3rd world Saint Louis!

[pdm_ad]

Originally Posted by welshearl

KC looks wealthier, cleaner and much more prosperous than St Louis city.

And STL county looks wealthier, cleaner, newer and much more prosperous than KCMO. Face it, much of the new developement in that metro is in KCKS side.

[welshearl]

Suburban County and Suburban KC is a wash-no better no worse. City vs City, KC comes out on top of STL. I've never lived in KC but have been there for work a lot. St Louis born and bred here.

[Smtchll]

Originally Posted by welshearl

Suburban County and Suburban KC is a wash-no better no worse. City vs City, KC comes out on top of STL. I've never lived in KC but have been there for work a lot. St Louis born and bred here.

But comparing STL and KC isn't really city vs city because STL is its original urban core, no annexed land, KC includes a lot of annexed suburban areas. In St. Louis, the suburban areas are completely separate from the city. So on paper, it makes it look like St. Louis is worse. If you wanted an accurate comparison of the cities, you'd have to compare STL to the original 60 sq miles of KC. I'm sure KC wouldnt look as pretty then. Actually, when you look at the entire metro areas, St. Louis is safer than KC. So KC certainly has its fair share of problems.

[Old Trafford]

Originally Posted by welshearl

Suburban County and Suburban KC is a wash-no better no worse. City vs City, KC comes out on top of STL. I've never lived in KC but have been there for work a lot. St Louis born and bred here.

Well here-

//www.city-data.com/forum/st-lo...l#post26454467

You claim to have lived in Prarie Village for 2 years which I would think is pretty... check that... very close to KC

Why don't you take a break and figure out if lived there are not.

[flynavyj]

When we purchased our first home in Kansas City, Prairie Village was very high on my list of ares I liked and could afford. The architecture in the Kansas City suburbs is very different from the architecture in the St. Louis Suburbs, specifically during the 1950's....the architecture of the modern California or side split homes seemed to become a little less distinctive between cities, but things still seemed a bit more interesting in the Kansas City side of the state than in Missouri...the same is true for the modern architecture, and I still prefer the Kansas and Kansas City side of the state to Missouri, at least in terms of architecture.

I also seemed to think Kansas City has a "slower" pace about it than St. Louis, at least in terms of personalities. It might have just been the friends I associated with when out there, but it always seemed like the folks in ST. Louis were "go go go" where as Kansas City seemed to be "hang out, relax, take your time".

[Old Trafford]

Originally Posted by flynavyj

When we purchased our first home in Kansas City, Prairie Village was very high on my list of ares I liked and could afford. The architecture in the Kansas City suburbs is very different from the architecture in the St. Louis Suburbs, specifically during the 1950's....the architecture of the modern California or side split homes seemed to become a little less distinctive between cities, but things still seemed a bit more interesting in the Kansas City side of the state than in Missouri...the same is true for the modern architecture, and I still prefer the Kansas and Kansas City side of the state to Missouri, at least in terms of architecture.

I also seemed to think Kansas City has a "slower" pace about it than St. Louis, at least in terms of personalities. It might have just been the friends I associated with when out there, but it always seemed like the folks in ST. Louis were "go go go" where as Kansas City seemed to be "hang out, relax, take your time".

yeah it is subjective, I just think the STL neighborhoods in the central corridor, the south side annd inner neighborhoods are hard to beat for housing stock, KC has some nice areas, but just cannot compete, they never had the European craftsmen that made ordinary hoods great, much of KC reminds me of the northern part of Springfield Mo. probably one of the reasons I don't care for it as much.

[pianist1972]

What one has to understand is that many of the blighted areas of places like Chicago (which has made strides) are less visible to the tourist. One must understand that in St. Louis, like in many large cities which started emptying out in the 50s and 60s, interstates were deliberately planned to go through "troubled" areas, cutting off neighborhoods and slashing the heart out of wide swaths of the city. One must also understand that St. Louis has lost over 500,000 ppl from its peak population in 1950. Think about all that housing stock! The view from I-70 from the airport to downtown is troubling, but there are inroads being made. I live in an area near downtown (south and west) called Lafayette Square that was the wealthiest area of St. Louis in its time. It had degenerated to rooming houses through the 1950s and 1960s, and over the last 40 years has become one of the most beautiful and vibrant residential areas in the city. This is playing itself out in other neighborhoods is well. St. Louis will rise again, and is doing so right now. I have not had a single issue in my considerable travels throughout a wide swath of the city, and I strongly encourage others to consider moving to the city. There are wonderful neighborhoods, shops, restaurants, cultural amenities, and people who want to make a difference.

[moorlander]

^ Great post!