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.
St. Louis is about twice the size of Milwaukee (metro), so there’s a start. Not to mention the historic rivalry between STL and Chicago that defined the trajectories of both cities dating back to the 1860s, and i don’t mean Cubs vs. Cards. The interrelations between the two run long and deep.
I think maybe that has changed. More interrelations with Milwaukee than St. Louis. Milwaukee would be bigger, but Chicago has swallowed up some of its MSA. At any rate, it's continuous development between the two cities. I only interjected with Milwaukee, as I don't get the St. Louis correlation, at all.
No, it hasn't, unless you're referring to the city's square miles. Since 1960 the footprint of Memphis has more than doubled (240%) while its population has grown by only 31%. And since the state made it illegal for cities to annex areas without the residents' permission, the population of Memphis has been in decline. A population growth of 31% over 60 years is not "considerable" growth, even if it were without massive annexation.
While St Louis does have more urban decay than Memphis--much of that because Memphis has bulldozed thousands of abandoned homes--it's hard to overlook the fact that the tallest building in Memphis and the 5th tallest building in Memphis are completely vacant.
The population of Memphis city limits has still increased, even if it has increased via annexation. I know that is a way a city "cheats," but hey, it is a common practice.
The absolute level of inner city devastation in Memphis is not at the same level of inner city devastation in St Louis. Both cities have their crime, poverty and issues, yes, but large areas in St Louis have been destroyed by major population decline.
A city does not see nearly 560,000 people move away over 50 years + and not have tons of destroyed neighborhoods, vacant buildings and derelict 'hoods. St Louis is in a bad way like that.
Yep, Memphis has a couple of big looming vacant buildings downtown. Lots of cities do, unfortunately--that is why every city in the US these similar sizes do not have tons of skyscrapers being constructed downtown--high vacancy rates.
I have read that Memphis' downtown beauty, the vacant "Sterick Building" has a different land lease holder and building lease holder, complicating the sale. But I think both expire in the mid 2020s, freeing up a future sale.
Sadly, St Louis has their 2nd tallest and largest downtown 44 story tower currently sitting completely vacant, the AT&T Tower:
I was just reminiscing about past trips to St Louis and the new Attractions the city added...St Louis is pretty cool when you think about it. The Arch, Union Station, St Louis Wheel, Busch Stadium, St Louis Aquarium, Forest Park, City Museum, St Louis Zoo, the Metrolink Subway, Six Flags
I just wished St Louis had a more Active Downtown, And didn't make that Stupid City County split decision, And Although Parts of St Louis look like the Iraqi Air Force flew over and did missions, The City has Great Urban bones...I may change my vote to in the middle
but I still say Memphis feels more vibrant and energetic
Last edited by BlueRedTide; 05-13-2020 at 12:07 AM..
I think maybe that has changed. More interrelations with Milwaukee than St. Louis. Milwaukee would be bigger, but Chicago has swallowed up some of its MSA. At any rate, it's continuous development between the two cities. I only interjected with Milwaukee, as I don't get the St. Louis correlation, at all.
You mean other than St. Louis being the subject of this suspect thread? As someone who knows and has lived in both Chicago and St. Louis, I can compare a million things between the two (and they've been compared a lot due to their mentioned intertwined histories) so people here sure need help with the meaning of the word compare...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelsealate
Memphis. Come on now. St. Louis is no longer a top 20 American city.
Seems like it's exactly number 20 right now, so yeah, I guess it still is
You mean other than St. Louis being the subject of this suspect thread? As someone who knows and has lived in both Chicago and St. Louis, I can compare a million things between the two (and they've been compared a lot due to their mentioned intertwined histories) so people here sure need help with the meaning of the word compare...
Seems like it's exactly number 20 right now, so yeah, I guess it still is
I've lived in Chicago, been to St. Louis, and I don't see much in one, that reminds me of the other...at all. I think the OP is comparing in the present, as mention is not made of "histories."
The population of Memphis city limits has still increased, even if it has increased via annexation. I know that is a way a city "cheats," but hey, it is a common practice.
The absolute level of inner city devastation in Memphis is not at the same level of inner city devastation in St Louis. Both cities have their crime, poverty and issues, yes, but large areas in St Louis have been destroyed by major population decline.
A city does not see nearly 560,000 people move away over 50 years + and not have tons of destroyed neighborhoods, vacant buildings and derelict 'hoods. St Louis is in a bad way like that.
Yep, Memphis has a couple of big looming vacant buildings downtown. Lots of cities do, unfortunately--that is why every city in the US these similar sizes do not have tons of skyscrapers being constructed downtown--high vacancy rates.
I have read that Memphis' downtown beauty, the vacant "Sterick Building" has a different land lease holder and building lease holder, complicating the sale. But I think both expire in the mid 2020s, freeing up a future sale.
Sadly, St Louis has their 2nd tallest and largest downtown 44 story tower currently sitting completely vacant, the AT&T Tower:
I love how you're like, "yeah, what I said was super misleading, but so what!"
I'll shed some more light on other numbers you're throwing about since context still is important to some of us... Generally speaking, the majority of those people that "moved away" from the tiny land area that is the limits of St. Louis city (which cannot annex and I bet you knew that) went right next door to St. Louis County. The St. Louis MSA always continued to grow. Also, because of its age and legacy of one of the largest cities in the country for most of US history, St. Louis was built pretty dense and has absorbed population loss in a variety of ways. It certainly does have large tracts of abandonment in certain areas, but it has way, way more where that structural density is still intact. 4-Families being converted to 2-Families, 2-Families converted to SFH, etc. show population loss, but buildings are intact and occupied. Like a lot of US cities, St. Louis was also hit pretty hard (from an urban lovers' perspective, it's great for the average car loving American) by the birth of interstates and lost whole neighborhoods to them in some cases. The point being, population loss likes to get thrown around a lot to make it seem like 2/3rds of the city is empty, when way more than the exact opposite is true.
I've lived in Chicago, been to St. Louis, and I don't see much in one, that reminds me of the other...at all. I think the OP is comparing in the present, as mention is not made of "histories."
People are saying they can't be compared in a thread that is literally comparing them on something... Hmmm...
You can't draw any comparisons on any of these subjects from the OP?
Last edited by Caesarstl; 05-13-2020 at 08:51 AM..
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.
Generally speaking, the majority of those people that "moved away" from the tiny land area that is the limits of St. Louis city (which cannot annex and I bet you knew that) went right next door to St. Louis County. The St. Louis MSA always continued to grow. Also, because of its age and legacy of one of the largest cities in the country for most of US history, St. Louis was built pretty dense and has absorbed population loss in a variety of ways. It certainly does have large tracts of abandonment in certain areas, but it has way, way more where that structural density is still intact. 4-Families being converted to 2-Families, 2-Families converted to SFH, etc. show population loss, but buildings are intact and occupied. Like a lot of US cities, St. Louis was also hit pretty hard (from an urban lovers' perspective, it's great for the average car loving American) by the birth of interstates and lost whole neighborhoods to them in some cases. The point being, population loss likes to get thrown around a lot to make it seem like 2/3rds of the city is empty, when way more than the exact opposite is true.
