U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S.
 [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: What is your favorite U.S. river city?
Cincinnati 9 5.08%
Pittsburgh 22 12.43%
NYC 15 8.47%
Minneapolis 6 3.39%
Detroit 3 1.69%
St. Louis 21 11.86%
Kansas City, MO 1 0.56%
Philadephia 3 1.69%
Washington, D.C. 4 2.26%
Boston 6 3.39%
Wilminton, DE 0 0%
Providence, RI 0 0%
Richmond, VA 1 0.56%
Memphis, TN 6 3.39%
Nashville, TN 1 0.56%
Chattanooga, TN 1 0.56%
Knoxville, TN 2 1.13%
Wilmington, NC 1 0.56%
Charleston, SC 3 1.69%
Savannah, GA 5 2.82%
New Orleans, LA 11 6.21%
Jacksonville, FL 2 1.13%
Portland, OR 11 6.21%
Sacramento, CA 4 2.26%
San Antonio, TX 11 6.21%
Omaha, NE 11 6.21%
other (specify in your post) 17 9.60%
Voters: 177. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-26-2008, 10:59 AM
 
Location: LaSalle Park / St. Louis
570 posts, read 1,815,539 times
Reputation: 254

Advertisements

I repped you chitown regarding the ajf comment. Nice photo post too. It shows the real St. Louis. It helps address the negative impressions people may have of St. Louis.
Though I'm not sure what torchwood meant by the podunk comment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-26-2008, 11:11 AM
 
Location: Chicago
395 posts, read 1,223,273 times
Reputation: 192
Quote:
Originally Posted by st. louie louie View Post
I repped you chitown regarding the ajf comment. Nice photo post too. It shows the real St. Louis. It helps address the negative impressions people may have of St. Louis.
Though I'm not sure what torchwood meant by the podunk comment.
Thanks bro (assuming youre a guy)! I feel like through reading your posts you have a strong understanding for st. louis, and see that you have a more "urban" perspective of it...which is why i appreciate st. louis, and often think it's widely overlooked. I for one, have spent considerable time in st. louis, and know other chicago transplants that have found and discovered st. louis and are happy living there.

For being overlooked, i think that's partly st. louis' own fault for being so parochial at times. I wouldn't say "pokunk" either, though i think parts of it are when you get outside the suburb limits, and i've seen some podunk folks in the city as well (you call them hoosiers, i know). But i do believe, as many chicagoans view, st. louis is half southern. Most people here who haven't been or geographically challenged think its closer to new orleans than chicago. But nonetheless, without a personal attack, there are some (or one) st. louis "reps" on this forum who don't do a very good job of illustrating how great and unique the city really is, and to me, don't understand the city in the context of its place in the country and how it compares to other cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 11:56 AM
 
Location: LaSalle Park / St. Louis
570 posts, read 1,815,539 times
Reputation: 254
You are correct, a big problem for St. Louis is it's parochialism such as many peoples inability to see St. Louis as a region (in other words, they think the cities pros or cons don't affect the suburbs. Wrong.) and it has a slight inferiority complex. Which I hate and I can't figure out.

And hoosier are great. I always wanted to be one when I grew up. No worries, no cares. Doesn't every city have them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 02:20 PM
 
Location: Chicago
3,340 posts, read 8,714,156 times
Reputation: 1215
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajf131 View Post
I'm a little confused, an Illinois town on the Western side of the Mississippi? Please explain...i'm not attacking your statement, just asking for clarification of it. Thanks
The town was originally on the east bank but the earth quake changed it's flow putting the town on the west side
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 02:29 PM
 
Location: Chicago
3,340 posts, read 8,714,156 times
Reputation: 1215
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMT View Post
No, it's not arbitrary at all. If your definition of a "river city" is merely any city that happens to be located on a river, that would be just about any city in the country.

But a true "river city" is one whose very heart and soul is centered on its river. That means places like Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Louisville, Saint Louis, Memphis, New Orleans, and even smaller towns like Paducah and Vicksburg.

That would exclude Omaha. Even my beloved Knoxville, located on the Tennessee River, is hardly a "river city." Just because there's some new development going up by the river, as if the city has all of a sudden realized that there even IS a river in their town, doesn't make it a river city.

It's too bad that you're taking this so personally, and I apologize if I made it sound like your city is any less valued than true river cities.
Sorry we didnt want to develop our downtown so close to potential flooding which caused Carter lake, Iowa to be on the west side of the river. Sorry we used to have industrial centers on the river but got rid of those because of their pollution of the river. Sorry we cant build 50 million towers on the river in 10 seconds. Sorry its taking a while to get enough economic strength to develop our water front. I'm sorry our river culture isnt up to your strict standards!!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 03:43 PM
 
Location: Chicago
3,340 posts, read 8,714,156 times
Reputation: 1215
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMT View Post
I'm sorry, but that still seems mighty far away. Compared to true "river cities" like Saint Louis, Louisville, Memphis, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati and New Orleans--whose downtowns are right smack ON the river--the picture you showed is of a city which looks like being on a river was more of an afterthought.

That's not necessarily a bad thing, and it doesn't mean your city isn't a great place to live. But I would not consider that to be a true river city
St. Louis', Cincinnati's, and Pittsburgh tallest buildings are .4 miles away from a river Louisville's and Memphis' are .3. New Orleans is .6. Omaha's tallest building is .5 miles away from the river, .1 mile closer than New Orleans tallest building and yet you dont consider omaha a river city?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 03:54 PM
 
Location: New Albany, Indiana (Greater Louisville)
9,896 posts, read 21,176,302 times
Reputation: 9447
Louisville's new tallest building is being built .1 mile from the river
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 04:26 PM
 
Location: Southeast Missouri
5,812 posts, read 16,678,033 times
Reputation: 3335
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajf131 View Post
I'm a little confused, an Illinois town on the Western side of the Mississippi? Please explain...i'm not attacking your statement, just asking for clarification of it. Thanks
Kaskaskia, Illinois - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:
Kaskaskia is a village in Randolph County, Illinois, United States. In the 2000 census the population was 9. It was Illinois' first state capital, before the capital was moved to Vandalia in 1820.
Most of the town was destroyed in April of 1881 by flooding. During the flood, the Mississippi shifted to a new channel, running to the east of the town instead of to the west as before; the state boundary line, however, remained in its original location. Kaskaskia is therefore one of the few portions of Illinois west of the Mississippi. The old riverbed is now a creek or bayou.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 04:41 PM
 
Location: St. Louis, MO
3,742 posts, read 6,919,821 times
Reputation: 660
ST. LOUIS ISN'T SOUTHERN!!! GOOD GOD do you people just need to believe it is..its industry, the dialect, the culture, the history, DO NOT fit a Southern city. Southern style bbq? Might I kindly point out that barbecue is an AMERICAN food, not a Southern food. Chitown is determined to get on my nerves, that's all he is doing. he wants to get this forum against me because he doesn't have anything better to do. TorchwoodChi and Chitownwarrior being Chicagoans cannot accept St. Louis being Midwestern. If St. Louis isn't Midwestern, neither is Cincinnati, nor is Indy or Kansas City. You all need to wake up and smell the coffee...a Southern characteristic does not make a city Southern. St. Louis' industry, demographics, speech patterns, political leniencies, architecture, overall history, are that of a Midwestern city. END OF DISCUSSION!!! If you want to argue with the facts go ahead, I'm not going to waste my time on people who think their opinons override the facts, just like chitown who believes that the trees in the Arkansas Ozarks are the same as the Missouri Ozarks, without realizing like most people would that climatalogy, plant hardiness, and landscape play a role in defining agriculture...also, corn can grow in the Missouri Ozarks, it is very possible to do it, drive along I-44 and you will see them...in the Arkansas Ozarks corn is impossible to grow because it's too far south. The Ozark chinapin, either that or chinaquapin, trees are found exclusively in the Arkansas Ozarks and no further north than Branson, Missouri. I'd rather complain and whine like a baby then be like chitown and go with his stereotypical instincts and primitive knowledge. All three of you can take me on. Send a friggin' army. Better yet, go to the discussion in the St. Louis forum about "St. Louis...Southern or Midwestern?" Locals decided on it being midwestern by an overwhelming majority. There is my final piece of evidence. You all can take it up with people other than st. louie-louie who have lived here and know the truth like me. Maybe Chitown is just a sore loser. Locals know this city better than outsiders. Plain and simple. It should also be noted that every city has their own style of barbeque. Google Chicago-style bbq, Indy-style bbq, Cleveland-style bbq, Cincinnati-style bbq, and watch the magic happen. Complainer, no? A fact-giver? 100%. You can say that St. Louis half-Southern and half-Northern ONLY by the fact that it is the same distance to due north to Canada from here as to the Gulf of Mexico due south. That is it. Everything else points it to being more Midwestern/Northern. Something else to note is that St. Louis to my knowledge, while having its own style of barbeque, does not really many big barbeque restaurants restaurants promoting its style of barbeque. Chicago has its own barbeque for crying out loud.

Last edited by ajf131; 02-26-2008 at 04:55 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-26-2008, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
2,237 posts, read 6,572,267 times
Reputation: 843
I've always thought of St. Louis as Midwestern.
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.
Similar Threads
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