This City May Just Be The Ugliest In Missouri, Do You Agree?
So if I asked you what the ugliest city in Missouri is, what would you say? Would you say, St. Louis? That's not the city I would pick.
There may be parts of St. Louis that are dangerous. Some areas of St. Louis may be polluted. Yet I highly doubt that St. Louis is the ugliest in Missouri. There are some pretty nice areas of St. Louis. Now, East St. Louis might be a contender, except the problem with that is that East St. Louis is in Illinois.
Yet Travado.net, who created this list of the Ugliest Cities In Every State named St. Louis the ugliest in Missouri. They pretty much assume outside of the arch and Busch Stadium that it's not a great place. They say:
"It's a city with tons of history, but it's also, unfortunately, a city with tons of crime, which has led to some portions of the city turning into run-down dumps."
Travado.net also quotes a St. Louis resident taking a pot shot at East St. Louis, and doesn't seem to understand that across the river is Illinois, not Missouri. So take their pick of St. Louis as the ugliest city in Missouri with a grain of salt.
That's not the only larger city they've named as ugliest in a state either. St. Louis shares that distinction with Milwaukee, Memphis, Baltimore, Albuquerque, and Detroit. The only city on that list that deserves any significant consideration is Detroit. A city with a long history of problems much deeper than whether or not it's ugly.
If you've done some traveling around Missouri, what city would you consider to be Missouri's ugliest? Just don't say St. Louis, 'cause that isn't right.