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.
I think Seattle is much more densely urban than the Twin Cities. Outside of the downtown area, you don't see a lot of residential high rises and things like that in the Twin Cities. Seattle has a lot more of that.
The topography and climate are nothing alike.
Both do have prominent hipster culture, and that's the main similarity.
I think the people comparing MSP to DFW are onto something. The Twin Cities are smaller and more liberal, but they have a lot in common in terms of layout, density, etc. Both sit on or near the edge of the plains and have their start as centers of agricultural hubs, Minneapolis with the grain milling, DFW with the stock yards.
I think Seattle is much more densely urban than the Twin Cities. Outside of the downtown area, you don't see a lot of residential high rises and things like that in the Twin Cities. Seattle has a lot more of that.
The topography and climate are nothing alike.
Both do have prominent hipster culture, and that's the main similarity.
I think the people comparing MSP to DFW are onto something. The Twin Cities are smaller and more liberal, but they have a lot in common in terms of layout, density, etc. Both sit on or near the edge of the plains and have their start as centers of agricultural hubs, Minneapolis with the grain milling, DFW with the stock yards.
MSP has about double the density of Dallas. It's a lot closer to Seattle as far as density is concerned.
I think Seattle is much more densely urban than the Twin Cities. Outside of the downtown area, you don't see a lot of residential high rises and things like that in the Twin Cities. Seattle has a lot more of that.
The topography and climate are nothing alike.
Both do have prominent hipster culture, and that's the main similarity.
I think the people comparing MSP to DFW are onto something. The Twin Cities are smaller and more liberal, but they have a lot in common in terms of layout, density, etc. Both sit on or near the edge of the plains and have their start as centers of agricultural hubs, Minneapolis with the grain milling, DFW with the stock yards.
To be sure, there are neighborhoods outside of Downtown Minneapolis that are pretty dense (Uptown, Dinkeytown, St. Anthony, etc.)
That is kind of an unfair comparison, though. Dallas has much larger city limits than MPLS and almost 4x population.
At the metro level DFW is as or more dense than the twin cities, is it not?
I guess. SF has tiny city limits and I don't see anyone saying their density doesn't count. And I'm really talking about the core cities. MSP metro has a lot of lakes which lower its density.
Both heavily influenced by Scandinavian settlers, more so than any other top 30 metros.
Both have high education levels, and low household sizes within the central cities. Basically, lots of well-educated white people with Northern European ancestry who don't want to make friends with people who didn't grow up nearby.
Water is usually not counted, but wilderness land usually is.
Yea but the lakes make the metro spread out more lowering its overall density.
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.
