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.
I think you meant "KS needs to get a major metro" — but it already has one. It just doesn't have its principal city.
Would it be more accurate to say principal municipality? Seeing as though the Kansas Cities are divided by a state border, I wouldn't be surprised if the reality is that it is more like one city split into two municipalities, not too dissimilar from Minneapolis and St. Paul perhaps...or more like Bristol TN/VA and Texarkana TX/AR given their bi-state locations also.
Would it be more accurate to say principal municipality? Seeing as though the Kansas Cities are divided by a state border, I wouldn't be surprised if the reality is that it is more like one city split into two municipalities, not too dissimilar from Minneapolis and St. Paul perhaps...or more like Bristol TN/VA and Texarkana TX/AR given their bi-state locations also.
Not quite, and you'd need to visit the city to understand why the two Kansas Cities do differ from all of the above cities.
In the case of the two smaller ones (Bristol and Texarkana), the state line is actually the main street, or the main highway into the city (from the north in Texarkana's case). In Texarkana, the main post office was sited to straddle the state line, even.
In the case of the Twin Cities, it's hard to differentiate Minneapolis from St. Paul where the two cities meet, but there are some differences that distinguish one from the other. St. Paul has the capital while Minneapolis has the university and the major sports arena, but Minneapolis has the more impressive skyline.
In Kansas City, the only place where it's hard to differentiate the two cities is in the southern KCK district of Rosedale, which is the only part of KCK where State Line Road is a street. Yes, it's also hard to tell when you've crossed from Missouri into Kansas in the West Bottoms (the Stockyards District), but most people experience that area only by crossing it on one of two road viaducts, the Lewis and Clark Viaduct and I-670. Thus there is some (perceived) spatial separation between the centers of the two cities, and the downtown of the one in Kansas is decidedly smaller and not as impressive as the one in Missouri.
Even the street numbering system differs between the two — except in Rosedale, which Kansas City, Kansas, annexed during World War II and whose addresses and naming conventions follow the metropolitan grid (numbered streets run east-west and named ones north-south, and the origin point for house numbers is Main Street at the Missouri River).. In the rest of Kansas City, Kansas, numbered streets run north-south and named ones east-west, and the origin point is what would be Central Avenue at the state line in KCK.
And this is also where some confusion arises: the OP did correctly identify Wichita as Kansas' largest city. But its principal municipality is not located in its principal urban area; that would be the Kansas side of the KC metro.
Not quite, and you'd need to visit the city to understand why the two Kansas Cities do differ from all of the above cities.
In the case of the two smaller ones (Bristol and Texarkana), the state line is actually the main street, or the main highway into the city (from the north in Texarkana's case). In Texarkana, the main post office was sited to straddle the state line, even.
In the case of the Twin Cities, it's hard to differentiate Minneapolis from St. Paul where the two cities meet, but there are some differences that distinguish one from the other. St. Paul has the capital while Minneapolis has the university and the major sports arena, but Minneapolis has the more impressive skyline.
In Kansas City, the only place where it's hard to differentiate the two cities is in the southern KCK district of Rosedale, which is the only part of KCK where State Line Road is a street. Yes, it's also hard to tell when you've crossed from Missouri into Kansas in the West Bottoms (the Stockyards District), but most people experience that area only by crossing it on one of two road viaducts, the Lewis and Clark Viaduct and I-670. Thus there is some (perceived) spatial separation between the centers of the two cities, and the downtown of the one in Kansas is decidedly smaller and not as impressive as the one in Missouri.
Even the street numbering system differs between the two — except in Rosedale, which Kansas City, Kansas, annexed during World War II and whose addresses and naming conventions follow the metropolitan grid (numbered streets run east-west and named ones north-south, and the origin point for house numbers is Main Street at the Missouri River).. In the rest of Kansas City, Kansas, numbered streets run north-south and named ones east-west, and the origin point is what would be Central Avenue at the state line in KCK.
And this is also where some confusion arises: the OP did correctly identify Wichita as Kansas' largest city. But its principal municipality is not located in its principal urban area; that would be the Kansas side of the KC metro.
I appreciate the explanation.
Random observation: both cities have weird city limits, especially KCMO.
Random observation: both cities have weird city limits, especially KCMO.
For the latter you can blame (or credit) the nearly 40-year annexation spree KCMo undertook from 1947 (when it annexed the city of Marlborough on its southern border) to the early 1980s (when it annexed territory in a fourth county, Cass), tripling its land area in the process. The annexations encircled the cities of North Kansas City and Gladstone north of the river and nearly encircled Raytown and Independence south of it. Grandview, where Harry Truman was born, is surrounded by KC on three sides.
KCK's city limits are less weird than they once were, for the city merged with Wyandotte County to form what's known as the Unified Government in 1992. However, the separate cities of Bonner Springs, Edwardsville and Lake Quivira (mostly in Johnson County) were not extinguished and continue to perform their functions, which accounts for the notches in the combined Wyandotte County/City of Kansas City, Kansas.
Just had a laugh: When I did a Google search to confirm which county Tonganoxie is in (Leavenworth), I then did a search on "Kansas City, KS" to see what the boundaries looked like. The results page read at the top "Kansas City - City in Kansas" above the now-iconic photo of Kansas City, MO, that of the downtown skyline taken from the National World War I Memorial with Union Station in the foreground.
There's really no iconic shot of KCK. This is what downtown KCK looks like from the one vantage point where you can take it all in: Lewis and Clark Point, atop Quality Hill at the northwest corner of downtown KCMo:
I-70 from Quality Hill in Kansas City by thunderoof via Wikimedia Commons, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.5
The West Bottoms is basically the floodplain around the junction of the Kansas and Missouri rivers. A bad flood in 1903 prompted both the construction of the first span of the Intercity (now Lewis & Clark) Viaduct in 1907 (the second span was added when the road formally became part of I-70 in 1963) and the relocation of the city's main train station out of the West Bottoms to the site at the south edge of the downtown where it now sits. An even worse flood inundated this district in 1951, triggering the gradual demise of both the Kansas City Stockyards and the meatpacking plants located next to it (both Armour and Swift had facilities in the West Bottoms).
Last edited by MarketStEl; 02-26-2024 at 05:59 AM..
A comparison of four states with relatively obscure primary MSA's:
Kansas: Witchita MSA (19% of state population)
Connecticut: Hartford MSA (43% of state population)
Mississippi: Jackson MSA (18% of state population)
Arkansas: Little Rock MSA (22% of state population)
Which state would lose the most status absent its primary MSA?
Mississippi doesn't have much Status to begin with, would people notice if Jackson was gone? I think Arkansas stands the most to lose without Little Rock
Mississippi would be worse off. I think without it, several services would not be available to people like medical care, education, and food deserts would persist. The others have cities that could pick up some of the weight. There are no other midsized cities for hundreds of miles without Jackson.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueRedTide
Mississippi doesn't have much Status to begin with, would people notice if Jackson was gone? I think Arkansas stands the most to lose without Little Rock
They would.
Shakeesha made a good point about services.
Are there any Level 1 trauma centers in Mississippi apart from U of Miss medical centers in Jackson?
How about airports?
If you think MS lacks status now, what would a Jackson-less MS look like?
Are there any Level 1 trauma centers in Mississippi apart from U of Miss medical centers in Jackson?
How about airports?
If you think MS lacks status now, what would a Jackson-less MS look like?
Agrarian Like Wyoming, decreased crime levels, and without the embarrassing Jackson water crisis bringing shame on the state. I Meant on a national level. Would people in California or Pennsylvania even Notice if Jackson was gone, Should have clarified. Of Course people in Mississippi would notice, You're right it does provide essential service like health centers and airport, But it doesn't bring growth or prosperity to it's state in a way or small degree Little Rock does for Arkansas, and without it Arkansas 's whole future is bound to a 400-500,000 Metro (Northwest) that's all the rage on here, But Nobody talks about in real life.
Agrarian Like Wyoming, decreased crime levels, and without the embarrassing Jackson water crisis bringing shame on the state. I Meant on a national level. Would people in California or Pennsylvania even Notice if Jackson was gone, Should have clarified. Of Course people in Mississippi would notice, You're right it does provide essential service like health centers and airport, But it doesn't bring growth or prosperity to it's state in a way or small degree Little Rock does for Arkansas, and without it Arkansas 's whole future is bound to a 400-500,000 Metro (Northwest) that's all the rage on here, But Nobody talks about in real life.
They would if they ever needed to fly to Mississippi.
I flew from San Diego to Chicago a few months ago and it was an expensive, delay-ridden debacle.
I wonder what flying into Gulfport or Hattiesburg would be like?
What I think people are missing here are two things...
1) The cities that are state capitals carry more importance.
2) Cities that have a service area that expands far beyond their MSA.
Three of these towns are state capitals. (all but Wichita).
Three of these towns have extensive service areas (All but Hartford)
One person on here says that he "hardly thinks of Wichita" when he thinks of Kansas. But living not far from there... for a large chunk of Kansas... Wichita IS the main city in Kansas. Just as Little Rock and Jackson are in their respective states.
This despite the large populations stuck in the corners of their states.
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.
