St. Paul, the dead city. Why? (Minneapolis: apartment, lofts, co-ops)

[greyduk]

Originally Posted by Globe199

We're bigger than Denver, St Louis, Pittsburgh. Everyone knows where those are. Yet people are surprised when, in national surveys, pretty much the only thing anyone knows about the TC is how bad the winters are. There is very little national identity and I believe it is a direct result of being divided.

I guess we've just met other people. I've traveled all over the country and a majority of my peers now are from just about every part of the country. When I've mentioned St. Paul, they all know it's the capital. When I mention Minneapolis, they all have known where it was. Sure, the city gets credit for things like the airport, the mall, and even worse, the RNC... but the point is they know about it. On a lesser scale, mostly everyone has known what I was talking about when I have said "Twin Cities." I do think that's part of the confusion though, that term seems to be much more a regionally recognizable name. Just say Minneapolis or St. Paul, or both, and you'll start to get the recognition you want.

Another thing to consider is the cities you mentioned. Denver is well known for the mountains being nearby... people associate the two. Seattle for its music and coffee. Minneapolis is really good at just about everything, but there's very little that we're the BEST at anymore. All the things we love to brag about have other places where it's better known. Theatre anyone? Since the decline of milling, it's been a lot different.

I think you're giving the competition a little more credit than it deserves.

[Ben Around]

Originally Posted by Clifford63

Seems like you hear about more of these things getting denied than happening. Last one in the area that I know about is Long Lake and Wayzata.

At any rate, I doubt Minneapolis and St. Paul will ever seriously consider a merge. They are two cities is two different counties both with a lot of civic pride.

I agree.

[Ben Around]

Originally Posted by MplsTodd

Excellent Post!! One thing that works against the national identity of Minneapolis and St Paul is because all our teams are named Minnesota, rather than Minneapolis or Mpls-St Paul. Practically every other city with major sports is named after the city rather than the state (with a few exceptions like the Texas Rangers, New England Patriots etc... but even they have other temas named after the city--Dallas Cowboys, Dallas Stars, Boston Celtics etc...).

We've even extended this practice beyond sports teams to:

Orchestra: The Minnesota Orchestra
Newspaper: The Star Tribune (rather than the Minneapolis Tribune)

I do think that this practice does play a part in reducing the national identity for the Twin Cities.

Also: Regarding two cities which have merged into one, the best example I can think of is Port Arthur/Fort William Ontario, which merged together in the late 1960s/early 1970s to become Thunder Bay! Also, Buda & Pest were separate cities at one point, before becoming Budapest.

Excellent post! I've always wondered why we don't name our teams and the MN Orchestra after our cities. (The Twins even took the "TC" logo off their hats in favor of an "M") My speculation is that MN'ns are enamored with cities than people in other parts of the country.

[Clifford63]

Originally Posted by Ben Around

Excellent post! I've always wondered why we don't name our teams and the MN Orchestra after our cities. (The Twins even took the "TC" logo off their hats in favor of an "M") My speculation is that MN'ns are enamored with cities than people in other parts of the country.

TC is on the home hat, M is on the road hat. Interesting thought.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by Globe199

I still think someone could write a PhD thesis on how the Twin Cities have missed out on big opportunities because it is a divided city. We're the 15th largest metro area in the country, yet if you say "Twin Cities" outside the "Upper Midwest" (a loaded term which really means everything outside Chicago), no one has any clue what you're talking about. The TC are similar in population to Seattle and San Diego. Everyone in the country knows where those cities are. If I travel to either coast, I just tell people I'm from Minnesota. That usually suffices.

People in Atlanta seem to have no problem when I say I'm from the Twin Cities. That name is apparently quite well known here.

[tpk-nyc]

Originally Posted by krillbee

Agreed. I'm just wondering if something like that has ever been done before.

Yes, there is a very famous example of this: New York City (Manhattan) and Brooklyn. They combined in 1894. Brooklyn is actually larger (in population and land-area) than Manhattan. If it were still a separate city, it would be the fourth or fifth largest in the country.

When I lived in the Cities, I always thought the duplication of services was a waste. I don't think a merger will ever happen, however. Most Minneapolitans probably wouldn't care either way, but people in St. Paul a very proud of NOT being Minneapolis.

[Ben Around]

Originally Posted by tpk-nyc

Yes, there is a very famous example of this: New York City (Manhattan) and Brooklyn. They combined in 1894. Brooklyn is actually larger (in population and land-area) than Manhattan. If it were still a separate city, it would be the fourth or fifth largest in the country.

When I lived in the Cities, I always thought the duplication of services was a waste. I don't think a merger will ever happen, however. Most Minneapolitans probably wouldn't care either way, but people in St. Paul a very proud of NOT being Minneapolis.

The vast majority of people who call the "Twin Cities" home don't even live in Minneapolis or St. Paul. The metro area keeps expanding out to St Cloud, over to WI and down to Rochester. It'll always be called the "Twin Cities" due to tradition, but the term has become more diluted and meaningless over the years.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by Ben Around

The vast majority of people who call the "Twin Cities" home don't even live in Minneapolis or St. Paul. The metro area keeps expanding out to St Cloud, over to WI and down to Rochester. It'll always be called the "Twin Cities" due to tradition, but the term has become more diluted and meaningless over the years.

Not meaningless. It's a general label for the entire metro area, just as "Atlanta" is when I'm talking about where I live to folks in MN.

I actually live in a subdivision in an unincorporated suburb, not a town, with an associated local name of "Mableton", located OTP (outside the 285 perimeter) in one of the many counties which make up the Atlanta metro area, but it's a lot easier for outsiders if I just say "Atlanta".

[Boomerbiker]

Downtown St Paul may be dead but the Highland Park/Merriam Park area is hot - when it comes to real estate. Five colleges, Grand Avenue (similar to Linden Hills or 50th and France) and close to downtown Minneapolis and the river - attracting lots of new residents. Just purchased a house last Friday and resold it Saturday - what real estate crash??? We are buying several more homes this week! Highland Park is silmilar to Minneapolis southwest but without the lakes and HIGH home prices.

[ajo]

This discussion is interesting to me. I grew up in St Paul (St Anthony Park) and my husband grew up in Minneapolis (Kenwood). So we both come from priviledged neighborhoods, but I know that I have a lot more loyalty to St Paul than he does to Minneapolis. Maybe this is partly because we could possibly buy into SAP but no way no how could we buy into Kenwood. As we consider moving back to the Cities, we are looking at lots of areas, and my gut reaction is pro-St Paul and St Paul suburbs. The only Minneapolis area we are really considering is NE. We would consider Hale/Field, but fear that airplane noise would be overwhelming. We are big on having our windows open, hanging out outside.