urbanMSP

I thought that Skyways are split in half by each building owner.

I have no idea, but I assumed they were owned by one building, based on how they often stylistically match one of the buildings they attach to and clash with the other.

Well that's not true, you've been posting the same thing in this thread since October (page 3) and every few pages since.

Moving on...

I know you are the moderator, but there is no reason to be an a-hole. Before today the last time I posted in this thread was in December 2014, which is well beyond the 5 - 8 pages grant referenced. Hell, I didn't even post in the forum during the month of Feb.

Moving on...

Well that's not true, you've been posting the same thing in this thread since October (page 3) and every few pages since.

Moving on...

I know you are the moderator, but there is no reason to be an a-hole. Before today the last time I posted in this thread was in December 2014, which is well beyond the 5 - 8 pages grant referenced. Hell, I didn't even post in the forum during the month of Feb.

Moving on...

Agree

Well that's not true, you've been posting the same thing in this thread since October (page 3) and every few pages since.

Moving on...

I know you are the moderator, but there is no reason to be an a-hole. Before today the last time I posted in this thread was in December 2014, which is well beyond the 5 - 8 pages grant referenced. Hell, I didn't even post in the forum during the month of Feb.

Moving on...

Agree

meh

If this were Facebook I'd like that picture.

-1

Is that cement board, though?

So clever of you Nick. Can I please become a mod too? There is nothing I want more than to exercise my power on a tiny, development board.

I'm pretty sure anyone can post pictures, actually.

Did you happen to notice those are my words in the photo? Sure, anyone can post photos, but when you are posting them at the expense of others or just to be a d*ck, it's uncalled for - don't ya think?. If I were to act this way, it wouldn't be tolerated. I bitched about this project (and no, it wasn't every other page or few pages) and was attacked. I'm sorry some of you don't agree with me, but seriously - get a life.

Did you happen to notice those are my words in the photo? Sure, anyone can post photos, but when you are posting them at the expense of others or just to be a d*ck, it's uncalled for - don't ya think?. If I were to act this way, it wouldn't be tolerated. I bitched about this project (and no, it wasn't every other page or few pages) and was attacked. I'm sorry some of you don't agree with me, but seriously - get a life.

I thought the text represented legitimate criticism. I wasn't paying enough attention to see how much this project was criticized or by whom. The U.P. thing won't be ic0nic...is that fact even up for debate?

Half the people on these boards aren't even that interested in architecture (by their own admission) and just want to see density and "vibrancy." That's fine; everyone has their own agenda.

I wouldn't let people get to you...

Did you happen to notice those are my words in the photo? Sure, anyone can post photos, but when you are posting them at the expense of others or just to be a d*ck, it's uncalled for - don't ya think?. If I were to act this way, it wouldn't be tolerated. I bitched about this project (and no, it wasn't every other page or few pages) and was attacked. I'm sorry some of you don't agree with me, but seriously - get a life.

Agreed. It is pretty childish behavior. All of the other mods seem to bring a great deal to this site, it is unfortunate that one has to act this way.

I see my previous post was deleted about the city wanting a quality project for this site. So this site doesn't tolerate one being critical of proposals and / or the city?

FWIW, I deleted the post, not Nick.

Perhaps some of you should read the RFP again: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 132418.pdf

The City’s development goals for
the property include iconic high quality designed new construction of a structure(s) of
not fewer than 20 active floors in height with a mix of commercial, retail, residential,
office, and hospitality uses, active street front retail, and preference for substantial
integrated public/green space.

Does the United proposal not do that? Also, let's remember that it was the tallest of the 3 proposals. The Duval proposal was not real, and no amount of wishing by anyone on an internet forum will make it so. The United proposal, at 36 stories, was the tallest actual proposal and represents the greatest total development value, not to mention the highest purchase price for the land. What would you have had the city do, turn down all of the proposals and start over? If the City expected a supertall, don't you think they would have set the bar higher than 20 floors? I just can't understand how some of you height fetishists are so detached from reality. LET.IT.GO.

Some good points there.

The Duval proposal was real, but he didn't have his act together enough to work within the city requirements and timeline. Certainly the area around Nicollet Mall is the logical place for a very tall landmark building to be built. That said, the United proposal will be very good and ( if they follow through with strong retail at the base) will be an asset to Nicollet Mall.

Perhaps some of you should read the RFP again: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 132418.pdf

The City’s development goals for
the property include *WORD NOT FOUND* high quality designed new construction of a structure(s) of
not fewer than 20 active floors in height with a mix of commercial, retail, residential,
office, and hospitality uses, active street front retail, and preference for substantial
integrated public/green space.

Does the United proposal not do that? Also, let's remember that it was the tallest of the 3 proposals. The Duval proposal was not real, and no amount of wishing by anyone on an internet forum will make it so. The United proposal, at 36 stories, was the tallest actual proposal and represents the greatest total development value, not to mention the highest purchase price for the land. What would you have had the city do, turn down all of the proposals and start over? If the City expected a supertall, don't you think they would have set the bar higher than 20 floors? I just can't understand how some of you height fetishists are so detached from reality. LET.IT.GO.

Thanks for responding, twincitizen. I did read the RFP - more than once. My problem is with the fact that it's yet another local developer and that it's only a 36-story high rise. Does it need to be a supertall - absolutely not, BUT I'm highly doubtful this 36-story high rise will be *WORD NOT FOUND.* Whatever the case, I'm moving on from this topic.

We don't even know a height yet. But height shouldn't constitute whether it's iconic or not. I used to think that sometimes too. This could be the start of a new gateway path to the river. Also isn't it already *WORD NOT FOUND*? We're arguing about it being so, so it must be a bit of an icon

We don't even know a height yet. But height shouldn't constitute whether it's *WORD NOT FOUND* or not. I used to think that sometimes too. This could be the start of a new gateway path to the river. Also isn't it already *WORD NOT FOUND*? We're arguing about it being so, so it must be a bit of an icon

Good point.