Page 3 of 6

1400 Park Avenue Apartments

Posted: June 3rd, 2016, 8:16 am
by Qhaberl
Figured we could start a thred for this


http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 177568.pdf

April 11 planning meeting. Anyone know what other things must happen prior to the start of building?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 12:30 pm
by DanB
Updated plans going before Planning Commission August 29th.

http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups ... 185554.pdf

Unit count and layout essentially the same but significant changes to exterior appearance.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 12:39 pm
by acs
I like it a lot, more brick and cornices will fit in well with the neighborhood. Ditto the Mansard roof.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 12:43 pm
by twinkess
Wow. That has the potential to look really good.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 12:45 pm
by EOst
Has anyone heard if this little Victorian is going to be demolished or moved? There's a perfectly-sized vacant grass lot right across the street owned by PPL. Could it really cost much extra?

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 12:52 pm
by acs
Pretty sure it's toast, based on the site map.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 12:53 pm
by Qhaberl
I like the outside masonry on the building. I think it looks a lot nicer than the original. If this goes through, any chance they'll start construction before the end of the year?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 12:55 pm
by DanB
EOst wrote:Has anyone heard if this little Victorian is going to be demolished or moved? There's a perfectly-sized vacant grass lot right across the street owned by PPL. Could it really cost much extra?
In the document they say they plan to demolish it (Page 2).

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 1:07 pm
by EOst
Shame. Seems like such a no-brainer, especially since nothing could ever be built on the lot across the street without demolishing (probably) the whole row of houses.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 1:10 pm
by acs
Very true. Single homes can be infill too.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 1:39 pm
by aeisenberg
Wow. Pick a style. It looks

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 4:44 pm
by Mdcastle
There wasn't enough of one color of brick in stock so they had to use several?

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 24th, 2016, 5:47 pm
by grant1simons2
It's going to end up looking like 317 Groveland in Loring Park.

Image

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 25th, 2016, 12:19 pm
by Nathan
I think it looks considerably better than 317 Groveland. 317 Groveland has so many terrible dead ends in its design.

I really like this in comparison to the original. You get some post modern features on park, including that nice covered retail area that looks really nice. It would be great to have a(nother) restaurant over here. Lots of ground entry units and a much more cohesive materials scheme than the last go around.

I'm pretty stoked for this one. Especially as a neighborhood changer.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 25th, 2016, 12:33 pm
by beige_box
Nathan wrote:Especially as a neighborhood changer.
What do you mean by that?

In any case, I don't think any of these massive, full-block developments, built to superficially resemble 18th/19th-century European-style development, will ever be considered an architectural success over the long term. The way they try and emulate a block full of smaller buildings, while actually just being a hotel-style line of shotgun-narrow units built around one central hallway, is so manifestly inauthentic, as well as weak in terms of unit design (outside of having some shiny new appliances and interiors).

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 25th, 2016, 12:38 pm
by fehler
Is that an alley next to the old church?

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 25th, 2016, 1:13 pm
by Nathan
I mean that in terms of density, added housing, added retail, less surface parking/vacant lots.

It may be false in terms of the size and scale and segmentation but this project is a lot higher quality and uniform in terms of design and materials than places with real high rents in uptown.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 25th, 2016, 2:21 pm
by EOst
fehler wrote:Is that an alley next to the old church?
Yep. They hint about trying to knock down the church in coming years, but it's landmarked so there's no way that could happen without a condemnation. Of course, if they don't stabilize the structure, the vibration might be enough to do the trick.

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 25th, 2016, 2:44 pm
by RailBaronYarr
beige_box wrote:In any case, I don't think any of these massive, full-block developments, built to superficially resemble 18th/19th-century European-style development, will ever be considered an architectural success over the long term. The way they try and emulate a block full of smaller buildings, while actually just being a hotel-style line of shotgun-narrow units built around one central hallway, is so manifestly inauthentic, as well as weak in terms of unit design (outside of having some shiny new appliances and interiors).
Do you have any policy prescriptions to build authentic blocks of piecemeal walkup housing + courtyards where units face the front and rear rather than full- or half-block apartments with central hallways? What are the benefits? What are the tradeoffs? Could it even be built given current construction labor/material/building code/ADA realities?

Or are you just here to complain about windowless bedrooms again?

Re: 1400 Park Avenue

Posted: August 26th, 2016, 10:27 am
by aeisenberg
aeisenberg wrote:Wow. Pick a style. It looks
...terrible.