St. Paul’s downtown core sits at a critical inflection point. The pandemic dealt a devastating blow to urban centers nationwide, but the challenges facing St. Paul’s core—from 7th Street to Kellogg Boulevard, Cedar Street to Jackson Street—run deeper than COVID’s impact. The St. Paul Downtown Alliance’s new initiative to gather citizen input through surveys and events represents an important step, but the approach must go beyond collecting wishlist items to fundamentally rethinking downtown’s purpose in a post-pandemic world.
The Madison equities portfolio foreclosures mentioned in the original article aren’t isolated incidents but symptoms of a deeper structural problem: downtowns designed primarily around 9-to-5 office work are struggling to find their identity when that model has been permanently disrupted. The question isn’t just what amenities might attract visitors—it’s whether we’re brave enough to reimagine what urban cores are for.
The Limitations of Traditional Engagement Models
While the Downtown Alliance’s survey approach demonstrates good intentions, similar initiatives in other cities reveal the limitations of this model. In Denver, a 2018 downtown revitalization survey collected thousands of responses but ultimately led to incremental changes rather than transformative vision. The fundamental problem? Surveys tend to generate wish lists rather than cohesive visions, and they often reach a self-selecting group of participants.
The Downtown Alliance’s focus on what will “attract visitors” and “keep workers after 5 o’clock” frames downtown primarily as a destination rather than a neighborhood. This approach risks creating a space that feels artificial—designed for occasional visitors rather than supporting a genuine community. Josh Secaur of Gambit Brewing Company identified the core issue when he said “getting people down here is the trick.” But the more important question is: why should people come downtown at all when suburban alternatives offer convenience?
True revitalization requires moving beyond attraction strategies to building authentic purpose. Pittsburgh’s Cultural District transformation succeeded not because they surveyed what people wanted, but because they committed to a bold vision of arts-driven development that gave people specific reasons to engage with downtown that couldn’t be replicated elsewhere.
The Housing Imperative That’s Missing from the Conversation
The most successful downtown revitalizations nationwide share one common element conspicuously absent from the Downtown Alliance’s framing: residential density. Downtown Minneapolis has added over 14,000 residents since 2006, creating a built-in customer base for businesses that doesn’t depend on convincing suburban residents to make special trips downtown.
St. Paul’s downtown core has tremendous potential for residential conversion, particularly with office buildings facing high vacancy rates. The Madison equities portfolio challenges represent an opportunity, not just a problem—these properties could become housing at various price points, creating a 24/7 neighborhood where businesses like Gambit Brewing would have a built-in customer base.
Cities like Oklahoma City have successfully implemented residential conversion programs, offering tax incentives and streamlined permitting for developers willing to convert commercial buildings to residential use. Within three years, they added 2,000 downtown housing units, which in turn supported a 40% increase in retail occupancy. St. Paul needs this kind of bold approach rather than simply asking what attractions might draw occasional visitors.
Public Space Activation Requires Institutional Commitment
The survey’s focus on what people want to see downtown misses a crucial point: successful public spaces require ongoing management, not just good design. Bryant Park in New York transformed from a crime-ridden area to one of the city’s most beloved spaces not just through redesign but through the creation of a dedicated management entity with sustainable funding.
St. Paul has beautiful bones—from Rice Park to Mears Park—but lacks the consistent programming and management that would make these spaces consistently vibrant. Rather than asking what new attractions people want, the Downtown Alliance should focus on creating the infrastructure to better activate what already exists.
The Nicollet Mall in Minneapolis demonstrates this challenge perfectly. Despite a $50 million renovation completed in 2017, the space struggled with activation until the Downtown Improvement District implemented consistent programming and management. Physical improvements alone don’t create vibrancy—institutional commitment does.
The Transportation Equation
Any discussion of downtown revitalization must address how people get there. The survey mentions accessibility, but truly successful downtowns are moving beyond the car-centric model that has dominated American urban planning for decades.
Cities like Indianapolis have demonstrated that investing in connected, protected bike networks can significantly increase downtown visitation without requiring massive parking infrastructure. Their Cultural Trail connects downtown to surrounding neighborhoods, making it easy for residents to access downtown amenities without driving.
St. Paul’s Green Line light rail provides excellent regional connectivity, but the final half-mile connections within downtown remain challenging. Rather than focusing exclusively on what new businesses might attract visitors, the Downtown Alliance should address the fundamental infrastructure that makes visiting downtown convenient and pleasant.
Alternative Viewpoints: The Case for Incremental Improvement
Some urban planners argue that the incremental approach—gathering public input, making targeted improvements, and measuring results—is more financially sustainable than grand visions. They point to cities like Cincinnati, where the Over-the-Rhine neighborhood transformation happened block by block over 15 years rather than through a comprehensive redevelopment.
This perspective has merit, particularly in the current economic climate where massive capital investments may be difficult to secure. Small, tactical improvements can build momentum and demonstrate possibilities before larger investments are made.
However, even incremental approaches require a clear framework and vision. Without addressing the fundamental questions of downtown’s purpose in a changed world, even well-executed tactical improvements risk feeling disconnected and insufficient.
Moving Forward: Beyond Surveys to Co-Creation
The Downtown Alliance’s engagement effort should be commended, but to truly revitalize downtown St. Paul, the process needs to evolve from collecting opinions to facilitating co-creation. Rather than just asking what people want to see, the Alliance should create structures that allow citizens, businesses, and institutions to actively participate in building downtown’s future.
This could include popup retail programs that allow entrepreneurs to test concepts with minimal risk, community development corporations that give residents ownership stakes in new developments, or business improvement districts that provide sustainable funding for public space management.
Downtown St. Paul doesn’t need another wish list—it needs a fundamental reimagining of its purpose and function in a changed world. The pandemic didn’t create downtown’s challenges; it merely accelerated trends that were already underway. Addressing these challenges requires more than attracting visitors—it requires building a place where people genuinely want to be part of a community.
The citizens of St. Paul deserve more than a chance to fill out a survey. They deserve a meaningful role in co-creating a downtown that serves as the heart of their city for generations to come. Will the Downtown Alliance rise to this challenge?
