[min-chi-cbus]

I just wanted to post some thoughts on how I view the metro area on its approach towards becoming/maintaining a strong national/global player from an economic perspective only.

There are three issues in particular I am concerned with:

1. Government spending and urban initiatives do not seem to be prioritizing some key opportunities. For instance, there is an opportunity for the Twin Cities to exploit its proximity to the grain belt, corn/ethanol belt, Western coal and Canadian oil. Being in such close proximity to these types of commodities is what put Minneapolis on the map 150 years ago (grain) and it seems like it has the potential to reap some of the benefits of some of the coal deposits in Wyoming and Alberta black sands deposits in the future if we provide the infrastructure to support it.

2. On this same line of thinking, I guess I'd like to see the Twin Cities take a more proactive approach to luring freight and intermodal transportation based on this geographic advantage. I'd love to see an effort such as Kansas City's SmartPort, which consolidates air cargo and truck and rail freight. Although I am a fan of all things freight (truck, rail, air and ship), I think it's also a major economic catalyst. Also, from what I've read, other centers of transportation such as Chicago and St. Louis are already being "choked out", and there is opportunity to pick up some of that spillover activity. Albeit, Kansas City, Indianapolis, St. Louis and Chicago are all geographically more centrally located than Mpls/St. Paul. A Cargo Port would be a definate good start, and should be a priority if it isn't already (I know they spoke some about putting a cargo airport near Rosemount). Living in Columbus, OH for about 5 years, I've seen what a cargo port can do to the economy.

3. The cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul should make smart decisions about how to invest in exisiting transportation infrastructure. Yes, the Hiawatha rail line is a necessary means of connecting three major centers of commerce (MSP Airport, Downtown and the Mall of America), but a rail system that connects most/all major points of interest in the area is what is needed to be an effective working economic investment. Not to mention commuter rail, like the "Northstar" that can bring suburbanites 40 miles away off the roads and provide alternatives to living in the city if people's preference are to live on 1-3 acre lots. I personally am against that type of lifestyle, but many people aren't, so why fight it? Most importantly, I believe the city can relieve many of it's traffic problems with relatively small (but probably expensive) changes to it's existing infrastructure. Clover-leaf interchanges are dangerous and slow down the natural flow of traffic throughout the city. I think much of the I-494 traffic in Bloomington could be reduced drastically if we had better interchanges, especially at I-35W, France Ave, Cedar Ave and Lyndale Ave. We could probably use a 4th lane in each direction as well. Hwy 169, the Crosstown and I-35W will probably also need additional lanes sometime in the future, but adding lanes does nothing without smooth transitions between freeways.

These are just some thoughts I have on the Twin Cities current economic situation. I am a current resident and would like to live here for many years to come, but I feel like the area could do so much better if it focused on some key issues and took some necessary investment risks on items such as intermodal transportation hubs that promote trans-American commerce and investment.

How do other locals feel about the state of our city?

How do other midwesterners in other cities feel about the state of their city and what things you would like to see your city do to improve itself?

[hudkina]

A cargo port wouldn't work in Minneapolis due to its isolation. It is off the beaten path.

[vgmLiquid]

While sure it would be great for a lot of those things to happen, the only one the cities of Minneapolis and St Paul (actually, its not up to them for this either) have any control over is the third item on the list, which if you have read minnescraper or on SSC will know that they have about 3-4 more LRT lines in the works but it is more or less a matter of lack of funding to get all of them built now rather than building one at a time. Minneapolis is studying financing its own streetcars to cover ground the LRT won't hit but still could benefit from a rail structure.

The other two are completely based off of corporations and private industry. The first, as you mention, a lot of grains, etc...we pretty much already are there. The Minneapolis Grain Exchange (MGEX) is the largest of its sort and for all purposes, the most important. Plus we have a great deal of corporations investing into bio-fuels and other biotech such as Cargill, CHS, General Mills, and other prominent corporations in the region.

As far as freight cargo port stuff goes...MSP (the airport) is one of the largest in the world and does see a fair amount of cargo traffic along with actual passengers. Minneapolis-St Paul also was headquarters to the only transcontinental railroad that never went bankrupt under the leadership of James J Hill. While a great deal of that has all passed, if you have cargo going into Minnesota, Western Wisconsin, North Dakota, South Dakota, Northern Iowa, Montana, or heading to the northern areas of the west coast such as Seattle...there is a fairly good chance it passed through Minneapolis at one point.

You really shouldn't worry to much about our economy. Our economy is very diversified which is a good thing. If we were so dependent upon wheats and grains we would have been crushed when the majority of the mills were moved away from Minneapolis (even though Minneapolis still controlled the finances behind those mills) but our economy diversified. Look at cities in the past that have been dependent upon one industry they failed...Duluth is a great example.

Really what we should worry about is how we can show off our city to the world so they know what we are all about...but we have the RNC 2008 next year to do that with. Maybe what we should really worry about is how can we build mass transit in a way that will help prevent more sprawl, promote urban living, and remove current crime problems in North Minneapolis. I think we could also look at attracting an MLS team for St Paul and worry about keeping the Vikings in Minneapolis. Those two things aren't necessarily going to make or break the region, but it is about a quality of life thing which helps attract people to the region. People will come to the region though, just because we have a lot of large corporations that are growing...aka they want jobs.

[min-chi-cbus]

I agree with the above post, but just because our economy is stable, doesn't mean there can't be improvement. We have a diversified economy in a broad scope (retail, bio-sciences, manufacturing, healthcare, banking, etc. etc.) but my main point was that I feel cities underestimate the power of fluidity (e.g. transportation). I am ultra pro-urban, but I am also a realist when it comes to lessaiz faires (sp) and the notion that people can and will do what they want. Let the economy decide how to centralize/decentralize and adjust accordingly. The best thing to do as a pro-"urbanist" is to promote scenarios where living centrally is a more attractive alternative. I'm just hoping that local economies can create environments where living central trumps suburban flight. I personally feel it begins and ends with transportation. However, even if people do want to live 40 miles away....and they will....we should have a transportation system in place that supports that type of lifestyle, or we will eventually get "choked out" as well. I have relatives in Chicago who never leave their home to visit the city or even other suburbs because the traffic is unbearable. That eventually drains the economy and slows the lifeblood of a metro area.

Just some thoughts, I'm interested in how other people view urbanization, centralization, and economic resurgence....particularly in the "rust belt".

[Jesse276]

So the idea I am hearing is that we should have a market-based system except when it comes to highways and roads. For those we should have generous subsidies.

Do you work for a real-estate developer or a road building company?

[min-chi-cbus]

I studied Real Estate, Finance and City Planning, so I think about several different aspects of urban planning/development. The whole point of this thread was twofold:

1. To get somebody to talk about Minneapolis because nobody else does.
2. To get people's opinions about how to create a better city.

I don't think there are any easy answers for how to accomplish this, but I personally feel transportation and infrastructure are key components. To answer your question, I have no self interest in building roads.

Do you have an opinion? I would love to hear it.

[Jesse276]

So you sidestep my question. I asked you, how can you espose a market system while also advocating for subsidies for roads?

If you can't answer a simple question, your studies mean nothing.

[Dream'n]

^Poofs out chest and states he's the big man on campus. How boring and insulting.

[min-chi-cbus]

We live in a system controlled by both markets and structure. We govern the laws we need to have in place and then we let the market decide how to use those laws to accomplish what it needs.

For instance (and on the local news tonight) McMansions:

Zoning requirements are set in places such as Edina so that a building is zoned say R1, and you are allowed to zone within the extent of what R1 entails. You cannot decide to build a skyscraper next to a 1,200 SF home because zoning laws restrict that, but you can build a 3,000 SF monster next to that same house because the market decided that property was desirable enough to support such a home (an example, not a segway to a McMansion debate necessarily).

Dream'n, I am not tooting my own horn at all, I'm just a young urban professional. Jesse276 wanted to know what I do despite the fact that it's none of his/her business.

[Jesse276]

We live in a system controlled by both markets and structure. We govern the laws we need to have in place and then we let the market decide how to use those laws to accomplish what it needs.

For instance (and on the local news tonight) McMansions:

Zoning requirements are set in places such as Edina so that a building is zoned say R1, and you are allowed to zone within the extent of what R1 entails. You cannot decide to build a skyscraper next to a 1,200 SF home because zoning laws restrict that, but you can build a 3,000 SF monster next to that same house because the market decided that property was desirable enough to support such a home (an example, not a segway to a McMansion debate necessarily).

Dream'n, I am not tooting my own horn at all, I'm just a young urban professional. Jesse276 wanted to know what I do despite the fact that it's none of his/her business.

Wow, you sure do know how to dance. You're side-steppin' all over the place.

[min-chi-cbus]

"how can you espose [expose] a market system while also advocating for subsidies for roads?"

Are you familiar with government subsidies for building highways for example? Let's pretend you are. So you want to know how can we have a market system in place that supports HBU development while we subsidize certain areas. You allocate the dollars that taxpayers pay towards the things you feel are most important. My point was (and this is a while ago now) that you can allocate federal spending (or SUBSIDIES) towards roads to promote future economic development and prosperity, because, my feeling was that we need create a more fluid transportation system to sustain our economic environment. Once this investment has been made, the economy can work with the infrastructure it has been provided and a MARKET can come in and decide how to use that infrastructure so support HBU development.

And like someone mentioned earlier, we have already done this with the Hiawatha rail line and any possible future LRT expansion nodes. We subsidized a transportation system that was designed less to take people off the roads and more to create a connection between three vital economic entities (the MOA, MSP Airport and downtown). It's an economic train if it's anything.

Jesse276, I hope this finally answers your endless streams of questions and rants. I keep saying that I am not an expert in this area, and instead, I was actually inquisitive as to why this could or could not work and what other people's thoughts and feelings were. But your contributions have been helpful, thanks.

[Dream'n]

We live in a system controlled by both markets and structure. We govern the laws we need to have in place and then we let the market decide how to use those laws to accomplish what it needs.

For instance (and on the local news tonight) McMansions:

Zoning requirements are set in places such as Edina so that a building is zoned say R1, and you are allowed to zone within the extent of what R1 entails. You cannot decide to build a skyscraper next to a 1,200 SF home because zoning laws restrict that, but you can build a 3,000 SF monster next to that same house because the market decided that property was desirable enough to support such a home (an example, not a segway to a McMansion debate necessarily).

Dream'n, I am not tooting my own horn at all, I'm just a young urban professional. Jesse276 wanted to know what I do despite the fact that it's none of his/her business.


I was referring to Jesse276. He's great at quoting people and then attach some little snide childish remark to it, thus making his post bigger than the original but showing instead just how small he is.

[Jesse276]

My point is that you can't advocate for a free market and then arbritrarily advocate for your own special interests. It's like me saying we should subsidise Cheerios in the cereal market, because I think they're good.

Anyway, you both can have your flame war without me. I must say though, your trolling skills are as sharp as your wit.

[Stephenapolis]

It's like me saying we should subsidise Cheerios in the cereal market, because I think they're good.



I am ALL for THAT. Job security baby!:tup: