St Louis vs Kansas City (St. Louis, Independence: condos, crime, houses)

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by northbound74

^^Kansas City has to split it's fame into two states, considering roughly half of the metro's population is in Kansas. So, a lot of people not from the area think that KC is in Kansas. When in fact, most of the stuff one associates with KC is in Missouri, like the sports teams and all the touristy stuff.
The big majority of St. Louis' overall population is in Missouri, so yes, people think of it as Missouri's big city.

St. Louis (and the inner suburbs) are also more mature and established with much higher density levels compared with Kansas City. Kansas City includes a ridiculous number of counties in the entire metro area considering its population is far less than St. Louis. I also can't help but laugh when the city limits of Kansas City, MO span three separate counties (Jackson, Clay, and Platte).

[aragx6]

I know I was shocked when I learned this as well.

St. Louis itself is itty bitty size-wise when compared to nearly every major city in America, but the metro is the 16th largest in the US, whereas KC is only the 29th. I think that's why people think of St. Louis as MO's big city and not KC.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by Plains10

St. Louis (and the inner suburbs) are also more mature and established with much higher density levels compared with Kansas City. Kansas City includes a ridiculous number of counties in the entire metro area considering its population is far less than St. Louis. I also can't help but laugh when the city limits of Kansas City, MO span three separate counties (Jackson, Clay, and Platte).

The St Louis MSA covers a much larger area than KC.

Actually, there are about 2.5 million people within 60 miles of downtown KC, about the same as St Louis. Only Lawrence and St Joe are their own MSAs so they are not included in KC MSA. The StL MSA reaches a lot further than the KC MSA to reach their 2.7 million people.

The population of KC and StL is not all the different from one another.

StL City and StL County are quite dense. The other 1.5 million people in the other dozen or more counties? Not so much.

Three counties come together and meet in Downtown KCMO. KCMO takes up only a small portion of every county. It's not like KCMO is in all of three counties.

The urbanized area of KCMO is about 1.5 million. I think StL is only 1.7.

The original part of KCMO south of the river and north of 85th is quite dense and just because the city has annexed all that land up north and out south doesn't change the fact that the built up part of KCMO is quite dense.

I love St Louis, but I am always amazed at how so many people know so little about KC, especially those that claim to be from there.

Having said that, I do think that StL is the largest and more important city in the state, especially since most of the city and its companies are in Missouri where nearly half of KC's are in Kansas.

But give KC respect where it's due.

[STLCardsBlues1989]

St. Louis just seems more urban to me.

Also, I never really understood why Kaufmann and Arrowhead are out in the middle of nowhere. I realize you need space for tailgating in football, but a baseball stadium (in my opinion) is supposed to be urban with shops and restaurants and bars around it.

I've never been to Kansas City. Just from pictures I've seen St. Louis seems more urban. And St. Louis city limits are about 62 sq. miles. Kansas City is 313.5 sq. miles. St. Louis is 353,837 in the city and Kansas City is 447,306. Kansas City metro is 1,947,694 Kansas City's density is 1,406.6 people per sq. mile. St. Louis density is 5,716.3/sq mi in the city. Metro population is 2,866,517 .

St. Louis City is technically smaller in land and population, but the density is much greater. And St. Louis is bigger overall (in population).

[kcmo]

KC and StL are about the same in the urban cores.

Once you leave the urban core of StL Downtown-CWE-Clayton and the urban core of KC Downtown-CC-Plaza, I think StL wins hands down. StL has a lot more of a suburban population. But KC's suburbs are growing much faster than those in StL and the metro is closing the population gap.

It doesn't matter about the stadiums. Our stadiums are not downtown, they are in a sparsely populated, mostly industrial area. That doesn't mean the entire city is that way.

But if you have never been to KC, I don't think you can really say much can you? I have lived in both.



[mod cut]

[northbound74]

Originally Posted by STLCardsBlues1989

St. Louis just seems more urban to me.

Also, I never really understood why Kaufmann and Arrowhead are out in the middle of nowhere. I realize you need space for tailgating in football, but a baseball stadium (in my opinion) is supposed to be urban with shops and restaurants and bars around it.

I've never been to Kansas City. Just from pictures I've seen St. Louis seems more urban. And St. Louis city limits are about 62 sq. miles. Kansas City is 313.5 sq. miles. St. Louis is 353,837 in the city and Kansas City is 447,306. Kansas City metro is 1,947,694 Kansas City's density is 1,406.6 people per sq. mile. St. Louis density is 5,716.3/sq mi in the city. Metro population is 2,866,517 .

St. Louis City is technically smaller in land and population, but the density is much greater. And St. Louis is bigger overall (in population).

If anything, the Sports Complex is very centrally located. Sure, KC, MO is mostly to the west, as is the Kansas suburbs, but there's a few hundred thousand of us that live to the east, south, and north of the stadiums.
The areas immediately around there are industrially mixed, as a result of poor, or nonexistant city planning.
I like the location. It's easy to get in and out of.
I've been to the old Busch numerous times, and had no desire to stick around downtown St. Louis after the game. I think I'd feel the same way about KC, even though I love the downtown area there.
KC is every bit as urban as St. Louis... in good ways.

[kcmo]

The stadiums are in the Blue Valley corridor. This is a large river valley that runs along the entire east side of KCMO from SKC to the MO river. I-435 on the east side basically follows this valley.

The area is mostly just industry, warehouse, junkyards, trailer parks, very rough and hilly forests and basically under utilized land. The area is very expensive to develop, most of it is flood prone and it doesn't have very good sewers and other basic infrastructure. Plus, much of the industrial areas is no longer being used like it once was.

That's why 435 is also not very developed in this area.

Look at google and you will see the mass swath of underdeveloped land that follows 435. The Little Blue River does the same thing east of Raytown and again, you will see a pretty large undeveloped corridor that goes from SKC up through Unity Village between Noland and Lee's Summit Roads up through eastern Independence.

Jackson County is divided up because of these river valleys.

Even so, there is actually more people living east of 435 in suburban Jackson County than in the city of KCMO in western Jackson County now, about 400,000 residents live outside 435.

[northbound74]

Forgot about the flood problems. That explains why there's not much development around some parts over there. Still, I'd like to see 40 hwy cleaned up. Much of it's on a hill, like the areas around the I-70 drive-in. It would be a great setting for some new stuff. Actually, 40 hwy needs lots of help regardless of what area, or even what city it's in. The only halfway decent looking part is in southeast Independence.
Also, they could do more with Blue Ridge Cut-Off.

[kcmo]

Originally Posted by northbound74

Forgot about the flood problems. That explains why there's not much development around some parts over there. Still, I'd like to see 40 hwy cleaned up. Much of it's on a hill, like the areas around the I-70 drive-in. It would be a great setting for some new stuff. Actually, 40 hwy needs lots of help regardless of what area, or even what city it's in. The only halfway decent looking part is in southeast Independence.
Also, they could do more with Blue Ridge Cut-Off.

I agree 100% with that.

40 needs to be redeveloped and I think light rail down 40 might help do the trick. The corridor has great potential, it just needs attention.

Blue Ridge Cuttoff is the same way. It needs some TLC.

MoDot is going to rebuild the Blue Ridge exit soon near the stadiums. We should at least get a nicer bridge with sidewalks, lighting and landscaping. The city of KCMO, Independence and Jackson County should work with MoDot to clean up all of Blue Ridge Cuttoff from 40 to Raytown Road. This is one area of the city that most tourists will see and it's embarrassing in its current state.

We will soon have an amazing, modern sports complex. Let's clean up the area around it.

I won't hold my breath.

[aragx6]

What Kansas City lacks that St. Louis has are livable and interesting neighborhoods in the city outside of the downtown core. St. Louis is a city of neighborhoods and they are distinct and have a vibrancy that is lacking in Kansas City's residential areas. Even KC's residential neighborhoods are car oriented, and there's not very much within walking distance to most of the nice areas with old homes and families.