Forbes 30 most visited US cities (Kansas City, St. Louis: 2010, houses, employment)

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by Brickmama

Just want to clarify the density comment that Skrazzle disputed. The pop density in the city limits of both cities is posted below.

STL - 5948 per sq mi
KC - 1425 per sq mi

This is one is the reasons STL compares more to eastern cities while KC is more like western cities.

Come on. KCMO has tons of undeveloped land it annexed.

The original city limits from the river south within 435 is dense. Most zips are 5000-6000 people per square mile. Some are 7-9k.

[kcmo]

Here are some of KCMO's urban zip codes. Not bad really.
64123 5458
64124 5637
64127 4891
64128 4872
64109 5909
64111 6703
64124 8032
64123 5458
64112 5768
64113 4579

Here are some of the zips that make KC's density stats look horrible. Keep in mind, these are large areas and they will really throw off stats. These zips are up by KCI, Liberty, east of Raytown and south of 470.

64154 99
64153 99
64156 77
64136 263
64139 184
64149 44
64146 225
64147 226

Imagine if StL City quadrupled it's size by annexing a bunch of land in IL. Lot's of industrial areas, flood plains, suburban areas, rural areas etc.

Would that change how dense the actual city is? No.

I realize StL is denser than KC. It's just not 4-5 times a dense as the stats would make you think. StL is about 10-20% more dense IMO. The urbanized built up area of metro StL is also only slightly more dense than metro KC.

Just like it's silly to say KC is a larger city than StL just because of the city has more people, it's silly to think that KCMO is less dense than most suburbs. Most of the people that live in KCMO live in a small part of the city limits.

[Brickmama]

It is what it is. You still can change the actual numbers. Yes I could fudge the stats to remove some of the vacant areas of N STL and other areas not inhabited close to the mississippi which would push our density above 8k however there is no point in doing so since it is still within the city limits.

Yes KC covers roughly 400 sq miles and that is part of my point comparing it to western cities. Eastern cities are much more compact and cover less ground while western cities cover vast amounts of ground.

[northbound74]

Kansas City is sort-of more western, I guess. The city got the to the land before the suburbs had the chance. If it didn't, we'd have a bazillion suburbs like St. Louis.
St. Louis would likely be in a very similar situation had they not seceded from the county. I think that's a much bigger factor in feel and density than the "east-west" argument. KC has an older, inner-city type of downtown than what many western towns have.
KC may feel western compared to most eastern cities, but it feels eastern compared to many western cities. It seems to be a blend of all directions.

[kcmo]

Oh, I agree. Because the stats say so, KC is a city with only 1400 people per sq mile.

These photos say so!






I don't think the "city" of KC is western at all. The "metro" could be considered more western like Denver or Phoenix, but the city is more more eastern than most western cities like Denver and Phoenix.

Like northbound said,

"It seems to be a blend of all directions."

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by Brickmama

Just want to clarify the density comment that Skrazzle disputed. The pop density in the city limits of both cities is posted below.

STL - 5948 per sq mi
KC - 1425 per sq mi

This is one is the reasons STL compares more to eastern cities while KC is more like western cities.

Dispute what? You are giving the density based on large regions of KC that are burbs and annexed land.

I said QUOTE "the urban cores are just as dense"

Which is a complete fact.

I also said downtown KC has a bigger population... STL has 11k people. Downtown KC has 17k and growing....

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by kcmo

Oh, I agree. Because the stats say so, KC is a city with only 1400 people per sq mile.

These photos say so!






I don't think the "city" of KC is western at all. The "metro" could be considered more western like Denver or Phoenix, but the city is more more eastern than most western cities like Denver and Phoenix.

Like northbound said,

"It seems to be a blend of all directions."

Sums it up exactly....

[Brickmama]

Hey as I said before we have areas that are not quite as dense which hurts our density. It goes both ways.

Urban cores as in the city limits of both cities.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by Brickmama

Urban cores as in the city limits of both cities.

Wow, you really need to invest in a map, or at least spend some time on google and at least try to understand what your are talking about. Most of KC's suburbs are more urban and more developed than much of KCMO's outer annexed land. The noise buffer around KCI alone is probably bigger than the city of St Louis.

[GraniteStater]

The total rural land area surrounding KCI is extremely large. This is a western influence because DIA also has a vast land holding connected to their airport as well. Cities in the east don't usually have thousands of "vacant" acres of land sitting on top of an airport.