DTE: Wells Fargo, Radisson Red, Edition Apts & Millwright Building

[Rich]

So how do you envision Ryan closing this deal with no ramp? Would they ask Wells Fargo employees to commute to the office Disneyland-style?

[RailBaronYarr]

No, I would ask they commute by the Red Line, Blue Line, Central Corridor, Northstar, Southwest Transit, Metro Transit to Lakeville/Burnsville (Orange Line-ish), MVTA, city buses, bikes, live closer, or walk the extra few blocks when they park (almost all of which have already subsidized suburban commuters' decision to live far from where they work). Continuing to subsidize parking for corporations should not be our game, and Minneapolis needs to step up and lead the way in making this shift. If suburban cities want to continue letting this happen, so be it. It's a tough decision but a crucial one if we want Minneapolis to be a place for people and not for cars.

I further question the notion that our only choice in making downtown healthy is to land a big corporation like Wells Fargo in towers like these. Instead, why not focus on small businesses (many of them) and allow (encourage) smaller development in these spaces. The people working at companies like this are more likely to live close (maybe live-work buildings) to downtown and not require parking. If it seems "out of scale" for a downtown then that's a sacrifice we make to not continue subsidizing car storage.

[Andrew_F]

So how do you envision Ryan closing this deal with no ramp? Would they ask Wells Fargo employees to commute to the office Disneyland-style?

I'm fine with them having a ramp (as long as it's not too obtrusive), I just think they should pay for it themselves.

It's a tough decision but a crucial one if we want Minneapolis to be a place for people and not for cars.

If it seems "out of scale" for a downtown then that's a sacrifice we make to not continue subsidizing car storage.

-1.

I love shiny new buildings as much as anyone else (well, more than the vast majority of the population), but they need to happen of their own fruition. If it takes $65 million in public money (and we are slowly finding out that this deal is asking for a lot more than that) to build 20-story office towers rather than 6-story apartment buildings, I'll take the apartment buildings. Ryan won't stop developing in Minneapolis without this subsidy, and even if they did, Minneapolis would be just fine. How about we concentrate on basic services and making property attractive to development through transportation, street, and quality of life improvements, rather than throwing bags of money at developers.

I very rarely find much that I like in the Strib comments, but I found this gem today: "Forgive the Minneapolis taxpayer, Ryan, for they know not what they have elected."

[jet777]

Maybe some fancy new version of electronic gambling with bright lights and sounds could pay for this?

[gpete]

Regarding the park aspect of this plan, has anyone heard any comments from the Minneapolis Park and Rec Board? I'm assuming they'd be in charge of the parkland. I'm surprised they haven't offered any input on this plan or discussed their ability to manage and maintain this proposed park.

[min-chi-cbus]

^and one that shoves $10/pack cigarrettes down your throat!

I belive this tactic that Ryan is using is called "sand-bagging". I don't see a great reason to subsidize this development, which in many ways goes very much against the grain of the City's 2025 Plan. Rather, the City should buy two DTE blocks to build a park and let private development commence as it may -- it won't take much longer to fill in those parcels at the current rate of development, especially with a new park.

[RailBaronYarr]

^Agreed. Honestly, the fact that Ryan would have the development rights for the western 1/3 (more like 1/2) of "The Yard" means it would feel like a half-finished, half-assed space until the city was sure Ryan wasn't purchasing it. Good luck putting anything permanent there like an amphitheater, big trees, pond, etc to make it a great refuge space because it may be developed in a few years.

[mullen]

it's sounding more and more like there are too many hoops for this project to jump through. and the strib buildng may be deemed historic. we subsidize so much parking. bonding for the state capitol renovation includes big parking structure. meh...

[helsinki]

Yes, it isn't immediately apparent what the city is chasing after. Unless the development is manifestly superior to what the market would provide on its own, the subsidy seems unjustified. Sure, it would be great if Wells Fargo moved all their employees nationwide to downtown Minneapolis. But one would hope government leaders had collectively learned that throwing money at banks oftentimes results in sub-optimal outcomes. Apparently not.

A particularly shortsighted aspect of this whole project is the placement of the Vikings parking ramp. From the city's point of view (not Ryan's, obviously, given their prospective development parcels), the ideal location of the ramp is on the other side - bounded by Chicago Ave, 6th Street, and Carew Drive. If the ramp were there, it would be bounded by (1) a stadium, (2) HCMC, (3) that industrial building on 6th, and (4) the backs of other buildings. In other words, it would detrimentally impact no future development. By contrast, the block bounded by 4th, 3rd, Chicago, and Park (the proposed location of the ramp) not only has a cool funky old warehouse building ripe for redevelopment (that would be torn down), but it is also immediately adjacent to the LRT station, to old warehouses currently occupied by residences (American Trio Lofts) and offices (Advance Thresher Building) and one of the Strib blocks.

I italicize 'immediately adjacent to the LRT station' to highlight the bizarre logic that invests billions in a rail system that meets at a certain point, and then builds a parking ramp at that exact location because how else would people get there?

[RailBaronYarr]

I italicize 'immediately adjacent to the LRT station' to highlight the bizarre logic that invests billions in a rail system that meets at a certain point, and then builds a parking ramp at that exact location because how else would people get there?

Very well put way to describe the inability of politicians, business leaders, and the general public to truly grasp how far we are from building places not completely oriented around the automobile and what it has cost us.

[Rich]

the ideal location of the ramp is on the other side - bounded by Chicago Ave, 6th Street, and Carew Drive.

The MSFA is already planning a 560-space ramp on that block.

[helsinki]

The MSFA is already planning a 560-space ramp on that block.

The thought exercise could continue: there are a number of other blocks that are adjacent to the Stadium that are not adjacent to the LRT station. For instance, there is a surface parking lot on 11th Ave between 5th and 6th streets. That site is a veritable wasteland with zero redevelopment possibilities.

The absurdity of erecting parking structures next to LRT stations downtown brings the point into focus, but it could be stated more generally in this way: parking ramps kill street life. The do nothing to support it, and they actively work against it by denying sidewalk frontage to businesses and residences (and by their ugliness and propensity to attract crime). If the city wants to make DTE into a livable neighborhood with street life, it shouldn't subsidize projects that will thwart that aim. Instead, it should re-direct the location of these allegedly necessary ramps to less valuable land - like the surface parking lot on 11th Ave between 5th and 6th streets.

[minnyapple]

Problems and hurdles ahead for this project. Heres a story from KSTP. http://kstp.com/news/stories/S3054800.shtml?cat=1

[MNdible]

From the KSTP story:

Schiff says he does not think any of these issues will kill the project, but he says they have to be resolved before the ambitious project moves forward.

If full-time nay-sayer Gary Schiff thinks the project is possible, then I'd say the odds are pretty good.

I know you all hate parking ramps. I think this project is a great way to maximize the use of this ramp that needs to be built regardless. These Wells Fargo towers are going to house way more employees than this parking ramp can hold. The majority of them are still going to have to take transit or park elsewhere.

This is a good (not great) project that will be a complete game changer for this part of town. I'm all for it, warts and all.

[Unity77]

I knew this was going to happen. Be prepared to see this proposal dumbed down Minnesota style.

[mattaudio]

Of course, Hennepin County would want these "streets" to connect through because they see Park/Portland as roads rather than streets. If they closed the streets to traffic, they'd still fulfill the function of a "street" in terms of connecting the grid for walkers/bikers. There would be no building frontage access lost since it's a park, so the vehicular access provided by a "street" is not necessary there.

[mnmike]

I think it's a very bad idea to close off these streets...in my humble opinion, messing up the street grid too much does not lead to good things....and we aren't talking about closing off two very small side streets here, that would be a little different. I could maybe see closing one, and making the other a through two way...I don't think the county is going to accept that or any variation though, we will see. I really don't think it is BS arguing that this would make a difference for ambulance access to HCMC either, it is a crucial ER, and these are main access points to and from. Explain to the person in the ambulance... the trip is a couple minutes longer, but we don't want to do anything to make it easier for vehicular traffic, now do we? Has to be a better reason for closing them than just that people should be walking, not driving in this neighborhood.

I might be swayed if there was actually a grand park plan in place...but in reality, Ryan doesn't even know what they are going to do with the space, and will surely be looking for money from others to make it anything other than a lawn. If some amazing park plan actually comes forward with tons of unique amenities, I would say at that point it is worth considering....anything short of that can coexist with the streets. I think a better option would be to pave the streets with brick or some more attractive material as they pass through the park, and include gates that could close them off for special events at the ....Sort of like Chicago has been by the dome for years.

Speaking Chicago, Grant/Millenium park has major streets passing through it every couple blocks, many at grade. It can be done, and you can still have a great park.

[woofner]

Conversely, while I generally support the plan given the fact that we've already made the Faustian bargain for the parking ramp, I'm tempted to oppose it if no funding source for actual park improvements comes to light before dirt turns. Sure, the Ryan buildings are a good thing, but I'm not sure they're worth two permanently empty blocks right in the middle of everything.

Re: Park & Portland, I'm sure that Peter "McGlaughlin" is primarily concerned with ambulances getting where they need to go as quickly as possible, but I wonder if he makes the connection between that and the traffic-calming he generally supports? It hardly seems unreasonable to rebuild one or both streets similar to Chicago Ave and close them on game days.

[mnmike]

I think the county will go for that variation perhaps, and like I said, I really think that is probably the best option! I guess I just meant that I didn't think the county would go for any variation that permanently closed one of the streets, if that wasn't clear. I also completely agree, the park plan needs to be solid. We don't really need another empty lawn like Gold Medal.

[MNdible]

Re: Park & Portland, I'm sure that Peter "McGlaughlin" is primarily concerned with ambulances getting where they need to go as quickly as possible, but I wonder if he makes the connection between that and the traffic-calming he generally supports? It hardly seems unreasonable to rebuild one or both streets similar to Chicago Ave and close them on game days.

Do we know that he doesn't support this? In the end, I suspect that this will be the (very reasonable) outcome for these streets. But so far, the proposal on the table calls for completely shutting them down, not just for special events.