Does St. Louis, Missouri feel like a big city to you? (Kansas City: real estate, neighborhoods)

[Seahawksfan33]

As much as it pains me to admit it, this city holds up well for a city that has been rapidly shrinking. I'm stuck here nonetheless since it's the only city that I can afford to live in, so I guess that I'll have to learn to like it somehow.

[FrankMiller]

I would say no, but it's hard to say because big/small city isn't truly a binary condition. It's big compared to smaller cities, but small compared to bigger cities. There's less to do than in Chicago, more to do than in Perryville.

[julsstlouis]

Depends....are we talking big in terms of population or big in terms of land area? The city is on apx. 62 square miles with 320,000 people. San Francisco is smaller; 47 square miles but you have 740,000 people stacked on top of each other. So smaller land area, yet it's considered a big city because of the population, not the city limits.

But with any city, what makes it "look big" is the metro area. Take Atlanta.....only apx. 500,000 people in the actual city but it looks bigger than it is because of the metro area which is about to hit at 6 million. I think St. Louis "city" actually "looks" bigger than it is. I know several New Yorkers who come here, particularly the Central West End and compare it to Brooklyn or the upper west side of Manhattan because it has a city feel for sure. But the metro area ranks #20 in size nationwide compared to other metropolitan areas which makes it big.

[RisingAurvandil]

We have multiple skylines (Downtown, Midtown, CWE, Clayton), a metro rail system, several 8-10 lane freeways, nationally ranked universities and institutions, and countless distinct neighborhoods. We still have a few ethnic enclaves, which are a hallmark of large cities.

This isn't Chicago or New York, but it's not a small city either. This is the dominant metro in Missouri. There are 3 million in the metro area, and the "city" extends well beyond city limits. Driving highway 40 (I-64) from Illinois to Chesterfield confirms this.

[mjtinmemphis]

Originally Posted by Seahawksfan33

As much as it pains me to admit it, this city holds up well for a city that has been rapidly shrinking. I'm stuck here nonetheless since it's the only city that I can afford to live in, so I guess that I'll have to learn to like it somehow.

When I have friends in town for the first time, they are either surprised at how laid back and clean St. Louis is or how big it is. Unless I take them into north St. Louis, they don't think of it as a shrinking city. If I do, they just think of it as "the bad side of town". Most of the "bad St. Louis" talk comes from people who never lived here or suburbanites who feel the need to bash the city for self esteem reasons.

St. Louis is barely big enough to be what you want it to be. The city has lost a lot of its population due to sprawl not because it is such a bad place. Metro St Louis hasn't seen drastic population loss like Detroit.

[goat314]

Originally Posted by mjtinmemphis

When I have friends in town for the first time, they are either surprised at how laid back and clean St. Louis is or how big it is. Unless I take them into north St. Louis, they don't think of it as a shrinking city. If I do, they just think of it as "the bad side of town". Most of the "bad St. Louis" talk comes from people who never lived here or suburbanites who feel the need to bash the city for self esteem reasons.

St. Louis is barely big enough to be what you want it to be. The city has lost a lot of its population due to sprawl not because it is such a bad place. Metro St Louis hasn't seen drastic population loss like Detroit.

I would agree. Most of the people I have brought to STL for the first time are really surprised with the size (some people really think St. Louis is the country "thanks Nelly") but I've found people even more impressed with the urbanity and architecture. Most people really don't perceive St. Louis as an urban city and are really expecting Indianapolis or Nashville with an Arch (again thanks Nelly), but end up leaving the city with a totally different perception (good or bad).

With that said, I think St. Louis is about as small as a big region could be. So yes, I do consider St. Louis a major city, but really on the smaller side. It's age, history, and built environment actually make it appear much grander than it actually is. Having Metrolink (which is essentially a smallish heavy rail system) also puts it on a different level than say KC, Indy, and Cincinnati in my opinion. I think the region needs about 1 million more people to really fill out and have the big city vibrancy.

[chicagobear]

Originally Posted by goat314

I would agree. Most of the people I have brought to STL for the first time are really surprised with the size (some people really think St. Louis is the country "thanks Nelly") but I've found people even more impressed with the urbanity and architecture. Most people really don't perceive St. Louis as an urban city and are really expecting Indianapolis or Nashville with an Arch (again thanks Nelly), but end up leaving the city with a totally different perception (good or bad).

With that said, I think St. Louis is about as small as a big region could be. So yes, I do consider St. Louis a major city, but really on the smaller side. It's age, history, and built environment actually make it appear much grander than it actually is. Having Metrolink (which is essentially a smallish heavy rail system) also puts it on a different level than say KC, Indy, and Cincinnati in my opinion. I think the region needs about 1 million more people to really fill out and have the big city vibrancy.

I grew up in St. Louis and visit often, and certainly wish it well, but the worst part is that downtown is so small for a metro area of almost 3 million people. Denver is about the same size and its downtown is practically in a different solar system from St. Louis's. Pittsburgh and Cincinnati are smaller metro areas but have much bigger and nicer downtowns.

[FrankMiller]

Originally Posted by chicagobear

I grew up in St. Louis and visit often, and certainly wish it well, but the worst part is that downtown is so small for a metro area of almost 3 million people. Denver is about the same size and its downtown is practically in a different solar system from St. Louis's. Pittsburgh and Cincinnati are smaller metro areas but have much bigger and nicer downtowns.

If it helps, most suburbanites around here call everything east of I-170 "downtown", which makes our downtown one of the largest.

[MUTGR]

Originally Posted by Seahawksfan33

As much as it pains me to admit it, this city holds up well for a city that has been rapidly shrinking. I'm stuck here nonetheless since it's the only city that I can afford to live in, so I guess that I'll have to learn to like it somehow.

I hate to break this to you, but there are cheaper cities than St. Louis.

Real estate is generally cheaper in the Kansas City metro, for example.

[1grin_g0]

St. Louis feels like what it is, a stagnant and established city rich in history. If you spend a little time at the airport or in "rush hour" traffic it doesn't take very long to realize that its a small town.