Saint Louis vs. Kansas City? (St. Louis, Union: 2009, condos, theater)

[northbound74]

Kansas City has some really amazing architecture, and it's not just in the Plaza area. It's all over the older parts of town. Some of it's in neighborhoods that many suburbanites would be terrified to drive down, but it's there. KC's skyline is very large and spread out, with much more in the way of tall buildings. Coming from the west on I-70 is not the best angle to view it from. I prefer from the south on Main Street, or from the north on 169.
Swope Park is a good bit larger than Forest Park. That's where the Zoo, Starlight Theatre, fishing lakes, and a golf course are, among other things. KC's zoo isn't the best, but it's not nearly as bad as people tend to make it sound sometimes.
KC has an excellent boulevard and park system, with lot's of fountains.
KC is very hilly, and we don't get many ice storms, as someone tried to imply. More snow than otherwise. The weather's not drastically different than St. Louis.
World's of Fun is like Six Flags, but without the long lines. It's not a depressing ghost town, but it's not annoyingly crowded, either.
I'd much rather see a baseball game in KC than St. Louis. For one, parking is never an issue.. the 40k seat Kauffman Stadium shares a parking lot with the 75k seat Arrowhead, and the Royals are my team.
Don't get me wrong, St. Louis is okay, but Kansas City's much more my style.

[myrab]

Originally Posted by ShadowCaver

FWIW, couple wiki articles on both cities [both need to be expanded IMHO]:
Architecture of Kansas City - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Architecture of St. Louis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Great links. Thank you!

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by aragx6

I like soccer quite a bit and am looking forward to having an MLS team here, but you know as well as anybody that when you talk about 4-sport towns in the US soccer is not included.

St. Louis is nationally and internationally renowned for its architecture -- there's really just no comparison and I think you know it.

St. Louis has crime problems, but if you take the time to read up on how those "most dangerous" lists are compiled, you'll see there are inconsistencies. Chicago is actually one of the most dangerous, but you won't find them anywhere on the list because they don't report their numbers.

Again as I said, there are very dangerous neighborhoods, but there are vast swaths of the city that are perfectly livable.

As someone who has been to several countries, I can say honestly NO St. Louis is not internationally renowned for its architecture.

Now, neither is KC (actually the Plaza is pretty well known)... but I never claimed it was. It's all personal opinion, but from personal experience with people and my own opinion, you can find more beautiful architecture to look at in KC.... which I think is attributed also to a more interesting history, especially during the roaring 20s, etc...

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by Brickmama

Architecture? I prefer KC. STL isn't bad, i just think KC is a lot more unique, a larger and much better downtown then STL. STL has nothing that compares to the Plaza.

Sorry to be rude but you have no idea what you are talking about. STL has some of the best architecture in the world. KC is generally very comparable to STL in most aspects but in this category ther is NO COMPARISON!!!

Please elaborate then/ I've been to STL, i've never seen anything special...

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by ajf131

St. Louis' skyline if looked at from the south or north or west of the Central West End dwarfs Kansas City. St. Louis technically has four different skylines...Downtown, Midtown, the Central West End, and Downtown Clayton, all within less than 8 miles. Kansas City pretty much has a downtown skyline not much larger than St. Louis...only difference is the buildings are much more spread out...St. Louis' downtown seems small since all the buildings are so cramped together...if you can get past all the buildings being crammed together, you will see Downtown St. Louis is just as large as Kansas City if not larger. Kansas City is not as humid as St. Louis during the summer but temperature wise it is actually usually much hotter...it is much more often in the 90s than St. Louis is. In terms of winters, that is hard to say...yes it is on the Plains, and normally can be somewhat colder than St. Louis for a longer period of time because of this, but both normally see the same amount of snowfall...around a historical average of 20 inches a year. Both cities can be brutally hot in the summer and bone-chillingly cold in the winter.

This is just plain wrong. The skyline doesn't dwarf KCs at all, and I would expect most people who have been to both cities to admit that is the case. It also is not larger.. next time try a google search before making these statements.

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by STLCardsBlues1989

"better BBQ" is also subjective.

Obviously neither city is better, but I like St. Louis myself. Granted, I've never been to KC. I really have no reason to go to KC.

And yes, soccer is a sport. If things go well, St. Louis may have soccer by 2011 or 2012 anyway.

Kansas City city is also "Bigger" in land mass and population, but it's a lot less dense overall.

No one thinks of STL when they think of BBQ....

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by friedzone

Thank you ladies and gentlemen. The winters are milder than Chicago but summers hotter per the chart. KC very similar. STL is a great sports town with all the stadiums located close downtown. Just a few quick impressions of mine.

THIS i find in STL favor....

our sprawl in KC sucks, our stadiums and airport are both far from downtown, which blows. They also have light rail which even if its not that great at the moment, is a start and much better then not having it at all.

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by Brickmama

KCMO you said yea, and there has been more in KC. It's a fact. Downtown KC has converted dozens of towers to residential and entire warehouse districts like the crossroads, garment district, river market and others have been completely renovated into mostly residential.

I challenge you to prove it to all of us that what you are saying is true. I want to see the statistics that KC have invested more money and increased their pop downtown more than STL. I think what you find will disappoint you.

Ok check :

Downtown St. Louis Partnership - Live Downtown

"he downtown population has grown to nearly 11,000 residents today and is projected to reach 12,000 by 2010."


Now check: and this info is slightly old its better now, I just need to find it:

CBD-Downtown, Kansas City - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As of 2007, Downtown has 16,292 permanent residents and 11,500 housing units.[1] In 2000, the population may have been as low as 10,000 people with 7,330 units


Over 2000 units being constructed downtown 3506 proposed.

STL projected downtown growth is 1000 in 2 years (the info I posted is written in 2008)

KC has been growing at a rate of around 1000 per year. Twice as fast.

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by Brickmama

RickMG, you said Kansas City's architecture is far and away hands down over St. Louis. Just drive up Ward Parkway and you'll think you're in Beverly Hills.

We are only comparing the architecture in the only the city limits of both cities. Have you actually driven around STL city and took notice of the architechture? Downtown, Soulard, Benton Park, Compton Heights, CWE, TG South and East, Midtown, Mvkinley Heights, Holly Hills, Carondalet, Old North STL, etc...

I think what you see will cause you to change your viewpoint. Any architecture junkie will side with STL in this category.

.... Ward Parkway is city limits. As is Plaza, midtown, westport, Hyde Park, etc....

[kshe95girl]

Originally Posted by skrazzle

Please elaborate then/ I've been to STL, i've never seen anything special...

you must have been asleep then or perhaps are not as well traveled in the Lou as you would like to think. There are dozens of neighborhoods with outstanding architecture scattered all over STL. Not to mention downtown........