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.
Most people will choose Minneapolis from a somewhat shallow perspective based on the criteria given.
And that's fine. Minneapolis has a lot going for it. Minneapolis is a fine city and I understand the appeal. KC is altogether a different city from Minneapolis.
If you've never been to KC you really can't understand the cultural, musical, artistic and soulful qualities it has that make it a great city. KC's appeal is not in the number of Fortune 500 companies and shiny towers. KC's appeal is in the nooks and crannies. It has all of the soul of Memphis but larger, cleaner and more things to do. It has all the grit of Philly, only smaller and much cheaper. It's history is steeped in the American experiences of the Pony Express, the Civil War, Prohibition, and the musical development of Ragtime, Jazz and the Blues. Mafia and political bosses and great and tragic floods influenced the city's development and course. The food culture is deep with soul food roots, steak and BBQ. Hallmark Cards and the KC Art Institute nurtured and established an artistic atmosphere here many decades ago and the arts scene is very deep. The Crossroads Art District is completely unique from anything in almost any city outside of NY. The Plaza District is also a unique experience from any other city.
The low cost of living, and quality of life allow KC to grow at a moderate pace while staying the same "down home," easy place to live and breath. That's why those that love it do. These are intangibles that Minneapolis cant' touch in a million lifetimes. Both cities have many great attributes, but they couldn't be more different.
"shallow perceptive"? While I agree with your post describing KCMO. My opinion stands that Minneapolis is just in a different tier today. MSP is far more progressive especially with their infrastructure. Much better parks, protected bike lanes, light rail, commuter rail, a better regional bus system, a much larger and more connected airport, downtown sports venues etc. The city is far more active. Like I mentioned, you will see more people biking in downtown Minneapolis in the winter than you will see in downtown KC in the summer. A corporate community much more committed to downtown. A metro area that actually can get along even though there are two major central business districts. Suburbs that support the city rather than try to tear it down for their own short term gain. Not to mention a huge urban university.
I do like that KC has a tad more "grit and soul" than MSP, but KC is still a far cry from MSP. If metro KC were to ever wake up, get on the same page and do some major big city infrastructure investments (KCI is a nice start), then it could someday be like MSP is today. Right now, it's just not there.
I would love to be a KC homer here, but It's not even close. Minneapolis is just on a whole different level. KC can compete or may even surpass Minneapolis as far as architecture, but Minneapolis wins in just about every other department I can think of unless you hate hate colder winters. But even with the colder winters, there are more people biking in MSP in the winter than in KC in the summer. It's just a more active city.
It really is. I visit MSP about once a year or so and the weather has little impact on people there. It is an extremely active city. Comparable to Denver, Portland, Seattle, Montreal etc. KC is getting better, but it's still one of the least active major metro areas in the country as far as biking, urban recreation etc. There is very little urban recreation of any type there. There is no way anybody that actively travels could possibly argue that. Even smaller metros like Little Rock, Tulsa, Des Moines, Omaha, Memphis etc are considerably more active with bike lanes, urban trails, parks, pedestrian bridges etc.
It's just an area that KC is just really struggling with.
If you don't care about or partake in such activities (like "locain"), you may not care, but most people moving to urban areas do care a lot about available urban recreational infrastructure. All you have to do is spend time in any thriving city.
Other than that and the lack of a major urban university next to downtown, lack of any pro sports venues downtown, lack of a comprehensive regional rail system and a lack of a major corporate presence downtown, KC and Minneapolis are pretty equal .
But yeah, KCMO does have a bit more grit, soul and history IMO and better food. KC's arrowhead stadium is also better than any shiny new billion dollar stadium.
It really is. I visit MSP about once a year or so and the weather has little impact on people there. It is an extremely active city. Comparable to Denver, Portland, Seattle, Montreal etc. KC is getting better, but it's still one of the least active major metro areas in the country as far as biking, urban recreation etc. There is very little urban recreation of any type there. There is no way anybody that actively travels could possibly argue that. Even smaller metros like Little Rock, Tulsa, Des Moines, Omaha, Memphis etc are considerably more active with bike lanes, urban trails, parks, pedestrian bridges etc.
It's just an area that KC is just really struggling with.
If you don't care about or partake in such activities (like "locain"), you may not care, but most people moving to urban areas do care a lot about available urban recreational infrastructure. All you have to do is spend time in any thriving city.
Other than that and the lack of a major urban university next to downtown, lack of any pro sports venues downtown, lack of a comprehensive regional rail system and a lack of a major corporate presence downtown, KC and Minneapolis are pretty equal .
But yeah, KCMO does have a bit more grit, soul and history IMO and better food. KC's arrowhead stadium is also better than any shiny new billion dollar stadium.
I'd say the food options are better in Minneapolis too. There is just more ethnic diversity, especially if you add St. Paul into the mix. Also, while Arrowhead is a great experience, it's location and the fact that it's surrounded by a sea of parking lots doesn't do it for me. Also, having several stadiums either on or within a short walking distance of stadiums / arenas is a huge plus too. Target Field, Target Center, US Bank Stadium, TCF Bank Stadium, Williams Arena, Mariucci Arena, Ridder Arena, the new Allianz Field, and either have a stop or are within a short-walking distance (a block or two). Xcel Energy Center is about a five block walk or a 10 minute walk.
I'd say the food options are better in Minneapolis too. There is just more ethnic diversity, especially if you add St. Paul into the mix. Also, while Arrowhead is a great experience, it's location and the fact that it's surrounded by a sea of parking lots doesn't do it for me. Also, having several stadiums either on or within a short walking distance of stadiums / arenas is a huge plus too. Target Field, Target Center, US Bank Stadium, TCF Bank Stadium, Williams Arena, Mariucci Arena, Ridder Arena, the new Allianz Field, and either have a stop or are within a short-walking distance (a block or two). Xcel Energy Center is about a five block walk or a 10 minute walk.
Disagree 100% about the location of Arrowhead being a negative. The baseball stadium should be downtown, but Arrowhead belongs right where it is. The parking lots that surround Arrowhead is half of the atmosphere of going to a game there. If you have ever gone to a game there, you would know this. The tailgating experience there is second to none and the outdoor stadium atmosphere there will give any football fan goosebumps.
Huge football stadiums do not belong anywhere near a downtown area. They are rarely used and yet they create a massive dead zone of activity and a massive need for parking. They have far more negatives than positives when placed in or near downtown areas.
Baseball stadiums and arenas are a totally different situation, but even they can have a negative impact if not placed properly.
I have been very honest with KC not quite matching up to Minneapolis, but there are things KC does better and the NFL experience in KC is one of them.
I also don't agree on the food thing. KC has a very diverse food scene. It's big enough to have everything you want. However, KC also has its own food culture (bbq). Few cities have such a local food and KC is one of them.
Disagree 100% about the location of Arrowhead being a negative. The baseball stadium should be downtown, but Arrowhead belongs right where it is. The parking lots that surround Arrowhead is half of the atmosphere of going to a game there. If you have ever gone to a game there, you would know this. The tailgating experience there is second to none and the outdoor stadium atmosphere there will give any football fan goosebumps.
Huge football stadiums do not belong anywhere near a downtown area. They are rarely used and yet they create a massive dead zone of activity and a massive need for parking. They have far more negatives than positives when placed in or near downtown areas.
Baseball stadiums and arenas are a totally different situation, but even they can have a negative impact if not placed properly.
I have been very honest with KC not quite matching up to Minneapolis, but there are things KC does better and the NFL experience in KC is one of them.
I also don't agree on the food thing. KC has a very diverse food scene. It's big enough to have everything you want. However, KC also has its own food culture (bbq). Few cities have such a local food and KC is one of them.
Yes, I've been to Arrowhead - once and it's pushing 8 years since I was there. I realize for many that tailgating is part of the experience and I agree that KC tops MPLS in that regard. However, I'm no longer into the tailgating thing so that part of the experience doesn't mean anything to me. That said, I will take the location / access to US Bank Stadium over that of Arrowhead.
The area around the Metrodome used to be a dead zone, but it's changed drastically since the completion of US Bank Stadium.
Minneapolis overall I guess, but that's not saying much. Kansas City is still a great city. Just smaller
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghengis
like Denver
I'll take Prairie and access to real topography over a frozen tundra
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.
.
