Stadium Parking Ramp Development Site - 25 stories / 294'

[grant1simons2]

We haven't been for a while.. This is probably one of the first warehouses to go down in that district since it's been growing

[Nathan]

saying we haven't in a while... isn't any better, they aren't exactly a renewable resource. With that and the strib building down we're going to have a very static sterile new neighborhood without a lot of architectural diversity. I get that developing the 5 strib blocks was a big deal, but I feel like it could have been done a little bit more sensitively to mpls history. We really aren't very good at preserving things. It's not that hard to keep something, renovate and then build new around it. Anyways let's hope whatever gets built in front of this damn ramp is decent.

[mattaudio]

It's the first warehouse to go down in that growing district since nearly all of them were razed for asphalt lots decades ago.

[grant1simons2]

Never ever did I say it's a good thing, but there have been buildings that were MUCH bigger mistakes than this. Also the ramp is going to be under the building.. Not just behind it

[Nathan]

Having seen a lot of creative re-uses of "not that important" historic buildings all over the world, and wondering how they can accomplish it and how Minneapolis is stuck in the 50's is what's important here, not where the ramp technically is or what you feel about this building in it's current state. This is about the feel and context of our city when we live in it. Many MANY famous urbanists and travelers have critiqued Minneapolis for not having very much historic architecture or context and it's because... oh it's just one for a better use here and there, and "urban renewal" things that killed the soul of what our city could have been. There's no good reason aside from general laziness and lack of caring that these blocks had to be wiped clean to make way for a good urban project. It was easier this way and that's all that matters to them. That should be frustrating to about everyone.

[Nathan]

How to turn a site with random historic buildings into a modern mix use site, Thanks Canada.

http://urbantoronto.ca/sites/default/fi ... -31078.jpg

*article

http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2013/10/uni ... g-qrc-west

Also: One King West http://s453.photobucket.com/user/isaids ... t.jpg.html

[MplsSteve]

We haven't been for a while.. This is probably one of the first warehouses to go down in that district since it's been growing

We haven't in the downtown area simply because there's just not a lot left to tear down anymore. We have leveled a ton of historic housing around the U - an area with some of the oldest housing stock in the city. And all for what? Stick built, tin covered crap. We've also torn down a lot of housing in North Minneapolis because that's the only answer we have for that area.

Sorry, I know. Way off topic. Yeah - go Vikes!

[grant1simons2]

I've heard the exact oppisite. Many many architects have come here and said that Minneapolis is doing a much better job with keeping classic and historic architecture around. They screwed the renovation on this building up once before, and yes it would've been nice if we had maybe kept this.. but it would looks so out of place and so strange. Have you seen it up close? There isn't much that is historically significant or architecturally beautiful on this. If Minneapolis is so stuck in the 50s then they'd tear down the entire warehouse district and mill city district and make it all surface lots and ramps. But no. That stopped. We fixed it. The city learned it was wrong to do and that it was stupid. You don't think I get angry at some of the stupid mistakes that we made back then? Hell I own a book on it.

[Nathan]

I've heard the exact oppisite. Many many architects have come here and said that Minneapolis is doing a much better job with keeping classic and historic architecture around. They screwed the renovation on this building up once before, and yes it would've been nice if we had maybe kept this.. but it would looks so out of place and so strange. Have you seen it up close? There isn't much that is historically significant or architecturally beautiful on this. If Minneapolis is so stuck in the 50s then they'd tear down the entire warehouse district and mill city district and make it all surface lots and ramps. But no. That stopped. We fixed it. The city learned it was wrong to do and that it was stupid. You don't think I get angry at some of the stupid mistakes that we made back then? Hell I own a book on it.

You just said they learned to stop in the same breath as talking about this being torn down lol. And LOL at your architects that have come here. They have no idea what we destroyed and what we could have had. We have a handful of nice historic buildings nothing to compare to a lot of cities in the US and nothing to compare to the rest of the western world. When my friends from Europe come here, they always comment on how clean and modern Minneapolis is, as in: all your buildings are so new and sleek and without historic ornamentation from different eras we 1. weren't a city during and 2. we didn't care to save.

[mattaudio]

To sort of tie this back to the project, since it's about a parking ramp that is clearcutting a block ... I think we'd get much better results if we put in the effort to work around existing structures rather than redeveloping blocks wholesale.

I'm convinced the likelyhood of a good urban project is inversely related to the size and standardization of the property in question. Get up to a full block, and it's less likely to be good urbanism. Get up to multiple full blocks, and it's much more likely to feel like a master-planned campus in Woodbury or Maple Grove.

[twincitizen]

Clearcutting? The building in question covered 20% of the block. I'm sorry, this building just wasn't worth saving, no matter how you slice it. This is the wrong place to direct our collective anger over the wholesale clearance of the Gateway district. Being in favor of demolishing 2320 Colfax, but against demolishing this building is a pretty ridiculous position to take.

[mattaudio]

Who's saying I'm against it? We're arguing nuance and what-ifs here, not making categorical claims.

[Nathan]

Clearcutting? The building in question covered 20% of the block. I'm sorry, this building just wasn't worth saving, no matter how you slice it. This is the wrong place to direct our collective anger over the wholesale clearance of the Gateway district. Being in favor of demolishing 2320 Colfax, but against demolishing this building is a pretty ridiculous position to take.

The possibility of high density creative reuse on a mostly empty downtown block with an open format old warehouse building only taking up 20% of it is SIGNIFICANTLY larger than 2320, but nice try.

[nate]

I'm convinced the likelyhood of a good urban project is inversely related to the size and standardization of the property in question. Get up to a full block, and it's less likely to be good urbanism. Get up to multiple full blocks, and it's much more likely to feel like a master-planned campus in Woodbury or Maple Grove.

Tend to agree.

[Archiapolis]

Cities make mistakes (alert the media).

What happened in Gateway and lots of downtown were mistakes. It is fine to lament mistakes but please have some perspective on the social context of building demolition. It was a bit more complicated than "We should tear down this brick and stone building to make way for a surface parking lot because people need places to park."

Preserving little 18' tall warehouses peppered around downtown isn't going to bring back the flour milling industry.

Also, sorry to be so positive but has anyone seen the North Loop lately? Some pretty excellent reuse of "unremarkable buildings" that are adding a LOT of density to the city of Minneapolis.

I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

[mullen]

developers are making progress and just look at the area around the guthrie theater. that was a vast wasteland of surface parking 15 years ago.

that being said i agree this could've been incorporated into this block. would've taken money and creativity and sadly this project seems to be about getting vehicle parking built as quickly as possible.

[bapster2006]

I'll help document the demolition

Stadium air rights development demolition 10-7-14 by bapster2006, on Flickr

Stadium air rights building demolition 10-7-14 by bapster2006, on Flickr

[Nathan]

Cities make mistakes (alert the media).

What happened in Gateway and lots of downtown were mistakes. It is fine to lament mistakes but please have some perspective on the social context of building demolition. It was a bit more complicated than "We should tear down this brick and stone building to make way for a surface parking lot because people need places to park."

Preserving little 18' tall warehouses peppered around downtown isn't going to bring back the flour milling industry.

Also, sorry to be so positive but has anyone seen the North Loop lately? Some pretty excellent reuse of "unremarkable buildings" that are adding a LOT of density to the city of Minneapolis.

I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

3 stories... 18 feet. .. people were so much shorter in the old days. I just showed good examples of good urban infill using smaller warehouse buildings like this. It's all about the values of a city and Minneapolis obviously doesn't value historic buildings unless there is money behind it.

[mullen]

obviously mistakes were made 50s and 60s. it was a different time. new york city tore down penn station. mpls was not alone tearing down buidlings it deemed standing in the way of progress.

our riverfront and warehouse district/north loop which we now celebrate are a direct result of the 180 done on this issue in the 70s. i believe we as a city do value our history.

[min-chi-cbus]

I kinda wish they tried to salvage this building too, but what's done is done. Hopefully next time more consideration is given towards saving historic buildings, even 3 story warehouses. This thing has character that you just don't see anymore.