Census Results! (Minneapolis, St. Paul, Bloomington: low crime, job market, buyers)

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by Minnesota Spring

I think as gas prices continue to rise in the coming years, people will give more serious consideration to how far they live from work and more will prefer pedestrian and bicycle friendly neighborhoods (and obesity rates will decline). As demand for mass transit continues to grow, transit authorities will shift funding priorities from highways towards rail etc. Cities will contiue to attract more people that otherwise would establish themselves in the suburbs if gas was cheaper.

Maybe rising gas prices will be a blessing in disguise, when looking at the bigger picture, over time.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by Minnesota Spring

I think as gas prices continue to rise in the coming years, people will give more serious consideration to how far they live from work and more will prefer pedestrian and bicycle friendly neighborhoods (and obesity rates will decline). As demand for mass transit continues to grow, transit authorities will shift funding priorities from highways towards rail etc. Cities will contiue to attract more people that otherwise would establish themselves in the suburbs if gas was cheaper.

One thing to think about with mass transit--who is going to PAY to expand these things. They are not going to just stop fixing and improving roads, perhaps won't build any new major arteries but they don't have any planned now either. How much is that short line going from Minneapolis to St. Paul costing, $70 MILLION? How much does it cost to run the current light rail system. Gas is going to have to go up to $20/gallon or more for it to be even CLOSE to cost effective to pay for all these grand projects people have in mind.

Look at the "Big Dig" in Boston and what a nightmare that was for everyone--AND at 14.5 BILLION dollars, do you REALLY think people outside of Minneapolis are going to support something on that scale--which would actually be a lot more than that because we don't have an existing system to start and costs have gone up in the past 10+ years.

Something that keeps getting forgotten here as well but MOST of the job opportunities in the Twin Cities area are NOT in Minneapolis/ St. Paul, they are in the suburbs. Concentrating efforts to improve mass transportation in "The Cities" is not the solution. I have said it time and time again, MOST people in the suburbs do NOT live that far from jobs. Funny thing is that EVERYONE I know that live in Minneapolis and St. Paul commute out to the suburbs

[green_mariner]

Originally Posted by golfgal

One thing to think about with mass transit--who is going to PAY to expand these things. They are not going to just stop fixing and improving roads, perhaps won't build any new major arteries but they don't have any planned now either. How much is that short line going from Minneapolis to St. Paul costing, $70 MILLION? How much does it cost to run the current light rail system. Gas is going to have to go up to $20/gallon or more for it to be even CLOSE to cost effective to pay for all these grand projects people have in mind.

Look at the "Big Dig" in Boston and what a nightmare that was for everyone--AND at 14.5 BILLION dollars, do you REALLY think people outside of Minneapolis are going to support something on that scale--which would actually be a lot more than that because we don't have an existing system to start and costs have gone up in the past 10+ years.

Something that keeps getting forgotten here as well but MOST of the job opportunities in the Twin Cities area are NOT in Minneapolis/ St. Paul, they are in the suburbs. Concentrating efforts to improve mass transportation in "The Cities" is not the solution. I have said it time and time again, MOST people in the suburbs do NOT live that far from jobs. Funny thing is that EVERYONE I know that live in Minneapolis and St. Paul commute out to the suburbs

I do work and I am willing to pay the taxes to have any mass transit system expanded, as long as it is done the right way.

[uptown_urbanist]

Originally Posted by golfgal

One thing to think about with mass transit--who is going to PAY to expand these things. They are not going to just stop fixing and improving roads, perhaps won't build any new major arteries but they don't have any planned now either. How much is that short line going from Minneapolis to St. Paul costing, $70 MILLION? How much does it cost to run the current light rail system. Gas is going to have to go up to $20/gallon or more for it to be even CLOSE to cost effective to pay for all these grand projects people have in mind.

Look at the "Big Dig" in Boston and what a nightmare that was for everyone--AND at 14.5 BILLION dollars, do you REALLY think people outside of Minneapolis are going to support something on that scale--which would actually be a lot more than that because we don't have an existing system to start and costs have gone up in the past 10+ years.

Something that keeps getting forgotten here as well but MOST of the job opportunities in the Twin Cities area are NOT in Minneapolis/ St. Paul, they are in the suburbs. Concentrating efforts to improve mass transportation in "The Cities" is not the solution. I have said it time and time again, MOST people in the suburbs do NOT live that far from jobs. Funny thing is that EVERYONE I know that live in Minneapolis and St. Paul commute out to the suburbs

As we've noted before, your experience of having such a short commute is not the norm for the suburbs. All the statistical evidence is there -- even in Rosemount. The average commute for most suburban residents is longer than the average Minneapolis or St. Paul resident. Some of those people may be working in suburbs, but they're driving, on average, longer distances to get there.

And since it sounds like you don't spent a lot of time in the actual core cities (and don't work in one), I'm guessing that your sample of friends isn't exactly representative. If they're living and working in Minneapolis or St. Paul, they might not come across your radar out in the outer 'burbs. In any case, MOST people in MOST of the suburbs DO live a long way from their jobs -- just take a look at the census data if you doubt it.The inner suburbs have pretty short commutes, but the numbers go up fast as you move outwards.

Public transportation can work suburb-to-suburb, too. It doesn't have to be all about suburbs to city.

And I know it's no good pointing this out, but roads (and sprawl) are heavily subsidized, too.

Some sample mean times for commuting:
Lakeville 25.4 minutes
Apple Valley 24.7
Shakopee 25.3
Woodbury 25.7
St. Paul 21.5
Minneapolis 21.8

The percentage of people commuting in ways other than just the single solo commuter in a car goes way up in the core city and inner suburbs, too. Those commutes from places like Lakeville or Rosemount may be doable now, but with traffic expected to dramatically increase in the coming decade, some of those people may be regretting living so far from work.

[FamousBlueRaincoat]

Originally Posted by golfgal

Look at the "Big Dig" in Boston and what a nightmare that was for everyone--AND at 14.5 BILLION dollars, do you REALLY think people outside of Minneapolis are going to support something on that scale--which would actually be a lot more than that because we don't have an existing system to start and costs have gone up in the past 10+ years.

The Big Dig wasn't a public transit system. It was them burying the interstate system underground. Previously, it had cut straight through Downtown Boston, separating the modern downtown from the historic North End (I think that's what it's called).

I think there was some mass transit incorporated into it just because they were doing the work anyway, but primarily, when people refer to the "Big Dig" project, they just talk about the process of making it so people coming into or living in Boston, which is a very nice city, didn't have to stare at an interstate highway while being in one of the nicest downtowns in the country.

They should have just gotten rid of the interstate period, IMO. But I still don't really see how the Big Dig is relevant at all.

[uptown_urbanist]

Yes, I didn't understand the Big Dig reference, either. The Twin Cities isn't looking at anything near that level of intense activity or cost, and in any case, as you noted, it wasn't a mass transit project.

As far as people outside of Minneapolis paying for it, it's that kind of provincial short-sightedness that's going to keep the Twin Cities from ever achieving any hope of being a major city. To compete in the big leagues you've got to have some basic amenities, and decent public transportation is one of them. It's been okay so far, since so many other cities were also behind, but we're going to get left in the (exhaust-filled) dust while the top talent and corporations set up shop in cities that, well, feel like cities, not backwaters. I love this city, but I worry about its future if some current lawmakers and their inability to look at the big picture get their way. That's not good for the city, the metro area, or the state.

At the same time, not all rail projects are created equal, and I wish the transit supporters here would stop looking at mass transit as solely a way to move people to and from jobs. That's also such a limited view.

ETA: not transit-specific, but still relevant: here's an editorial from Albert Lea in support of the core cities. ("Suburbs are like sucker plants.").
http://www.albertleatribune.com/2011...sucker-plants/

[knke0204]

Golfgal brings up some good points about inner city public transportation, especially light rail. There should be more of a concentration on alleviating suburb-suburb transportation. In a metro of nearly 3.5 million people, keep in mind that under 800,000 live in the actual cities of MPLS and STP. The majority of employment in the metro is not DT MPLS nor DT STP. I don't get what spending $70 million for a fancy rail line connecting the two DTs is going to do?

I just read that Woodbury is expecting to add another 20,000 in new residents in the near future... to the OPs Topic, the census, does anyone have any predictions as to which suburb will hit 100,000? Which one will be the first? I have it narrowed down to Lakeville, Woodbury and Brooklyn Park, since all are already pretty large

[uptown_urbanist]

I interpreted Golfgal's points to be that mass transit is pointless in the Twin Cities, and that some people living in the suburbs prefer not to pay for it because it doesn't benefit them, as they -- she says -- live right by their work.

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist

I interpreted Golfgal's points to be that mass transit is pointless in the Twin Cities, and that some people living in the suburbs prefer not to pay for it because it doesn't benefit them, as they -- she says -- live right by their work.

No, golfgal was saying that those of you that live in the city have a narrow minded view of what life is like for the REST of the metro area, the MAJORITY of whom do NOT want to live in an urban environment nor do they WORK in the urban environment. If they did, they would already. You also feel that there are zero options for public transport to the cities, which is TOTALLY false, as well as your opinion that there are not public transportation options in the suburbs, again, TOTALLY false. It's great that you are able to live the life you want, but stop putting the rest of the population down when we CHOOSE not to live on top of one another and enjoy having a yard, a quite neighborhood with zero traffic, noise or crime. Living in Uptown is NOT the be all/end all of the world.

I will also say that you are right, the majority of people in MN are NOT going to vote to support a mass transit system that only benefits the 500,000 people living in Minneapolis/St. Paul when the other 4.5 MILLION of us won't use it.

[queenswake]

The Twin Cities has a problem. Too many companies prefer to set up shop out in the far out suburbs. To some extent, who can blame them? Cheap leases, plenty of parking, large shells of buildings to build out how they want to. Plus, the owners of the companies probably live in big houses in the far out suburbs as well. The Twin Cities is a car culture so it's natural that the suburban focus has continued to this day. It's too expensive to drive into the city for work. Companies set up shop in the suburbs because it's easy and it's cheap. They continue to get talented workers applying for positions because a large majority of Twin Cities residents lives out in the suburbs and loves the suburban lifestyle. So why on earth would they move closer to the city where it's more expensive, your options are more limited in terms of buildings, your employees aren't going to be as happy making that commute. So this is the situation.

For people who live near the same suburb that their office is in, great! That's close to ideal as you can get. The problem, however, is that no one stays at their job for 30 years anymore. So when you get that next job, it could very well be in a suburb on the other side of the city. If more jobs were at the urban core, it wouldn't be such an issue. Another poster in this or another thread made a great point about so many jobs have been lost in the core and first-ring suburbs. So many manufacturing and other industrial jobs. Nothing has filled that in except retail jobs.

Now, many more young people all across the country today are wanting to stay in the cities. These are the people who were raised in the green age, of high gas prices, who don't have the jobs to support the use of a car, and who are more interested in their tech gadgets than cars anyway. They are more about having experiences rather than needing the 3-car garage full of toys. So this is a big subset of that age group. But in the Twin Cities, a larger one who still values the suburban lifestyle exists. The American Dream in the Twin Cities has always been to get married young, then move out to a new development out in the outer suburbs. I think in certain cities like the Twin Cities, this mentality will thrive long after populations in other urban areas really move away from the suburbs. There is just this huge suburban mentality and FEAR of the city. The city is dirty, too much crime, too many people that don't look like me. It's laughable because the crime in the Twin Cities is NOTHING compared to so many other cities. But that's just it. People are happy out in the suburbs with their big houses, toys, and satellite TV. And I'm not being critical. To each their own. But the Twin Cities is one of the cities where suburban culture is really rampant compared to a lot of other cities.

I don't currently live in the Twin Cities but am hoping to move back very soon. But one of the things that puts me off is that so many jobs in my industry are out in the outer suburbs (IT). I remember interviewing for a programming job at a company in Plymouth after college graduation. It was in your typical office park with one huge room full of cubes with half-height cubicle walls. No privacy. Everytime someone would walk by, you'd instantly be distracted. I didn't even consider their offer. Miserable. The point is that more and more highly educated people in the creative fields do not want the cubicle life out in the bland suburbs. Especially the younger generation. In order for companies and cities in general to thrive in the future, they are going to have to adapt and create environments that people want to be in. One of the problems I have with working out in the suburbs is that there is no sense of being part of a community. Everyone drives into the office park, puts in their hours, and heads home in all different directions. After work happy hours are few because everyone needs to rush home to beat traffic because everyone lives 20 miles away in every direction. In the citiy, you walk somewhere for lunch. Maybe meet up with some friends for drinks after work. Stop by a store. No rush getting home because that bus or light-rail will get you home. This is the kind of culture that so many people crave. Less stress. Read, listen to music, watch a movie on your way to work.

But I am realistic. The Twin Cities suffers for a lot of reasons beyond anyone's control. They are late to the game in getting mass transit developed. It's going to be decades before enough lines are in place to really create a viable system. Only then will you start to see the areas near LRT stops become real centers of redevelopment. The Twin Cities also does not have a large enough population, and not bad enough traffic to really get people out of their cars and want to live closer to work.

I don't know, I think a lot of blame lies within the city of Minneapolis. I think they lack the vision to create a reason for people to go downtown to either live or work. Target Field cannot be it. There is no destination. Other cities have a destintation. I suppose Nicollet Mall should be it, but it's just not there. There needs to be more than just bars and stores that close at 7PM. Now, part of the problem is that so many of the cities assets are spread out. So many big cities are anchored on a waterfront. Well, Mpls has the lakes, but they are far from downtown. Then you have the great river area on the opposite side of the city. So you have all of these pockets of greatness on the borders of downtown, but nothing actually in downtown.

I'm rambling and really getting off topic. But that's because there are so many factors involved with the city/suburb car/mass-transit discussion in the Twin Cities. It's going to take generations to move beyond the current model there. The growing urban focus in the youth won't be enough to change the suburban culture in MN for a long time. And the Twin Cities is not alone in this. Even the cities that have some of the most built-out subway systems suffer from the same problems. It's going to take a long time before we can redo the mess the country created for ourselves with the suburbs. People complain why can't we have faster internet or wireless service. Well the countries that do are so much more dense to support it. It's our fault. Why are the roads in such poor shape? Because we created too many of them to support too few cars as the suburbs expanded. Why are my property taxes going up? Because you live in an outer suburb that's nothing more than a bedroom community with a few office parks. This is what happens when everything is so spread out.