*New* AARP study names Minneapolis and St. Paul among top livable communities nationwide (rankings, population)

[Isaysos]

Originally Posted by jmgg

It was a list of MID sized cities. Sioux Falls is larger than 5 of the cities on that list.

You have to get out of the house and take a drive here some day. The population of SF (this isn't metro, but inside the city limits) is over 202,000.

A metropolis to behold.

[wamer27]

Maybe it’s just me, but I have zero appeal to ever go to NYC, but I’ve been to SF a few times and of big cities, I’d put it number one. I do realize the price point, but prices wouldn’t be that high with no demand. A house in Belvedere/Tiburon/Sausalito, the view is off the charts!

[jmgg]

Originally Posted by Isaysos

A metropolis to behold.

It really is (I know you're making a wise-crack ). Let's see, in 1950 Minneapolis was over 520,000 and it now stands at approx. 430,000. Sioux Falls was around 20,000 and now is over 200,000. BEHOLD!!!

[atler8]

Originally Posted by jmgg

It really is (I know you're making a wise-crack ). Let's see, in 1950 Minneapolis was over 520,000 and it now stands at approx. 430,000. Sioux Falls was around 20,000 and now is over 200,000. BEHOLD!!!

I get your overall point but I am generally a real stickler when it comes to population data and accuracy. In the past though, on City-data I've let some claims slide while knowing better or otherwise.

In 1950 SF had a population of 52,000. As it happens, the "20,000" figure you mentioned was actually probably accurate for SF in 1915 or thereabouts.

Although both sizes are tiny, there is nevertheless plenty of difference between what would constitute a town of 20,000 as compared to a town of 52,000.

In terms of Minnesota-centric data, Edina has a population of 52,000 while Northfield has 20,000. Those 2 examples readily show the difference between what each figure represents in terms of community size.

And specifically addressing the Minneapolis population loss that you included via posting it's 1950 & 2020 census counts here, it's difficult for an older, central city of a major metro to increase it's population when the fact is that it has not had an any land area added via an annexation since 1927, i.e. 95 years.

An analysis of a a detailed metro street map will reveal that Minneapolis is one of the most walled-off, i.e. surrounded by multiple rings of suburbs, cities in the country.
Chalk that fact up to Minnesota state law.

By comparison, SF is not particularly hindered by any South Dakota annexations laws and a drive passed it on I-90 is a remarkable study of contrast to Minneapolis. In fact, while passing by SF in that interstate corridor, on one side of the roadway there is an unremarkable amount of urban development while on the other side of the road, there is virtually nothing developed. In other words, SF is on the edge of open and almost completely undeveloped country on it's entire north side.
Nevertheless, although it is a small city, it is nevertheless a growing one.

As for the crux of the AARP survey, in view of the factors it measured, I'm not surprised that Minneapolis ranks high on the list.
Aside from it's winter weather which most likely makes the city a "no-go" choice of residence for me, Minneapolis does do well in terms of attributes and other available amenities and services that are important to me personally. I'll offer it's freshwater lakes and the river as examples!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sioux_Falls,_South_Dakota

https://hclib.tumblr.com/post/536693...p-we-worked-on

[Isaysos]

Originally Posted by jmgg

It really is (I know you're making a wise-crack ). Let's see, in 1950 Minneapolis was over 520,000 and it now stands at approx. 430,000. Sioux Falls was around 20,000 and now is over 200,000. BEHOLD!!!

1. You’re forgetting about St . Paul
2. You’re comparing a metro area of 250K to a metro area of 3.5 million.
3. MSP on average grows 350K per decade.
4. SF was 53K in 1950.
Side note: Hennepin County alone has over 300,000 people than the state of South Dakota. Dakota County, a suburban county of MSP, has more than twice the population of SF.

[Kaszilla]

Originally Posted by Isaysos

1. You’re forgetting about St . Paul
2. You’re comparing a metro area of 250K to a metro area of 3.5 million.
3. MSP on average grows 350K per decade.
4. SF was 53K in 1950.
Side note: Hennepin County alone has over 300,000 people than the state of South Dakota. Dakota County, a suburban county of MSP, has more than twice the population of SF.

These people hate Mpls so bad that they're not thinking logically

[Marv95]

Originally Posted by Isaysos

1. You’re forgetting about St . Paul
2. You’re comparing a metro area of 250K to a metro area of 3.5 million.
3. MSP on average grows 350K per decade.
4. SF was 53K in 1950.
Side note: Hennepin County alone has over 300,000 people than the state of South Dakota. Dakota County, a suburban county of MSP, has more than twice the population of SF.

The list/OP is talking about the city propers, not metro areas. Minneapolis' has dropped. Also St. Paul's growth has been stagnant compared to SF's(which is fine; I don't like sprawled overcrowded cities).

Cambridge MA? That's laughable. The COL is ridiculous.

Unless you have a well paying job, it's crazy. However almost every other metric you could argue that it's quite livable.

[Weaubleau]

Geez, using SF as an abbreviation for Sioux Falls is like using ATL for Altoona or CHI for Chico California.

[GraniteStater]

Originally Posted by Weaubleau

Geez, using SF as an abbreviation for Sioux Falls is like using ATL for Altoona or CHI for Chico California.

Sioux Falls is a much better area to live in from a tax perspective if you work for an employer compared to Kansas City...

[WoodburyWoody]

Originally Posted by Marv95

LOL they put DC at #3 in the big city category; SF at #1. And yeah I read the criteria.

Twin Cities should be in the bottom half. Sioux Falls has a severe lack of transit & I believe available housing for rent for its size.

Originally Posted by Kaszilla

These people hate Mpls so bad that they're not thinking logically

Seems more like envy. They spend a lot of time here.

Sad.