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.
IThere are great schools all around the country, but in many metro areas school districts have a huge impact on housing prices. When we lived in LA we lived for a time in a district known for its good public schools; housing was through the roof expensive as a result, with similar houses going for drastically higher prices within the district than they did just a short distance away in less desirable school districts. You can argue that some districts in the Twin Cities are better than others, but for there are no districts that people with choices will avoid at almost all costs. (not that some people won't move to some places due to fears of schools, but there's not anywhere near the same pressure that you find in cities like DC or LA, to name two places where I've lived before). (and talk about expensive housing: a tiny two-bedroom cottage with a postage stamp yard that looked frozen in time c. 1950 was listed for $500k on our block and sold fairly quickly since it was such a "good" deal).
As much as I enjoy living here - you cannot compare Minneapolis or St Paul (or a combination of both) to LA or DC.
I wasn't meaning to directly compare them -- obviously Minneapolis is not in the same tier of cities -- but just threw those cities out there because I've lived and worked in both within the past five years. Even much smaller cities, like Wilmington, DE, have expensive housing and greater school issues. But for us, like many who end up deciding to stick with the Twin Cities in the long run, Minneapolis does offer a compromise between the amenities of the big places (NYC, Boston, DC, LA, etc.) and budget. You can actually buy something in a nice neighborhood with a good school either in or close to the city in Minneapolis, while in many other cities (including those of smaller size) you either have to pay a lot more, live in a really sketchy neighborhood, or risk bad schools. And the city itself still has many of the bonuses offered by bigger cities: lots of cultural opportunities, big universities, etc, and the salaries are still pretty high. Not to say that there aren't other cities that also offer similar amenities and similar or even cheaper prices, but when we sat down and looked at all the pros and cons Minneapolis comes up looking pretty good. (for us family also tips the scales)
On the other hand, if I didn't like bigger city living and could be just as happy living somewhere smaller then there might be other options that would be a better fit. Same thing if I had a ton of money and could afford a $600k house. But for someone who likes a city, has a kid, and would like to be able to buy a place yet not get in over my head in debt, Minneapolis is a good match.
You can actually buy something in a nice neighborhood with a good school either in or close to the city in Minneapolis, while in many other cities (including those of smaller size) you either have to pay a lot more, live in a really sketchy neighborhood, or risk bad schools. And the city itself still has many of the bonuses offered by bigger cities: lots of cultural opportunities, big universities, etc, and the salaries are still pretty high. Not to say that there aren't other cities that also offer similar amenities and similar or even cheaper prices, but when we sat down and looked at all the pros and cons Minneapolis comes up looking pretty good.
for someone who likes a city, has a kid, and would like to be able to buy a place yet not get in over my head in debt, Minneapolis is a good match.
I agree that the housing costs are all relative. We've spent time living on the east coast and in California, and by comparison homes in the Twin Cities are extremely affordable.
What we seem to have found is that the Twin Cities is one of the most expensive places to live in the country, outside of either coast. The coasts are obviously much more expensive, but the rest of the middle of the country seems to be less expensive than here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist
I suppose it also depends on what kind of housing one is looking for; I'm gathering that "reasonable" is pretty subjective. I've found plenty of decent houses listed for less than $200k in the Twin Cities; that amount would possibly get me a ramshackle one-bedroom "fixer" in a rough neighborhood with terrible schools in many of the places we've lived. Single family homes are more expensive in my favorite neighborhoods, but even there it's possible to get something nice for well under $400k. Many of my friends and relatives (and not just the ones with the high-paying jobs) in the Twin Cities were able to buy houses in their 20s, sometimes a year or two after college; to me, that's evidence of relatively affordable housing. A single family house with multiple bedrooms in a somewhat safe neighborhood with access to decent schools for less than $200k sounds downright cheap, or at least within the realm of reason for many families.
I completely agree with this. Everything such as this is subjective. For our example, we can buy a 2,500 sq ft home, built between 2004-2006, with some really nice updates, in one of the best school districts in Austin for about $250k. Here, in the area we live in, $250k will not get you anything NEARLY that nice. There may be other areas here where that is possible, but my family is all in the Vadnais Heights area, so we looked around here, Shoreview, Arden Hills, New Brighton, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HugeTon
Congrat on your move to Austin. I've heard lots of good things about that city, and you probably did too.
Thanks! We fell in love with it when we visited and can't wait to make the move!
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist
I think what it comes down to is that maybe half of the people on this board are going to look at Twin Cities real estate prices and think what a bargain! and the other half are going to say "oh, it's sooo expensive here." What camp an individual falls into is going to depend heavily on personal experience or expectation.
Yep, I agree. Our perspective is currently Phoenix, since that's where we just came from. Our home there is currently listed for $245k and it's 3,100 sq ft (one-story), built in 2002 with ALL the upgrades, including double ovens, 5-burner gas cooktop, 10x10 master closet, pool, fireplace, theater room, etc. There is no way we could find that house here for anywhere near as low as $245k.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist
You can actually buy something in a nice neighborhood with a good school either in or close to the city in Minneapolis, while in many other cities (including those of smaller size) you either have to pay a lot more, live in a really sketchy neighborhood, or risk bad schools. And the city itself still has many of the bonuses offered by bigger cities: lots of cultural opportunities, big universities, etc, and the salaries are still pretty high.
Good points about the fact that some of us have been looking at different things when comparing housing prices (not just locations, but types of houses); I will admit that I've never bothered comparing relatively new and large houses between Minneapolis and where I've lived before, in part because there would be absolutely no way I could come close to having afforded to rent or buy one of them in those areas, anyway, and because that's not what I would buy and wasn't what was for sale in our neighborhoods. I hadn't spent a lot of time thinking about the differences in the way different types of housing compares; my preferences run towards the older, smaller, and in long-established pre-war neighborhoods. In that housing market the Twin Cities is great, and offers great value (as in so many other cities those types of neighborhoods seem to be either really expensive or really run-down or have terrible schools); I had just assumed that other categories of housing fell along similar lines, but now that I think about it there's no reason to have assumed that was the case. Interesting points.
I'd add smugness to the list. You'll notice it after you've been here a while. There is a smugness in the Twin Cities that you simply have to see to believe. This is the best city in the entire damn universe, don't you know? If you don't like the cold, then...then...well, then just leave! We don't want you here anyway! The cold keeps the riff-raff out, don't you know?
Now, I know the TC are better than a lot of places. I've been to Phoenix and aside from the weather there (which I love), I hated it. Milwaukee is a dump. Chicago isn't much better. New York is great, but it's a completely different lifestyle. Can't compare the two. LA is cool too, but it's huge and has its own mega problems. I haven't been to Denver, but I get the comparisons that are drawn. It really does seem like Denver has made good with their infrastructure as of late.
The point about public transit (and transportation infrastructure in general) is a good one. There are way too many people and politicians in Minnesota stuck in their ways. We've done it this way for 250 years, so why should we change? It seriously takes an act of god to get anything done around here transit-wise. Just look at this Central Corridor squabble. Holy living christ. A subway would have been built beneath the University in any normal city. Not here! That might raise the cost! Nevermind doing it right -- we just want cheap. The Northstar Line should have gone all the way past St Cloud. Nope. Extended debate and arguments caused delays and we wound up with just half the distance we should have.
Next look at the 35W/62 debacle. Any normal city would have elevated that project to level of CITY-WIDE EMERGENCY. All available construction money and people should have been poured into the project (like the new 35W bridge) to finish it as well and quickly as possible. But no. The whole process has dragged on for decades. How many false starts were there? Construction itself will last what...three years? Four? Meanwhile, the whole area is a nightmare to drive.
You can't do anything about weather, but you can fix infrastructure. We've chosen not to. Consider the 35W bridge disaster. There was a genuine change in thinking about infrastructure after it fell. Things were going to get done, dammit. Even our penny-pinching governor was on board. But did that mood last? Of course not. A magical thing happened -- within just months, it was like the bridge never even fell. Gradually we were again bickering over how an improved infrastructure might cost us another nickel in tax. Precious money indeed.
I've posted it before, but inertia is what keeps many of us here. Objects at rest tend to stay at rest.
I find the smugness irritating, too. There is sometimes a sense of "Minnesotans are just nicer, better, smarter, work harder, and are just different from those 'other' people elsewhere." Certainly not everyone has that attitude, but you do see it sometimes. I especially hate it when it pops up in advertisements or political messages, the sort of thing trying to make people feel good because they're "real" Americans and therefore somehow special and different from everyone else. Smugness or sense of superiority is by no means exclusive to the Twin Cities, of course (Minnesotans didn't invent the phrase "flyover country," for example...). Denver seems to be a little smug, too, although more of the "we're rugged outdoorsy people, and oh, did we mention we have mountains, and everyone wants to move here" kind of way. Minnesotans can't brag about the weather or mountains, and often gets overlooked as a city, so maybe that contributes to the smugness and defense mechanism thing. (anyone else out there encounter people in other states who have referred to "Minnianapolis", which I take to be a blend between Indianapolis and Minneapolis? That's one of my personal pet peeves, and I've heard it multiple times. I think some of the people saying it genuinely didn't realize that there was a difference; Midwest is Midwest, right?)
Still, I love Minneapolis, think it's a great place, don't love the cold but will put up with it for the many other benefits, but fully acknowledge that there are other nice cities out there, too. I appreciate Minneapolis a lot more after having lived in other cities, although there are still those things that really annoy me (attitude towards public transportation probably being #1, followed by views of density and urban living in the city). I'd like to think that those views may change in the future. Every city has its pluses and minuses, and I wouldn't trust anyone who claimed there were only good things about where they live. It's all about figuring out which pluses and minuses matter most to you, and that exact mix of needs and tastes is going to be different for all of us. Obviously a lot of us have found the Twin Cities to be a good fit, while equally obviously it's not the right fit for everyone.
When the 35W bridge fell and was all over TV, I remember thinking that ten million people just asked themselves, "Where the heck is Minneanapolis?"
I've noticed that for years, though I've never thought of the Indianapolis angle. That's interesting. I always just thought people were being ignorant about our great city
my preferences run towards the older, smaller, and in long-established pre-war neighborhoods. In that housing market the Twin Cities is great, and offers great value (as in so many other cities those types of neighborhoods seem to be either really expensive or really run-down or have terrible schools); I had just assumed that other categories of housing fell along similar lines, but now that I think about it there's no reason to have assumed that was the case. Interesting points.
That is so interesting, because you are so right! In Phoenix, those homes cost SO MUCH MORE! So I guess it's a matter of it being expensive here for what we are used to/would like!
Quote:
Originally Posted by uptown_urbanist
Minnesotans can't brag about the weather or mountains, and often gets overlooked as a city, so maybe that contributes to the smugness and defense mechanism thing. (anyone else out there encounter people in other states who have referred to "Minnianapolis", which I take to be a blend between Indianapolis and Minneapolis? That's one of my personal pet peeves, and I've heard it multiple times. I think some of the people saying it genuinely didn't realize that there was a difference; Midwest is Midwest, right?)
This drives me crazy, too. It's like people who have never been here think it's just some little po-dunk town and don't recognize it as a real metropolitan area!!! The movies that are put out based here don't help, either! We saw some TERRIBLE movie with Renee Zellweger recently, but it made it look like Minneapolis was a tiny, tiny town out in the middle of Minnesota farmland. Ugh!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Globe199
When the 35W bridge fell and was all over TV, I remember thinking that ten million people just asked themselves, "Where the heck is Minneanapolis?"
I've noticed that for years, though I've never thought of the Indianapolis angle. That's interesting. I always just thought people were being ignorant about our great city
They are.
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.
