Is minneapolis sprawled? (St. Paul, Rosemount: for sale, new home, school)

[golfgal]

Originally Posted by kuan

Sorry suburbs... but there is so much you just cannot get in the suburbs. Yesterday I was biking on Plymouth Ave. near North MPLS and stopped to get some ribs from the street vendor, then I stopped again a couple blocks down to pick up some fresh lemongrass for $1. BTW you know you cannot find a leather bike seat in any bike store in the suburbs?

Erik's Bike in Burnsville


Yesterday I walked over to my neighbors and had the BEST smoked ribs. The nursery down the street sells pretty much any kind of plant/whatever you need. If they don't have it and you want it, they will grow it for you for the next year.

Camden, I find it interesting that you are complaining about living on top of your neighbors, houses being too close, etc. then you move to the city. I know the Walmart wiping out local businesses comes up frequently but I have to say that it just isn't true. I know in our old town everyone was afraid that Walmart was going to put the downtown out of business--especially the downtown business owners. The reality is that Walmart RARELY is in direct competition with any of the downtown type businesses in smaller towns. The downtown businesses tend to be specialty shops of one kind or another and Walmart just doesn't offer those products.

What puts small businesses out of business-they do it to themselves--either they are too specialized, don't manage their business well or they price themselves out of the market. One business in our old town sold expensive clothing, like $300/sweater expensive. Their feeling was that there was a lot of money in our old town, there was, however, they didn't factor in that most people, money or not, were jeans/sweatshirt type people and wouldn't consider ever spending $300 on a sweater. They blamed Walmart for their failure (never mind that Walmart was there before they opened the shop).

Another example was the Bird Feeder store they had in town. They sold bird feeders and bird food--that's it. People will only buy so many bird feeders and only need bird food so often. Too specialized, too limited.

There is one 'shop' in our town that really has a handle on the market. They are open one weekend/month. They do more business that way and it keeps their overhead low. The place is PACKED for those 3 days. People come from all over to shop there. They have an email system set up to remind people of the weekend, and they are doing great. They wouldn't be nearly as successful if they were open every day. Smart owners.

We had one business go out of business a year or so ago. It had nothing to do with Walmart and everything to do with the fact that there was already a successful store in town that sold pretty much the same things--right across the street. Why would you open a second one. Even if they had opened the store on the other side of town they would have done much better. Was that Walmart's fault, no.

As for being 'wasteful' consumers--who knows. One could argue that having more green space is actually better for the environment. I would bet big bucks that we have more trees/plants in our yard then you do in yours. Those are good things. I have said it before, all of our friends work near our town. If we moved to Minneapolis or St. Paul we would end up commuting FARTHER away from our homes. Even Slig drives farther to work then I do, even with him biking in the summer because the miles he puts on in the winter are far more then I put on all year round with my mile commute to work.

I think there are too many people here that have had one bad experience with the suburbs so they are all bad. Slig 'drove past' Rosemount--sorry, no way that happened since you can't 'drive past' town anywhere--you have to drive THROUGH town--and thinks it's a bad place to live. If he really drove through town he would have discovered that our town looks VERY similar most South Minneapolis neighborhoods, but there will be no convincing most people of that.

[Slig]

So wait, are Camden and Kuan the same person? I'm confused. By the way, I went to Erik's bike shop in Burnsville back when I lived in Eagan. That place is a slight upgrade to the Schwinn place in Eagan (absolutely horrible, will never go back) but it pales in comparison to all the fantastic bike shops you will find littered around Minneapolis and St. Paul. Lately I've been going to Nokomis Cycle on 46th and Bloomington and the Bike Co-op just south of Lake Street on Minnehaha Ave. Both of those places are cheaper than Erik's and the people who work there aren't clueless high school kids with a summer job, they're bike freaks who know what they're talking about.

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by SlyFrog

No, you don't.

I think remedial logic would be lost on you, so I'll drop it.

In any case, I'm not saying that there are no unique businesses in the suburbs- that is clearly the case. However, if one values small businesses rather than being in a generic tract of suburban sprawl indistinguishable from any other square mile of sprawl from the tip of Florida the the coast of Washington state, one is more likely to find urban living to their tastes.

It's funny that we have one "pro-suburb" person arguing that there are just as many small businesses in the suburbs that there are in the cities, whereas the other argues that he prefers the suburbs because the uniqueness of many businesses in the cities doesn't appeal to him.

Ultimately, given that many of my friends live in the suburbs, I still feel "to each his own". I merely think that facts and opinions on the matter are two different things that often are getting confused in what people are saying.

If you prefer suburbs, more power to you.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by golfgal

Camden, I find it interesting that you are complaining about living on top of your neighbors, houses being too close, etc. then you move to the city.

We have a small house on 1.5 lots with nine huge trees in the front, back, and side-yards, you can't get that in most suburbs. Houses being close together was a shock to me when I was eight, but you get used to it and realize that 90% of yards generally go unused/ unutilized most of the time, plus we have miles of park/ green space within a few blocks from us here in the city (much more than I've ever seen in a small town/ suburb), which really cancels out any need for even having a yard.

Originally Posted by golfgal

As for being 'wasteful' consumers--who knows. One could argue that having more green space is actually better for the environment. I would bet big bucks that we have more trees/plants in our yard then you do in yours. Those are good things. I have said it before, all of our friends work near our town.

And I have also said before that I can respect/ appreciate that there are a number of people that live/ work in their suburb or very close by, but I think there many more that don't. And I know from experience that there are some great people and great businesses in Rosemount - Associated Wood, for example, is a great company.

As for you and your neighbors' green space being good for the environment....maybe...that is if you and all of your neighbors have decided to restore the native prairie and/or woodland habitat in all of your developments' yard spaces, and everyone is creating multiple rain gardens to offset all of the runoff coming from the gently sloped hills around your mcmansions. But I have a sneaking suspicion that a high majority of yours and your neighbors' yards consist of continuously and inorganically fertilized/ pesticized/ herbicized lawns set to be automatically watered every day - the stuff that ChemLawn salesmans' dreams are made of. I'm not saying that urban dwellers are all busy re-creating native habitats, but more of us are taking up less space, using less resources, and living in homes that have been here since before our own time. And in my own neighborhood, many folks are implementing measures to prevent water runoff and utilize ecologically-friendly plants in their yards.

And I just might take you up on that "big bucks" bet of yours that you have more trees/ plants in your yard than I do - over the past two summers, I have taken out a lot of lawn and planted about 60 new perennials/ bushes in its place (in addition to what was already here). Here are some pics of my latest project (small section of front yard and an example of our tree coverage), I'll wait for you to send some of yours GG.

[kuan]

Originally Posted by Slig

So wait, are Camden and Kuan the same person? I'm confused. By the way, I went to Erik's bike shop in Burnsville back when I lived in Eagan.

LOL! Nope, we're different people. I just happened to ride my bike through Wirth Park to St. Paul and back yesterday and took a short break at Behind Bars Bikes.

And yep, Erik's gotten a little too big for my liking. Nope, no Brooks saddles at Erik's.

[Minnehahapolitan]

Only in America can you wirte a rant about ChemLawn and have a link appear to advertise it.

[Camden Northsider]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

Only in America can you wirte a rant about ChemLawn and have a link appear to advertise it.

LOL, I thought the pictures on their website further illustrated the point I was trying to make - they definitely know their target audience.

[golfgal]

I will have to get some pictures uploaded. We have more plants just in our front yard then you do in your entire yard. Our development was a gravel pit so anything green here is an improvement for the environment. We have 20+ trees in our yard alone. Again, the city dwellers tend to have the opinion that they are the best and the suburban dwellers are blights on society--I am just trying to point out that isn't the case.

[kuan]

Originally Posted by golfgal

I will have to get some pictures uploaded. We have more plants just in our front yard then you do in your entire yard. Our development was a gravel pit so anything green here is an improvement for the environment. We have 20+ trees in our yard alone. Again, the city dwellers tend to have the opinion that they are the best and the suburban dwellers are blights on society--I am just trying to point out that isn't the case.

I don't think they think they're the best. They're just trying to make a case against sprawl. It's not a p*ssing match about who has more trees. More trees per what; per person, per acre, vs. built up area? Of course the suburbs are going to have more trees per person, whereas the city might have more trees per concrete square area. Skew the statistics any way you want. There are methods to make both, suburb and city, the winner.

Even though I'm a suburbanite, I head into the city for almost all my foodie needs. I head into the city for all my cycling needs as well. In fact, all my artsy, foodie, biking, record collecting, useless esoteric hobbies require a visit to downtown. I head downtown, then come home to my little idyllic no neighbor across the street home where kids can still play out on the street and where I know all my neighbors. That's the one big plus about suburbs that trumps a lot of other things. Kids still love to play stickball in the street. (gotta stay off the neighbor's lawn)

[Thedosius]

Originally Posted by kuan

I don't think they think they're the best. They're just trying to make a case against sprawl. It's not a p*ssing match about who has more trees. More trees per what; per person, per acre, vs. built up area? Of course the suburbs are going to have more trees per person, whereas the city might have more trees per concrete square area. Skew the statistics any way you want. There are methods to make both, suburb and city, the winner.

Though I'm a clear fan of urban living, I take questions about city-dwelling being more "earth-friendly" than suburb dwelling with a grain of salt.

First, however, I'll admit that I think sprawl is bad. Other than developing what is for the most part either farmland or natural settings and covering them with non-permeable surfaces (streets, parking lots, buildings, etc.), sprawl also encourages more automobile use.

However, when I look at the earth-friendly pros and cons of my personal situation, it is clear that there are things which most suburbanites have an advantage over me. My pros are that I only have one car between my partner and I, so I use the train every day to get to and from work. Also, there are a fair number of businesses I can walk to, which is not the case in many (not all) suburbs. Furthermore, I live on land that has been occupied for a very, very long time- no more topsoil needs to be disturbed for my dwelling, no greenspace needs to be removed.

I don't know in the overall balance how much my cons outweigh my pros. My cons are this: my home is a 1926 bungalow. For whatever (immense) loss in charm and character that has taken place in building techniques over the past 80 years, there have been large improvements in environmentally-friendly design and materials. My windows are the original casement style that came with the house. I am well aware that they are incredibly energy-inefficient, but at about $200 apiece to replace- and with an uncertain job future in this economy- it will be a long time before I can replace them. In addition, I have an 80-year old "octopus" furnace in my basement. That will cost about $5000 to replace- and even that may be a low-end estimate. Lastly, old houses are just plain more drafty in general than new construction: I'm losing a lot of heat due to the age of the house.

Generally speaking, most suburban living spaces are newer, less drafty, and with more modern heating and cooling systems than older city dwellings. Of course, one can retrofit one's old house (which I look forward to doing eventually, when my money tree starts bearing $'s), but I honestly think on matters of earth-friendliness, the suburbs vs. city is far from clear. Perhaps one can begrudge the fact that if more people chose to live in the city, more of our society's resources would be geared towards retro-fitting old dwellings up to modern standards, but you have to balance that benefit with the overall benefit of allowing people their choice of where and how to live the way they see fit.