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.
Being a west coast guy myself, Kansas City is definitely more for me. KC posters probably would hate me, but I would live in Johnson County, KS
Johnson County, KS tries very hard to be something it isn't the vast majority of the time, even developing entire neighborhoods that look like they belong in a different geographical area of the country. If you like "West Coast" style architecture with stuccoed exteriors and red tile roofs, you might look at "Tuscany Reserve" or "Hallbrook" in Leawood- just make sure to budget $1,000,000 to $4,000,000 million. Yep, California architecture with northern landscaping- combined with high precipitation amounts. It makes lots of sense.
Johnson County, KS tries very hard to be something it isn't the vast majority of the time, even developing entire neighborhoods that look like they belong in a different geographical area of the country. If you like "West Coast" style architecture with stuccoed exteriors and red tile roofs, you might look at "Tuscany Reserve" or "Hallbrook" in Leawood- just make sure to budget $1,000,000 to $4,000,000 million. Yep, California architecture with northern landscaping- combined with high precipitation amounts. It makes lots of sense.
JC is definitely not unique in this respect. The developers take advantage of certain architectural styles then regurgitate them into mass produced caricatures of the original. That style is all around where I live. Pure exploitation...
JC is definitely not unique in this respect. The developers take advantage of certain architectural styles then regurgitate them into mass produced caricatures of the original. That style is all around where I live. Pure exploitation...
It always strikes me as hilarious that you have houses with stuccoed exteriors and red tile roofs with maple, spruce, oak and fir trees as landscaping. It just looks so artificial and fake. What needs to happen is a prairie/plains architectural revival that matches the surrounding the landscape.
It always strikes me as hilarious that you have houses with stuccoed exteriors and red tile roofs with maple, spruce, oak and fir trees as landscaping. It just looks so artificial and fake. What needs to happen is a prairie/plains architectural revival that matches the surrounding the landscape.
Come back, Frank Lloyd Wright! All is forgiven!
(in addition to several Usonian houses in Valentine, there's a particularly striking FLLW house in the Northland, cresting the bluff overlooking the floodplain in which North Kansas City sits. And, of course, the Community Christian Church on the Plaza.)
(in addition to several Usonian houses in Valentine, there's a particularly striking FLLW house in the Northland, cresting the bluff overlooking the floodplain in which North Kansas City sits. And, of course, the Community Christian Church on the Plaza.)
Exactly, we need Frank Lloyd Wright back again, or at least someone with similar ideas. This constant changing of architecture every few years in a set geographic location makes no sense, kind of like the "flavor of the month." I looked at Zillow regarding Leawood, hard to believe some of the prices there. I do think the median housing price for Johnson County as a whole is still quite low at $222,000, per census bureau data.
Well, if you're driving around the Metro area, St Louis seems much larger that KC.
If you're walking around downtown, KC feels like a bigger City than St Louis.
I like both cities and visit STL frequently. My favorite STL hood is the Delmar Loop.
IMO STL feels like a larger metro, but the urban cores of both cities are very similar.
Urban KC has more and better mid and high rise architecture and is growing much faster than STL's urban core.
STL has older and better housing architecture and denser residential due to being much older.
KC has not only passed STL in population and architecture, it also has a wide-open, younger feel and arts scene.
KC has an anything-is-possible-feel while STL seems stagnant and stuck in provincialism.
Well, if you're driving around the Metro area, St Louis seems much larger that KC.
If you're walking around downtown, KC feels like a bigger City than St Louis.
I prefer the KC suburbs, and Downtown St Louis.
I'm the opposite: I'd take Clayton over Overland Park, Ladue over Leawood (but not Mission Hills) and Downtown KC over Downtown StL.
I think St. Louis' Central West End and Delmar Loop are pretty cool too, but I'd also take Westport/Hyde Park and the Plaza over those.
St. Louis is stagnant without a doubt. I didn't know KC was so inspiring? I need to go for another visit.
When was the last time you were there?
The city I returned to in 2006 was much livelier than the one I left for college and for good in 1976, and the one I visited in 2014 and 2016 even livelier still.
Oddly enough, the only part of town that felt moribund to me was downtown, once you left the immediate vicinity of the Power & Light District. The Crossroads, the old warehouse and light industrial district just south of the Downtown Loop, had pretty much soaked up the rest of the downtown energy.
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.
