urbanMSP

Are you really surprised you're getting pushback? Given the choice of building something or not building something, how many regular posters on this board are going to choose the latter in any given situation? No, I'm not the least bit surprised. I guess in some ways I'm deliberately poking at this...

"We" are "they" and "they" are "we" -- you could also say we want them to use our public right of way to create compelling spaces in our neighborhood. We do. But I don't think a $400 (if that's what it is) fee is bad at all, considering that the layout needs ...

Gahhh... right in the way of future expansion of the train station. Just to be clear, the transit planners looked at this and adjusted the plans to accommodate future expansion of the train station. Now, it may not accommodate future fantasy expansion of the train station, but that's another thing ...

But think of the children.

Alright, I'm the bad guy. Carry on. Build the bridge so that the people in this disconnected cluster of apartments can walk through the giant parking lot to get to the mall.

And how about "No sidewalk seating that encumbers or interferes with street use or the continuous width of sidewalk on a street." No $400+ annual barriers to business experimentation required. They're using the public right of way rent free to make money. They don't own that sidewalk -- w...

Was this the once-dirty petroleum site that was the subject of the lawsuits about whether or not they'd let them build residential?

I'd read about this earlier, but was thinking it was the Wilder building at Lafond and Milton, and I couldn't figure out who would be building million dollar homes in Frogtown. Makes sense now.

"Throwing good money after bad" may be a logical fallacy, but that doesn't make it a good idea.

Not sure why we're so obsessed about fixing this particular spot.

Based on the name and the website, am I the only one to assume that the ValuStay is infested with bedbugs?

Even when this wasn't yet a failed plan, there were a lot of people (and not just the usual smart growth suspects) who said this proposal was ridiculous pie-in-the-sky. There's a long line of people to say I told you so on this one.

The entire Rosedale area is a pedestrian disaster, not because of the Snelling bridge, but because the land uses are designed for automobiles. It's a lost cause. We'd be better served to focus our energies where they'll have real benefits for significant numbers of pedestrians. Also, pedestrian over...

Please, not Schiff. He's been running for Mayor of Minneapolis longer than Romney had been running for President.

Realistically, how many people do we think might use this on any given day? Related, what would be the minimum number of users necessary to justify building it, assuming, say, a $3 million price tag? Assuming that there is a finite budget for pedestrian improvements, is this really where you'd spend...

Didn't we discuss this at length on the old forum? Noticed that the sidewalk improvements along Fairview are done.

This whole deal stank from day one. Develop in Rochester, or Minneapolis, but not half way in between in a location that's not convenient for anybody.

I think that the Atrium at Lambeau Field was originally supposed to have more stores open year round. As it turned out, there's not much there that's open on non-game days.

Rosedale has a great location with no real competition on that side of town.

Here's a link.

No, I heard that the existing brickwork on the original structure is starting to fail, but that they're going to reclad it in new brick to match the old. There are some old windows that have been covered up over time -- it would be nice to see these reopened to make the building a bit more visually ...

I would like to see an REI downtown.

I love this idea. Not sure if it's viable or not, but I love it. I could also see a store like this going into Riverplace, where it would be immediately adjacent to the river.