U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-03-2014, 04:58 AM
Status: "Rocktober...well that was fast. :-(" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
10,302 posts, read 10,457,063 times
Reputation: 13259

Advertisements

Yimby, it's funny you didn't want to move there. I've never lived there but have passed through numerous times and always think positive things about it. I generally read positive things about it (save common problems every major city deals with). My in-laws live in Northern Minnesota and I am well aware Minneapolis is a gateway to some pretty awesome recreational opportunities, too. And since I don't mind the cold, I'd rather live in a place like Minneapolis over Miami in a heartbeat.

I'll leave you with this analogy and like you, will move on. A bright star near an even brighter star does not always appear as bright as a similarly bright star in a more isolated region of the sky. This is why Denver is pound for pound much more prominent than other cities of similar size. If Colorado Springs had 2 million people then perhaps this wouldn't be so. If Wichita had 2 million, Denver's regional prominence would not be as high. Salt Lake City is pretty large, but it is geographically isolated in its own right and not necessarily an easy day-trip away from Denver. When you look at the map, Denver is the only top 25 city for literally hundreds of miles. The result is a pretty high concentration of amenities, the combination of which can usually only be found in cities larger than Denver. And as Denver continues to grow, it's national and international profile are going to grow with it.

With that I am happy to lay this debate to rest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2014, 08:13 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis (St. Louis Park)
5,991 posts, read 7,923,517 times
Reputation: 4213
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sconesforme View Post
Minneapolis has a larger metropolitan area than Denver but Denver proper houses more people than Minneapolis. In fact, Denver has a population of 635,000 people and Minneapolis just 400,000. One has to mention that Denver area is 2.5 times Minneapolis. Denver is less dense than Minneapolis and the difference in density is quite significant between the cities. Minneapolis had a GDP of 220,167 million dollars in 2013 and Denver had a GDP of 167,886 million dollars the same year. One should note that Metropolitan Minneapolis holds 3.4 million people and Metropolitan Denver holds 2.9 million people. Looking at median household income it is higher in Minneapolis (CMSA) than in Denver (CMSA) but only with 3216 US dollar.

The median house-hold income is slightly higher in Minnesota than in Colorado as of 2013 and both of them seem too developed pretty similar after the 2008 crisis. Looking at numbers of high rises – there are 208 in Denver and 246 in Minneapolis but I do not know if these numbers are correct. Minneapolis has 36 buildings that are over 90 meters high but Denver has at least 32 buildings that are over 100 meter high. None of them have subways and both uses light rails – a subway is a sign of a growing urban city and none of the cities seem to think it is important. Both cities are growing rapidly. Denver grew with 8.22 percent 2010-2013 and Minneapolis grew 4.57 percent under the same period. Denver MSA grew with 6.05 percent under 2010-2013 and Minneapolis grew with 3.29 percent. Minneapolis (proper) has still 120,000 people short since 1950 and Denver had never been bigger in 2013.

Minneapolis is a more diverse city than Denver. Minneapolis has 63.8 percent whites and Denver has 68.9 percent whites. I would guess that Minneapolis could end up with a white flight – as so many other cities when the minorities push close to being a majority. What you can see in the statistics is this. Denver had a decline 1980-1990 but turned around and by 2000 they had not only recovered but moved upward which they continue to do. Minneapolis had a decline in 1960-1990 and is still recovering. Population is not everything but is clearly an important factor. Doing a prognosis is difficult (and I have no time) but clearly – both cities seem to be on the move. Denver will likely surpass Memphis, El Paso and Detroit the coming three years based on previous growth. Denver may also grow beyond Seattle, but is also show high population growth. Still, Denver is the third fastest growing city in the US with a population of 500,000. Minneapolis will not even surpass Oakland. When it comes to Denver Metropolis they will likely surpass Baltimore and St. Louis the coming three years. Minneapolis will not surpass anybody but it seems like San Diego is coming closer and close Minneapolis.

The thing here is that Minneapolis Metropolitan Area is playing in the middle of the 3+ million-club but is still far from coming close to the 4+ million club where Detroit is playing. Denver on the other hand is playing in the late 2+ million metropolitan Area club and Denver has only Baltimore and St. Louis and Tampa in front of them. The first two show little development in population and Tampa, who has a good population growth is still not high enough to compete with Denver. Behind Denver there is no competition other than San Antonio, Charlotte and Orlando but they will not grow beyond Denver for a quite some time. It will take 6-10 years until Denver surpass Minneapolis.


Detroit (proper) continues to rapidly lose population. Detroit Metropolitan Area is still top 15 in United States but it sees no population growth at all. It started to see a drop in 2000 and so it has continued. The entire region is losing population. Yes, even the state is losing its population even if there is some recovery. Detroit will most likely be among the top 25 largest cities in the USA within three years but they may be that 25th city. They recently elected a new Mayor (a smart one) and what did he do? He used 9 million in federal funds to restore 30 homes and then sold them for 2 million dollar. Detroit is a dead city run by the worse kind of crony liberals and has been this way since the 50s. Minneapolis will likely surpass Detroit when it comes to population within 10-15 years.
If/when population defines the greatness of one's city, then I will bow down to that city as being superior. Until then, it's going to take more than growth and population to be "better" for me. I can name quite a few bigger and/or faster-growing cities that I think are below Minneapolis OR Denver, couldn't you?

Notes:
*Minneapolis and St. Paul DID experience white flight already (the 1950's/60's) and drove the majority of their respective population losses (Denver never experienced this), and it's reversing, if anything.
*"population" when I use the term means metro area, not city area, because city land sizes are so different and some cities continue to annex land (like Denver) while others don't/won't (like Mpls).
*cities don't build subways because they are prohibitively expensive, and only the most densely-populated cities in the most expensive regions will even consider building a TRUE subway today (that excludes Seattle, which isn't building a true subway).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2014, 08:40 AM
 
1,170 posts, read 1,180,186 times
Reputation: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
Yimby, it's funny you didn't want to move there. I've never lived there but have passed through numerous times and always think positive things about it. I generally read positive things about it (save common problems every major city deals with). My in-laws live in Northern Minnesota and I am well aware Minneapolis is a gateway to some pretty awesome recreational opportunities, too. And since I don't mind the cold, I'd rather live in a place like Minneapolis over Miami in a heartbeat.
Well, if you are ever in the Twin Cities area, drop me a line and we can have a discussion like this or any other city-data-related topic over a beer, or two, or three.

Quote:
Originally Posted by iknowftbll View Post
This is why Denver is pound for pound much more prominent than other cities of similar size. If Colorado Springs had 2 million people then perhaps this wouldn't be so. If Wichita had 2 million, Denver's regional prominence would not be as high. Salt Lake City is pretty large, but it is geographically isolated in its own right and not necessarily an easy day-trip away from Denver. When you look at the map, Denver is the only top 25 city for literally hundreds of miles. The result is a pretty high concentration of amenities, the combination of which can usually only be found in cities larger than Denver. And as Denver continues to grow, it's national and international profile are going to grow with it.
I understand what you are saying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2014, 09:59 AM
Status: "Rocktober...well that was fast. :-(" (set 22 days ago)
 
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
10,302 posts, read 10,457,063 times
Reputation: 13259
Quote:
Originally Posted by YIMBY View Post
Well, if you are ever in the Twin Cities area, drop me a line and we can have a discussion like this or any other city-data-related topic over a beer, or two, or three.
Deal. And I invite you to dothe same if you are ever down here in Virginia.

@ min-chi-bus: good post but it is worth noting Denver is not growing by annexing. By far the most significant annexing the city did was in order to incorporate the airport into city and county limits. The city covered about 100 square miles prior to annexing the site. The airport added 54 square miles to the city's area, and most of this is consumed by the actual airport complex and supporting activities. The addition did add some open space in the city providing the city an opportunity to pursue other developments, but for the most part Denver's population growth has come from real growth, not annexation. I don't think the city has annexed a square inch since adding the airport. The area NE of downtown is seeing a lot of progress, and the Stapleton neighborhood, site of the old airport, has filled in as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2014, 10:25 AM
 
271 posts, read 293,737 times
Reputation: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Min-Chi-Cbus View Post
If/when population defines the greatness of one's city, then I will bow down to that city as being superior. Until then, it's going to take more than growth and population to be "better" for me. I can name quite a few bigger and/or faster-growing cities that I think are below Minneapolis OR Denver, couldn't you?

Notes:
*Minneapolis and St. Paul DID experience white flight already (the 1950's/60's) and drove the majority of their respective population losses (Denver never experienced this), and it's reversing, if anything.
*"population" when I use the term means metro area, not city area, because city land sizes are so different and some cities continue to annex land (like Denver) while others don't/won't (like Mpls).
*cities don't build subways because they are prohibitively expensive, and only the most densely-populated cities in the most expensive regions will even consider building a TRUE subway today (that excludes Seattle, which isn't building a true subway).
Of course there are plenty of cities that have a faster growth than Denver. I think I mentioned it. Population is not everything. Cities like Jakarta, Delhi, Manila, Karachi, Mumbai, Lagos and others are extremely large cities but they are still third world slums. How we define cities can be done with several of methods and annexation does come as a factor not to compare proper cities. According to Wiki (maybe not the most reliable source) Tokyo seems to be the largest city in plenty of measurement-categories.

World's largest cities - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I think most cities experiences white flight in the US but I don’t think that all explains why Minneapolis dropped in population under thirty years. When it comes to subways a lot of cities build them. In 2014 three cities (two in China and one in Panama) opened new subways. Even Santo Domingo in Dominican Republic opened a subway 2009 with 30 stations.

Plenty of poor nations have subways – what is about is that the public in United States prefer owning a car and live in satellite suburbs outside cities. Buying, owing and driving a car in United States is cheap because of low taxes on gas and it is a part of American identity and culture. The US spends an insane amount of money on high ways – much more than they spend on public transit. In Europe, Asia and Latin-America – cars are taxed and taxes are used to build subways. There are a few cities in the US that should consider subways and maybe Denver or Minneapolis are two of those cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top