Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just to quickly play referee. I don't know the answer, but....
Kansas has larger counties. That is why their MSA is over twice the size in land area than Charlotte. That is why their MSA is not very dense and it is also why MSA is not a very good geographic level for density comparisons.
A better place to start would be the urban area. Even that might have some problems... but far fewer.
I agree with you. But the claim was that Kansa City is more dense than Charlotte, both city and metro. This is the claim that I was challenging. But KC definitely has a more dense urban area and downtown.
urban kcmo and metro kc sure seems more dense to me than Charlotte. You can throw those msa and city density stats out the window because they don't reflect KC's true density. I've explained why a million times, but KC's urbanized population and the vast majority of the MSA population converges in a relatively small area where the five core counties meet. The rest of the MSA and the outer portions of the five core counties adds very little population and a whole lot of square miles.
2010 urbanized area and like I said, KC sure feels more dense (central city and metro)
Kansas City, MO--KS 1519417
Charlotte, NC--SC 1249442
I guess Charlotte has a lot more people in all those surrounding rural counties and it adds up to a huge MSA. The KC counties outside the five core counites have very small populations expcept Lawrence and St Joseph
urban kcmo and metro kc sure seems more dense to me than Charlotte. You can throw those msa and city density stats out the window because they don't reflect KC's true density. I've explained why a million times, but KC's urbanized population and the vast majority of the MSA population converges in a relatively small area where the five core counties meet. The rest of the MSA and the outer portions of the five core counties adds very little population and a whole lot of square miles.
Well you can throw them out the window if you want but the facts are the facts. Kansas City had a more dense urban core and a larger urban core. Charlotte, as a city, is more dense than Kansas City and it's MSA is more dense than Kansas City. You have explained what's going on before but the fact still is, Charlotte packs more people in a smaller area than the larger urban core and larger urban area of Kansas City. So I guess those rural counties are more dense than the urban core counties of Kansas City.
2010 urbanized area and like I said, KC sure feels more dense (central city and metro)
Kansas City, MO--KS 1519417
Charlotte, NC--SC 1249442
I guess Charlotte has a lot more people in all those surrounding rural counties and it adds up to a huge MSA. The KC counties outside the five core counites have very small populations expcept Lawrence and St Joseph
Pretty much. Concord's urbanized area of 215K is contiguous to Charlotte's but not counted in Charlotte's UA.
Pretty much. Concord's urbanized area of 215K is contiguous to Charlotte's but not counted in Charlotte's UA.
Well now that's interesting. Charlotte has contiguous development with a "rural"county that if it were actually combined, would just about equal the far superior and more dense Kansas City. Maybe Kansas City has a bit of rural character as well or maybe Charlotte is not as rural as expected.
Well you can throw them out the window if you want but the facts are the facts. Kansas City had a more dense urban core and a larger urban core. Charlotte, as a city, is more dense than Kansas City and it's MSA is more dense than Kansas City. You have explained what's going on before but the fact still is, Charlotte packs more people in a smaller area than the larger urban core and larger urban area of Kansas City. So I guess those rural counties are more dense than the urban core counties of Kansas City.
Dude, I just tell it like it is. If the stats were twisted for Charlotte, I would bet you would be saying the same thing.
I will be the first to point out KC's flaws, but the "reality" is that KC has a more dense and more populated urbanized area while Charlotte has more people in its region.
You probably think Wichita is bigger than St Louis too don't you.
Dude, I just tell it like it is. If the stats were twisted for Charlotte, I would bet you would be saying the same thing.
I will be the first to point out KC's flaws, but the "reality" is that KC has a more dense and more populated urbanized area while Charlotte has more people in its region.
You probably think Wichita is bigger than St Louis too don't you.
How did you guess? But for real, going by the facts Charlotte is larger while Kansas City is more urban feeling. If I was to make an excuse for Charlotte's smaller urban area I could refer to the map that Mutiny 77 brought up as proof that Charlotte is more urbanized than the stats show (which would be a valid argument) but the facts are the facts. Even though Charlotte has contiguous development with its satellite cities the fact remains they are separate urbanized areas. And the Anne goes for your point. Even though the population lives in close proximity within a county and near each other, the large county sizes hurt KC. Charlotte MSA packs more people than KC MSA. That is also a fact.
We really don't have too much of disagreement because I will also point out Charlotte's flaws. But I try to stock to the facts. You're a very well traveled and knowledgeable poster, I'm not sure why these facts are hard.
And everyone knows Wichita is larger than St. Louis.
Lol.
2010 urbanized area and like I said, KC sure feels more dense (central city and metro)
Kansas City, MO--KS 1519417
Charlotte, NC--SC 1249442
I guess Charlotte has a lot more people in all those surrounding rural counties and it adds up to a huge MSA. The KC counties outside the five core counites have very small populations expcept Lawrence and St Joseph
What about the other 3 UAs that border UA Charlotte? All 4 combined are close to 1.8 million.
How did you guess? But for real, going by the facts Charlotte is larger while Kansas City is more urban feeling. If I was to make an excuse for Charlotte's smaller urban area I could refer to the map that Mutiny 77 brought up as proof that Charlotte is more urbanized than the stats show (which would be a valid argument) but the facts are the facts. Even though Charlotte has contiguous development with its satellite cities the fact remains they are separate urbanized areas. And the Anne goes for your point. Even though the population lives in close proximity within a county and near each other, the large county sizes hurt KC. Charlotte MSA packs more people than KC MSA. That is also a fact.
We really don't have too much of disagreement because I will also point out Charlotte's flaws. But I try to stock to the facts. You're a very well traveled and knowledgeable poster, I'm not sure why these facts are hard.
And everyone knows Wichita is larger than St. Louis.
Lol.
Well, I would agree with this post. I forgot what we were arguing about .
Bottom line is your quote:
"But for real, going by the facts Charlotte is larger while Kansas City is more urban feeling"
I think we are both saying the same thing. The cities are pretty similar in size overall. Charlotte has more people in the region, but they both have a similar amount of people when you factor in Lawrence etc.
I honestly don’t know anything about the bordering urbanized areas, just like it’s very difficult for people to comprehend KCMO’s very low density stats. KCMO is an average density city and more dense than Charlotte, regardless of the stats. When I’m in Charlotte, I’m in the city and the immediate suburbs. The main metro area.
All I have ever said was that KC has more people (or really, about the same) in that main urbanized area, but the bigger difference is KC feels more built up and dense than Charlotte, especially in the urban core, but also in many suburban areas.
As far as the region. Move Lawrence ten miles closer and you have essentially the same thing as Charlotte. Right now there is a gap between them.
I have already stated my observation. I just think that NC is overall a more populated state around Charlotte than KS and MO are around KC. You either live in the urbanized portion of KC or you don’t. Very few people live in ten of the 15 counties in the KC MSA.
That is proven by how quickly Charlotte’s MSA and CSA increases in size compared to the Charlotte urbanized area.
But when visited cities, you generally “feel” how the urbanized area is, not how the area is within 40-50 miles of the city center.
Charlotte is a nice city and similar in size to KC, it's just a newer city while KC is more established. They are different, yet similar and I personally like them both.
Charlotte continues to build skyscrapers in the central city. Metro KC continues to poach business back and forth across state line from one suburban office park to another. Charlotte will continue to pull away from KC so long as metro KC continues to fight among itself and subsidize sprawl rather than attempt to complete wth fast growing urban areas like Charlotte.
Hope I’m making sense.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
