U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Missouri > Kansas 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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-09-2012, 04:01 PM
 
Location: IN
20,170 posts, read 34,488,778 times
Reputation: 12508

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
Of course it is in the political fray....because the only reason we no longer have social conservatism coast-to-coast is the political activism by fringe groups in the last few decades. What you're seeing now is some better-late-than-never push-back politically against those groups and the damage they have done to our social fabric.

I don't know enough about Brownback to say whether he is "mainstream", but this discussion is not about him or any single person anyway. I do know that I don't share his religious views, but do agree with his positions on many issues.

I fail to see the relevance of my being gone for over 20 years to this particular topic. The KC area was socially conservative in the 70s and 80s and you are constantly complaining about it being so today - so what is the point?

How is the culture much different, relative to this discussion?

Developers have ruined everything? You mean like developers "ruined" Manhattan island, San Francisco Bay, and every other plot of ground on earth where humans congregate? We're into the stratosphere of irrelevance here, IMHO.
I would say JOCO in particular is less socially conservative now than 20-30 years ago with most of them in the southwest part of the county in Olathe and Gardner as well as parts of southern Overland Park. JOCO has one of the highest percentages of the total population with a four year degree of any county in the country so demographically that typically lends itself far more to fiscal conservatism, indpendents, and a more moderate voting bloc in general. JOCO has next to nothing in common with the rest of Kansas so a definite disconnect exists there but is found in numerous other states as well. As a geographer, I have found that the higher the population density gets, the less socially conservative a place becomes overall. JOCO now has the same population density per square mile as Jackson county, MO.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-09-2012, 06:25 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
7,656 posts, read 5,640,644 times
Reputation: 7505
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
I would say JOCO in particular is less socially conservative now than 20-30 years ago with most of them in the southwest part of the county in Olathe and Gardner as well as parts of southern Overland Park. JOCO has one of the highest percentages of the total population with a four year degree of any county in the country so demographically that typically lends itself far more to fiscal conservatism, indpendents, and a more moderate voting bloc in general. JOCO has next to nothing in common with the rest of Kansas so a definite disconnect exists there but is found in numerous other states as well. As a geographer, I have found that the higher the population density gets, the less socially conservative a place becomes overall. JOCO now has the same population density per square mile as Jackson county, MO.
You do realize that Jackson County's population density is extremely low for a large metro? Lower than many large suburbs? So Johnson County's being similar is not the least bit surprising or significant.

And higher population densities being less socially conservative is even less surprising for reasons too obvious to need elaboration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-09-2012, 07:20 PM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,498,983 times
Reputation: 5415
Johnson County is actually quite a bit more dense then suburban Jackson County (mostly because of the flat topography, lack of flood plains, lakes, parks etc).

KC metro as a whole has average density when you look at the built up part of the metro. It's no chicago or boston, but it's pretty much in line with most metros of 2-4 million. You can't just look at a county wide density and make any sense out of it because much of Jackson County (and all counties in the KC area) is rural outside the core developed part of the county.

KC doesn't not have a true central county that is built up to the county boundaries because metro KC is developed in parts of five counties where they meet near downtown.

I'm sure this is making no sense to anybody here, so I'll just stop.

I still don’t see how kc is really any different than any major Midwestern city as far as dating goes. I’m sure it’s not on the level of DC or something, but why would it be?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 12:49 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
7,656 posts, read 5,640,644 times
Reputation: 7505
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
Johnson County is actually quite a bit more dense then suburban Jackson County (mostly because of the flat topography, lack of flood plains, lakes, parks etc).

KC metro as a whole has average density when you look at the built up part of the metro. It's no chicago or boston, but it's pretty much in line with most metros of 2-4 million. You can't just look at a county wide density and make any sense out of it because much of Jackson County (and all counties in the KC area) is rural outside the core developed part of the county.

KC doesn't not have a true central county that is built up to the county boundaries because metro KC is developed in parts of five counties where they meet near downtown.

I'm sure this is making no sense to anybody here, so I'll just stop.

I still donít see how kc is really any different than any major Midwestern city as far as dating goes. Iím sure itís not on the level of DC or something, but why would it be?
No, it isn't....it's far lower. A definite plus for KC.

2000 Census: US Municipalities Over 50,000: Ranked by 2000 Density
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 07:53 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,498,983 times
Reputation: 5415
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
No, it isn't....it's far lower. A definite plus for KC.

2000 Census: US Municipalities Over 50,000: Ranked by 2000 Density
Like I said, a bit over your head

You can't just look at city density stats. KCMO has a lot of open space in newer annexed areas, but just because a city annexes land doesn't make the existing areas any less dense, even though density stats would go down. The density of the KC area and KCMO city (urban footprint) is average for the size of the city. The link you provided means almost nothing to anybody except city planners that need to figure out how to serve people that live in far flung rural areas of the city. Go to google and plant yourself in midtown kcmo and tell me that the kc area is less dense than 550 other cities. LOL.

If San Francisco somehow annexed a bunch of land in napa valley and its density stats dropped by 80%, would the city truly be less dense or would the density stats just be out of whack?

To help you understand: (this is not the perfect way to compare densities, still lots of variables, but way better than just raw city density stats.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
Here are the top 55 cities ranked by density of the their UA.

NAME POP AREALANDSQMI POPDEN
1 Los Angeles--Long Beach--Anaheim, CA 12150996 1736.02 6999.3
2 San Francisco--Oakland, CA 3281212 523.62 6266.4
3 San Jose, CA 1664496 285.98 5820.3
4 New York--Newark, NY--NJ--CT 18351295 3450.2 5318.9
5 Urban Honolulu, HI 802459 170.17 4715.6
6 Las Vegas--Henderson, NV 1886011 416.84 4524.5
7 Miami, FL 5502379 1238.61 4442.4
8 San Diego, CA 2956746 732.41 4037
9 Salt Lake City--West Valley City, UT 1021243 277.89 3675.1
10 Sacramento, CA 1723634 470.98 3659.7
11 New Orleans, LA 899703 251.39 3578.9
12 Denver--Aurora, CO 2374203 667.95 3554.4
13 Riverside--San Bernardino, CA 1932666 544.97 3546.4
14 Portland, OR--WA 1849898 524.38 3527.8
15 Chicago, IL--IN 8608208 2442.75 3524
16 Washington, DC--VA--MD 4586770 1321.73 3470.3
17 El Paso, TX--NM 803086 250.57 3205
18 Phoenix--Mesa, AZ 3629114 1146.57 3165.2
19 Baltimore, MD 2203663 717.04 3073.3
20 Seattle, WA 3059393 1010.31 3028.2
21 Houston, TX 4944332 1660.02 2978.5
22 San Antonio, TX 1758210 597.1 2944.6
23 Dallas--Fort Worth--Arlington, TX 5121892 1779.13 2878.9
24 Virginia Beach, VA 1439666 515.45 2793
25 Detroit, MI 3734090 1337.16 2792.5
26 Philadelphia, PA--NJ--DE--MD 5441567 1981.37 2746.4
27 Columbus, OH 1368035 510.46 2680
28 Austin, TX 1362416 523.03 2604.8
29 Minneapolis--St. Paul, MN--WI 2650890 1021.8 2594.3
30 Tampa--St. Petersburg, FL 2441770 956.99 2551.5
31 Orlando, FL 1510516 597.69 2527.3
32 Milwaukee, WI 1376476 545.62 2522.8
33 San Juan, PR 2148346 866.69 2478.8
34 Buffalo, NY 935906 379.93 2463.4
35 Tucson, AZ 843168 353.46 2385.4
36 St. Louis, MO--IL 2150706 923.64 2328.5
37 Cleveland, OH 1780673 771.97 2306.7
38 Kansas City, MO--KS 1519417 677.84 2241.6
39 Boston, MA--NH--RI 4181019 1873.46 2231.7
40 Providence, RI--MA 1190956 545.05 2185.1
41 Memphis, TN--MS--AR 1060061 497.31 2131.6
42 Indianapolis, IN 1487483 705.74 2107.7
43 Oklahoma City, OK 861505 410.63 2098
44 Cincinnati, OH--KY--IN 1624827 787.74 2062.6
45 Louisville/Jefferson County, KY--IN 972546 476.72 2040.1
46 Jacksonville, FL 1065219 530.36 2008.5
47 Bridgeport--Stamford, CT--NY 923311 466.21 1980.5
48 Richmond, VA 953556 492.17 1937.5
49 Pittsburgh, PA 1733853 905.17 1915.5
50 Hartford, CT 924859 516.25 1791.5
51 Nashville-Davidson, TN 969587 563.47 1720.7
52 Raleigh, NC 884891 518.14 1707.8
53 Atlanta, GA 4515419 2645.35 1706.9
54 Charlotte, NC--SC 1249442 741.49 1685
55 Birmingham, AL 749495 529.9 1414.4

Last edited by kcmo; 09-10-2012 at 08:26 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 10:43 AM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
7,656 posts, read 5,640,644 times
Reputation: 7505
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
Like I said, a bit over your head

You can't just look at city density stats. KCMO has a lot of open space in newer annexed areas, but just because a city annexes land doesn't make the existing areas any less dense, even though density stats would go down. The density of the KC area and KCMO city (urban footprint) is average for the size of the city. The link you provided means almost nothing to anybody except city planners that need to figure out how to serve people that live in far flung rural areas of the city. Go to google and plant yourself in midtown kcmo and tell me that the kc area is less dense than 550 other cities. LOL.

If San Francisco somehow annexed a bunch of land in napa valley and its density stats dropped by 80%, would the city truly be less dense or would the density stats just be out of whack?

To help you understand: (this is not the perfect way to compare densities, still lots of variables, but way better than just raw city density stats.)
What appears to be over your head is what we're talking about here.

The previous comparison was Johnson County to Jackson County. I posted stats showing KC's very low density compared to most other large US cities. If I had found and posted the same stats for Jackson County, the difference would only be amplified. You are so obsessed with "urban" that apparently you've forgotten that KC's high density footprint is very small and that most of it is more suburban with more elbow room than found in many/most other large cities.

Most of KC is not high-density living and that is to its credit. Even If it had half the square mileage, KC would still be lower density than 337 other listed cities. I suggest you expand your horizon beyond the "urban core" once in a while and many things may become more clear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 11:01 AM
 
Location: Washington, DC area
10,705 posts, read 18,498,983 times
Reputation: 5415
^ urban core and urbanized area are two very different things. The urban footprint of KC goes from just north of Gladstone to Blue Springs to Olathe etc. KC's urbanized area does not even include Lee's Summit because there is a gap between LS and the metro. The area of metro KC WHERE MOST PEOPLE ACTUALLY LIVE has pretty average density compared to St Louis, Cleveland, Dallas etc.

A lot of KCMO city limits proper is not even in the urbanized area of the metropolitan area while Olathe is.

Err, nevermind, it's not worth it. You are right. KC has 1400 people per sqare mile. Everybody has two acres. Yep.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 01:33 PM
 
2,195 posts, read 2,146,270 times
Reputation: 1916
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post

KC metro as a whole has average density when you look at the built up part of the metro. It's no chicago or boston,
Yeah, metro KC is actually denser than metro Boston.

Anyway, obviously you're larger point is correct: KC is not particularly dense, but it not particularly spread out, either. The urban core is pretty much average density and size for a midsized midwestern city, as is the urbanized area (which is about the best measure of city size). CV doesn't understand, or doesn't want to (and people who love to trot out KC as a poster child for sprawl are often willfully ignorant on this note) so don't waste your time. Most people who have been to KC, or know anything about American cities, know
that KC is neither especially spread out nor especially urban and dense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 01:34 PM
 
2,195 posts, read 2,146,270 times
Reputation: 1916
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownVic95 View Post
KC's high density footprint is very small and that most of it is more suburban
Which is of course, true of 95% of cities in America, especially in the midwest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2012, 06:09 PM
 
Location: SF Bay Area
7,656 posts, read 5,640,644 times
Reputation: 7505
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.davis View Post
Yeah, metro KC is actually denser than metro Boston.

Anyway, obviously you're larger point is correct: KC is not particularly dense, but it not particularly spread out, either. The urban core is pretty much average density and size for a midsized midwestern city, as is the urbanized area (which is about the best measure of city size). CV doesn't understand, or doesn't want to (and people who love to trot out KC as a poster child for sprawl are often willfully ignorant on this note) so don't waste your time. Most people who have been to KC, or know anything about American cities, know
that KC is neither especially spread out nor especially urban and dense.
Absolute rubbish....though predictable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kcmo View Post
^ urban core and urbanized area are two very different things. The urban footprint of KC goes from just north of Gladstone to Blue Springs to Olathe etc. KC's urbanized area does not even include Lee's Summit because there is a gap between LS and the metro. The area of metro KC WHERE MOST PEOPLE ACTUALLY LIVE has pretty average density compared to St Louis, Cleveland, Dallas etc.

A lot of KCMO city limits proper is not even in the urbanized area of the metropolitan area while Olathe is.

Err, nevermind, it's not worth it. You are right. KC has 1400 people per sqare mile. Everybody has two acres. Yep.
You're right, it's not worth. If that latest gem is any indication of a trend, the next contribution will claim that One Kansas City Place is the world's tallest building.

I understand your point completely, BTW. But still say that KC is below average density....based not on the stats, but my own experience living in multiple metros in addition to KC and visiting many, many more. Granted it's not as much lower as those stats would indicate, but there's still a lot of elbow room around KC not as common in many other metros.
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:


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > Missouri > Kansas City
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

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