find in Indy -- at least the things that matter to me. Indy is better than St. Louis in some ways. In others, St. Louis is superior. So be it.
Pretty much all of Indy's rowhousing has been torn down with the exception of a few spots like on North Alabama around the 1100 block on north.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-21-2011, 01:22 PM
 
3,008 posts, read 4,325,297 times
Reputation: 1524
Quote:
Originally Posted by slengel View Post
i choose not to argue with you because you cannot reason with ignorance. you spew nonsense and more nonsense. st. louis has miles upon miles upon miles of 19th century housing, which indianapolis does not. this is just not up for debate. goodbye.
So in other words, you couldn't answer the question. Again aloof thinking that City A has what City B doesn't have.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top