What are St. Louis and Minneapolis doing right that Pittsburgh isn't? (Denver: crime rate, home)

[gameguy56]

Both are former industrial cities that are gaining population in their traditional city centers as well as their Metro areas.

They are growing in a slow, sustainable way that Pittsburgh should be looking to emulate.

[By~Tor]

As one who lived in the STL for 6 years, I can't say they're doing anything particularly "right". . . in fact, the government is just as corrupt as ever there, but the people there know that they have cheap land, an underutilized workforce and varied industry opportunities. It's the private sector driving any growth there....

Pittsburgh can do the same thing, but it needs a grass-roots level approach to get private donors and financiers interested and able to see results for their investment.

[BrianTH]

I can't claim to be too familiar with either city, but off hand I don't think either Saint Louis or Minneapolis was quite as dependent on a single industry as Pittsburgh was on the steel industry, and therefore they were not subject to the same sort of large scale and very disruptive economic collapse. Moreover, with respect to Saint Louis in particular, my impression is that it was just in the last few years that the city proper stopped losing population. I gather the population of Minneapolis proper stabilized a little earlier--in the 1990s--but it is still well below its earlier peaks and growing very gradually.

That said, my sense is that both cities have in fact been doing a relatively good job at things like making the gradual transition from an industrial economy to a service center economy, while simultaneously re-developing their urban areas in ways attractive to the so-called "creative class" (the economic group which has been associated with urban revitalization). I personally think much of Pittsburgh proper is heading that way as well, but I do think Pittsburgh is still in the last stages of adjusting to the collapse of the steel industry, and therefore may be a few years behind these other cities even if it is on the same general track.

By the way, I think all these cities are doing far better than, say, a comparable city like Detroit. In other words, I think despite the problems associated with its former dependence on the steel industry, Pittsburgh has managed to stay closer to the Saint Louis/Minneapolis end of the spectrum than the Detroit end of the spectrum, which is very good news.

[Geeo]

I think that St. Louis, Cincinnatti and Pittsburgh are all very similar. In fact, St. Louis has lost even more population from its peak than Pittsburgh as. At its peak in 1950, I think St. Louis had 850,000 and Pittsburgh had 676,00 (both within the city limits). Now St. Louis city and Pittsburgh are about the same population. And I think both metros are similar in size as well.

[Katarina Witt]

Minneapolis has a lot of telecom, agribusiness such as General Mills and Pillsbury; high-tech such as Honeywell, which has been there for years; 3M, which has its R&D offices there, medical equipment manufacturing and R&D; in other words a diversified economy. Also Corporate HQ for the Dayton-Hudson Co, including Target Stores. It has a younger population (median age 31.2 vs 35.5 for Pittsburgh). That doesn't sound like much, but it actually is fairly significant.

[RockLobster]

In my eyes what lacks in Pittsburgh and basically all of the Keystone state is economically savy government leadership. The private sector is in fact growing and responsible for the growth in the urban area. Granted many of the high profile development projects planned or underway are coming with great tif and local gov't financing. But there is also local and regional private enterprise and corporate growth. If local and state government were not as prohibitive in encouraging growth right here in Pittsburgh and southwestern pa we would see even greater economic growth.

Regionalism of course being a hot term as of late will become a standard term over the next few months as a comprehensive study will come to the public's attention as the positives and negatives of merging city and county are brought to light. The Twin Cities region is perhaps the best example of the positives of regionalsim and merging. Cooperation between the urban core, suburbs, and rural are needed for an entire region to benefit. And the Twin Cities have been able to come together as a region and sure enough the economic and social benefit has been positive. I don't know much about Saint Louis other then a very high violent crime rate and a struggling downtown retail core. The loss of the hub years ago at Lambert St Louis Int'l Airport had similiar effects to the air transit employment sector that Pittsburgh recently has been going through.
Detroit is bracing for a long term fall economically as the Michigan auto industry continues to head downward.

Pittsburgh is blessed with the college and university make up it has and the numerous foundations that call the city home thanks to our past industrial homies from the burgh.
Despite the huge loss in population in the city, Pittsburgh plays upward as a larger city with it's cultural make up, corporate presence, financial play and medical, technological advancement. If local government would figure out how to support the local buisness climate then we would see expansion growth ala mode.

I have been in Palm Beach County. Florida for the past few weeks. This being one of the fastest growing counties in the nation over the past 20 years. Trust me the growth has been mainly in avergae service sector jobs. The region in south florida is desperate for high tech growth and any technology that is willing to move south. Pittsburgh has the pieces allready in place. The private sector has the brains but does the city, county and state ? Thus far I think not.

[gameguy56]

Originally Posted by Geeo

I think that St. Louis, Cincinnatti and Pittsburgh are all very similar. In fact, St. Louis has lost even more population from its peak than Pittsburgh as. At its peak in 1950, I think St. Louis had 850,000 and Pittsburgh had 676,00 (both within the city limits). Now St. Louis city and Pittsburgh are about the same population. And I think both metros are similar in size as well.

compare Pittsburgh:
CensusScope -- Population Growth

St. Louis:
CensusScope -- Population Growth

[CHIP72]

I'm as anti-Pittsburgh as almost anyone you'll meet, but downtown Pittsburgh, like most other fairly large cities, has been GAINING population the last few years, not losing it. (The city and metro region as a whole are losing population.)

I haven't ever been to either St. Louis or the Twin Cities (yet), so I don't have a good feel about what is making them "successful" compared to Pittsburgh. (I do have to question St. Louis being considered successful considering it was ranked as the most dangerous large city in the U.S. in a recent year, I think 2005 or 2006.) One thing I'll note that works as an advantage for the MSP area is general emptying of the Great Plains and in a somewhat different way, the lack of other population centers in Minnesota. Small towns in places like the Dakotas and eastern Montana (and perhaps Minnesota, I don't know) are shriveling up because of the lack of job opportunities, and people are moving to larger cities. In some cases people are moving to relatively small (but large in a regional sense) cities like Billings or Fargo, but I suspect some people are going for the big enchalada and are moving to the Twin Cities (or Denver). Though Pittsburgh is THE city for most of western PA, much of West Virginia, and a small chunk of eastern Ohio, it doesn't have anywhere near the size of the hinterland of the Twin Cities, which stretches from western Wisconsin (and northern Iowa) westward to at least the Dakotas/Montana border. For people in this wide swath of land, the Minneapolis/St. Paul area is THE big city that is closest. This is just a guess on my part.

[BrianTH]

Originally Posted by CHIP72

One thing I'll note that works as an advantage for the MSP area is general emptying of the Great Plains and in a somewhat different way, the lack of other population centers in Minnesota. Small towns in places like the Dakotas and eastern Montana (and perhaps Minnesota, I don't know) are shriveling up because of the lack of job opportunities, and people are moving to larger cities. In some cases people are moving to relatively small (but large in a regional sense) cities like Billings or Fargo, but I suspect some people are going for the big enchalada and are moving to the Twin Cities (or Denver). Though Pittsburgh is THE city for most of western PA, much of West Virginia, and a small chunk of eastern Ohio, it doesn't have anywhere near the size of the hinterland of the Twin Cities, which stretches from western Wisconsin (and northern Iowa) westward to at least the Dakotas/Montana border. For people in this wide swath of land, the Minneapolis/St. Paul area is THE big city that is closest. This is just a guess on my part.

That is a good point. If you head straight West from Minneapolis, the next comparable city you hit is Seattle.

[guylocke]

I haven't ever been to either St. Louis or the Twin Cities (yet), so I don't have a good feel about what is making them "successful" compared to Pittsburgh. (I do have to question St. Louis being considered successful considering it was ranked as the most dangerous large city in the U.S. in a recent year, I think 2005 or 2006.) One thing I'll note that works as an advantage for the MSP area is general emptying of the Great Plains and in a somewhat different way, the lack of other population centers in Minnesota. Small towns in places like the Dakotas and eastern Montana (and perhaps Minnesota, I don't know) are shriveling up because of the lack of job opportunities, and people are moving to larger cities. In some cases people are moving to relatively small (but large in a regional sense) cities like Billings or Fargo, but I suspect some people are going for the big enchalada and are moving to the Twin Cities (or Denver). Though Pittsburgh is THE city for most of western PA, much of West Virginia, and a small chunk of eastern Ohio, it doesn't have anywhere near the size of the hinterland of the Twin Cities, which stretches from western Wisconsin (and northern Iowa) westward to at least the Dakotas/Montana border. For people in this wide swath of land, the Minneapolis/St. Paul area is THE big city that is closest. This is just a guess on my part.

Interesting, thank you.

That is a good point. If you head straight West from Minneapolis, the next comparable city you hit is Seattle.

Seattle is quite a bit more impressive than St. Paul or Minneapolis. Seattle is a growing city for not the same reasons. In fact, the entire Pacific Northwest is largely growing. Actually, unless I'm mistaken, the city of Minneapolis and St. Paul have slowly been losing population since 2000.

EDIT:

No I'm right, I looked it up. Both cities have been losing population yearly since 2000. I'm not sure about the suburbs, though.