Does Minneapolis-St. Paul have dense, urban neighborhoods? [Archive]

The anti-cheesehead

May 3rd, 2005, 04:22 AM

http://img79.exs.cx/img79/5049/3372.jpg

http://img79.exs.cx/img79/6280/3353.jpg

http://img79.exs.cx/img79/4049/3354.jpg

http://img79.exs.cx/img79/2017/3355.jpg

http://img143.exs.cx/img143/1892/m37ph.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img143.exs.cx/img143/334/m43fl.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/5629/m58rp.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/6046/m69gu.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/5354/m70pk.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/9936/m89nm.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/4859/m97so.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/1566/m102ea.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/3701/m117vj.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/3039/m122kx.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/1114/m136bo.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/4307/m143js.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/8783/m157jp.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/1728/m161uk.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/7982/m170gi.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/4600/m186rv.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/3786/m191jw.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/211/m209fz.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/1244/m214mx.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/1301/m226zq.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/3403/m231nj.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img212.exs.cx/img212/3779/m248hb.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/3535/m13fb.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/2254/m20cv.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/4219/m35bl.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/3131/m48kj.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/7859/m53mm.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/3792/m68sx.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/5714/m78si.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/1192/m88ke.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/3479/m92yn.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/2923/m107la.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/3136/m115du.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/5797/m125oq.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/5559/m135op.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/9847/m149ib.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/6292/m153lr.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/5273/m162qi.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/8985/m177nd.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/1527/m187lt.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/1594/m192qt.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/838/m203ts.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/2235/m218fm.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/7128/m223xm.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/418/m234vf.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

The anti-cheesehead

May 3rd, 2005, 04:28 AM

Sorry, a few of those pics are off topic, but I just copied and pasted them from another thread.

Minneapolis612

May 3rd, 2005, 05:07 AM

Anti-cheesehead what neighborhood or area are those pictures takin?

The anti-cheesehead

May 3rd, 2005, 05:17 AM

Anti-cheesehead what neighborhood or area are those pictures takin?

They're not from any one neighborhood, they're from all over the place.

STL4EVER

May 3rd, 2005, 05:26 AM

So the answer is no, but they do have some apartment buildings scattered about?

Minneapolis612

May 3rd, 2005, 05:34 AM

The answer is yes, there are dense neighborhoods (just like pictures show)

The anti-cheesehead

May 3rd, 2005, 05:36 AM

So the answer is no, but they do have some apartment buildings scattered about?

What do you mean by dense? Not population denisty?

wheelingman

May 3rd, 2005, 12:06 PM

Thanks for posting those pictures. :)

Toggie

May 3rd, 2005, 03:13 PM

https://www.designcenter.umn.edu/imagebank/images/800x600/dc030000-dc034999/dc032936.jpg

The anti-cheesehead

May 5th, 2005, 04:33 AM

So the answer is no, but they do have some apartment buildings scattered about?

You still haven't answered the question. If those pics don't show dense neigborhoods, then what is a dense neighborhood?

I see you're from St. Louis, so are you saying that a dense urban neighborhood must have rowhouses? Brick buildings and apartments don't count?

Are we talking about dense as in population density, or dense as in abandoned dilapadated rowhouse density?

Soulbrotha

May 5th, 2005, 05:02 AM

Are we talking about dense as in population density, or dense as in abandoned dilapadated rowhouse density?

good question

JivecitySTL

May 5th, 2005, 05:58 AM

You still haven't answered the question. If those pics don't show dense neigborhoods, then what is a dense neighborhood?

I see you're from St. Louis, so are you saying that a dense urban neighborhood must have rowhouses? Brick buildings and apartments don't count?
I'm from St. Louis and I think these pics of Minneapolis are impressive as all hell. It's a younger city, both demographically and structurally, but the neighborhoods depicted in this thread could stand with the most urban neighborhoods in the Midwest. It's a different kind of urbanity. Whereas cities like STL and Cincinnati have older, more crowded looking neighborhoods (which is characteristic of most older river cities), Minneapolis resembles the appearance of many Chicago neighborhoods-- not quite as old, but solid and urban as hell.

Are we talking about dense as in population density, or dense as in abandoned dilapadated rowhouse density?
Don't take it too far there man. There are many very densely populated, stable and solid neighborhoods in St. Louis City. It's doesn't help your case to draw on stereotypes.

The anti-cheesehead

May 5th, 2005, 06:16 AM

It's a different kind of urbanity. Whereas cities like STL and Cincinnati have older, more crowded looking neighborhoods (which is characteristic of most older river cities), Minneapolis resembles the appearance of many Chicago neighborhoods-- not quite as old, but solid and urban as hell..

Exactly. My Mom is from Chicago, so I've been to Chicago many, many times, and some of those pics look identical to some Chicago neighborhoods, even the age of the neighborhoods. Chicago has loads of those square brick aparment buildings.

Don't take it too far there man. There are many very densely populated, stable and solid neighborhoods in St. Louis City. It's doesn't help your case to draw on stereotypes.

STL4EVER was purposely being an asshole and I was just returning the favor.

JivecitySTL

May 5th, 2005, 06:21 AM

^My mom is also from Chicago. :)

Columbus_Queer

May 5th, 2005, 06:22 AM

Minneapolis has a very unimpressive collection of neighborhoods, most of which are not dense at all. Minneapolis is a very suburban city where you can see subdivision-style housing within city limits.

Minneapolitan

May 5th, 2005, 07:48 AM

^ :bash:

Minneapolis612

May 5th, 2005, 05:57 PM

Seriously Denvernative (columbus queer) you arnt from minneapolis you dont live here and u know nothing about minneapolis your just a little fuckin bitch

The anti-cheesehead

May 5th, 2005, 06:20 PM

^My mom is also from Chicago. :)

Cool. My Mom is from the Chicago Lawn neighborhood, near Marquette Park.

JivecitySTL

May 5th, 2005, 06:22 PM

My mom is from Albany Park (Northwest Side) and then moved to Skokie. Cheers to our Chicago moms. :)

Steely Dan

May 5th, 2005, 07:17 PM

^ my mom is from chicago too. she grew up in edison park (far northwest side). can i join the chicago mothers party too? ;)

The anti-cheesehead

May 5th, 2005, 09:13 PM

^ my mom is from chicago too. she grew up in edison park (far northwest side). can i join the chicago mothers party too? ;)

No, it's a very exclusive club. It's the "residents of St. Louis and Minneapolis who have Mothers from Chicago club". ;)

Minneapolis612

May 5th, 2005, 11:49 PM

My mom is from a suburb from chicago...does that count

losangelino

August 30th, 2009, 04:27 AM

srsmn

September 6th, 2009, 03:22 AM

Exactly. My Mom is from Chicago, so I've been to Chicago many, many times, and some of those pics look identical to some Chicago neighborhoods, even the age of the neighborhoods. Chicago has loads of those square brick aparment buildings.

STL4EVER was purposely being an asshole and I was just returning the favor.

Yeah....it seems like we have somebody ask this exact same question once every few months, and the fact of the matter is, information like this is very public.

A quick search of a world almanac reveals that Minneapolis is significantly denser than St. Louis...and denser than practically any other midwestern city besides Chicago. Now, I don't mind answering this question for people that are polite and genuinely interested (like the original poster), but assholes like STL4EVER who just want to pretend like it's not true with no basis need to open up a book and read it for themselves...

PS. My almanac is from 2000. Since then, we've experienced population growth in both core cities, while most midwestern cities (including St. Louis) have continued a trend of decline...

progressisgood

September 6th, 2009, 06:30 AM

Yeah....it seems like we have somebody ask this exact same question once every few months, and the fact of the matter is, information like this is very public.

A quick search of a world almanac reveals that Minneapolis is significantly denser than St. Louis...and denser than practically any other midwestern city besides Chicago. Now, I don't mind answering this question for people that are polite and genuinely interested (like the original poster), but assholes like STL4EVER who just want to pretend like it's not true with no basis need to open up a book and read it for themselves...

PS. My almanac is from 2000. Since then, we've experienced population growth in both core cities, while most midwestern cities (including St. Louis) have continued a trend of decline...
Milwaukee has the second densest core in the Midwest and the population density is just as high as Minneapolis in a larger area.

srsmn

September 6th, 2009, 10:11 AM

Milwaukee has the second densest core in the Midwest and the population density is just as high as Minneapolis in a larger area.

Wow. Notice that I said "practically". Way to miss the key operative.

Also, Milwaukee pop./sq. mile= 6,296.3 as of 2008.

Minneapolis? 6,722 as of 2007.

Also, why would you even mention Milwaukee's "larger area" in this discussion? Nobody is questioning that Milwaukee has more residents than Minneapolis...that would be a stupid contention.

In addition, I would gladly bank on Cedar-Riverside's population density against any 1/2 square mile (or whatever it is....) neighborhood anywhere in Milwaukee and pretty much anywhere in the Midwest. God, grow up and deal with the fact that there are dense neighborhoods in Minneapolis, people. It's not the Australian Outback, or something...it shouldn't be that tought o wrap your brain around.... :ohno:

minneapolis-uptown

September 25th, 2009, 03:41 AM

The most dense residential area in the twin cities is Cedar-Riverside, just east of downtown minneapolis:

http://k53.pbase.com/v3/02/589102/2/49307090.DSC_4353_resize.jpg

http://images30.fotki.com/v478/photos/1/10467/102313/st9-vi.jpg

http://images.publicradio.org/content/2009/09/05/20090905_cedar-riverside_33.JPG

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d190/SRieder/cedar_riverside.jpg

http://www.zumach.net/az_notecards/designs/MPLS/downtown/light_rail/DSC09954_e_ncbt_px.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2165/2186956684_a5457df45c.jpg

progressisgood

September 25th, 2009, 04:01 AM

Wow. Notice that I said "practically". Way to miss the key operative.

Also, Milwaukee pop./sq. mile= 6,296.3 as of 2008.

Minneapolis? 6,722 as of 2007.

Also, why would you even mention Milwaukee's "larger area" in this discussion? Nobody is questioning that Milwaukee has more residents than Minneapolis...that would be a stupid contention.

In addition, I would gladly bank on Cedar-Riverside's population density

against any 1/2 square mile (or whatever it is....) neighborhood anywhere in

Milwaukee and pretty much anywhere in the Midwest. God, grow up and deal

with the fact that there are dense neighborhoods in Minneapolis, people. It's

not the Australian Outback, or something...it shouldn't be that tought o wrap

your brain around.... :ohno:
I was only saying that Milwaukee has a close population density to Minneapolis in a much larger area. Nobody thinks Minneapolis is Alice Springs or something.

The anti-cheesehead

September 25th, 2009, 06:21 AM

I was only saying that Milwaukee has a close population density to Minneapolis in a much larger area.

British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli:

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics"

To say that Milwaukee has a "much larger area" is misleading. People always "forget" (in the midwest forum, often intentionally) that Minneapolis isn't like most other urban areas...it has another central city right next door, St. Paul.

Together they form one urban core.

Central Milwaukee's area is slightly smaller than central Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Milwaukee metro is about half the metro population of metro Minneapolis-St. Paul.

Just setting the record straight. :)

minneapolis-uptown

September 25th, 2009, 08:47 AM

Another very dense area is the Warehouse district, just west of downtown Minneapolis:
http://minneapplerealestate.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/698px-minneapolis_warehouse_district.jpg

http://cityblock.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/img_4477.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_KOlb2tzvm0E/Sfs70ab2IZI/AAAAAAAAARc/IZtMuBYw5lI/s400/minneapolis-warehousedistrict-bldg.jpg

progressisgood

September 25th, 2009, 08:39 PM

The title of this thread about housing density, not Metro populations.

Paule

September 25th, 2009, 10:12 PM

British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli:

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics"

To say that Milwaukee has a "much larger area" is misleading. People always "forget" (in the midwest forum, often intentionally) that Minneapolis isn't like most other urban areas...it has another central city right next door, St. Paul.

Together they form one urban core.

Central Milwaukee's area is slightly smaller than central Minneapolis-St. Paul, and Milwaukee metro is about half the metro population of metro Minneapolis-St. Paul.

Just setting the record straight. :)
That works both ways though. I see Minnesotans forget about St. Paul, sometimes intentionally. I don't know why but often St Paul is never mentioned and the name Twin Cities not refered to.

The anti-cheesehead

September 26th, 2009, 05:42 PM

The title of this thread about housing density, not Metro populations.

Well, if you want, you can ignore the part about metro population and focus on the rest of the points in my post as they relate to housing density.

I pointed out metro population because metro population does contribute to a feeling of density in the central city. Generally, the more people there are in a metro area, the busier the central city is. Suburban residents don't always stay in the suburbs. 140,000 people work in downtown Minneapolis, and they aren't all from the central cities.

Paule

September 26th, 2009, 06:25 PM

Well, if you want, you can ignore the part about metro population and focus on the rest of the points in my post as they relate to housing density.

I pointed out metro population because metro population does contribute to a feeling of density in the central city. Generally, the more people there are in a metro area, the busier the central city is. Suburban residents don't always stay in the suburbs. 140,000 people work in downtown Minneapolis, and they aren't all from the central cities.
Generally yes, that's true, when it comes to metro areas like Kansas City for instance that may not be the case.

I think why some people may come to think of the Twin Cities as not being all that dense is because it has such a huge suburban population. It's actually quite extensive in both land and population. I will agree that the Twin Cities central city is very dense but for the size of the whole metro one might expect the central city to be larger in size than what the Twin Cities actually has, and that being in both land area and population. I'm just thinking, not making a statement.

You have in your signature "Minneapolis and St. Paul 669,769 in 108 sq. miles" that's a very good number of people but when you consider that the Twin cities metro is well over 3,000,000 people you might begin to see what I'm trying to say.

The anti-cheesehead

September 26th, 2009, 08:22 PM

I will agree that the Twin Cities central city is very dense but for the size of the whole metro one might expect the central city to be larger in size than what the Twin Cities actually has, and that being in both land area and population. I'm just thinking, not making a statement.

If you look at other midwestern cities, and even some eastern cities, the Twin Cities isn't out of the ordinary in terms of central city size vs. metro size.

0m09ja

September 26th, 2009, 08:42 PM

Generally yes, that's true, when it comes to metro areas like Kansas City for instance that may not be the case.

I think why some people may come to think of the Twin Cities as not being all that dense is because it has such a huge suburban population. It's actually quite extensive in both land and population. I will agree that the Twin Cities central city is very dense but for the size of the whole metro one might expect the central city to be larger in size than what the Twin Cities actually has, and that being in both land area and population. I'm just thinking, not making a statement.

You have in your signature "Minneapolis and St. Paul 669,769 in 108 sq. miles" that's a very good number of people but when you consider that the Twin cities metro is well over 3,000,000 people you might begin to see what I'm trying to say.

Pretty much every major metro in the United States has this problem.

Paule

September 26th, 2009, 09:25 PM

Pretty much every major metro in the United States has this problem.
"problem"? I wasn't talking about a problem.

Are the Twin Cities doing OK? If you think they are, how was what I was takling about a "problem"? I honestly don't understand what you're talking about.

progressisgood

September 26th, 2009, 09:34 PM

I can see there being alot of people working in downtown Minneapolis, I don't know about St. Paul. The metro population might have something to do with it I don't know. Earlier in this thread, housing density was talked about, maybe to do with population density. So all I was mentioning was density in neighborhoods in both housing and people per square mile. I thought that's what this thread was about.

Paule

September 26th, 2009, 09:39 PM

If you look at other midwestern cities, and even some eastern cities, the Twin Cities isn't out of the ordinary in terms of central city size vs. metro size.
Well then Milwaukee must be way out of the ordinary. Milwaukee's pop. is 602,000 with a land area of 96 sq. miles. Minneapolis and St. Paul have a combined pop. of 669,000 with a land area of 108 sq miles. Very comparable, but now look at the metro size.

The Twin Cities metro is well over 3,000,000, Milwaukee's metro is 1,700,000. Virtually the same center city size but the suburban size for the Twin Cities is twice that of Milwaukees.

And I am not saying that that is a problem or bad in anyway.

Paule

September 26th, 2009, 09:42 PM

progressisgood

September 26th, 2009, 09:45 PM

Yeah, but what does that have to with housing density?

Paule

September 26th, 2009, 10:54 PM

Yeah, but what does that have to with housing density?

Not a whole hell-of-a-lot.

Paule

September 26th, 2009, 11:09 PM

That works both ways though. I see Minnesotans forget about St. Paul, sometimes intentionally. I don't know why but often St Paul is never mentioned and the name Twin Cities not refered to.
To continue the thought; Minneapolis is often proped up on a pedestal by Twin City folks. It's like, they want Minneapolis to be this city without a twin, or they want others to think of Minneapolis in that way.

At the sametime, St. Paul is hardly ever mentioned or refered to. It's like people there view it as the black sheep of the family. They then want the whole metro, population and all, attributed to Minneapolis and Minneapolis alone. As if St Paul doesn't exist.

That's great and marvelous for Minneapolis, but what about St. Paul?

I've sometimes heard of the Minneapolis metro being over 3,000,000 people, but I have never heard of the St. Paul metro being over 3,000,000. And that's my point.

The anti-cheesehead

September 26th, 2009, 11:34 PM

So all I was mentioning was density in neighborhoods in both housing and people per square mile. I thought that's what this thread was about.

It is, sorry for sidetracking the discussion by mentioning metro population.

And I'm not one of the people who thinks St. Paul is a "black sheep", obviously.

It's in my signature, and I do bring it up whenever anyone compares a central city population to Minneapolis, for example, when someone says that Milwaukee has a similar population density, but in a much larger area than Minneapolis....which is technically true.....but it's also technically true that Jacksonville has more people than Boston.

The anti-cheesehead

September 26th, 2009, 11:36 PM

I've sometimes heard of the Minneapolis metro being over 3,000,000 people, but I have never heard of the St. Paul metro being over 3,000,000. And that's my point.

Have you ever flown into Minneapolis? The pilot always says "Minneapolis-St. Paul"

progressisgood

September 27th, 2009, 12:36 AM

Maybe St.Paul-Minneapolis sounds better? We could call Dallas-Ft. Worth the twin cities?

Paule

September 27th, 2009, 01:05 AM

Have you ever flown into Minneapolis? The pilot always says "Minneapolis-St. Paul"
Yes, but that is a dumb point to make, after all, and I'm sorry if I didn't mention this before but I'm talking about people on message board forums, not airplane pilots or the average person living in the Twin Cities. Why would pilots have a Minneapolis bias? They don't, but people on message board forums do.

I was pointing out how Twin City forumers, members of internet message boards, often ignor the fact that Minneapolis has a twin. The effect makes Minneapolis seem much more promenant. The two cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul together are great, but when you ignor one from the other it's like cutting off the legs from a person.

Paule

September 27th, 2009, 01:23 AM

Maybe St.Paul-Minneapolis sounds better? We could call Dallas-Ft. Worth the twin cities?
Or we could call it the Ft. Worth-Dallas metroplex?

Jennifat

September 27th, 2009, 01:42 AM

Yes, but that is a dumb point to make, after all, and I'm sorry if I didn't mention this before but I'm talking about people on message board forums, not airplane pilots or the average person living in the Twin Cities. Why would pilots have a Minneapolis bias? They don't, but people on message board forums do.

I was pointing out how Twin City forumers, members of internet message boards, often ignor the fact that Minneapolis has a twin. The effect makes Minneapolis seem much more promenant. The two cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul together are great, but when you ignor one from the other it's like cutting off the legs from a person.

Most of the time when I'm referring to the metro as a whole, I just say "the Twin Cities". I almost never use the term "Minneapolis–St. Paul"; it sounds too unnatural. No one here uses it, really.

I think the biggest reason that a lot of locals just refer to the metro as "Minneapolis" when speaking with people outside of the region is because that's how the rest of the country knows it. If I were to mention the Twin Cities to a regular person on the street outside of the Midwest, most would probably reply with "sounds familiar...but where exactly is that?"

0m09ja

September 27th, 2009, 04:18 AM

"problem"? I wasn't talking about a problem.

Are the Twin Cities doing OK? If you think they are, how was what I was takling about a "problem"? I honestly don't understand what you're talking about.

It's called sprawl. And yeah, it's a problem.

The anti-cheesehead

September 28th, 2009, 01:40 AM

Yes, but that is a dumb point to make.

My point is that most people who have heard of Minneapolis have also heard of the term "Minneapolis-St. Paul".

I don't think leaving St. Paul out of the name is people intentionally slighting St. Paul. Out of convenience (Minneapolis is already a long name, adding St. Paul to it just makes it even longer) and the fact that Minneapolis is the more prominent twin, some people just refer to it as "Minneapolis".

Mplsuptown

September 28th, 2009, 05:50 AM

To continue the thought; Minneapolis is often proped up on a pedestal by Twin City folks. It's like, they want Minneapolis to be this city without a twin, or they want others to think of Minneapolis in that way.

At the sametime, St. Paul is hardly ever mentioned or refered to. It's like people there view it as the black sheep of the family. They then want the whole metro, population and all, attributed to Minneapolis and Minneapolis alone. As if St Paul doesn't exist.

That's great and marvelous for Minneapolis, but what about St. Paul?

I've sometimes heard of the Minneapolis metro being over 3,000,000 people, but I have never heard of the St. Paul metro being over 3,000,000. And that's my point.

Some of that can be contributed to the news. Locally it's often Minneapolis this or that...and national news is usually stated with only Minneapolis being mentioned. Also in todays fast pace it's much easier to just say Minneapolis and if you have to add St. Paul in a conversation you look and/or percieved as stupid or boring. Kind of like adding ya know after every other word you (not you) speak.

Paule

September 28th, 2009, 10:33 PM

It's called sprawl. And yeah, it's a problem.
Ok, I agree with you that every large metro has this problem to one extent or another, but that's not what I was getting at with what I was saying. The cities where I think this is a real problem are Phoenix or San Jose. I don't think the Twin Cities are even close to being that bad.

Paule

September 28th, 2009, 10:38 PM

Ok, thanks for filling me in on all that everyone. I guess it's just that people around here, central Wisconsin, usually refer to the metro as "the Twin Cities", so when I see people from there not refering to it in the same way but only calling the metro Minneapolis I wonder why. I personally love St Paul and I think most of the time it gets dissed.

Paule

September 28th, 2009, 10:51 PM

srsmn

September 29th, 2009, 01:29 AM

Well then Milwaukee must be way out of the ordinary. Milwaukee's pop. is 602,000 with a land area of 96 sq. miles. Minneapolis and St. Paul have a combined pop. of 669,000 with a land area of 108 sq miles. Very comparable, but now look at the metro size.

The Twin Cities metro is well over 3,000,000, Milwaukee's metro is 1,700,000. Virtually the same center city size but the suburban size for the Twin Cities is twice that of Milwaukees.

And I am not saying that that is a problem or bad in anyway.

Actually, Milwaukee is a bit of an anomoly in that sense.

I won't get into square mileage or density, but Metropolitan areas are typically 3x the size of core urban areas on the smaller end-- more like 4 or 5x on average. MSP is approximately 5x; Chicago would be about 2.8/10mil, so that's a lot more than 3x but less than 4. LA would be about 4/14mil, but I know that the West Coast is irrelevant to our discussion. Detroit is 900k/4.5mil, so 5x. Cleveland is probably about 5x. Denver is, too. Philly is about 1.5/6mil, so about 4x.

That ratio works for practically every major American metropolitan area. The anomolies on the high end aren't places like MSP, but sunbelt cities like Atlanta and Miami which have *REAL* spurious sprawl, places like St. Louis and Cincinatti where the core pop. has declined most rapidly, and places like Indianapolis where the core-city still comprises a majority of the metro area's residents, and the process of suburbanization really hasn't taken root (in Indy's case, being sandwiched between Chicago and the big metro areas of Ohio probably hurts its ability to attract big downtown employers, but I'm just talking out of my rear end on that one...)

For all the talk of how "sprawling" and "suburban" MSP is, it simply statistically isn't the case. More likely than not, what people want to express is that MSP is big (it is-- #15 or #16 biggest metro in a country known for big metros), and also that the process of suburbanization has been rapid and recent. If you look at MSP 20 or 30 years ago, it looks a lot more like those mid-sized cities I mentioned in its residential makeup....

srsmn

September 29th, 2009, 01:35 AM

One thing that I can compliment both Minneapolis and St Paul on is that niether city has much of a slum area. Driving around on Google Maps it shows that Minneapolis has some pretty seedy and run down areas to the northwest of downtown, and to the northwest and northeast of downtown St Paul but neither areas or neighborhoods are all that large, and I have certainly seen alot worse in other cities. Do any of you Minnesotans agree with this or am I just not looking in the right places?

St. Paul is typically thought to have larger patches of general thuggery, but the most dangerous areas in the Cities are a few very isolated spots in Minneapolis. Phillips and Camden especially used to both be notorious, but both have come up a lot (thanks in no small part to the influx of East African immigrants into both areas). Without sounding like a racist, it has always been my impression that gang violence is more prevalent with the Hmong community than it is with East Africans, and most of the Hmong are in St. Paul (along the Midway, Frogtown, and Payne-Phalen). But if anybody cares to prove me wrong....

One of the things that we have going for us is that the infrastructure is very good. We have a lot more highway miles per commuter than a lot of other places, and believe it or not, getting to jobs easily decreases crime which invariably decreases slum-like conditions. Even when we essentially tried to build a slum to stick low-income residents in (re: Cedar-Riverside), people still ended up finding jobs and jumpstarting the neighborhood, and now it's pretty safe and actually ain't a bad place to go out for a beer or a show...

srsmn

September 29th, 2009, 01:38 AM

Most of the time when I'm referring to the metro as a whole, I just say "the Twin Cities". I almost never use the term "Minneapolis–St. Paul"; it sounds too unnatural. No one here uses it, really.

I think the biggest reason that a lot of locals just refer to the metro as "Minneapolis" when speaking with people outside of the region is because that's how the rest of the country knows it. If I were to mention the Twin Cities to a regular person on the street outside of the Midwest, most would probably reply with "sounds familiar...but where exactly is that?"

Yeah, for what it's worth, I can't be anywhere in the country (or outside of the country) without somebody asking me about the TC symbol on my baseball cap.

Well, maybe if I'm in a rival city like Chicago....but even then, the team probably has to be in town for people to catch on...

0m09ja

September 29th, 2009, 05:40 AM

Paule

September 29th, 2009, 09:31 PM

True, but don't mistake this to mean that it's all safe. Certain parts of the North Side of Mpls especially, are places where you sometimes have to be a little vigilant. This isn't saying that the area is universally horrible or atypical of American cities, of course.

Actually, my supervisor at work lived in Minneapolis and he told me to avoid the northwest side altogether and told me that the west side was almost as bad. It was interesting because what he said was "you have downtown, then just to the west there's some bad areas but then there's a line of parks and country clubs and on the other side of all that are some real nice middle class neighborhoods". He said it was like night and day in just a matter of a mile or so.

Paule

September 29th, 2009, 09:34 PM

Yeah, for what it's worth, I can't be anywhere in the country (or outside of the country) without somebody asking me about the TC symbol on my baseball cap.

Well, maybe if I'm in a rival city like Chicago....but even then, the team probably has to be in town for people to catch on...
And that's mainly because we're all used to the old logo with the big M. I remember not knowing that the team changed it's logo and seeing people wareing these TC logo caps and for the life of me couldn't figure out what team it was, and I'm a huge MLB fan. After saying that, I have to disagree with the thought that most people outside the midwest wouldn't know what cities are being talked about when the Twin Cities are mentioned. I'm sorry but I don't belioeve that. yeah there are some ignorant people out there, I know. Some people think milwaukee is in Minnesota and that Minneapolis is in Wisconsin. You're always going to find some pretty ignorant people wherever you go.

Paule

September 29th, 2009, 09:45 PM

Actually, Milwaukee is a bit of an anomoly in that sense.

I won't get into square mileage or density, but Metropolitan areas are typically 3x the size of core urban areas on the smaller end-- more like 4 or 5x on average. MSP is approximately 5x; Chicago would be about 2.8/10mil, so that's a lot more than 3x but less than 4. LA would be about 4/14mil, but I know that the West Coast is irrelevant to our discussion. Detroit is 900k/4.5mil, so 5x. Cleveland is probably about 5x. Denver is, too. Philly is about 1.5/6mil, so about 4x.

That ratio works for practically every major American metropolitan area. The anomolies on the high end aren't places like MSP, but sunbelt cities like Atlanta and Miami which have *REAL* spurious sprawl, places like St. Louis and Cincinatti where the core pop. has declined most rapidly, and places like Indianapolis where the core-city still comprises a majority of the metro area's residents, and the process of suburbanization really hasn't taken root (in Indy's case, being sandwiched between Chicago and the big metro areas of Ohio probably hurts its ability to attract big downtown employers, but I'm just talking out of my rear end on that one...)

For all the talk of how "sprawling" and "suburban" MSP is, it simply statistically isn't the case. More likely than not, what people want to express is that MSP is big (it is-- #15 or #16 biggest metro in a country known for big metros), and also that the process of suburbanization has been rapid and recent. If you look at MSP 20 or 30 years ago, it looks a lot more like those mid-sized cities I mentioned in its residential makeup....

Cool, you've made your case perfectly, I concur. I have to admitt, Milwaukee always had a larger city area then most metros have concerning the center city. Back in the 50s Milwaukee used to be the 11th largest city in the nation but only had a metro size of 1.1 million.

Paule

September 29th, 2009, 09:53 PM

St. Paul is typically thought to have larger patches of general thuggery, but the most dangerous areas in the Cities are a few very isolated spots in Minneapolis. Phillips and Camden especially used to both be notorious, but both have come up a lot (thanks in no small part to the influx of East African immigrants into both areas). Without sounding like a racist, it has always been my impression that gang violence is more prevalent with the Hmong community than it is with East Africans, and most of the Hmong are in St. Paul (along the Midway, Frogtown, and Payne-Phalen). But if anybody cares to prove me wrong....
Where exactly are these areas, Phillips and camden? Also, I don't think it's being racist to point out your own observation. What we have been observing here in wausau over the years is Hmong gang recruitment from the Twin Cities. For a city of almost 39,000 we have a large Hmong population of around 5,000. And, yeah, the gangs from the Twin Cities send people over for recruitment purposes and it has caused some problems. Nothing real bad though.

One of the things that we have going for us is that the infrastructure is very good. We have a lot more highway miles per commuter than a lot of other places, and believe it or not, getting to jobs easily decreases crime which invariably decreases slum-like conditions. Even when we essentially tried to build a slum to stick low-income residents in (re: Cedar-Riverside), people still ended up finding jobs and jumpstarting the neighborhood, and now it's pretty safe and actually ain't a bad place to go out for a beer or a show...
Now this is very interesting also because I was on a website a few months ago where it was talking about the terrible traffic conditions in the Twin Cities and all the different remedies that the cities and state could do to remedy this. I'll go see if I can find that website again and post it here.

srsmn

September 29th, 2009, 11:58 PM

Considering the "bad neighborhoods": Your boss is more or less right. Loring Park, which clings to downtown, is an ugly neighborhood, and Phillips which I've mentioned before is also pretty bad. But again, each of these neighborhoods is a couple of square miles, max. And although the crime is most prevalent in probably those two neighborhoods, the real blight is poverty, and again, I think we'll gradually see the East African community that has decided to take up residence in the area pull themselves out of poverty.

Saying that the entire Northside is bad is a big exaggeration, although it was the impression we all got in the mid-90's when violent crime peeked. The worst neighborhoods are Jordan, Camden, Folwell, and maybe parts of Shingle Creek. Victory is actually quite nice, and in Near North and Bryn Mawr although you have low average familial incomes and high poverty rates, I also think that you have some of the most interesting black businesses in the city. I'd wager to say that Bryn Mawr has replaced Rondo (which we carelessly ran a six lane highway through) as the center of black life in the Cities.

As for Phillips and Camden, they are both Minneapolis-- Phillips from Blaisdell east all the way to Bloomington Ave, and from I-94 south past Franklin probably to about 24th Street. Camden is on the Northside, near Penn and Lowry, I believe. Phillips is only really ugly crime wise from 35W to Blaisdell.

Anything on the east side of St. Paul tends to be more blighted-- neighborhoods like Daytons Bluff, Mounds Park, Capitol Heights, Frogtown, Payne-Phalen-- whereas the west side is considered safer and more upscale (Highland Park, Mac-Groveland, Merriam Park, Crocus Hill, probably even West Seventh). And, unlike Minneapolis, although the crime is a little bit less intensified, most locals would tell you that it is spread out over a larger geographical swath and that gang activity is more prevalent there. That became officially true probably 5-10 years ago.

The Midway isn't pretty, either, but it's highly commercial and light industrial makeup makes most crime (besides drug deals) difficult. Some of it has spilt over into neighboring Merriam Park, however.

Concerning the traffic conditions: there have been several projects to "fix" our highways which-- although numerous-- are somewhat antiquated and were in need of high-occupancy/bus lanes. We were one of 8 metros (I think?) that received significant federal funding for this. What I meant to say is that there are no real "can't-get-there-from-heres" in Minneapolis or St. Paul proper. Where commuters would spend a significant amount of time stuck in traffic on a two-lane, stop-lighted city street in other big cities, most of us cruise four-eight lane limited access freeways, which is extremely rare, especially within city limits. Additionally, for people that don't have cars, there is an extensive network of bike paths that are well-used, and public transit is ambitiously expanding.

El Mariachi

September 30th, 2009, 12:39 AM

. Some people think milwaukee is in Minnesota and that Minneapolis is in Wisconsin. You're always going to find some pretty ignorant people wherever you go.

I have noticed both cities have been mistaken for each other quite a few times.

El Mariachi

September 30th, 2009, 12:42 AM

Actually, my supervisor at work lived in Minneapolis and he told me to avoid the northwest side altogether and told me that the west side was almost as bad. It was interesting because what he said was "you have downtown, then just to the west there's some bad areas but then there's a line of parks and country clubs and on the other side of all that are some real nice middle class neighborhoods". He said it was like night and day in just a matter of a mile or so.

I think that people blow their cities crime problems way out of proportion. Unless your city is Rio de Janeirio or something.

Paule

September 30th, 2009, 03:31 AM

Considering the "bad neighborhoods": Your boss is more or less right. Loring Park, which clings to downtown, is an ugly neighborhood, and Phillips which I've mentioned before is also pretty bad. But again, each of these neighborhoods is a couple of square miles, max. And although the crime is most prevalent in probably those two neighborhoods, the real blight is poverty, and again, I think we'll gradually see the East African community that has decided to take up residence in the area pull themselves out of poverty.
How does one "pull themselves out of poverty" in this economy, and with this administration? It's sad but I have to laugh.

Saying that the entire Northside is bad is a big exaggeration, although it was the impression we all got in the mid-90's when violent crime peeked. The worst neighborhoods are Jordan, Camden, Folwell, and maybe parts of Shingle Creek. Victory is actually quite nice, and in Near North and Bryn Mawr although you have low average familial incomes and high poverty rates, I also think that you have some of the most interesting black businesses in the city. I'd wager to say that Bryn Mawr has replaced Rondo (which we carelessly ran a six lane highway through) as the center of black life in the Cities.
WAIT, hold up, I and my supervisor never said that the entire Northside is bad. In fact I specifically said the areas and or neighborhoods to the northwest of downtown were seedly and run down. Well, he might've, but I knew what he was talking about.

As for Phillips and Camden, they are both Minneapolis-- Phillips from Blaisdell east all the way to Bloomington Ave, and from I-94 south past Franklin probably to about 24th Street. Camden is on the Northside, near Penn and Lowry, I believe. Phillips is only really ugly crime wise from 35W to Blaisdell.
Cool, thanks, I'll check them out on google when I get a chance.

Anything on the east side of St. Paul tends to be more blighted-- neighborhoods like Daytons Bluff, Mounds Park, Capitol Heights, Frogtown, Payne-Phalen-- whereas the west side is considered safer and more upscale (Highland Park, Mac-Groveland, Merriam Park, Crocus Hill, probably even West Seventh). And, unlike Minneapolis, although the crime is a little bit less intensified, most locals would tell you that it is spread out over a larger geographical swath and that gang activity is more prevalent there. That became officially true probably 5-10 years ago.

The Midway isn't pretty, either, but it's highly commercial and light industrial makeup makes most crime (besides drug deals) difficult. Some of it has spilt over into neighboring Merriam Park, however.

Concerning the traffic conditions: there have been several projects to "fix" our highways which-- although numerous-- are somewhat antiquated and were in need of high-occupancy/bus lanes. We were one of 8 metros (I think?) that received significant federal funding for this. What I meant to say is that there are no real "can't-get-there-from-heres" in Minneapolis or St. Paul proper. Where commuters would spend a significant amount of time stuck in traffic on a two-lane, stop-lighted city street in other big cities, most of us cruise four-eight lane limited access freeways, which is extremely rare, especially within city limits. Additionally, for people that don't have cars, there is an extensive network of bike paths that are well-used, and public transit is ambitiously expanding.
LOL, I don't know if your aquainted with this but years ago the Twin Cities used to have a second nick name, "The spagette bowl". Honestly though, I said I would check on that site again but haven't yet, i suppose I should give it a try.

Paule

September 30th, 2009, 03:48 AM

I think that people blow their cities crime problems way out of proportion. Unless your city is Rio de Janeirio or something.
Oh all the time! My brother-in-law has a sister who has lived in the Twin Cities metro for a long time now and whenever they come to visit, and I am there, all I hear from her husband is how bad the Twin Cities are getting. I just roll my eyes because I know that when it comes to large metros the Twin Cities are at the top of the list for low crime rate.

MplsTodd

September 30th, 2009, 11:36 PM

Jennifat

October 1st, 2009, 12:11 AM

Oh all the time! My brother-in-law has a sister who has lived in the Twin Cities metro for a long time now and whenever they come to visit, and I am there, all I hear from her husband is how bad the Twin Cities are getting. I just roll my eyes because I know that when it comes to large metros the Twin Cities are at the top of the list for low crime rate.

I think this perception that the city centers of Minneapolis and St. Paul are high crime has a lot to do with where you live in the Metro. Suburbanites tend to believe that the city centers are slums, especially those who never venture outside of their lily-white suburbs.

My parents live in the suburbs and they never, ever go to Minneapolis or St. Paul for anything. Literally never. All the know about the city is what they hear on the local news and thus they assume it's a crime-ridden slum.

El Mariachi

October 1st, 2009, 12:20 AM

Oh all the time! My brother-in-law has a sister who has lived in the Twin Cities metro for a long time now and whenever they come to visit, and I am there, all I hear from her husband is how bad the Twin Cities are getting. I just roll my eyes because I know that when it comes to large metros the Twin Cities are at the top of the list for low crime rate.

Yeah, its the same thing with Milwaukee. People make it out to be this cesspool, but unless you plan on dealing drugs and getting involved with gangs----you don't have to fear for your life. That all being said, I wouldn't be caught dead walking around at night in the ghetto---but you can at least safely pass through in a car without being shot. Who goes to these areas anyways for leisure?

Avian001

October 1st, 2009, 12:41 AM

I think this perception that the city centers of Minneapolis and St. Paul are high crime has a lot to do with where you live in the Metro. Suburbanites tend to believe that the city centers are slums, especially those who never venture outside of their lily-white suburbs.

My parents live in the suburbs and they never, ever go to Minneapolis or St. Paul for anything. Literally never. All the know about the city is what they hear on the local news and thus they assume it's a crime-ridden slum.

Totally agree with you. I happen to be lily-white, but I've got to tell you, I wouldn't be caught dead in the exurbs or even in the second-ring suburbs. I've traveled extensively and have spent time in almost every major city in this country. Burnsville, Minnesota is no different from Rockville, Maryland or Mesa, Arizona.

Give me a dense, urbane city neighborhood with noise, crowds, bars and great greasy food. :cheers:

minneapolis-uptown

October 1st, 2009, 01:45 AM

Paule

October 1st, 2009, 04:10 AM

Totally agree with you. I happen to be lily-white, but I've got to tell you, I wouldn't be caught dead in the exurbs or even in the second-ring suburbs. I've traveled extensively and have spent time in almost every major city in this country. Burnsville, Minnesota is no different from Rockville, Maryland or Mesa, Arizona.

Give me a dense, urbane city neighborhood with noise, crowds, bars and great greasy food. :cheers:
LOL, that was funny! :cheers:

Paule

October 1st, 2009, 04:12 AM

I'd hardly call Loring Park an ugly neighborhood. The park itself has been substantially improved over the past ten years, with new flower gardens, sculpture and bocce ball/horseshoe areas. Plus the park is also surrounded by some of the most elegant churches in the state: Basilica of St. Mary, Cathedral of St. Mark. There's also the new Eitel City Apartments, which is a very expensive apt development. The area does include a lot of older brick apartment buildings with small units so many of the residents are low to middle income, but given the density of the neighborhood, its certainly not a crime infested area.

For the record, my supervisor has lived here in Wausau for 12 years now so maybe back then it was worse than what it is now?

Paule

October 1st, 2009, 04:21 AM

Well, the truth is, you cant really get the atmosphere of a place by "driving" through it in google earth. You would not catch me walking any distance more than like 3 blocks in North Side Minneapolis even during broad daylight.

And the fact that Minneapolis is the Most literate city in the united states and also has this bad of neighborhoods has confused me for the longest time. can anyone shed any light on this?

It's Google Maps, not earth. Yeah I realize that you can't get a real feel for the atmosphere of a place by just driving thru but Google maps, to me, is the next best thing to actually being there walking the streets. have you ever used Google Maps where they show 360 degree photos from the street?

I disagree if you think the Twin Cities have real bad neighborhoods so extensive that it would confuse you as to why. I'm basically confused as to why the Twin Cities doesn't have much of a ghetto to speak of. It's there, but again, for the size of the cities, these "bad" neighborhoods are not that large in area or nearly as run down as other Midwestern cities.

Paule

October 1st, 2009, 04:27 AM

Yeah, its the same thing with Milwaukee. People make it out to be this cesspool, but unless you plan on dealing drugs and getting involved with gangs----you don't have to fear for your life. That all being said, I wouldn't be caught dead walking around at night in the ghetto---but you can at least safely pass through in a car without being shot. Who goes to these areas anyways for leisure?

About Two years ago a Milwaukee forumer, Fiddlerontheroof from Mequon, posted his story of one night when he and a buddie were driving through Milwaukee on Burleigh Ave. and a pick-up truck with two back guys chased them. They finally forced them to the side of the road and one of them got out and began hitting their car with a crow-bar and smashed the passenger window and punch one of them in the face. They took off and the chase resumed but they finally got onto the freeway and got away. Haven't heard much from ole' Fiddler since then. I think perhaps his love for urbanity has waned from that point on, perhaps?

srsmn

October 1st, 2009, 08:39 AM

Well, it's tough in any economy for a first-generation American. I guess my main point is that East Africans seem to be very adaptable immigrants-- many of them come over with secondary degrees and are only witheld jobs as doctors or lawyers because they earned their degrees from non-American, non-accredited universities. Having a wellspring of professional experience (and spending some time in refugee camps) seems to have taught this immigrant group in particular the value of hard work, and I can say-- and I've tutored some of the kids firsthand, so it's not all just blowing hot air-- that there's a strong commitment to make tomorrow better than today amongst the East African community here. It's something that you don't always see among immigrants, and frankly don't see as much amongst the Hmong immigrants across town. You see a lot of apathetic people that have been here forever, too, but that's a whole other issue.

I'm sorry to put words in your boss's mouth....I guess I got the impression that when you said "northwest side" or "northwest side of downtown" or whatever it was you meant the entire Northside. And the entire Northside certainly isn't bad.

Also, I had never heard the nickname for Minneapolis, although I had for Cincinatti and Louisville. Our interchange downtown is a bit hairy, though.

srsmn

October 1st, 2009, 08:41 AM

Well, the truth is, you cant really get the atmosphere of a place by "driving" through it in google earth. You would not catch me walking any distance more than like 3 blocks in North Side Minneapolis even during broad daylight.

And the fact that Minneapolis is the Most literate city in the united states and also has this bad of neighborhoods has confused me for the longest time. can anyone shed any light on this?

I totally disagree with that. I would call it categorically false. But, you're entitled to an opinion...

As far as the literacy goes, I don't think literacy automatically equates good neighborhoods, although it ought to help. Maybe the literacy rate is so much higher among the more "affluent" Minneapolitans that it compensates for the lower illiteracy rates in bad neighborhoods?

I also think you'd be surprised at how much worse neighborhoods or "ghettos" can get in truly illiterate cities in the Deep South...

srsmn

October 1st, 2009, 08:44 AM

I'd hardly call Loring Park an ugly neighborhood. The park itself has been substantially improved over the past ten years, with new flower gardens, sculpture and bocce ball/horseshoe areas. Plus the park is also surrounded by some of the most elegant churches in the state: Basilica of St. Mary, Cathedral of St. Mark. There's also the new Eitel City Apartments, which is a very expensive apt development. The area does include a lot of older brick apartment buildings with small units so many of the residents are low to middle income, but given the density of the neighborhood, its certainly not a crime infested area.

I agree with you that its very aesthetically pleasing. What I mean by "ugly" is that it is a relatively high crime area. It was a lot worse years ago, though, and-- like most places in Minneapolis-- if you're not there to buy or sell drugs you shouldn't find yourself in too much trouble.

Jennifat

October 1st, 2009, 11:54 AM

I totally disagree with that. I would call it categorically false. But, you're entitled to an opinion...

As far as the literacy goes, I don't think literacy automatically equates good neighborhoods, although it ought to help. Maybe the literacy rate is so much higher among the more "affluent" Minneapolitans that it compensates for the lower illiteracy rates in bad neighborhoods?

Well either you can read, or you can't. Maybe all of our less privileged can actually read? This isn't exactly Calcutta, our poor do get free k-12 education!

srsmn

October 1st, 2009, 06:53 PM

Well either you can read, or you can't. Maybe all of our less privileged can actually read? This isn't exactly Calcutta, our poor do get free k-12 education!

No, not 'either you can read or you can't'. There's a myriad of grey, there. Good schools= better reading. Worse neighborhoods= worse schools. Therefore, worse neighborhoods ought to = worse reading.

And why are you jumping down my throat? It was the op that made the suggestion that literacy and "living in a good/bad neighborhood" were related...

El Mariachi

October 2nd, 2009, 12:35 AM

About Two years ago a Milwaukee forumer, Fiddlerontheroof from Mequon, posted his story of one night when he and a buddie were driving through Milwaukee on Burleigh Ave. and a pick-up truck with two back guys chased them. They finally forced them to the side of the road and one of them got out and began hitting their car with a crow-bar and smashed the passenger window and punch one of them in the face. They took off and the chase resumed but they finally got onto the freeway and got away. Haven't heard much from ole' Fiddler since then. I think perhaps his love for urbanity has waned from that point on, perhaps?

yeah, I recall him telling his tale about that on here. As for why he doesn't post here anymore--I think he actually got banned for some reason.

You certainly hear about that sort of stuff going on in the ghetto to outsiders, but I don't think its common enough to completely avoid these areas, at least in a car. You have protection with one and few people are going to be able to harm you if your behind the wheel. Fiddler just happened to run into a maniac. I don't think most scumbags are going to want to draw that kind of attention by needlessly car chasing somebody and attacking them. The nice thing about Milwaukee is that its a grid----your always just a right turn from escaping trouble! :lol:

Paule

October 2nd, 2009, 01:19 AM

yeah, I recall him telling his tale about that on here. As for why he doesn't post here anymore--I think he actually got banned for some reason.

You certainly hear about that sort of stuff going on in the ghetto to outsiders, but I don't think its common enough to completely avoid these areas, at least in a car. You have protection with one and few people are going to be able to harm you if your behind the wheel. Fiddler just happened to run into a maniac. I don't think most scumbags are going to want to draw that kind of attention by needlessly car chasing somebody and attacking them. The nice thing about Milwaukee is that its a grid----your always just a right turn from escaping trouble! :lol:

Hmm, thanks for that explanation. That's too bad about Fiddler, he was one of my favorite posters, along with a few others that were banned.

El Mariachi

October 2nd, 2009, 01:29 AM

Hmm, thanks for that explanation. That's too bad about Fiddler, he was one of my favorite posters, along with a few others that were banned.

yeah, alot of Milwaukee forumers get banned around here. :lol:

I do miss Skyking though....

Paule

October 2nd, 2009, 02:08 AM

yeah, alot of Milwaukee forumers get banned around here. :lol:

I do miss Skyking though....
Must be something in the water?

LOL, I'm sorry, that was a bad joke!

El Mariachi

October 2nd, 2009, 02:39 AM

Must be something in the water?

LOL, I'm sorry, that was a bad joke!

i can appreciate a clever cryptosporidium outbreak joke when I hear one. :lol:

Rogee

October 2nd, 2009, 03:22 AM

Paule

October 2nd, 2009, 04:41 AM

I'm going to change the subject off of bad neighborhoods, but it still has to do with Twin Cities sprawl...

The Twin Cities have an excessive amount of freeways. When were most of these freeways built? Were they built after the sprawl happened, or did they encourage the sprawl?

I always found it amazing that all those freeways were built, while in Milwaukee we had massive opposition to freeways (still do). Half of our planned freeways were never built.
See srsmn, The Spaghetti Bowl. :)

To answer Rogee, they were built after the sprawl happend. As for what encouraged the sprawl in the Twin Cities, Minnesotans, like Wisconsinites, love the outdoors no matter what season, for the large majority, urbanity is a necessary evil and given the chance they will not live in it.

srsmn

October 2nd, 2009, 05:12 AM

See srsmn, The Spaghetti Bowl. :)

To answer Rogee, they were built after the sprawl happend. As for what encouraged the sprawl in the Twin Cities, Minnesotans, like Wisconsinites, love the outdoors no matter what season, for the large majority, urbanity is a necessary evil and given the chance they will not live in it.

Lol. touche. I actually didn't know the answer to that one, so I'm glad you did.

I think the exception is probably highway 100 in the West Metro....it predates most other freeways by about twenty+ years.

Paule, do you have specifics about when 94 and 35E and W were built? and for that matter 494 and 694? How many city blocks do you think had to go down in order to make way for the freeway? I had heard once-- from my dad, I think-- that originally they planned to build a second loop of 94 around dinkytown/marcy-holmes that would sort of spaghetti bowl with 35 on the east side of the river, but residents put up too much opposition. Guess they didn't do that anywhere else, huh?:ohno:

The anti-cheesehead

October 2nd, 2009, 05:17 AM

As for what encouraged the sprawl in the Twin Cities, Minnesotans, like Wisconsinites, love the outdoors no matter what season, for the large majority, urbanity is a necessary evil and given the chance they will not live in it.

Sprawl happens wherever any given metro continues to grow, not just in Minnesota. Higher growth metros have more sprawl. The less growth, the less sprawl.

Chicago has sprawl coming out it's ears but people don't seem to talk about it as much as the Twin Cities.

Paule

October 2nd, 2009, 06:28 AM

Sprawl happens wherever any given metro continues to grow, not just in Minnesota. Higher growth metros have more sprawl. The less growth, the less sprawl.

Chicago has sprawl coming out it's ears but people don't seem to talk about it as much as the Twin Cities.
Sigh, another person here who feels they have to teach me about sprawl and how the Twin Cities are no different than any other. Perhaps you should stop being so defensive of your city and just lighten up a bit? I included Wisconsinites with what I said. And I suppose I could've included other cities as well but I just didn't feel like it. Of course, if you don't see Minnesotans and Wisconsinites as being specifically more outdoors loving than any other area of the country one might want to agree more with you over what I said.

I think you should lose that chip on your shoulder. Here, have a beer, smoke it if you got it, loosen up the tie, seriously dude.

Paule

October 2nd, 2009, 06:39 AM

Lol. touche. I actually didn't know the answer to that one, so I'm glad you did.

I think the exception is probably highway 100 in the West Metro....it predates most other freeways by about twenty+ years.

Paule, do you have specifics about when 94 and 35E and W were built? and for that matter 494 and 694? How many city blocks do you think had to go down in order to make way for the freeway? I had heard once-- from my dad, I think-- that originally they planned to build a second loop of 94 around dinkytown/marcy-holmes that would sort of spaghetti bowl with 35 on the east side of the river, but residents put up too much opposition. Guess they didn't do that anywhere else, huh?:ohno:
Here's a map from 1968 showing the existing freeways and areas that were underconstruction and or planned.

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h237/paule17/frwymap.jpg

The anti-cheesehead

October 2nd, 2009, 02:45 PM

Of course, if you don't see Minnesotans and Wisconsinites as being specifically more outdoors loving than any other area of the country one might want to agree more with you over what I said.

I don't disagree with that, but I don't think that a love of outdoors has much to do with sprawl.

Maple Grove, Chaska, Barrington, Naperville, etc. aren't very "outdoorsy".

Paule

October 2nd, 2009, 06:34 PM

I don't disagree with that, but I don't think that a love of outdoors has much to do with sprawl.

Maple Grove, Chaska, Barrington, Naperville, etc. aren't very "outdoorsy".
And I'm talking about 100% of the metros, not just a few examples. It's not so much about being "outdoorsy" but people wanting their own home with a nice yard, not wanting to live in apartment houses or large condo buildings, in a sea of condos, apartments, and industry. But ok, we disagree, no big deal.

srsmn

October 2nd, 2009, 09:59 PM

Here's a map from 1968 showing the existing freeways and areas that were underconstruction and or planned.

http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h237/paule17/frwymap.jpg

Interesting! Thanks.

minneapolis-uptown

October 3rd, 2009, 09:21 PM

I totally disagree with that. I would call it categorically false. But, you're entitled to an opinion...

As far as the literacy goes, I don't think literacy automatically equates good neighborhoods, although it ought to help. Maybe the literacy rate is so much higher among the more "affluent" Minneapolitans that it compensates for the lower illiteracy rates in bad neighborhoods?

I also think you'd be surprised at how much worse neighborhoods or "ghettos" can get in truly illiterate cities in the Deep South...

oh, i totally agree with you about the bad neighborhoods in the south but I just didnt get how it could be this bad in this "smart" of a city, even though it may not be bad compared to New Orleans, Detroit, etc.

srsmn

October 3rd, 2009, 10:58 PM

oh, i totally agree with you about the bad neighborhoods in the south but I just didnt get how it could be this bad in this "smart" of a city, even though it may not be bad compared to New Orleans, Detroit, etc.

You may have a point, there. I have never been to Seattle (which we trade off the title of "Most Literate City" with most years), but my impression is that we have more areas of highly concentrated crime and poverty....

Hmmmm....anybody know better?

mhays

October 8th, 2009, 12:22 AM

You may have a point, there. I have never been to Seattle (which we trade off the title of "Most Literate City" with most years), but my impression is that we have more areas of highly concentrated crime and poverty....

Hmmmm....anybody know better?

Seattle has about 25 murders per year for 600,000 people. Not sure how that compares to MSP. We used to average around 65 in the early 90s I think, due to the crack epidemic in part.

As Seattle gentrifies, many of the poor are moving south, including to areas south of the city limits near the airport. We have significant poorer areas within the city limits, but if you find a $250,000 house in one of those places, even today, it's probably crap.

We have neighborhoods up to 45k/sm in terms of density (census tracts), but those are more bohemian/student than poor.

Paule

October 8th, 2009, 12:30 AM

Seattle has about 25 murders per year for 600,000 people. Not sure how that compares to MSP. We used to average around 65 in the early 90s I think, due to the crack epidemic in part.

As Seattle gentrifies, many of the poor are moving south, including to areas south of the city limits near the airport. We have significant poorer areas within the city limits, but if you find a $250,000 house in one of those places, even today, it's probably crap.

We have neighborhoods up to 45k/sm in terms of density (census tracts), but those are more bohemian/student than poor.
That's excellent compared to any city the same size, but now lets talk about the Seattle suicide rate, opps, just kidding. :)

mhays

October 8th, 2009, 08:59 AM

Maybe we just use different definitions... Someone standing on the wrong 7-11, killed during a robbery, must have been "asking for it" and therefore suicide....

Paule

October 8th, 2009, 10:25 AM

Maybe we just use different definitions... Someone standing on the wrong 7-11, killed during a robbery, must have been "asking for it" and therefore suicide....
LOL! Well, bridge jumpers is the definition I use and from what I understand the term was coined in Seattle because of all the numerus bridge jumpers over there, and I'm not refering to bungy cord jumpers either.

srsmn

October 8th, 2009, 07:47 PM

That's excellent compared to any city the same size, but now lets talk about the Seattle suicide rate, opps, just kidding. :)

Yeah, that is excellent if it's true. It would be like, four or five murders per 100,000....extremely low, but if any city could do that, it would be Seattle. People here freaked out when the murder rate peaked at about 40 some per 100,000. Chicago is around 70, I think, and that's considered low compared to the early 1990's. New Orleans, the one-time murder capital of the country (still is?) once had 200+ per 100,000.

But the suicide rate ain't higher anywhere than the Ol' Emerald City. Sorry,
Seattle--- it's not that your town stinks that bad....it's just that the weather does...

Then again, so does ours. Hmm.

wheelingman

October 8th, 2009, 10:16 PM

Nice conversation we have going on here. I am learning a lot about the Twin Cities. I wish I would have had time to visit the neighborhoods instead of just downtown Minneapolis.

mhays

October 8th, 2009, 10:21 PM

LOL! Well, bridge jumpers is the definition I use and from what I understand the term was coined in Seattle because of all the numerus bridge jumpers over there, and I'm not refering to bungy cord jumpers either.

If you're from Seattle and trying to sweep this under the rug I suggest you stop it. No one in this country, except for complete morons, will be fooled into believing that Seattle doesn't have the highest suicide rate. I'll stop here with this discussion but you are free to continue on. Course if you continue to pursue a course of ignorance on this I will have to defend myself, and it can get ugly, for you.

Do you REALLY think I was serious about what we consider suicide!?

srsmn, apparently some people have an aversion to overcast skies, and drizzle that can go on and on. Also, we get the "transplant" effect with a lot of people being far from their roots. And culturally we're polite but slow to invite people into our lives...basically northern European and Japanese traits.

As for that bridge, it's similar to at least one bridge in MSP, the one with the big chair. Very high up. But they're going to install a fence, which should at least reduce the number of jumps, removing the easiest way out.

srsmn

October 8th, 2009, 11:31 PM

As for that bridge, it's similar to at least one bridge in MSP, the one with the big chair. Very high up. But they're going to install a fence, which should at least reduce the number of jumps, removing the easiest way out.

I have no idea to which bridge you are referring....

Paule

October 9th, 2009, 12:35 AM

Do you REALLY think I was serious about what we consider suicide!?

Yeah, maybe, I don't know. I just hate it when I'm drunk and come to the forum and talk, I say the stupidest things.

colink

October 9th, 2009, 01:03 AM

Yeah, maybe, I don't know. I just hate it when I'm drunk and come to the forum and talk, I say the stupidest things.

I think you're referring to the High Bridge in St. Paul. There's a big Adirondack chair on the downtown side of the bridge.

srsmn

October 9th, 2009, 01:47 AM

I think you're referring to the High Bridge in St. Paul. There's a big Adirondack chair on the downtown side of the bridge.

http://www.caleuche.com/River/Assets/Images/HighBridge.jpg

Where's the 'chair' though???

btw, Paule wasn't the poster that said that....

srsmn

October 9th, 2009, 01:49 AM

oh, duh. It wouldn't be in that pic, would it?

So, this is some kind of public art? Hmmm....interesting. Guess I've got to get into St. Paul more often....:banana:

srsmn

October 9th, 2009, 01:51 AM

http://www.stpaulrealestateblog.com/.a/6a00d83451d6cf69e2011570f09b9e970c-500wi

Guessing this is it?

Somnifor

October 9th, 2009, 08:18 AM

1). I get horrible vertigo walking across the St Paul High Bridge, you could put a midrise tower under that thing and it would only come two thirds of the way up.

2). Posting when drunk is a dangerous thing. I used to self ban myself for some of the things I posted when drunk, I tended to say some embarassing stuff. I couldn't bring myself to come back for a few days afterwards. Jmancuso probably hates me for some of my drunken rants about Utica. I try not to post drunk anymore, or when I do I just talk about nonsense in the DLM, I figure everyone there is drunk based on what they write.

Snowguy716

October 11th, 2009, 12:27 AM

The freeways in the Twin Cities were mostly built along with or shortly after the sprawl. I-35W from the Minnesota River to downtown was completed in the late 1950s just as the grid-style sprawl began ballooning southward into Richfield and Bloomington.

My grandparents moved to a new subdivision in Bloomington in 1951 and my grandfather used city streets to commute to work until the late '50s. 494 was begun in the late 50s as well along the south metro area.

Many of the freeways in the Twin Cities have been completed relatively recently, though.

In more recent times, however, it'd be easy to say that the sprawl has followed the freeways, unlike earlier times.

minneapolis-uptown

October 11th, 2009, 07:20 AM

Seattle has about 25 murders per year for 600,000 people. Not sure how that compares to MSP. We used to average around 65 in the early 90s I think, due to the crack epidemic in part.

As Seattle gentrifies, many of the poor are moving south, including to areas south of the city limits near the airport. We have significant poorer areas within the city limits, but if you find a $250,000 house in one of those places, even today, it's probably crap.

We have neighborhoods up to 45k/sm in terms of density (census tracts), but those are more bohemian/student than poor.

in 1995 Minneapolis had about a hundred murders due to a raging gang turf war. just a litle interesting (didnt really want to say fun) fact :guns1::gunz:

minneapolis-uptown

October 23rd, 2009, 07:52 AM

back to the thread's original purpose

North loop/warehouse district:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3556/3450795624_57f29474b9.jpg

http://minneapplerealestate.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/698px-minneapolis_warehouse_district.jpg

http://cityblock.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/img_4477.jpg?w=450&h=337

http://cityblock.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/img_1184.jpg?w=450&h=337

http://www.urbanrail.net/am/minn/05-Minneapolis-Warehouse.jpg

http://www.minnesotaloftsandcondos.com/images/buildings/44990833.JPG:llama:

Paule

October 23rd, 2009, 08:07 AM

[B]back to the thread's original purpose

Yes, ok, lets get back to the OP's purpose. The pics that you have shown, very good and impressive pics I might add, are all in or very near the CBD of Minneapolis. Hey, I can show you pics of downtown Wausau that look urdan too, so what have you proved?

sicarim

October 23rd, 2009, 01:47 PM

http://img184.exs.cx/img184/418/m234vf.jpg (http://www.imageshack.us)

I almost moved into an apartment right next to that building.

In retrospect, i'm glad I didn't.

0m09ja

October 23rd, 2009, 10:52 PM

Yes, ok, lets get back to the OP's purpose. The pics that you have shown, very good and impressive pics I might add, are all in or very near the CBD of Minneapolis. Hey, I can show you pics of downtown Wausau that look urdan too, so what have you proved?

Why not look at the monthly pictures posted of Minneapolis and Saint Paul on this forum?

Paule

October 24th, 2009, 01:02 AM

Why not look at the monthly pictures posted of Minneapolis and Saint Paul on this forum?
I haven't, nor have I ever, said that the Twin Cities don't have urban neighborhoods, I know that they do. I'm just saying that if you're going to post pics to prove that the cities do have urban neighborhoods, the way to change people's minds is to post pics outside the CBD. The North Loop Warehouse District I guess is a good start but if you want to change people's minds about the Twin Cities go out a little further. I don't know the name of the neighborhood but around Lake Calhoun I think would prove this point alot better. Or the neighborhood just south of the downtown loop would be great, or even down along 35th st. I don't know, right now I don't have a map handy but there are neighborhoods all around inside the cities that would prove once and for all that the cities have plenty of urban neighborhoods.

And yes, I do view those threads, even over at skyscraperpage.com. You also have to realize that this is an old thread, since this thread was started, plenty of people have repressented the twin Cities well and would doubt that there currently are very many people that would argue that the Twin Cities lack urban neighborhoods.

minneapolis-uptown

October 24th, 2009, 05:10 PM

I don't know the name of the neighborhood but around Lake Calhoun I think would prove this point alot better. Or the neighborhood just south of the downtown loop would be great

you are thinking of uptown and stevens/phillips

minneapolis-uptown

October 24th, 2009, 05:49 PM

uptown & midtown:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a8/Calhoun_mpls.jpg

http://www.phototour.minneapolis.mn.us/pics/990.jpg

http://stevelyon.com/365/uploaded_images/20070105-1-746549.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/94/251855588_87eb6167e6.jpg?v=0

Stevens & phillips:
http://www.boomspeed.com/atucker7/Mpls_Summer_02.jpg

http://residency.pathology.umn.edu/images/content/hospitals/abbott_nw.jpg

http://www.luxurycollectiondestinations.com/images/uploaded/arts/img_1241076782_7149_Minneapolis_Culture_InsArtsPanoramic.jpg

Elliot Park:
http://www.zumach.net/az_notecards/designs/MPLS/downtown/east_side_elliot/misc/DSC09971_e2_ncbt_px.jpg

http://www.tclisc.org/twin_cities/images/neighborhood_tours/MplsEastSideAfter.jpg

Minneapolis has a lot of buildings like this:
http://www.minnesotaloftsandcondos.com/images/buildings/1289700711.jpg

http://minneapolis.condo.com/MLS_IMAGES/MN/22/3822548.jpg

minneapolis-uptown

October 24th, 2009, 06:37 PM

around lake Calhoun:
http://images01.olx.com/ui/2/99/40/f_34099940_1.jpeg

http://www.rent.com/media/property/34696/34696667.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_VyKh-ydn2JM/SWt7U39UA1I/AAAAAAAAAQM/9WL8aeeUQ2w/s400/loopcalhounext1web.jpg

http://www.phototour.minneapolis.mn.us/pics/2249.jpg

http://www.cotty.com/search/images/1/3551660.jpg

Paule

October 25th, 2009, 02:06 AM

you are thinking of uptown and stevens/phillips
Yep, and the pics you've shown I think goes further in showing the cities as bith dense and urban, good job!

Avian001

October 27th, 2009, 12:31 AM

What I like about this shot of Lake Street in Minneapolis is the fact you can see the top of the St. Paul skyline on the horizon!

uptown & midtown:
http://stevelyon.com/365/uploaded_images/20070105-1-746549.jpg

minneapolis-uptown

October 27th, 2009, 05:01 AM

What I like about this shot of Lake Street in Minneapolis is the fact you can see the top of the St. Paul skyline on the horizon!

yeah, and the massive midtown building

Somnifor

October 29th, 2009, 06:58 AM

31st and Bryant is pretty far from downtown:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2641/3855324360_a6250e0661_b.jpg

32nd and Bryant:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3440/3854501161_16443ea9b9_b.jpg

ColdRedRain

November 1st, 2009, 10:00 PM

What building did you take that photo of the MGM building and DT STP from?

Paule

November 1st, 2009, 11:17 PM

31st and Bryant is pretty far from downtown:
Looks like a pretty urban neighborhood to me.

minneapolis-uptown

November 2nd, 2009, 01:52 AM

What building did you take that photo of the MGM building and DT STP from?

Lyn-Lake building

wheelingman

November 2nd, 2009, 03:52 PM

I can't believe how long my thread has been going on. THANKS:) I have learned a lot. I wish I had time to visit the neighborhoods, but downtown Minneapolis was great even back in 2002. Hopefully I will get up there for a longer visit one of these days.

sirwalterralegh

November 6th, 2009, 04:42 AM

Interesting.

minneapolis-uptown

October 27th, 2010, 01:25 AM

Here are some pictures of a dense area in the Lowry Hill Neighborhood just north of uptown and southwest of downtown:
http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150/dathribab/img1288131724295.jpg

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150/dathribab/img1288131704917.jpg

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150/dathribab/img1288131686557.jpg

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w150/dathribab/img1288130923027.jpg
(sorry for the image quality i just snapped them on my camera phone while biking)

mysteek_1976

October 27th, 2010, 09:34 PM

Generally yes, that's true, when it comes to metro areas like Kansas City for instance that may not be the case.

I think why some people may come to think of the Twin Cities as not being all that dense is because it has such a huge suburban population. It's actually quite extensive in both land and population. I will agree that the Twin Cities central city is very dense but for the size of the whole metro one might expect the central city to be larger in size than what the Twin Cities actually has, and that being in both land area and population. I'm just thinking, not making a statement.

You have in your signature "Minneapolis and St. Paul 669,769 in 108 sq. miles" that's a very good number of people but when you consider that the Twin cities metro is well over 3,000,000 people you might begin to see what I'm trying to say.

No! I actually think you missed what that statement says! How much shit do you actually expect the city of Minneapolis to pack into 54 sq. mi. considering the fact that we have a big handful of lakes, parks, golf courses(more par 3 than any other city), the Mississippi and numerous other places that are not open to development? The fact that we have fit several hundred thousand people in this city is amazing!