Quote:
Originally Posted by ghdana
It would appear that more people choose Phoenix over Minneapolis by looking at the metro population. Also the population growth of Phoenix in the past 10 years is higher than Minneapolis. I haven't been to Phoenix, but I've spent a considerable amount of time in Minneapolis, at least enough to have my own personal opinion.
When I think of Minneapolis I think of a cleaner Cleveland. A city that is popular because there just because Minnesotans needed a central city to meet in. I couldn't ever live there, just because I am so tired of snow and clouds. The most interesting geographical features of Minnesota are the lakes, while Phoenix has a more unique desert with small hikable mountains. You can drive to any Californian cities in under a day or LV, while Minneapolis has Chicago as the only great destination.
|
Let's dissect this quick.
* "Phoenix is growing faster than Minneapolis"
Yes, definitely and verifiably true. Phoenix is a Sunbelt city that is expanding about as quickly as its infrastructure allows (though not as fast as some of its peers, like Houston, Austin, and Miami, and also not as fast as Northern cities like Seattle, Boise, and Des Moines). However, Minneapolis is still growing very fast too, well above the US average and ahead of metros likes Tampa, Boston, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia.
* "I've spent enough time in Minneapolis to have my own opinion"
Great! I'm glad you're engaging from a position of experience rather than assumption! I confess I don't know a ton about Phoenix, so I'll try to only talk about it when I'm citing hard facts.
* "Minneapolis is a cleaner Cleveland"
I believe that's what you experienced, but I can't quite figure out where it comes from. Minneapolis and Cleveland seem very different to me. I could see a comparison of Cleveland proper with St. Paul proper, but both Minneapolis proper and the Minneapolis-St. Paul metro area as a whole are visually/architecturally/aesthetically and also culturally more similar to Western and Northwestern cities like Denver, Seattle, and Portland than to Great Lakes/Rust Belt cities like Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Detroit as far as I can tell.
* "Minneapolis is popular because Minnesotans needed a central city"
Well, it definitely is the cultural and economic powerhouse of Minnesota, but it also anchors the entire Upper Midwest region, which I'm using here to define the area comprised of all of Minnesota, the eastern halves of North Dakota and South Dakota, most of Iowa, almost all of Wisconsin, most of Michigan's UP, and bits and pieces of Illinois and Nebraska - you could even argue that the influence of Minneapolis reaches all the way up to parts of Ontario and Manitoba. But even that is not at all the only reason Minneapolis is popular. What about the cultural institutions and history, the national economic weight, the urban vibrancy, and the copious recreational amenities?
* "Minneapolis is too cloudy and snowy"
Fair enough, winter is a real and present season in Minneapolis. However, the Twin Cities are actually much sunnier than most of the Midwest:
Average monthly sunshine hours (Nov-Feb; of the 10 largest MSAs in the Midwest)
1. Kansas City: 164.55
2. St. Louis: 148.35
3. Minneapolis: 141.5
4. Milwaukee: 139.375
5. Indianapolis: 125.875
...
10. Cleveland: 96.2
For comparison, the Phoenix average is 253.5.
And furthermore, Minneapolis is the #1 sunniest city in the Midwest during the summer:
Average monthly sunshine hours (May-Aug; of the 10 largest MSAs in the Midwest)
1. Minneapolis: 318.175
2. Kansas City: 303.825
3. Milwaukee: 300.1
4. Chicago: 298.675
5. Detroit: 294.55
...
10. Columbus: 249.725
Of course, this still can't compete with Phoenix (summer average: 378.975), but it is actually considerably higher than many major Sunbelt metros' summer averages, including Dallas (297.45) and Miami (296.75).
As far as snow, Minneapolis does have the snowiest autumn in the Midwest and the second snowiest spring (after Cleveland, tied with Milwaukee), but in terms of the entire snow season (Nov-Apr), it's fairly middle-of-the-pack:
Average monthly snowy days (Nov-Apr; of the 10 largest MSAs in the Midwest)
1. Cleveland: 7.7
2. Detroit: 6.12
3. Milwaukee: 5.82
4. Minneapolis: 5.81
5. Columbus: 4.93
...
10. Kansas City: 1.4
* "Minneapolis's lakes are its most interest geographical feature"
I would mostly agree, but it seems a bit unfair to leave out the Northwoods, the North Shore, the Boundary Waters, the Iron Range, and especially the Driftless/Mississippi Bluffs if we're talking about geographical features and access to recreation. There aren't mountains in the Upper Midwest like there are in the Southwest, and there isn't a desert, but there's plenty of fantastic hiking, camping, biking, and skiing (cross-country and some downhill) very near Minneapolis. The lake culture in Minnesota is also something that doesn't have an equivalent in Arizona.
* "Phoenix is closer to more"
Can't argue with the benefit of Phoenix's access to LA, San Diego, and Vegas. Phoenix is closer to those cities than Minneapolis is to any other major cities. That said, there is much more
between Minneapolis and those cities than there is between Phoenix and its neighbors, basically just because it's tough to build in the desert. It's also worth noting that even if Phoenix is a bit closer to its neighbors, Minneapolis is not THAT much further from Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Omaha, and Kansas City (with the benefit of cities like Duluth, Madison, and Des Moines in a closer ring) - all these cities are easily within a day's drive. All things considered, though, neither city has much to boast about in terms of proximity. They're both quite isolated compared to most other large cities, though arguably not as isolated as Denver or the Pacific Northwest.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
