How many people live in the Kansas City region? (Liberty: how much, home)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 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.
I like to play with census stats so I put together this spreadsheet. Hopefully people can make some sense out of the graphic and find some interest in this.
Basically, I wanted to know the population of the region from different perspectives and how much the area has grown and then I want to compare these estimates to the official numbers from the 2010 census when they come out and see how close they are.
Here is what I came up.
The core Kansas City metro area which only includes the closest in and most built up 8 counties, which includes Lawrence, but not the other 10 rural counties or St Joe, (this should be the KC MSA if you ask me) is 2,014,370
The Greater Kansas City metropolitan CMSA area (which I think should include Lawrence and St Joe in the CMSA) has 2,342,892 residents.
The Kansas City region which includes Topeka (this is basically the economic region) has 2,537,354 residents.
Greater KC (not including Topeka)
The Missouri side has 1,370,304 residents and added 140,374 new residents since 2000
The Kansas side has 972,588 residents and added 115,488 new residents since 2000
The KC area added roughly 250,000 new residents in the past nine years. We shall see what the official census numbers say...
I'm wondering when are you moving back to KC to run for office, you have to be Kansas City's biggest champion!
You can really see the growth in Clay County, although I would think it was even more. That place has changed so much in the last 10 years. Ten years ago I graduated from college and moved back home to Liberty, since then I've moved south, got married, and had babies. It feels like as much as my life has changed the organic life of clay county has also changed also.
I'm wondering when are you moving back to KC to run for office, you have to be Kansas City's biggest champion!
No he's not. He's better off moving to Minneapolis to run for mayor there, since he thinks Minneapolis, Denver, Boston, San Diego, etc. are so much better than Kansas City (HIS WORDS). In fact, most of his recent posts have been very, very critical not only of Kansas City but the people who live in Kansas City.
It's a Kansas City vs. Minneapolis thread currently being debated in the City vs. City forum. Read kcmo's posts in the thread. After stating in as many ways as possible how much better he thinks Minneapolis is than Kansas City, he concludes his opening post with:
Quote:
"I will probably never move back [to Kansas City]. However, I would move to Minneapolis in a heartbeat (city or suburbs)."
He also said this about Kansas City:
Quote:
"If you love suburbs, hate cities, worship college sports, nascar and casinos, have no interest in anything urban, transit, urban biking and hiking etc and while still having high taxes (with little to show for it), then KC is the place to be!"
kcmo is not "Kansas City's biggest champion". In that Kansas City vs. Minneapolis thread, I was one of the only people standing up for Kansas City and championing it. Everyone else, including the moderator of the Kansas City forum (GraniteStater), championed Minneapolis over Kansas City.
Just because someone knows about and spends a lot of his time writing about Kansas City doesn't mean he is a champion of it. He moved away, doesn't live there, flat out says he will probably never move back, and can't even defend the city against other Midwestern rivals. He's not a champion. He's just someone who can't move on.
No he's not. He's better off moving to Minneapolis to run for mayor there, since he thinks Minneapolis, Denver, Boston, San Diego, etc. are so much better than Kansas City (HIS WORDS). In fact, most of his recent posts have been very, very critical not only of Kansas City but the people who live in Kansas City.
It's a Kansas City vs. Minneapolis thread currently being debated in the City vs. City forum. Read kcmo's posts in the thread. After stating in as many ways as possible how much better he thinks Minneapolis is than Kansas City, he concludes his opening post with:
He also said this about Kansas City:
kcmo is not "Kansas City's biggest champion". In that Kansas City vs. Minneapolis thread, I was one of the only people standing up for Kansas City and championing it. Everyone else, including the moderator of the Kansas City forum (GraniteStater), championed Minneapolis over Kansas City.
Just because someone knows about and spends a lot of his time writing about Kansas City doesn't mean he is a champion of it. He moved away, doesn't live there, flat out says he will probably never move back, and can't even defend the city against other Midwestern rivals. He's not a champion. He's just someone who can't move on.
No he's not. He's better off moving to Minneapolis to run for mayor there, since he thinks Minneapolis, Denver, Boston, San Diego, etc. are so much better than Kansas City (HIS WORDS). In fact, most of his recent posts have been very, very critical not only of Kansas City but the people who live in Kansas City.
FreeStater, I’m not sure what your point is here. I tell it like it is and KC doesn’t measure up to Minneapolis. Why not post the countless KC vs whatevercity threads where KC does compare well to? Because like everything else, you chose to ignore those.
The first thing a city can do to become a better city is to admit its shortcomings and try to improve those and one way to do that is to compare your city to a city that has accomplished things that your city has not been able to accomplish.
Why pretend that KC is just as successful as another city when it’s pretty obvious that it’s just not the case. KC is not in the same league as Minneapolis or Denver. It could be, but it’s not. But since it could be, I point it out. Sometimes I’m a bit harsh on KC, but I’m honest. KC clearly needs to do a few thing before it can honestly compare to a place like Denver or Minneapolis or Boston or San Diego or Seattle. KC is still a top 10 or 15 city in this country despite not measuring up to those towns, at least now, it wasn’t ten years ago.
The bar is high for me because I want to see the city become more like a Minneapolis and not just hang out in “status quo” rut and sit and watch cities like Charlotte, Nashville even Omaha pass KC by just like Denver, Minneapolis, Atlanta, Dallas etc did long ago. You can overlook some of the things that really screw up KC (mostly the state line issues). If it has to do with JoCo, you seem to be just fine with completely ignoring what’s going on and pretending like things are hunky dory. I look at other towns and think of how it could be.
Minneapolis is one of those towns.
Here, I’ll sum it up from this quote from the same thread, a post replied to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo
As far as me putting down KCMO. Just like when I put down Kansas and you don't like it, I tell it like it is. KCMO stands up well to a lot of towns. Minneapolis is a town Kansas City really has a difficult time standing up to. You can paint a pretty picture all you want, just like you do with how Johnson County interacts with KCMO (in a very destructive way IMO). But the reality is that Minneapolis/St Paul is really in a different league than KCMO/KCK. Neither are perfect, but when it comes to things that make a city attractive and vibrant, the twin cities has the upper hand.
It's really that simple.
If KC wants to compare to Minneapolis here are a few things it can do.
Build light rail or at least a better regional bus system.
Build and use more urban recreational assets like bike trails, urban parks etc.
Have a much larger corporate presence downtown and metropolitan residents that have more pride in the central city.
Expand UMKC with more on campus housing, connect it to KCMO's other activity centers via trails and transit and build a sports arena on campus for the basketball team. (I know UMKC is trying to do this now, but they have a ways to go).
Turn KCK into something respectable. Right now it's a pretty trashed out city with a suburb slapped onto the side of it (speedway area). Look at St Paul, a real companion city to Minneapolis.
Bring the baseball stadium downtown.
Put an NHL or NBA tenant in the Sprint Center. Twin Cities have both.
Build an airport terminal that is not a total joke.
And last but not least, try some regional cooperation and respect from one side of the metro to the other. And you are right, I don't respect the KS side of KC much. They have given me little reason to do so and your taking the high road on those issues shows you have more interest in suburban KS than the city of Kansas City.
I like KC, It's still a great city, but it has a long way to go before it can really be put into the same category as Minneapolis or Denver or many other towns. The city is just too busy sprawling and decaying while fighting within the metro is just off the charts. Any growth in KC comes at the expense of some other part of KC.
I will promote KC to no end because most people outside of KC imagine a city like Topeka (small city in flat boring kansas) or something when they think KC and compared to Topeka (or even places like Indy, OKC etc), KC is paradise. But I have always wanted KC to go to the next level where I think Denver and Minneapolis and Boston and Seattle and San Diego are. It's not there now. It just isn't.
While we are posting from other threads, I'll post this one for you to look over:
I spend a lot of time in the city vs city forums, because I have been to every single major city many times over. Cities are something I am extremely interested in. How many times have you been to Minneapolis or Denver? Have you been to every city and have you experienced every city in a way that you can compare them against each other in a comprehensive way?
So while you Kansas side people give high fives and reps over silly posts about my posts, I'll still be out there either promoting KC or saying nope, it's not quite there yet because in the end, all I want is for KC to be the best it can be, no matter where I happen to live. I would bet I still spend more time in central kcmo than a good portion of metro KC residents and I live 1000 miles away...
BTW, you sure didn't help the case much by saying KC is close to Wichita? I mean, seriousy? haha.
Your perception of what KC and its residents "should" be and the reason why they aren't whatever you think they should be are based in your own clouded memories and perpetuated by your refusal to look at the past and present with any kind of balanced perspective.
It's unfortunate really, because your experience, if tempered with a healthy dose of balance in your point of view would otherwise be valuable. As it is though, its up to others to warn those coming here for information to be wary of your delusional rants.
Even though this is getting into the weeds, I will respond to those points here since I didn't do a point by point response in the Minneapolis vs. Kansas City thread.
Quote:
If KC wants to compare to Minneapolis here are a few things it can do.
Build light rail or at least a better regional bus system.
Minneapolis dragged their feet on this forever. Finally about a decade ago they put in a line going from downtown to the airport.
Quote:
Build and use more urban recreational assets like bike trails, urban parks etc.
Johnson County has some of the best bike trails I've seen anywhere.
Quote:
Have a much larger corporate presence downtown and metropolitan residents that have more pride in the central city.
H&R Block, Hallmark, AMC Theaters, KC Southern Railroad, Russell Stover, KCP&L all headquartered in downtown Kansas City. I consider downtown to be from the river to the Plaza. Look at all the Minneapolis companies that are headquartered in the suburbs of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, and Minnetonka rather than downtown. Most of the large Minneapolis companies are headquartered in the suburbs.
Quote:
Expand UMKC with more on campus housing, connect it to KCMO's other activity centers via trails and transit and build a sports arena on campus for the basketball team. (I know UMKC is trying to do this now, but they have a ways to go).
Municipal Auditorium is one of the most historic basketball arenas in the world. An on-campus arena will never be able to compete with it. Once again, it's just another subjective thing you think will make Kansas City better because some other city has it, but you ignore what Kansas City does have. Municipal is a great place to watch the Roos.
Quote:
Turn KCK into something respectable. Right now it's a pretty trashed out city with a suburb slapped onto the side of it (speedway area). Look at St Paul, a real companion city to Minneapolis.
St. Paul is a state capital. KCK is not. A better comparison is KCMO/Overland Park to St. Paul/Minneapolis.
Quote:
Bring the baseball stadium downtown.
Subjective opinion that a downtown stadium is better. Not everything has to be downtown. Kauffman is a nice stadium. The renovations were great. It looks great. 95% of the people who go there are going to drive there whether it's downtown or on I-70, so why does it matter? I bet 95% of the people who go to Target Field in Minneapolis drive to get there.
Quote:
Put an NHL or NBA tenant in the Sprint Center. Twin Cities have both.
Unfair comparison. Twin Cities have 3.2 million people. KC has 2 million. When KC has 3.2 million it will have an NHL or NBA team, or both. The NHL and NBA teams in the Twin Cities are very unimpressive. The Minnesota Timberwolves are one of the most boring teams in the NBA. The Minnesota Wild, I have never heard anything about them. If I didn't know better I would think it was a minor league team.
Quote:
Build an airport terminal that is not a total joke.
I wasn't aware that it was a joke. Is there a real problem, such as flight delays or high ticket costs, or is it that you just don't like the decor?
Some more points. The biggest shopping area in Minneapolis is a mall, the Mall of America. How is that urban? It's in a suburb. Minneapolis is largely a suburban metro area that sprawls even more than Kansas City. Even a lot of the neighborhoods in the city of Minneapolis and St. Paul feel like suburbs. There are only a few neighborhoods close to downtown that have an urban feel. Minneapolis had a lot of flight from the city and tore down a lot of the history in the city. Then once it became "cool" people started moving back to the city. I've read about its history. I think Kansas City has more character than Minneapolis.
Come on freestater, you are not even replying to any of these with logical responses. I can see why you don't want to post in the KC vs Minneapolis thread, because you will get ripped. But sure what the heck, I'll jump into the weeds with you.
Quote:
Minneapolis dragged their feet on this forever. Finally about a decade ago they put in a line going from downtown to the airport.
What is your point? They still built a starter line and are about to build a line from Minneapolis to St Paul right through the University of Minnesota. This is something KC doesn't have, this is something KC is nowhere close to having, this is something that nobody in the KC area or the state of Missouri or Kansas have an ounce of interest in building. And again, the Minneapolis area has an extensive bus system that blankets the entire region while KC has three bus systems that barely cover the urban core. The Twin Cities has transit system has 250,000 riders a day. That is over FIVE times the ridership of the Metro, BUS and JO combined. Does Minneapolis-St Paul have 10 million people since they have ten five times the transit riders in a city that you say is just as spread out and suburbanized as KC? Nope. It just shows how poor the transit options are in KC and that it why Minneapolis is better than KC here.
Quote:
Johnson County has some of the best bike trails I've seen anywhere.
That's great and I agree, they do, as does suburban Minneapolis. I'm sure the Twin Cities suburbs has many times the number of bike trails though. One reason for that is the way the twin cities suburbs cooperate and share revenue. Something I didn't even mention in that list. But that's all beside the point because I said URBAN recreation, not bike trails out in the suburbs running behind the strip malls. Do I really need to go into detail and explain what urban recreation is? Take a bike and go to downtown Minneapolis or St Paul or Denver or Boston or Chicago or Seattle, or San Diego or freaking Omaha and see how many people will be doing the same thing. Lots of people in river levee trails, urban parks and greenways, bike lanes etc. That is nearly non-existant in KC. Again, Twin Cities win here.
Quote:
H&R Block, Hallmark, AMC Theaters, KC Southern Railroad, Russell Stover, KCP&L all headquartered in downtown Kansas City. I consider downtown to be from the river to the Plaza. Look at all the Minneapolis companies that are headquartered in the suburbs of Bloomington, Eden Prairie, Edina, and Minnetonka rather than downtown. Most of the large Minneapolis companies are headquartered in the suburbs.
I didn't say that Downtown didn't have any companies, nor did I say that all of the companies in Minneapolis are downtown. I said Downtown needs more. Pretty simple. For the size of KC, the corporate presence downtown is extremely lopsided into the the suburbs. Overland Park and JoCo in general is a corporate suburb that belongs in a city 2-4 times the size of KC. KC is not a large enough metro to have San Jose type suburbs. There is an unhealthy amount of KC's corporate economy based away from Downtown and that has a drastic effect on downtown. Most of Downtown KC is half empty multi tenant buildings with law firms and federal employees. The city lacks the corporate towers with large companies proud to be in KC and wanting do do their part to make KC a better place. That have some but not enough for the size of the city. You can see the impact companies with lots of civic passion have in just about every skyline in America besides KC. Look at OKC, Dallas, Omaha, Des Moines, Denver, Charlotte and yes Minneapolis.
Quote:
Municipal Auditorium is one of the most historic basketball arenas in the world. An on-campus arena will never be able to compete with it. Once again, it's just another subjective thing you think will make Kansas City better because some other city has it, but you ignore what Kansas City does have. Municipal is a great place to watch the Roos.
Then why did UMKC recently pull the Roos from Muni? Its history isn't going to help UMKC build a campus atmosphere and the 600 people that show up at Muni for most games probably don't care tht Muni held final fours in the 30's anyway. KC needs a strong, vibrant, large urban university. A sports arena was just one idea. There are many other things that need to happen too. But again, almost every vibrant city has a strong urban university and yea, I do look at StLouis, Cincinnati, Boston, Omaha, Denver.......Minneapolis as something KC should strive for in this area.
Quote:
St. Paul is a state capital. KCK is not. A better comparison is KCMO/Overland Park to St. Paul/Minneapolis.
What??? You completely lost me on this one. I'm talking about KCK not Overland Park. Overland Park is a suburb. KCK is a companion city to KCMO, much like St Paul is to Minneapolis, only KCK is pretty much a bombed out shell compared to St Paul. So again, the Twin Cities win.
Quote:
Subjective opinion that a downtown stadium is better. Not everything has to be downtown. Kauffman is a nice stadium. The renovations were great. It looks great. 95% of the people who go there are going to drive there whether it's downtown or on I-70, so why does it matter? I bet 95% of the people who go to Target Field in Minneapolis drive to get there.
What's done is done, but Target Field will no doubt have a positive impact on Downtown Minneapolis. Kauffman is a wonderful stadium, but for what was spent to renovate it, KC could have a stadium that actually improves the vibrancy of the city. Minneapolis wins.
Quote:
Unfair comparison. Twin Cities have 3.2 million people. KC has 2 million. When KC has 3.2 million it will have an NHL or NBA team, or both. The NHL and NBA teams in the Twin Cities are very unimpressive. The Minnesota Timberwolves are one of the most boring teams in the NBA. The Minnesota Wild, I have never heard anything about them. If I didn't know better I would think it was a minor league team.
Maybe it's unfair, but the fact remains that the Twin Cities have both pro winter sports and KC does not. That makes the twin cities more attractive to me and many others and that's why I would chose the Twin Cities over KC in this case once again. I can't help it if KC doesn't' have 3.2 million people, but I do believe that KC was once a larger metro than the twin cities so they did something right.
Quote:
I wasn't aware that it was a joke. Is there a real problem, such as flight delays or high ticket costs, or is it that you just don't like the decor?
The "terminal structure" at KCI is a joke. Few in KC see it or care because they like it just the way it is. But KCI, not the entire airport, just the terminal, is one of the biggest things keeping KC from growing economically. The terminal is embarrassing to people that visit or pass through KC and will never be more than what it is today, a regional airport with a dark, dated and dead terminal that is extremely annoying to almost anybody that doesn't live in KC. There are no services, you are trapped in little secure areas and have to leave secured areas to change planes most of the time. There is a whole thread on it. KC needs to do what Indianapolis did and build a modern terminal which will turn KCI from terrible to one of the best in the nation with relatively little investment, because the rest of the airport is fine. Minneapolis wins. BTW, here is a quote from international press that visited KC when the Wizards played Manchester.
Quote:
When we first flew in Kansas City International Airport it seemed deserted.
If tumbleweed had blown past and disappeared down the concourse it wouldn't have felt at all strange.
. Good thing he didn't have to find a place to eat or have to change planes!
Quote:
I think Kansas City has more character than Minneapolis.
I agree. That doesn't mean KC matches the Minneapolis metro in other areas. I think if KC ever got its act together it could blow away the Twin Cities. But right now, I don't think they compare well.
And I see you didn't even try to say KC has better regional cooperation. Good move.
I love KC, but some metros seem to have more going on and be more on the same page than KC. I happen to think the twin cities offers more of what I like in a city. You may not. End of story.
Status:
"The great northern Summer has arrived!"
(set 13 days ago)
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
13,599 posts, read 15,437,844 times
Reputation: 6381
Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeStater
No he's not. He's better off moving to Minneapolis to run for mayor there, since he thinks Minneapolis, Denver, Boston, San Diego, etc. are so much better than Kansas City (HIS WORDS). In fact, most of his recent posts have been very, very critical not only of Kansas City but the people who live in Kansas City.
It's a Kansas City vs. Minneapolis thread currently being debated in the City vs. City forum. Read kcmo's posts in the thread. After stating in as many ways as possible how much better he thinks Minneapolis is than Kansas City, he concludes his opening post with:
He also said this about Kansas City:
kcmo is not "Kansas City's biggest champion". In that Kansas City vs. Minneapolis thread, I was one of the only people standing up for Kansas City and championing it. Everyone else, including the moderator of the Kansas City forum (GraniteStater), championed Minneapolis over Kansas City.
Just because someone knows about and spends a lot of his time writing about Kansas City doesn't mean he is a champion of it. He moved away, doesn't live there, flat out says he will probably never move back, and can't even defend the city against other Midwestern rivals. He's not a champion. He's just someone who can't move on.
Yes, I championed Minneapolis over Kansas City because it offers MORE at this time in history.
The TOP 10 REASONS WHY!
1) Economically superior to KC
2) University Downtown
3) Less Heat and Humidity
4) Close to the Northwoods
5) LAKES, everywhere
6) Top 10 Position Nationally for Educational Attainment.
7) Healthier Than Average Populace
8) Extensive Urban Bike Trails and Transit
9) Centrally Located International Airport
10) High Median Income and Moderate Cost of Living
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 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 1.5 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.
