Restaurants that best represent St. Louis (Kirkwood, Webster Groves: appointed, rentals, homes)

[scocar]

Originally Posted by aragx6

Kirkwood and Webster Groves do have walkable downtowns, but I'd be disinclined to call them inner-ring suburbs and they're neither particularly urban. Clayton and U City are totally different stories however and certainly worth exploration.

I would agree with that assessment. But they are referred to as inner-ring suburbs based on their proximity to the city. If someone is looking for urban in terms of "feel" then Clayton and U-City both give that to a much greater degree. As a matter of fact I think U-City around the loop has a much greater urban feel than some of the neighborhoods in south city.

[aragx6]

WG and K-Wood are outside of the inner belt (or rather where that line would be if 170 continued to 44) and I'd bet that the vast majority of St. Louis wouldn't call either inner ring. They're clearly not exurbs either like St. Peters or Wildwood or Arnold. But I've personally always said that only WG or K-Wood could bring me out of the inner ring. By whom do you hear them considered inner ring?

[scocar]

Originally Posted by aragx6

WG and K-Wood are outside of the inner belt (or rather where that line would be if 170 continued to 44) and I'd bet that the vast majority of St. Louis wouldn't call either inner ring. They're clearly not exurbs either like St. Peters or Wildwood or Arnold. But I've personally always said that only WG or K-Wood could bring me out of the inner ring. By whom do you hear them considered inner ring?

I've included the first paragraph of Webster Groves wikipedia page. Now I know that wikipedia is not always right, but much of their information is taken directly from other sites that summarize that content.

"Webster Groves is an inner-ring suburb of St. Louis, located in St. Louis County, Missouri, United States. The population was 22,995 at the 2010 census.[3] The city is named after New England politician Daniel Webster."

[mike0421]

For what it is worth, I too would consider Webster Groves to be an inner ring suburb. Kirkwood, not quite as much. There seems to be a thin veneer in this range where you cross over into the clear outer ring or exurbs such as Fenton, Chesterfield and the like.

[Dawn10am]

I consider the inner-ring suburbs to be Clayton, U-City, Brentwood, Maplewood, and Richmond Heights. These are pretty much as urban as the City itself, especially Clayton and U-City. After those are the second-ring burbs that are inside the 270 loop (including Webster and Kirkwood). Beyond that are the third-ring or exurbs that are outside the 270 loop and St. Charles County.

[stlcitygirl]

^Thats pretty how much I see it as well. I can see why people would consider WG and Kirkwood inner ring, but not quite for me. However, I really love both those communities and could see myself living there someday.

[Dawn10am]

Getting back to the original question, however, if you want good restaurants you don't have to even leave the City. If you do, there's no need or reason to go outside the inner ring.

[scocar]

Originally Posted by aragx6

WG and K-Wood are outside of the inner belt (or rather where that line would be if 170 continued to 44) and I'd bet that the vast majority of St. Louis wouldn't call either inner ring. They're clearly not exurbs either like St. Peters or Wildwood or Arnold. But I've personally always said that only WG or K-Wood could bring me out of the inner ring. By whom do you hear them considered inner ring?

If you took the inner belt straight down to the 44 it would cut through a decent portion of Webster Groves I believe. I don't have exact coordinates, and the streets here wind incredibly, but Brentwood Avenue continues south only about a block west of the 170 and it bisects Old Webster. Now a good portion of Webster Groves exists south of the 44 as well. I think it is referred to as inner-ring because in part there is either nothing or a very small, lightly populated suburb between Webster and the city.

[scocar]

Originally Posted by Dawn10am

Getting back to the original question, however, if you want good restaurants you don't have to even leave the City. If you do, there's no need or reason to go outside the inner ring.

That is definitely true. We usually head into the city to eat.

When the OP posted initially I thought it was her first post. In it she indicated that she would be moving here and was coming for a visit. That is why I brought up the uniqueness that is STL. I know that when I moved back in August I wanted out of the suburban environment I had lived in for years in Arizona. I thought I had to move to the city to get that. There are no older, "inner-ring" suburbs of Phoenix. All of the Phoenix suburbs are massive and have new home developments and shopping malls all over the place. So, not knowing where she was coming from I felt that giving her insight on the sort "next best thing to the city" for some sense of urban living was appropriate.

[Dawn10am]

Yeah, I think it's great that St. Louis has old, tree-lined suburbs with historic homes. Kirkwood and WG look like something straight out of a Norman Rockwell painting.