RBC Gateway & Four Seasons - 37 stories - 519'

[jw138]

I have to agree with Wedgeguy. Remove or limit the freeway and access to it too much and DT will decline. Yes, cars suck. However, they're not going away and discriminating too severely against them will cause all sorts of problems. Even Tokyo has cars, and lots of them!

[Sacrelicio]

I also see the real world where employers will leave the city if it is too difficult for their workers to get to and from work.

Yeah, I don't think that's the real world. Well, that's not quite right. That's a possible world, but we're absolutely nowhere near that possibility. Even with all of the construction messing things up this summer, I don't think we were close to a world where the difficulty of driving during peak rush hour was going to make a big difference in business location decisions. Heck, the cost of parking is way higher on the list of issues for commuters than whether they spend an extra three minutes in traffic if the happen to time it exactly wrong, and yet we still have lots of businesses downtown.

And, of course, we can reinforce the other factors that make businesses want to be downtown if downtown is a place (yeah, lazy shorthand but you know what I mean) instead of a through-way for commuters.

You can destroy and alter the city to cater to suburban commuters and sportsball fans all day long and they still won't be happy. We tried that already and it didn't work all that well. Downtown could literally be nothing but two stadiums and a thousand parking lots with exits galore and they'd still complain about having to park so far away.

[Mcgizz]

I also see the real world where employers will leave the city if it is too difficult for their workers to get to and from work.

Yeah, I don't think that's the real world. Well, that's not quite right. That's a possible world, but we're absolutely nowhere near that possibility. Even with all of the construction messing things up this summer, I don't think we were close to a world where the difficulty of driving during peak rush hour was going to make a big difference in business location decisions. Heck, the cost of parking is way higher on the list of issues for commuters than whether they spend an extra three minutes in traffic if the happen to time it exactly wrong, and yet we still have lots of businesses downtown.

And, of course, we can reinforce the other factors that make businesses want to be downtown if downtown is a place (yeah, lazy shorthand but you know what I mean) instead of a through-way for commuters.

You can destroy and alter the city to cater to suburban commuters and sportsball fans all day long and they still won't be happy. We tried that already and it didn't work all that well. Downtown could literally be nothing but two stadiums and a thousand parking lots with exits galore and they'd still complain about having to park so far away.

-1

[Nathan]

You can live in your fantasy world and I'll stay planted here in reality.

Look man, you really need to cut it out with this tone. We get that you disagree with lots of people on here, but your constant mentions of your inherent wisdom and experience is getting tiring to us meddling kids. You're following of development for 30+ years does not validate your superiority.

You're criticizing someone for tone in this thread and it's wedgeguy!? I think there is unnecessary rhetoric in this thread but it's not wedgeguy who inserts divisive subjects like racism to the each thread. Or the only one using and asserting an overly simplistic one sided opinion over and over.

[xandrex]

THIS. I don't think freeway access should be anywhere near downtown. It's always messy, lots of cars trying to get on or off at one choke point. Even people who aren't using the freeway get caught up in it. Make people get off the freeway way outside of downtown and drive in on surface streets. That would restore the grid and allow it to absorb traffic volume. This seems to work well in cities like Vancouver, or for a smaller example, Madison Wisconsin. You can't get off the freeway right into the main part of the city, you exit onto surface streets outside of downtown and make your way in. It takes a little longer but it's smoother and less disruptive to the core. If you want to go to a Twins or Vikings game you'll deal with it. It's not like driving downtown from the suburbs for an event is ever easy anyways.

394 should end at 94 with no direct access to downtown. To get to downtown you should be forced to get off at Broadway or 7th and take surface streets. Other access points could be in industrial or less populated areas like 35W around E Hennepin, 280/Huron, 55 near the airport.

There's probably a lot of agreement to be found on being more strategic about highway entrances.

That said, I dunno if Madison is a super awesome example. Sure, they don't have a freeway going through their downtown. Instead, they have this slightly-more-pleasant-than-Hiawatha, but still quite large, highway.

I also don't know how I feel about pushing traffic out through more neighborhoods than just downtown. It seems to simply push the issue further out than actually solving it.

[Mcgizz]

I have to agree with Wedgeguy. Remove or limit the freeway and access to it too much and DT will decline. Yes, cars suck. However, they're not going away and discriminating too severely against them will cause all sorts of problems. Even Tokyo has cars, and lots of them!

I think you are both dead wrong. There are a number of cities all around the world that are actively working to limit the interaction of cars and dense urban areas. London has a tax on cars in the most congested areas, London has not had any signs in becoming a less desirable place to live or work. Berlin and other cities in Europe are also actively working to remove the car from the streets. http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation- ... 29585.html

America is different though and so is Minneapolis. That does not mean that our city/county should cater to suburbanites who are just trying to flee our city centers as fast as possible.

[PhilmerPhil]

You can destroy and alter the city to cater to suburban commuters and sportsball fans all day long and they still won't be happy. We tried that already and it didn't work all that well. Downtown could literally be nothing but two stadiums and a thousand parking lots with exits galore and they'd still complain about having to park so far away.

Right, and obviously having nothing but huge parking lots, wide roads, megastadiums, and supertalls is an extreme example. But as a thought experiment, let's flip that. What kind of place would downtown be if we took it the other extreme? What if no street were more than two lanes wide, parking lots/ramps are exclusively at the perimeter, and every street had protected bikeways, wide sidewalks with green space and street trees, and midrise buildings throughout. Would Minneapolis become a ghost town, or would it become so desirable that it would attract even more employers, families, and businesses?

[trigonalmayhem]

You can live in your fantasy world and I'll stay planted here in reality.

Look man, you really need to cut it out with this tone. We get that you disagree with lots of people on here, but your constant mentions of your inherent wisdom and experience is getting tiring to us meddling kids. You're following of development for 30+ years does not validate your superiority.

You're criticizing someone for tone in this thread and it's wedgeguy!? I think there is unnecessary rhetoric in this thread but it's not wedgeguy who inserts divisive subjects like racism to the each thread. Or the only one using and asserting an overly simplistic one sided opinion over and over.

Oh I know you don't care for me, but he was the one being reductive and trying to simplify suburbanization to 'driving downtown was too hard.' If you want to deny that white flight and straight up racism didn't play a part in early suburban migration you could probably stand to do a little studying up on the topic.

[Nathan]

I think it's unfair to say that every suburban employee is fleeing the city because they hate it. When I'm done working I am done, ready to get home asap. People have children to pick up, and many things to do about their evening. I just hear a lot of assuming and we get further and further away from things that are relevant to this project.

[Sacrelicio]

You can destroy and alter the city to cater to suburban commuters and sportsball fans all day long and they still won't be happy. We tried that already and it didn't work all that well. Downtown could literally be nothing but two stadiums and a thousand parking lots with exits galore and they'd still complain about having to park so far away.

Right, and obviously having nothing but huge parking lots, wide roads, megastadiums, and supertalls is an extreme example. But as a thought experiment, let's flip that. What kind of place would downtown be if we took it the other extreme? What if no street were more than two lanes wide, parking lots/ramps are exclusively at the perimeter, and every street had protected bikeways, wide sidewalks with green space and street trees, and midrise buildings throughout. Would Minneapolis become a ghost town, or would it become so desirable that it would attract even more employers, families, and businesses?

I'd wager yes, especially in this day and age! People aren't moving back to the city because they can get on/off the freeway easily. And part of my argument is that the access is crappy as it is.

[Sacrelicio]

I think it's unfair to say that every suburban employee is fleeing the city because they hate it. When I'm done working I am done, ready to get home asap. People have children to pick up, and many things to do about their evening. I just hear a lot of assuming and we get further and further away from things that are relevant to this project.

They're not necessarily "fleeing" but they want to get in/out as fast as possible in cars, and the cities are expected to accommodate that.

[Nathan]

I don't "not like" anyone I haven't met. I don't like assumptions about my knowledge of something that doesn't relate to this building/project that was arbitrarily brought up to be divisive and create more tension and digression. I try to be productive and give constructive criticism because I don't believe in the concept of shutting anyone down or being more right than someone. I would really enjoy most of your posts if you thought momentarily about being more constructive than vindictive before posting.

[Nathan]

I think it's unfair to say that every suburban employee is fleeing the city because they hate it. When I'm done working I am done, ready to get home asap. People have children to pick up, and many things to do about their evening. I just hear a lot of assuming and we get further and further away from things that are relevant to this project.

They're not necessarily "fleeing" but they want to get in/out as fast as possible in cars, and the cities are expected to accommodate that.

And airports and restaurants and wherever, people like efficiency. Roads are a service that a lot of tax payers pay for. I understand that it's not a right but there should be an effective balance for their needs as well as everyone else's.

[Sacrelicio]

I think it's unfair to say that every suburban employee is fleeing the city because they hate it. When I'm done working I am done, ready to get home asap. People have children to pick up, and many things to do about their evening. I just hear a lot of assuming and we get further and further away from things that are relevant to this project.

They're not necessarily "fleeing" but they want to get in/out as fast as possible in cars, and the cities are expected to accommodate that.

And airports and restaurants and wherever, people like efficiency. Roads are a service that a lot of tax payers pay for. I understand that it's not a right but there should be an effective balance for their needs as well as everyone else's.

I'm not advocating for a carless downtown, just one that doesn't prioritize suburbanites jetting in and out (which they can't really do that well anyways, because of congestion).

[trigonalmayhem]

I think it's unfair to say that every suburban employee is fleeing the city because they hate it. When I'm done working I am done, ready to get home asap. People have children to pick up, and many things to do about their evening. I just hear a lot of assuming and we get further and further away from things that are relevant to this project.

They're not necessarily "fleeing" but they want to get in/out as fast as possible in cars, and the cities are expected to accommodate that.

And airports and restaurants and wherever, people like efficiency. Roads are a service that a lot of tax payers pay for. I understand that it's not a right but there should be an effective balance for their needs as well as everyone else's.

There is no balance right now. Roads are designed to funnel cars first and the rest of us are given whatever trimmings there's any space or money left for (usually there's little of either). We're actually arguing for some balance for a change instead of always getting screwed when priorities are set.

[TroyGBiv]

How 'bout them outdoor escalators...

[Nathan]

40k residents, 195k jobs. The region's use isn't balanced. I agree. I would love a carless downtown, I would love less lanes and more traffic calming but if we're talking about specifically the cbd, the (commuting) employees and their companies are the majority needing to be served. Atm. As downtown repopulates and it's residents property taxes start paying the bills then yeah, hell yeah it needs to calm down, and we have some leverage, but until then I think it's appropriately serving the majority of users. Popular opinion or not.

[trigonalmayhem]

Also what happened to the interesting way the streetcar was supposed to cut across the block in the original design? Wasn't it pictured going under the building and joining Hennepin mid-block? The new design is kind of bland and will make walking that corner be kind of dangerous. And why the center platform? Normally I'm all for them, but with the plaza this seems like a place where side platforms make more sense. Or is that part still super preliminary?

[trigonalmayhem]

40k residents, 195k jobs. The region's use isn't balanced. I agree. I would love a carless downtown, I would love less lanes and more traffic calming but if we're talking about specifically the cbd, the (commuting) employees and their companies are the majority needing to be served. Atm. As downtown repopulates and it's residents property taxes start paying the bills then yeah, hell yeah it needs to calm down, and we have some leverage, but until then I think it's appropriately serving the majority of users. Popular opinion or not.

The problem is as it's transitioning there's a good chance the nasty car centric environment will slow the change or even stop it dead in its tracks. If the city truly wants downtown to remain primarily a single use CBD of olden times I guess they're doing a fine job. But they keep talking like they want to turn it into a mixed use area and that is going to require some concessions from the commuters to make happen. The city government and planners need to take a stand and figure out what they actually want for the future instead of talking a big game and never following through.

[Sacrelicio]

40k residents, 195k jobs. The region's use isn't balanced. I agree. I would love a carless downtown, I would love less lanes and more traffic calming but if we're talking about specifically the cbd, the (commuting) employees and their companies are the majority needing to be served. Atm. As downtown repopulates and it's residents property taxes start paying the bills then yeah, hell yeah it needs to calm down, and we have some leverage, but until then I think it's appropriately serving the majority of users. Popular opinion or not.

I'm not just talking about serving residents, but commuters as well. I'm a commuter myself. I think there's too much focus on getting cars in/out of downtown as fast as possible at the expense of transit, bikes, peds, businesses that serve workers, etc.