St. Paul, the dead city. Why? (Minneapolis, Crystal: train, residential, station)

[Slig]

If Minneapolis and St. Paul were in the movie Twins, Minneapolis would be Arnold Schwartzenegger and St. Paul would be Danny Devito.

[Ben Around]

Originally Posted by MNBill

St. Paul will never be like Minneapolis, and it shouldn't try. Fort Worth will never be like Dallas. St. Petersburg will never be Tampa. Oakland is certainly not like San Francisco. Etcetera.

St. Paul is more provincial, more neighborhood-oriented, more full of families who've been there for generations (at least people I know there).

It only irritates me when an outsider talks about something in St Paul and say it's in Minneapolis. Like the Republican Convention later this year, it's at the Xcel Center in SAINT PAUL, NOT Minneapolis!!!

Don'tcha love it when you fly into MSP Airport and the stewardess says "Welcome to Minneapolis"? I could possibly accept this if the airport was in Mpls. but it's not!

I see where the chamber of commerce types have rebranded the entire Metro area for the Republican convention. They want the news media to call it "Minneapolis St. Paul" (no hyphen).

[K-Luv]

Originally Posted by Ben Around

Don'tcha love it when you fly into MSP Airport and the stewardess says "Welcome to Minneapolis"? I could possibly accept this if the airport was in Mpls. but it's not!

That's a tough one because it could be considered a suburb of Minneapolis or St. Paul.

[dkf747]

Originally Posted by Ben Around

Don'tcha love it when you fly into MSP Airport and the stewardess says "Welcome to Minneapolis"? I could possibly accept this if the airport was in Mpls. but it's not!

It's not in St. Paul either.

[What!]

Originally Posted by MNBill

St. Paul will never be like Minneapolis, and it shouldn't try. Fort Worth will never be like Dallas. St. Petersburg will never be Tampa. Oakland is certainly not like San Francisco. Etcetera.

St. Paul is more provincial, more neighborhood-oriented, more full of families who've been there for generations (at least people I know there).

It only irritates me when an outsider talks about something in St Paul and say it's in Minneapolis. Like the Republican Convention later this year, it's at the Xcel Center in SAINT PAUL, NOT Minneapolis!!!

But still, I think St. Paul should try to get its own character and atmosphere. I've lived in MN since the winter of '94 and always thought it had potential to be a vibrant city in its own right. I do not want it to be like Minneapolis; I want it to be something other than a "dead city".

[K-Luv]

Originally Posted by What!

But still, I think St. Paul should try to get its own character and atmosphere. I've lived in MN since the winter of '94 and always thought it had potential to be a vibrant city in its own right. I do not want it to be like Minneapolis; I want it to be something other than a "dead city".

St. Paul definitely has it's own character and vibe, it is just that it is such a contrast to what is going on with Minneapolis.

I think that if St. Paul was located in another area of the state then it would develop more into a vibrant city. I think that the general attitude with St. Paul is why should we compete with Minneapolis, were going to do our own thing.

[Ben Around]

Originally Posted by dkf747

It's not in St. Paul either.

Exactly! So how about saying "Welcome to Mpls/St Paul"? That IS the name of the airport!

[icewater]

I worked downtown for a while, and they were always talking about the "renaissance" and rebirth of DT STP. It's like soccer: the sport of the future and it always will be. The downtown is always on the rise, there's always some crackpot idea that'll restore the downtown to it's former grandeur. These are delusions of grandeur though. The library remodel was a shame, and I think that even the Xcel center isn't doing much for nightlife. The hockey fans drive in, watch, drive out. I vividly remember the posturing and posing over the golden opportunity presented by the vacant property across from the X....and it ended up being a parking garage. Another shame.
Unfortunately I live and work elsewhere now, but have visited the city I root for, and it seems to actively sabotage itself.....when it really could move on up. You work with what you have, and STP does have old money (read: Cathedral Hill and Summit Ave) and history. There are gems there, but as a previous poster said, they're secret. You gotta find them. You gotta give up on the "peanuts on parade" mentality and do something real. Do something to get some youth element excited about the area. I do remember during the coffee shop boom of the 90s there did seem to be a few kids hanging out downtown by choice. Not skyway thugs, but teens who represent vitality of a town. They served to offset the walker-with-tennis-balls-on-the-feet crowd. There was once a good art school in the heart of lowertown: Carmichael. The Farmer's market needs expansion. Maybe some warehouses could be rehabbed and rented out at lower to fair market values to specific targeted people who are more like tastemakers who might get some downtown STP buzz going. The buzz will not happen thru calculated press releases or mayoral decrees.
The 4th street station was a good spot to start with, and the Union Depot could be rehabbed (unless it has already). Lowertown was the only remotely happening part of town. As I left they built some condos to reattract empty-nesters (blah!) and yuppies......did this pan out?? Is west 7th jumping like it should be? Or are all the doors shutting at 5pm? Is the 5th and Minnesota Bus Stop still scary enough to feel like a real city corner? Do the police still ride horses around as a PR move? Are there any pockets of life down there? Do the rooms at the Jail still have the best river view?

I have a copy of "Lost Twin Cities" which is a book of photos of now-gone TC buildings. Saint Paul looked so much better then. Activity on the levee, gangsters hiding out, Ice Palaces......but my dad has talked of going downtown in the 40s and even back then it was dead. Maybe this will never change. But it could....just change the approach. It doesn't have to be world class, but it doesn't have to be makeup on a pig either. Maybe like a Providence (haven't visited but this is what I hear). Small, compact, with quality. It could be done. A while back someone suggested cable cars over the river to connect downtown workers to parking spaces....crazy yes, but this is the type of 1+1=3 thinking that will blaze a path for the capitol city and let it breathe its OWN rarefied air.

[krillbee]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

Look at their surroundings too; Mpls.'s downtown is surrounded by dense residential areas (Loring Park, Elliot Park, Whittier, Marcy-Holmes). All those people have downtown as an obvious area to go to for their services. Saint Paul's downtown is only surrounded on the western edge. Other than that, the Lafayette Bridge is flanked by an industrial area. The Capitol grounds killed the area north of the CBD 50 years ago.

This is exactly why: constraints along the borders.

The downtown area of St Paul is squeezed between I-94 and the Mississippi River. 35-E, 52, and 94 shoot out of it like spirals making it difficult for normal city movement to occur around there. Not to mention that, but the railroad corridors also choke the city from various sides. Building more streets and connections that lead to downtown is expensive because of all the obstacles in the way. There are few "neighborhood-like" streets that lead in/out of St Paul. St Paul kind of feels like an island, with only a few choked arteries to use to get into it.

If there were more residential neighborhoods that were naturally aligned and within close proximity to St Paul, it'd be easier to walk to work or the bar, there'd be more room for transit options, it'd be easier to drive there, etc.

Minneapolis is already setup well as the railroads and the river cut through only on one side mainly (northeast), and 94 is far enough south of downtown that the city just feels larger and like it has more room to work with. Numerous connections/bridges accross 94 lead to the southern neighborhoods in Minneapolis.

St Paul would have to spend billions of dollars to reroute all of it's freeways, rail corridors, industrial areas, and roads, in order to make it a better connnected city. Minneapolis is just a more well thought-out city when it comes to design and things. These types of problems screw cities over for a long time, possibly forever, unless reconstruction is done. It's kind of like the bad suburbs with all the confusing curvy streets with culdecs and high speed congested arterial streets. Is it even possible to redesign a bad city? Suburbs would need to be condemned and started over with completely just to fix all their problems.

I also believe that the St Paul downtown street alignment is much more akward with the rest of the neighboring street alignments than the way that Minneapolis downtown alignment is.

The other thing that St Paul lacks is a major college campus like the University of Minnesota. Downtown Minneapolis gets tons of business and activity from these nearby college students who want to go out and have a good time at night. Also graduates may be more likely to find a job and a place close to where they were already living while they were in college.

[DaPerpKazoo]

Originally Posted by icewater

the Union Depot could be rehabbed (unless it has already). Lowertown was the only remotely happening part of town. As I left they built some condos to reattract empty-nesters (blah!) and yuppies......did this pan out??

The new owner of the Depot remodeled the vacant office space into condos and a coffee shop. There's also a restaurant and fitness studio in there, and there are plans to run Amtrak, as well as high-speed rail to Chicago out of the old terminal. The new light rail will have a station there as well.