Do you consider Overland Park a suburb of KCMO or KCK? (Kansas City: vs, centers)

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by rwiksell

I agree with your conclusion, but I don't think the core city proper of a metro has to actually be larger in population than each of its component suburbs.

If St. Louis County were to become a single municipality, as some have proposed, it would be three times larger than St. Louis city. And yet, there would be no doubt which is the core city, and which is the suburb. I'm sure there are better examples, especially when an old city is blocked in somehow, and declines in population.

The only core cities I can think of that might fall into this category are the independent cities, the consolidated city-counties (in states where cities cannot annex across county lines) and those cities in states with no unincorporated territory.

Boston, Mass., and Hartford, Conn., are both examples of the last category. As counties have ceased to exist for all intents and purposes in both states, it makes little sense to point out that the suburban "counties" around Boston are more populous than the "county" in which Boston lies (which included the cities of Revere and Chelsea and the town of Winthrop in addition to the city of Boston).

The others that come to mind right now are:

Baltimore, MD (like St. Louis, it's independent of any county in its state)
Richmond and Norfolk, VA (all cities in Virginia are independent of any county, even if they house the courthouse for the counties surrounding them as Charlottesville does for Albemarle County)
Washington, DC (obvious)
San Francisco, CA (city and county)
Philadelphia, PA (ditto)

Most of the other consolidated city-counties are like the Unified Government in that the city combined with the county but the consolidation may not have extinguished all the other subunits within that county, so I don't count those.

Denver, CO, is also a consolidated city and county, but it can still annex land around it, which then becomes part of the City and County of Denver. I do STR, though, that the five counties across parts of which Denver now spreads got some sort of law passed constraining Denver's ability to do this, and one of Denver's suburbs also became a county to preclude its being annexed.

So the ranks of such cities are actually pretty small. And AFAIK, none of them are smaller than any other city in their metropolitan areas in population, though some counties may be more populous, as is the case with Baltimore County vs. Baltimore City and Montgomery and Prince George's counties in Maryland vs. DC.

[kcmo]

KCK is no different than other suburbs with 100,000 plus people like Overland Park, Olathe, Independence and Lee's Summit. Just because it has a historic and somewhat urban central core doesn't mean it's not a suburb.

Most of KCMO is suburban. That doesn't mean KCMO is a suburban city. It will always be the core urban city of the metro even when (not if) the suburban Northland outgrows the Jackson County portion of the city.

[brooksider2brooklyn]

KCK is a suburb of Overland Park

[kcbluesprings]

Let me clear this up!! Regarding the difference between urban and suburban in the Kansas City area...

Starting on the Missouri side. If you lived

north of Parvin Road,
northwest of Briarcliff,
east of Sterling north of I-70, (although around Independence Square, you could make it Noland or L.S. Road
east of I-435 south of I-70,
south of 85th St,
west of State Line south of 47th street,

On to Kansas side

west of I-635 to Missouri River

YOU ARE SUBURBAN!!!

Anything inside those boundaries and it's urban.

(while we can argue on the exact boundaries, this is what I consider the difference between urban and suburban)

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by brooksider2brooklyn

KCK is a suburb of Overland Park

Thank you, Harry Truman.

(Missouri's only President often claimed the same status for Kansas City (Mo.) relative to Independence.)

[rwiksell]

Originally Posted by kcbluesprings

Let me clear this up!! Regarding the difference between urban and suburban in the Kansas City area...

Starting on the Missouri side. If you lived

north of Parvin Road,
northwest of Briarcliff,
east of Sterling north of I-70, (although around Independence Square, you could make it Noland or L.S. Road
east of I-435 south of I-70,
south of 85th St,
west of State Line south of 47th street,

On to Kansas side

west of I-635 to Missouri River

YOU ARE SUBURBAN!!!

Anything inside those boundaries and it's urban.

(while we can argue on the exact boundaries, this is what I consider the difference between urban and suburban)

Are you saying no part of KCK is urban? That's a tough argument to make.

[SPonteKC]

Originally Posted by rwiksell

Are you saying no part of KCK is urban? That's a tough argument to make.

Eastern KCK has some of the highest population densities in the metro.

[MarketStEl]

Originally Posted by rwiksell

Are you saying no part of KCK is urban? That's a tough argument to make.

I think the poster meant to say "west of I-635 from the Johnson County line to the Missouri River is suburban."

East of it, it's most definitely urban.

I remember Kansas City, Kansas, as being home to all the interesting Eastern European ethnic groups as well as the largest Hispanic community in either of the Kansas Cities (named "Argentine" purely by coincidence, I believe) growing up. I also remember attending a wedding at a Russian Orthodox church situated at the top of Strawberry Hill as a teenager.

Historical trivia: I learned not too long ago that the City of Kansas City, Kansas, was formed ca. 1885 by the merger of the cities of Wyandotte, Argentine, Armourdale (yes, named for the meat packer) and Old Kansas City. Why this little settlement in the West Bottoms founded after Westport Landing was "Old" Kansas City is a question I'd love to know the answer to. (Kansas City annexed Rosedale, the one part of Wyandotte County where the street and house numbers follow the metropolitan grid originating at Main Street and the Missouri River in Kansas City, Mo., after World War I.)

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by MarketStEl

Thank you, Harry Truman.

(Missouri's only President often claimed the same status for Kansas City (Mo.) relative to Independence.)

Well, at one time, KC was a suburb of Independence. (although not while Truman was president )

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by MarketStEl

I think the poster meant to say "west of I-635 from the Johnson County line to the Missouri River is suburban."

East of it, it's most definitely urban.

I remember Kansas City, Kansas, as being home to all the interesting Eastern European ethnic groups as well as the largest Hispanic community in either of the Kansas Cities (named "Argentine" purely by coincidence, I believe) growing up. I also remember attending a wedding at a Russian Orthodox church situated at the top of Strawberry Hill as a teenager.

Historical trivia: I learned not too long ago that the City of Kansas City, Kansas, was formed ca. 1885 by the merger of the cities of Wyandotte, Argentine, Armourdale (yes, named for the meat packer) and Old Kansas City. Why this little settlement in the West Bottoms founded after Westport Landing was "Old" Kansas City is a question I'd love to know the answer to. (Kansas City annexed Rosedale, the one part of Wyandotte County where the street and house numbers follow the metropolitan grid originating at Main Street and the Missouri River in Kansas City, Mo., after World War I.)

I don't think the tiny "Kansas City" neighborhood in WyCo's portion of the West Bottoms was named "old Kansas City" originally was it? It was just a little industrial area nicknamed Kansas City on the real old maps I have seen. Maybe that area took on a new nickname after KCK was created from the different areas of WyCo? Regardless, I have heard many times by credible sources that KCK named its newly created city "Kansas City" for one reason. To take advantage of KCMO's reputation and capitalize on its confusing name. KCK thought that by calling themselves Kansas City too, that they would confuse people and industry to the east and they would grow their city by confusing people from outside of KC that they were the famous Kansas City.

I honestly don't know how true this is. But I have read it in history books, and have been told this by older history buffs that know KC history well including my late grandfather who knew KC history like nobody else.

I don't know how much it actually helped KCK. I mean KCK did develop a large industrial economy, but outside of that, the city has never been able to really evolve into anything more than a low income blue collar suburb.