St Louis vs Kansas City (St. Louis, Pacific: lofts, universities, quality of life)

[aragx6]

I guarantee you if you had to drive from Blue Springs down to southern Overland Park everyday you'd think Kansas City had pretty terrible commutes, or if you had to go through that -- sorry what do they call it? the Grandview triangle? That is real rough at rush hour.

Unless your St. Louis commute involves 270 (which is what you experienced) or 70 out between O'Fallon and St. Peters, traffic in St. Louis is generally amazingly calm.

Now I live in Chicago and it makes both cities look easy as pie! My point was that both cities have comparable commutes and both are below the national average as far as commute time goes.

[skrazzle]

Originally Posted by aragx6

I guarantee you if you had to drive from Blue Springs down to southern Overland Park everyday you'd think Kansas City had pretty terrible commutes, or if you had to go through that -- sorry what do they call it? the Grandview triangle? That is real rough at rush hour.

Unless your St. Louis commute involves 270 (which is what you experienced) or 70 out between O'Fallon and St. Peters, traffic in St. Louis is generally amazingly calm.

Now I live in Chicago and it makes both cities look easy as pie! My point was that both cities have comparable commutes and both are below the national average as far as commute time goes.

I used to live in Liberty and work in Gardner... that was a horrible commute.. but it had everything to do with distance.

435 isn't bad anymore since they are done with most of the road work, I70 still sucks pretty bad during rush hour.

[JackieB23]

Originally Posted by aragx6

I guarantee you if you had to drive from Blue Springs down to southern Overland Park everyday you'd think Kansas City had pretty terrible commutes, or if you had to go through that -- sorry what do they call it? the Grandview triangle? That is real rough at rush hour.

Unless your St. Louis commute involves 270 (which is what you experienced) or 70 out between O'Fallon and St. Peters, traffic in St. Louis is generally amazingly calm.

Now I live in Chicago and it makes both cities look easy as pie! My point was that both cities have comparable commutes and both are below the national average as far as commute time goes.

Depending on the time of day, 64 (I call it 40 still, but you know which interstate I mean) can be hell on *earth* for traffic, partly because some part of it is always under construction. 44 has its bad spots (that's the route we took from where we lived in Jeffco, as 270 was far worse than 44 - 44 to Kingshighway, and north from there), also 170/40 interchange can be really bad, I-55 coming up from Arnold can be a bear, and I've sat for a *long* time trying to get across the St. Charles Bridge on I-70 and on other occasions, I-64 bridge into St. Charles in the PM rush (as I was driving through STL from Memphis to KC).

But 270 is usually the worst, but it's a hard road to avoid if you are going north/south through the county.

Except for an extraordinary circumstance such as an accident - I've driven from OP to downtown KC at 8 am along I-35, I've crossed from the north across the Broadway, Burlington St., Heart of America, Cheauteau Trafficway and I-435 bridges in morning and afternoon rush, I've gone from downtown to Blue Springs on I-70 in the afternoon rush, and NONE of them were ever really bad compared to what I experienced daily in STL. They weren't fun, but they weren't horrible, either.

I have NOT attempted the Grandview Triangle in rush hour, so perhaps that's the worst spot in the city (at least, listening to the daily commute reports on the radio, it always seemed to be). But that's one spot, vs. a lot of spots in STL (if anybody's had to do the Illinois side to the Missouri side in rush... what's that like?)

Agreed that both cities are not bad for commutes, especially when you consider Chicago (or try Washington DC - traffic jams at 9pm at night).

However KC interstates take a little getting used to compared to STL - the I-29/I-35 join up and split thing and the loop around downtown confused the hell out of me for the first 6 months I lived there. Trying to explain it to somebody from out of town was always an interesting experience.

Here's something that will amuse you - I have recently relocated to Las Vegas from Memphis (man, I've lived in a lot of places). True, parts of Vegas have pretty bad traffic. However, I am buying a house on the northwest side of the city, and I work in the southwest, and I won't hit much traffic driving their ring road (215) to work. My commute will take about 30 minutes. Some people I work with here think that's outrageously long.

[aragx6]

Really? That's weird because according to that same link from the gov I posted, the avg. LV commute is longer -- 24.6 minutes! Maybe you just work with an odd group.

My commute in Chicago is at best 45 minutes and at worst -- well 2 hours plus. But that's my choice because I work in the 'burbs and want to live in the city.

[smellykat]

Originally Posted by aragx6

I guarantee you if you had to drive from Blue Springs down to southern Overland Park everyday you'd think Kansas City had pretty terrible commutes, or if you had to go through that -- sorry what do they call it? the Grandview triangle? That is real rough at rush hour.

Unless your St. Louis commute involves 270 (which is what you experienced) or 70 out between O'Fallon and St. Peters, traffic in St. Louis is generally amazingly calm.

Now I live in Chicago and it makes both cities look easy as pie! My point was that both cities have comparable commutes and both are below the national average as far as commute time goes.

I live in both cities and have for 25 years. KC commutes are a walk in the park compared in STL. I speak from experience and have never experienced "amazingly calm" with the exception of early morning Sunday driving. I do agree with your opinion on Chicago commuting, truly a heart throbbing, sweaty armpits experience!

[JackieB23]

Originally Posted by aragx6

Really? That's weird because according to that same link from the gov I posted, the avg. LV commute is longer -- 24.6 minutes! Maybe you just work with an odd group.

My commute in Chicago is at best 45 minutes and at worst -- well 2 hours plus. But that's my choice because I work in the 'burbs and want to live in the city.

I know - I think the Strip throws everything off.

They hired me, so they must be a little odd to begin with.

The funny thing is that we have me, another Kansas City/St. Louis transplant, and a Mizzou grad. We're all Chiefs fans (I have other friends here who are also from KC - we're thinking of starting a "Chiefs Fans of Las Vegas" club).

I almost moved to Chicago and that was the biggest question for us - the commute was going to be totally crazy!

[kcmo]

Having lived in both towns, I think traffic in both towns are quite similar. KC is probably better overall because, but there are some nasty commutes in KC.

The south side of the metro can be downright awful at times. Trying to get from Blue Springs / Lee's Summit area to the southwest suburbs of Overland Park, Lenexa and Olathe can easily take an hour. I live there and do that commute often. Nothing else in KC comes close. You can easily sit in traffic on 470 for 30 minutes and that's before you get to 435 and risk another 30 minute delay. If there is a wreck or bad weather, it's horribe.

Most the rest of the city is not bad. The commutes into the city from Blue Springs is only about 20-30 minutes, same with the Kansas suburbs into the city and there is hardly any traffic at all coming from the Northland. The bridges back up for a mile or two and people up there think that's traffic.

St Louis has some nasty commutes too. I would never want to drive from Westport to Lake St Louis for example. NB 270 to WB 70? No thank you.

The Popular Street bridge gets pretty nasty too. Just don't live in freaking St Charles County and you will probably be fine in StL.

[aragx6]

^^Now from Westport you just take the page extension. Once they reach their end game and extend 364 all the way to 40 it'll be a piece of cake.

That has really eased the commute times for a lot of St. Charles Co. residents (and don't forget how thrilled they are to feel so close to West Co instead of North Co like they've been wanting to for 20 years).

But yes, I totally agree. If your STL commute requires NB 270 in the mornings and SB in the evenings you might as well give up! Used to do that commute all the time shuffling between my mom's in St. Peters and my dad's in Rock Hill, though luckily our commute was a little earlier than true rush hour -- like 6:30 in the mornings and 3:30 in the afternoons.

[MoNative34]

Originally Posted by aragx6

I guarantee you if you had to drive from Blue Springs down to southern Overland Park everyday you'd think Kansas City had pretty terrible commutes, or if you had to go through that -- sorry what do they call it? the Grandview triangle? That is real rough at rush hour.

That's been gone through and redone so its much better than it was prior. It is better, but can still get hairy at the peak times.

[stlcitygirl]

Having lived in both cities, I prefer St Louis. St Louis metro area is much larger, and there is a lot more to do. It has more of a "city" feel. If you like baseball, this will be your heaven (unless you are a cubs fan). A huge draw for me was the public transportation (metrolink). I can take the metrolink to work everyday and I hardly have to use my car. The architecture is amazing and each neighborhood has it's own unique flare. There is a lot for out of towners to do when visiting. If you are into music (indie or main stream), there is a great music scene as well as several amazing venues. If you are into the arts, you will love The Muny, Art Museum, St Louis Symphony, The Fox, etc. I have had friends with children comment that there is a lot of activities for children (zoo (amazing), science center, City Museum, Magic House, Six Flags) Having said this, Kansas Citians seem to be much friendlier and it really does feel more western. It's a much better football town (Chiefs). Kansas City does seem to be more family friendly as it has a smaller "town" feel. Kansas City has some great jazz and the BBQ is amazing. Both cities have a lot to offer and either one would make a good home.