Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Seattle and Minneapolis are equal in terms of cultural / entertainment amenities. The difference is for $900 you can get a place in Minneapolis that puts you NEAR those amenities.
Seattle and Minneapolis are equal in terms of cultural / entertainment amenities. The difference is for $900 you can get a place in Minneapolis that puts you NEAR those amenities.
Seattle is a few notches above of Minneapolis in terms of amenities.
Seattle has a bigger city feel to it with more than double the restaurants and bars of Minneapolis. As well as more libraries and museums.
Seattle is a few notches above of Minneapolis in terms of amenities.
Seattle has a bigger city feel to it with more than double the restaurants and bars of Minneapolis. As well as more libraries and museums.
I'm not sure that's a really interesting way to compare amenities since:
1. You only took the Minneapolis numbers. You should probably at least add in St. Paul's as well to be fair.
2. Even given that what does it mean to have more libraries or museums when actually living in a place? Libraries might be interesting per capita or avg. distance from a house or even average # of books. But having more of them doesn't make a place better per. se. Likewise museums are extremely variable, the Metropolitan Museum of Art is worth multiple regional Art Museums in many cases. Its hard to say much based on just the number per city.
3. Restaurants and bars certainly should also be considered at least on a per capita basis. Again that doesn't rally capture whether its an interesting scene, or has cheap ethnic food, or a special regional flair etc. People value different things so even that level of detail doesn't answer the question in the general sense.
That all said, I think we have an excellent quality of life and amenities in Seattle. But I have no idea how they stack relative to the twin cities.
How can you possibly include St. Paul? It is a completely different city, even if it is close by.
I guess Seattle can include Tacoma and/or Bellevue then.
Minneapolis and St. Paul in practice form a single urban core. Seattle does not share common border with Tacoma, and suburban Bellevue is a body of water away.
Seattle is a few notches above of Minneapolis in terms of amenities.
Seattle has a bigger city feel to it with more than double the restaurants and bars of Minneapolis. As well as more libraries and museums.
The City of Seattle is double the size of the City of Minneapolis, so it's only natural that it would have more the things you listed. Still, you failed to show what makes Seattle so much better than Minneapolis. Minneapolis has plenty of excellent libraries (Hennepin Central Library, U of M Libraries), museums (MIA, the Walker, Weismann, Science Museum), and arguably the best theater scene outside NYC.
Minneapolis and St. Paul in practice form a single urban core. Seattle does not share common border with Tacoma, and suburban Bellevue is a body of water away.
Bellevue is 10 miles from Seattle St. Paul is 10 miles from Minneapolis.
You can always live in the Kent Desmoins area there opening light rail extension there next year. The rent is much more reasonable you could get a place for 900.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
