U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Celebrating Memorial Day!
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)
View Poll Results: Pittsburgh vs Minneapolis
Pittsburgh 80 41.88%
Mineeapolis 95 49.74%
Both pretty much the same 16 8.38%
Voters: 191. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-18-2015, 09:24 AM
 
1,706 posts, read 946,164 times
Reputation: 985

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SDPMiami View Post
Pittsburgh, cool bar strips.
Yeah I've seen Flashdance too

Minneapolis FTW. I go there for work a lot and it's affordable, bike friendly (ride share!) and tons of bars. Midtown Minneapolis is filled with young people and is definitely up and coming. I go there for work a lot and while it can never be as vast as a city like LA, it's pretty impressive to visit when it's not a tundra outside.

That said, the weather is awful for a good chunk of the year. There isn't much you can do about that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2015, 03:30 PM
 
1,333 posts, read 1,153,738 times
Reputation: 1149
Cleveland really shines when you're talking about its burbs IMO. The city itself is patchy and has a ways to go before a lot of people come back.

I'm not sure why this wasn't a Columbus vs Minneapolis thread. Granted the Metro populations aren't all that similar, but the cities are both of the same style being the newer, modern, forward thinking, and somewhat suburban type of cities.

If you take the combined Minneapolis-St. Paul population and Columbus you're coming close to the same number.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2015, 05:36 PM
 
Location: Twin Cities (StP)
3,007 posts, read 1,706,931 times
Reputation: 2293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Port Pitt Ash View Post
Cleveland really shines when you're talking about its burbs IMO. The city itself is patchy and has a ways to go before a lot of people come back.

I'm not sure why this wasn't a Columbus vs Minneapolis thread. Granted the Metro populations aren't all that similar, but the cities are both of the same style being the newer, modern, forward thinking, and somewhat suburban type of cities.

If you take the combined Minneapolis-St. Paul population and Columbus you're coming close to the same number.
While the Twin Cities are half of the area.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 06:05 AM
 
1,333 posts, read 1,153,738 times
Reputation: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grizzly Addams View Post
While the Twin Cities are half of the area.
I'm talking about looking at it from the style of city. Pittsburgh and Minneapolis aren't the same style of city. Maybe that was the point, but it seems like it turns into little more than a popularity contest if that's the case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 04:18 PM
 
Location: Twin Cities (StP)
3,007 posts, read 1,706,931 times
Reputation: 2293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Port Pitt Ash View Post
I'm talking about looking at it from the style of city. Pittsburgh and Minneapolis aren't the same style of city. Maybe that was the point, but it seems like it turns into little more than a popularity contest if that's the case.
I was just commenting on the fact that Columbus is twice the land area of Saint Paul and Minneapolis combined.

I have never been to Pittsburgh, but I have always gotten the feeling that it is more like Saint Paul than Minneapolis (which really aren't anything alike). I'm not sure if the rest of the country understands this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 09:32 PM
 
Location: The Windy City
5,163 posts, read 2,843,175 times
Reputation: 4371
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Buster View Post
I'd guess that it's a difference of opinion of "big city feel" based on region. Many midwestern or southern people get the feeling of a big city by wide avenues and streets. In the northeast, I think it's more focused on the building density and housing density, and amount of activity on sidewalks and storefronts. But the poster you responded to is clearly pretty mixed up about the size of the metros areas he/she was mentioning, so this may just be confusion or the result of being misinformed.
When I was in Pittsburgh for a conference, I didn't get the feel that the metro had the population that it does.

I live near the Kansas City area, and when I drive through there, I get the impression that there are a lot more residents than the stats say. I can drive for 45 minutes and still be in the metro area.

However, Kansas City is one of the largest cities by land mass. Pittsburgh is more compact. This is probably what caused my confusion. In Pittsburgh I drove for 30 minutes and I was already in the boonies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-19-2015, 09:40 PM
 
1,333 posts, read 1,153,738 times
Reputation: 1149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grizzly Addams View Post
I was just commenting on the fact that Columbus is twice the land area of Saint Paul and Minneapolis combined.

I have never been to Pittsburgh, but I have always gotten the feeling that it is more like Saint Paul than Minneapolis (which really aren't anything alike). I'm not sure if the rest of the country understands this.
Sorry, I took it for a snarky comment. Guess I've been around some of the CD people who like to troll to much?

Yeah, Saint Paul is more like Pittsburgh than Minneapolis.

Outside of these forums I doubt the Twin Cities are known in half as much detail though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2015, 03:27 AM
 
Location: The canyon (with my pistols and knife)
12,994 posts, read 17,113,637 times
Reputation: 14300
Quote:
Originally Posted by lepoisson View Post
When I was in Pittsburgh for a conference, I didn't get the feel that the metro had the population that it does.

I live near the Kansas City area, and when I drive through there, I get the impression that there are a lot more residents than the stats say. I can drive for 45 minutes and still be in the metro area.

However, Kansas City is one of the largest cities by land mass. Pittsburgh is more compact. This is probably what caused my confusion. In Pittsburgh I drove for 30 minutes and I was already in the boonies.
I've been to Kansas City many times before, and I've always been struck by the relative lack of development north of the Missouri River. All there is is Liberty, Gladstone, Kansas City International Airport, and a few suburban areas that were annexed by the city, and that's really it. There's virtually nothing north of the airport on I-29, or north of Liberty on I-35. Even inside I-435, there's a lot of undeveloped land north of the river. There also appears to be a sharp edge between suburban and rural areas.

South of the Missouri River, Kansas City seems more substantial. Development extends east to Grain Valley on I-70, south to Belton on (the new) I-49, and south to Olathe on I-35. There doesn't appear to be much other than the Kansas Speedway to the west on I-70, though, so maybe the dividing line on the Kansas side is the Kansas River.

As for Pittsburgh (and Pennsylvania, really), much of the population is hidden from the highways by hills and trees. The development is there, though, especially along I-79 between I-70 and the Pennsylvania Turnpike, which is 40 miles of development that's mostly visible from the highway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2015, 09:29 AM
 
Location: The Windy City
5,163 posts, read 2,843,175 times
Reputation: 4371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craziaskowboi View Post
I've been to Kansas City many times before, and I've always been struck by the relative lack of development north of the Missouri River. All there is is Liberty, Gladstone, Kansas City International Airport, and a few suburban areas that were annexed by the city, and that's really it. There's virtually nothing north of the airport on I-29, or north of Liberty on I-35. Even inside I-435, there's a lot of undeveloped land north of the river. There also appears to be a sharp edge between suburban and rural areas.

South of the Missouri River, Kansas City seems more substantial. Development extends east to Grain Valley on I-70, south to Belton on (the new) I-49, and south to Olathe on I-35. There doesn't appear to be much other than the Kansas Speedway to the west on I-70, though, so maybe the dividing line on the Kansas side is the Kansas River.

As for Pittsburgh (and Pennsylvania, really), much of the population is hidden from the highways by hills and trees. The development is there, though, especially along I-79 between I-70 and the Pennsylvania Turnpike, which is 40 miles of development that's mostly visible from the highway.
You're right about those areas. Also, Kansas City, KS near the race track is very sparse.

That being said, it's amazing to me how huge Kansas City is in terms of land mass.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-20-2015, 09:38 AM
 
Location: Minneapolis
1,704 posts, read 2,626,829 times
Reputation: 2325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Port Pitt Ash View Post
Sorry, I took it for a snarky comment. Guess I've been around some of the CD people who like to troll to much?

Yeah, Saint Paul is more like Pittsburgh than Minneapolis.

Outside of these forums I doubt the Twin Cities are known in half as much detail though.
Yeah, this is why it bothers me when people here complain about the Twin Cities being "overhyped," as if there is literally any common understanding of the Twin Cities at the national level beyond "it's cold and flat and they have a funny accent." A couple summers ago I was working in Cape Town and living with a bunch of other Americans, mostly from California and New England/NYC area, and they were all absolutely aghast when I said my favorite US city is Minneapolis. I remember one of them was like "...have you even been to Boston?"

I'm sure Pittsburgh gets a lot of the same heat, but I'd argue the difference is that Pittsburgh has suffered generations of explicitly negative public image, whereas Minneapolis has no public image at all. I don't know which is worse, I just know that it sucks to never see your skyline in movies or on TV, never hear about the iconic streets and major cultural institutions in your city, never come across a tourist who isn't from North or South Dakota.
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
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