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.
Atlanta is is just okay to me. It may have a large metro population, massive freeways with lots of traffic and tall buildings, but other than that, I just don't get the hype. I find the city to be rather underwhelming and more annoying than anything for its size. I mean, you put up with a LOT of really bad traffic, sprawl, etc and you really don't get a lot in return compared to other large cities.
I personally think smaller cities like Denver and Minneapolis are much better than Atlanta as far as quality of life, amenities etc and KC+StL would be similar.
Atlanta is is just okay to me. It may have a large metro population, massive freeways with lots of traffic and tall buildings, but other than that, I just don't get the hype. I find the city to be rather underwhelming and more annoying than anything for its size. I mean, you put up with a LOT of really bad traffic, sprawl, etc and you really don't get a lot in return compared to other large cities.
I personally think smaller cities like Denver and Minneapolis are much better than Atlanta as far as quality of life, amenities etc and KC+StL would be similar.
That's my opinion anyway.
I’m curious about your “you really don’t get a lot of return compared to other large cities” statement.
Atlanta compared to other metro areas offers a lot of amenities considering the still relatively low living costs. Access to a world class airport, many higher education options including several highly respected institutions (GT, Emory, Spelman, Morehouse), 4 major league sports teams, several NCAA Div I athletics programs, some great neighborhoods with good restaurants and nightlife, beautiful city parks and green space, quality secondary entertainment venues (Cobb Energy Center and Infinate Energy Arena in Gwinnett), Six Flags Parks (including the water parks), top rated medical systems (Emory, Norhside, Piedmont, Children’s), extensive corporate base (UPS, Home Depot, Chick Fil A, Delta.. many others), massive federal presence with CDC, vibrant & fast growing ethnic communities, extensive freeway system, heavy rail with direct link to the airport. Soo much more.. Oh, you’re also a day trip away via car to great beaches (Ga, SC coasts & Florida) and some pretty awesome mountain scenery in the Appalachians.
Hey, obviously Atlanta ain’t your thing and isn’t for everyone, but let’s not be disingenuous under the guise of “opinion”.
I’m curious about your “you really don’t get a lot of return compared to other large cities” statement.
Atlanta compared to other metro areas offers a lot of amenities considering the still relatively low living costs. Access to a world class airport, many higher education options including several highly respected institutions (GT, Emory, Spelman, Morehouse), 4 major league sports teams, several NCAA Div I athletics programs, some great neighborhoods with good restaurants and nightlife, beautiful city parks and green space, quality secondary entertainment venues (Cobb Energy Center and Infinate Energy Arena in Gwinnett), Six Flags Parks (including the water parks), top rated medical systems (Emory, Norhside, Piedmont, Children’s), extensive corporate base (UPS, Home Depot, Chick Fil A, Delta.. many others), massive federal presence with CDC, vibrant & fast growing ethnic communities, extensive freeway system, heavy rail with direct link to the airport. Soo much more.. Oh, you’re also a day trip away via car to great beaches (Ga, SC coasts & Florida) and some pretty awesome mountain scenery in the Appalachians.
Hey, obviously Atlanta ain’t your thing and isn’t for everyone, but let’s not be disingenuous under the guise of “opinion”.
What does St Louis and Kansas City have in response to this? It's okay if you don't know.
St Louis has Six Flags and Kansas City has Worlds of Fun.
St Louis has a better freeway system and a decent grid. So does Kansas City. Both have better traffic flow.
St Louis also has secondary concert venues like Chefiets arena and St. Charles family arena. I am sure Kansas City does too.
St Louis has a decent LRT system that is just as extensive (over 40 miles) as Martas heavy rail. And yes it does go to the airport.
I don't have time to go on but all are great places. They all offer a great value for what you get.
Regarding traffic flow, I recall some study of commuting delays (how much longer it takes one to complete a trip at rush hour vs. the rest of the day) that found that Kansas City has the lowest traffic congestion of any city in the Western Hemisphere. This may account for the relative lack of interest among Kansas Citians living outside the city's most heavily urbanized corridor in a rail transit system.
KC's chief arena-concert venues are the Sprint Center downtown and some amphitheater out in western Kansas City, Kan.
The city has no hospitals in Barnes-Jewish's league, but the University of Kansas Hospital is one of the better regional hospitals in the country.
You forgot: High Museum of Art | St. Louis Museum of Art | Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art. There are some out there who would contend that the last of these three is the best, but all are outstanding institutions.
I think I agree that the three cities are closer to one another than those claiming Atlanta blows both of the others out of the water think. But the lack of a decent metropolitan rail transit system I do consider a strike against my forever hometown - and it's one of the main reasons I haven't moved back there.
I’m curious about your “you really don’t get a lot of return compared to other large cities” statement.
Atlanta compared to other metro areas offers a lot of amenities considering the still relatively low living costs. Access to a world class airport, many higher education options including several highly respected institutions (GT, Emory, Spelman, Morehouse), 4 major league sports teams, several NCAA Div I athletics programs, some great neighborhoods with good restaurants and nightlife, beautiful city parks and green space, quality secondary entertainment venues (Cobb Energy Center and Infinate Energy Arena in Gwinnett), Six Flags Parks (including the water parks), top rated medical systems (Emory, Norhside, Piedmont, Children’s), extensive corporate base (UPS, Home Depot, Chick Fil A, Delta.. many others), massive federal presence with CDC, vibrant & fast growing ethnic communities, extensive freeway system, heavy rail with direct link to the airport. Soo much more.. Oh, you’re also a day trip away via car to great beaches (Ga, SC coasts & Florida) and some pretty awesome mountain scenery in the Appalachians.
Hey, obviously Atlanta ain’t your thing and isn’t for everyone, but let’s not be disingenuous under the guise of “opinion”.
First off, lets' talk quality of life. Your traffic SUCKS. When people here in freaking DC go to Atlanta for business, they come back to DC and are happy to get away from your traffic.
In KC and StL delays during peak hours are rarely more than 10-15 minutes. And people don't drive nearly as far in KC and StL and many do in metro Atlanta. You had to move your freaking baseball stadium to the suburbs because people don't want to drive an hour in heavy traffic to get to a game. (although now it really sucks for those in the south metro and downtown areas). May as well call them the Cobb County Braves.
Who cares how many companies a city has unless you work for them all.
As far as amenities, how does Atlanta offer more than both KC and StL combined?
You mentioned Six Flags. You don't think Worlds of Fun plus Six Flags StL is probably greater? KC has two major water parks and StL has one.
You act like KC and StL don't have concert venues. KC alone has many, including Sprint Center (one of bu busiest concert arenas in the country), but KC also has Starlight, Cricket Wireless Amphitheater, a suburban arena etc. You double that with StL and come on.
ATL has four pro teams. KC+STL have five. (should be more but StL is down to two teams). KC and StL both have very good zoos, museums, performing arts venues etc.
ATL has a world airport, heavy rail, a booming economy etc. So it does win in some areas, but KC and StL can almost hold their own alone against Atlanta when it comes to day to day living and quality of life and basic amenities. If you were to combine the two cities, you would easily exceed Atlanta in many areas.
So that's all I'm saying. If I want to deal with the inconveniences of a city of over 4 million, I'm going to choose a city that gives me more a lot more than what Atlanta offers. Personally I would much rather use transit in Denver or MSP or Seattle than Atlanta, the metros have less traffic, it's easier to get around them, they have just as many, if not more attractions and things to do.
I like Atlanta, I just think people are being silly thinking it's a world class city. Economically, sure, but outside of that, the city is more of a peer to cities much smaller IMO.
First off, lets' talk quality of life. Your traffic SUCKS. When people here in freaking DC go to Atlanta for business, they come back to DC and are happy to get away from your traffic.
Having lived in Fairfax County and negotiating I-66 every day, I stopped reading right there.
Kansas City is a nice size town with a ton of stuff to do, a good economy, and is easy to live in and afford.
St. Louis isn't my thing, but it holds its own against bigger peers.
Like has been stated by others, if I wanted to bump it up to a bigger city, there are better options than Atlanta.
For that, I vote for the Missouri cities.
I don't have time to go on but all are great places. They all offer a great value for what you get.
I think at the end of the day, St Louis city is has some nice neighborhoods, a decent downtown, and has some solid companies located there, but is a fading/declining city with some really amazing suburbs; while Kansas City is a mid-sized nice, slowly gentrifying city that is moderately growing.
Both cities have nice cultural options, with some decent shopping and great pro sports teams.
However, Atlanta is a world class major metro area of 6 million and booming, and just in an entirely different league than either of these two cities--separate or combined.
Back in the 1930s/40s/50s, St Louis was a booming "Atlanta" type of city. However, time has not been too kind to the city of St Louis, and the population has drastically plunged. Even though it boasts some major companies, amazing cultural institutions and has a decent metro of 2.8 million, it's heyday of being a world class city is in the past, unfortunately. While I like the city and a lot of its offerings, it's too rough around the edges these days to compare fairly to a city like Atlanta.
Having lived in Fairfax County and negotiating I-66 every day, I stopped reading right there.
If you note his residence, you will find that kcmo is, like me, an expat Kansas Citian.
You will also find that, unlike me, he is a Washingtonian.
His statemtent was meant to underscore just how awful Atlanta traffic is. If DC traffic is a source of relief, then Atlanta's has to be hell on earth.
Having wound up in a ginormous traffic jam on I-95 headed towards Richmond from the Beltway one Saturday afternoon, I've had some firsthand experience with Washington-area traffic. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.
Ergo, Atlanta must be the seventh circle of Hell, and Washington merely the entry level.
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.
