How Cosmopolitan are the Twin Cities? (Minneapolis, Bloomington: appointed, theater, restaurants)

[mrconfusion87]

How cosmopolitan are the Twin Cities? Based on my visits there, it didn't seem too provincial to me.

Which cities can it compare to in that department? Anyone enlighten me? Thanks...

[kuan]

Not really cosmopolitan. If you're looking for tea and high fashion you'll be disappointed. We have a few nice restaurants, some with better ideas than talent, but nothing over the top.

But we have enough, so, maybe a little better than Milwaukee in that sense.

[Clifford63]

Originally Posted by mrconfusion87

How cosmopolitan are the Twin Cities? Based on my visits there, it didn't seem too provincial to me.

Which cities can it compare to in that department? Anyone enlighten me? Thanks...

On on hand we have theater and arts scene that is right up there most of the metros with a few exceptions like NYC. If you want to be cosmo, you certianly can be. You see this downtown Minneapolis more than anywhere in the metro. Metro Sexual, latte drinkin, beamer drivin, frankin votin types are not hard to find.

On the other hand Minnesotans are often thought of as practical, down to earth, casual and perhaps simple and stoic. Lot of camo wearing, deer shootin, fish catchin, church goin, chevy drivin folks.

Two metros that seem quite similar to me are Seattle and Portland. I have not spent as much time out east, but Boston seems somewhat similar.

[knke0402]

Seattle, Denver, Portland, Oklahoma City, Omaha, San Diego.

Alll fall on the same boat as TC

[Minneapolitan]

Oklahoma City? Omaha? I dont think so...

[knke0402]

Originally Posted by Minneapolitan

Oklahoma City? Omaha? I dont think so...

Not anywhere in terms of entertainment, commerce, or arts of the TC, but i was strictly speaking of cities of the similar size in populaton compared to MPLS>

[Minnehahapolitan]

Just because a municipality has a population similar to Mpls. doesn't mean that they are a similar size. Okla. City hardly has any suburban cities, and I have heard how the city limits incorporate farmsteads. The Cities are three times bigger than Omaha. You have to compare metropolitan areas.

[knke0402]

Originally Posted by Minnehahapolitan

Just because a municipality has a population similar to Mpls. doesn't mean that they are a similar size. Okla. City hardly has any suburban cities, and I have heard how the city limits incorporate farmsteads. The Cities are three times bigger than Omaha. You have to compare metropolitan areas.

Agree.

I think that that is exactly what makes the Twin Cities so recognizable. The actual city limits of MPLS and STP are 56 and 52 respectivly, with populations of 360,000 and 280,000 (roughly). But the suburbs make up nearly 3 million residents. Omaha has more residents in the city limits, but once you leave the city you dont see :Maple Grove: 65,000 :Plymouth 70,000: Eagan: 70,000: Bloomington: 90,000: Lakeville: 60,000: Brooklyn Park: 75,000: Eden Prairie: 60,000: Burnsville: 70,000:

If you think about all the suburbs over 20,000 in population, its quite astonishing.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by knke0402

Not anywhere in terms of entertainment, commerce, or arts of the TC, but i was strictly speaking of cities of the similar size in populaton compared to MPLS>

The Twin Cities metro is 3.5 million. Omaha is what? Approx 830,000 in the entire metro?

Not really comparable.

[thatguy1]

Being from Omaha, I can safely say it is no where near as cosmopolitan as the Twin Cities. I had a great time when I was there last. Hell, I had a great time sitting in an airport bar chatting it up with the waitress! =)