One thing I like about StL is a larger portion of it's people are urban or big city type people where KC seems to have many rural and small town attitude people.
I am by no means saying StL is better than KC because everyone know KC is way better and has far more potential in the future , but I sometimes wish KC had more urban mined people and leaders. Drive around StL or Denver and you don't see near the amount of pick-ups etc. and a freaking AM station like 61 Country would not be as popular in those cities.
I know that Denver and StL get more transplants for other large cities where KC feeds off the smaller town in the surrounding states.
I just wonder what others think of this.
I compare KC to StL and Denver because I know those two cities nearly as well as KC.
I just think people that come from Salina or Joplin or even Omaha have a different view of what a city should be like than people from Twin Cities, Seattle or Cincy etc.
Actually I think KC is more urban-minded than you think. If country music and pick up trucks made a city a small hick town, Dallas certainly wouldn't be what it is. I have spent a lot of time in and around St. Louis and they definitely have their share of "rural" people, to put it nicely. Spend a day at Six Flags. Yikes.
A lot of people in St. Louis seem to think KC is the more fun city and vice versa. I saw a lot of this attitude at MU which has a lot of people from both cities. The big difference, besides population, seems to be that the leaders in StL seem to have their act together, whereas the ones in KC do NOT. Also, KC is more divided than StL which is a big problem. They have their south county/west county/north county thing going on, but not nearly as bad as the KS/MO thing here. I wish our population was more unified.
As far as where everyone is coming from, here is a very interesting page online, I hope you have Adobe Acrobat. Look especially at the net migration map. KC is losing population, oddly enough, to a lot of rural Missouri counties, as well as places like Phoenix and Texas, which are stealing people from all over the country (including yours truly). The rest of KC's population gain is coming from the larger cities around the area (St. Louis, Wichita, Omaha) as well as LA, Chicago, and NY. Interesting how more people are going from StL to KC than the other way around.
I agree with you, Northlander. (And I got stolen by Phoenix/Texas too!) That post had me thinking of that metroline data too. I would be intersted to see a similar analyis od St. Louis. I think that the urban-suburban mindset is nore east-west than urban-rural. Out here, where there is more land to go around, people spread out, and they don't care about downtown. Downtown Phoenix sucks, LA is biger thanb KC, but for the size of the city, its downtown is small. San Fransisco is a different matter, but they are on a penninsula, so land is expensive.
Also, St. Louis has more of an urban history than KC, but I think that the populus is turning away from that history. It is one of the great White-flight cities in the country (along with Detroit) and except for its stadiums, which go dowtown, the downtown is nithing special. St. Louisians, form my experience, take the greatest pride in St. Charles growth, even though most of that comes from St. Louis County. If you want to see the difference between KC and St. Louis, and get depressed at the same time, look at builtstlouis.com. that, I think is the closest thing to their version of this site, but its all about what they are losing. Its amazing how much history is being destroyed for parking lots over there.
And, I agree with Northlander that it is a stretch to say the Kansas City is more country than St. Louis. That is a myth propagated by St. Louisans to make themselves feel better about their history of slavery and racism.
And, I would agree wtiih Northlander again that St. Louis has leaders who get things done. They got the rail done, although it took some doing, they got the TWA dome done, they got the Savis Center done, and they are probably going to get the new stadium and the neighborhood around it, even though they just spent money to fix up Busch, which is close in age to the K. As for division, the metro is mostly in Missouri, the majority of the suburbs are in the county, and St. Charles County is just an extension to St. Louis County. People in the Northland are from the Northland. People inSt. Charles are from ST. Louis County or out of town. I don't see where there would be a rivalry there that would prevent development.
OK, I'm sure I'm being a little hard on KC, but you have to admit, the city has become so conservative and stuck with the status quo that I am looking for any anwsers as to why the majority of the city is still not ready to jump on the bandwagon and fix our regions problems; downtown, transit, roads, stadiums, etc.
I think it has more to do with the lousy leadership than anything else. Personally I think people in KC want a vibrant downtown, new stadiums, state of the art transit, etc etc. The biggest problem seems to be that we have seen so many wonderful ideas fail that when a new one comes up it just seems natural to assume the city leaders, planners, whoever, will screw it up again and waste out tax dollars (the reason Prop B failed in MO). Look at Union Station, the Zoo, and other projects that managed to get completed but are now struggling.
I don't think it's so much the mind set of the population. Every city has people that just care about good schools and filling the pot holes on their street and nothing else. Granted, midwestern cities have more. St. Louis has a ton of people like that, as well as the suburbanites that could care less about downtown. (Watch the city of St Louis's population lose 5,000 a year). But, like phxcat pointed out, in St. Louis you have city leaders who get the ball rolling on projects and can convince the state to give money for them. It really helps StL that nearly all their metro is Missouri, making their MO population much bigger than KC's MO population, thus lawmakers in MO think the east side of the state is the only side that matters. Kansas Citians pretty much get screwed by KS and MO and are left funding projects ourselves with bistate taxes and such. And tax payers are tired of seeing their money go down the toilet.
and phxcat, you make a good point about downtowns everywhere. It is definitely nothing particular about Kansas City, it is a major national trend. The only cities that have a solid downtown population (New York, Philadelphia, DC for example) either have no room to grow space-wise, or are losing population fast anyway. Even big cities like Chicago and LA have major suburbia complexes.
Trying to reverse the suburb trend is trying to reverse the mind-set of America. No easy task for any city.
I also have to wonder, after reading the Olathe thread on the Kansas board, how much differnece it makes to have so many large cities in the metro. St. Louis is the only city in the metro over 100,000. We have five! I don't know if that adds to the division that prevents things from getting done, but you don't see Mission or Roeland Park trying to build arenas and convention centers.
I think it's right on the mark to say that much of KC's small town attitude steems from the "big suburbs" we have. The bigger the suburb gets...the bigger the suburbanite's head gets.
I have spent a lot of time in and around St. Louis and they definitely have their share of "rural" people, to put it nicely. Spend a day at Six Flags. Yikes.
Ever spent a day at Worlds of Fun or any other midwestern theme park? Both Kansas City and Saint Louis are in the same mostly rural, conservative state. When I was at WOF last year, I noticed most license plates were from Kansas and Nebraska. A good chunk of visitors to SF are from Tennessee and Arkansas.
And, I agree with Northlander that it is a stretch to say the Kansas City is more country than St. Louis. That is a myth propagated by St. Louisans to make themselves feel better about their history of slavery and racism.
Wow, you figured out the big secret. I lived in Saint Louis for 25 years and don't worry, the vast majority don't give a shit enough to create myths about Kansas City. Most know nothing about KC and sadly have never bothered to visit. While Kansas Citians feel the need to feel inferior to cities like Denver or Saint Louis, Saint Louisans are just as busy feeling inferior to Chicago & Atlanta. Get over it, Kansas City is a great town and so is Saint Louis. Nuff said.
St. Louisians, form my experience, take the greatest pride in St. Charles growth, even though most of that comes from St. Louis County.
I know nothing makes me prouder than 300,000 people gobbling up farmland and forest and building identical McMansions behind identical shopping centers, horrendous traffic, and the constant complaining about giving some of their tax dollars to the city they abandoned. Damn proud.
On the migration issue, KC loses people to those rural counties because of the amounts of people retiring and moving to the ozarks and the satelitte cities.
That migration document is a great source of reference...we're getting people from a lot of places nobody would ever expect. Also the intercity migration stats are interesting.
StL is a fine city but I don't see anybody here striving to be them. No urban population and even with all the pieces in place for a vibrant downtown, it's very dead.
I jus' think St. Louis gets more influence from Memphis and Chicago while Kansas City is influenced by Omaha and Wichita. I'm always hard on my city, but that's because I want to see a change in attitudes. I went to an Irish bar in KC and they were playin' country & western music! I HATE PICK-UPS ON THE CITY STREETS! Don't get me wrong, I love to visit the small towns/bed & breakfasts...but keep that Pro-Life/Pro-Guns - Jesus Saves $hit in the country and out of the city! I'm ready to push this city's attitude out of the uncultured, unconsincious, Jerry Springer meets 700 Club era; and Jesus, Mohammed, Jahovah, Joseph Smith and Buddah are welcome to tag along as long as they keep their oppressive opinions to themselves!
The Pendergast Poltergeist Project!
I finally divorced beer and proposed to whiskey, but I occassionally cheat with fine wine.
Some cities don't have much intra-regional insularity. Denver strikes me as one such place; there was no hardcore divisions between those living in Jefferson County, Arapahoe County, Denver proper, Aurora or Adams County. There were some minor demographic differences; Aurora is solidly middle-class, JeffCo tends to be conservative, and Adams County is a bit more blue collar, but the natives for the most seem to travel and move from one region to the other without much regard to where they feel more at home.
Buffalo has something similar to the St. Louis North/South/West County dynamic in St. Louis. There's the Northtowns, culturally Buffalo's West and North Sides, Tonawanda, Amherst and Clarence, and other adjacent communities. The Easttowns are the old white ethnic East Side neighborhoods, Cheektowaga, Lancaster and Depew, and Alden. The Southtowns are Buffalo's South Side, Lackawanna, Hamburg, West Seneca, Orchard Park, East Aurora and points south.
I'm a native Northtowner; when I go to the Easttowns or Southtowns, I have a hard time finding my way around. The development patterns are entirely different, the major streets laid out much differently (Northtowns-grid, Easttowns-radial from downtown Buffalo, Southtowns-random cowpath), the people much different.
Most of may family are Northtowners; when an any and uncle moved from Amherst to Lancaster, we thought their new location was so far away! My parents would sooner drive 15 miles to eat at another Northtowns restaurant than drive 5 miles to Cheektowaga, technically in the Easttowns; the Easttowns just feel so much farther away.
The Northtowns are middle and upper income and more white collar; pretty much Buffalo's JoCo. The Easttowns are blue collar and ethnic; think of an all-Polish and German Independence or Blue Springs. The Southtowns are middle-to-upper middle class, and a bit more blue collar; think of the Northland with an Irish brogue.
Orlando, Florida definitely had the divisions, but they functioned differently. The bulk of the population lived north, east and west of downtown. The western 'burbs were the strange and alien land; people would sooner drive 20 miles from Winter Park to Sanford, up north, than drive eight miles to Ocoee, out west. West Orange was predominantly middle and upper-middle-class (except for Winter Garden), but culturally it was far, far more Southern and blue-collar than the rest of the Orlando metro area. Combine a Raytown attitude with Overland Park and Prairie Village incomes, and you've got Metro West, Ocoee, Winer Garden South, and Clermont nailed. Lots of bass boats, lots of Baptists, lots of big 'ol crew cab dually pickup trucks with Dale Earnhardt shrines and shiny metal bed boxes.
Cleveland's "East Side/West Side" division is more famous and even deeper than the North/South/West County minset of St. Louis.
The KC pattern of "I live in KCMO/JoCo/KCK y'all/the Northland/Independence/Raytown y'all and I don't leave except for work" seems oddly and sadly familiar.
BTW, if you think having a state line crossing your metro area is tough, try an INTERNATIONAL boundary. Buffalo sprawls only because there are no Westtowns to ease development pressure on the suburban frontier. Yes, there's municipalies west of Buffalo ... Fort Erie, Port Colborne, Welland, Thorold, and Wainfleet. However, they're in Canada. A good third of what could be the greater Buffalo metro area is permanently locked off to development, because it's in another country.
Denver feels inferior to Seattle, Portland, Vancouver and San Francisco.
Salt Lake City feels inferior to Denver.
El Paso feels inferior to Albuquerque and Tucson, as it should be.
Orlando feels inferior to Tampa.
Jacksonville feels inferior to Orlando.
Buffalo feels inferior to Charlotte, Raleigh and Greensboro. (I don't get the Buffalo/North Carolina dynamic, either, but it's there. It's where the bulk of the Buffalo diaspora is heading.)
Detroit feels inferior to Chicago. No wonder.
Toronto thinks it's the best thing since sliced bread, as does Dallas, Atlanta, San Francisco and New York.
Urban inferiority comnplexes even happens on a smaller scale. Las Cruces, New Mexico feels inferior to Santa Fe. Fort Collins, Colorado feels inferior to Boulder, and Greeley feels inferior to Fort Collins, and Cheyenne feels inferior compared to both Fort Collins and Greeley. Hell, even Dodge City collectively looks up to Garden City as a model 'burg.
, but I sometimes wish KC had more urban mined people and leaders. Drive around StL or Denver and you don't see near the amount of pick-ups etc. and a freaking AM station like 61 Country would not be as popular in those cities.
