Ironclad Apartments & Moxy Hotel - Washington & Chicago

[grant1simons2]

I'm fine with everything North of Washington and East of 3rd being zoned the way it is currently. You're right though Nathan. Now that we have a very tall stadium and a couple ~300' office towers, what's the hold up? I think almost all of Downtown East is zoned* 10 stories.

Side note: At the Starbucks next to Loews hotel and they have 240 check-ins tomorrow... Is that kind of telling of our hotel market?

*forgot important word

[acs]

What are the chances that the apartments are on top of the hotel? Would be nice to get a little variation and height now that the stadium is so tall.

Probably low. There's a height limit in this area isn't there? Both in one building would surely put it above 10 floors right? Plus the Stone Arch team is banking on being able to see the stadium from their rooftop deck, so unless Graves is purposely trying to be a dick and kill that project putting one on top of the other when you have 2 acres to work with is dumb.

[Wedgeguy]

I could be wrong, but I think the height restriction is only for the Mill District and not DTE.

[grant1simons2]

They're for Downtown East too.

http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/www/gro ... 279174.pdf

https://www.municode.com/library/mn/min ... IIB4DONEDI

549.550. - Height.

The maximum height of all principal structures located in the B4N District shall be ten (10) stories or one hundred forty (140) feet in height, whichever is less.

Always room for a CUP though!

The height limitations of principal structures located in the B4N Downtown Neighborhood District may be increased by conditional use permit, as provided in Chapter 525, Administration and Enforcement. In addition to the conditional use standards, the city planning commission shall consider, but not be limited to, the following factors when determining the maximum height:

(1)Access to light and air of surrounding properties.

(2)Shadowing of residential properties, significant public spaces, or existing solar energy systems.

(3)The scale and character of surrounding uses.

(4)Preservation of views of landmark buildings, significant open spaces or water bodies.

[Nathan]

I think it would be nice to have a 9 story structure (similar to the uptown proposal) at the corner of Chicago and Washington, along Chicago. And then the more 6 story residential portion along Washington and the rail corridor.

[Wedgeguy]

I think that the height restriction will be going away. Your talking a residential tower on the MSFA ramp sliver which is to be well over 10 stories. I think the height restriction goes back a few decades when they were worried that developers would build towers away from the core on cheaper land outside the core. Like when they proposed a tower for IDS on the Normandy site. City got that stopped. I'd tend to say mid rise versus high rise would be built, with a few exception.

[twincitizen]

It's not a height restriction. "Conditional Use Permit" literally means permitted, with conditions. If the conditions (which Grant posted above) can be met, then it will likely meet approval. There are also general conditions to issue a CUP (in addition to those specifically tied to height increase) which generally say that the proposal must be compatible with the comprehensive plan, etc.

So why a 10-story "limit" in these zoning districts, which cover a great deal of downtown?
My guess is that 10-stories is probably about the height level where you don't want just any old thing to be built "by right", but would want to have that extra level of control over what is being built. There is absolutely no problem with the current regulation (evidence: Skyscape is in this same B4N zoning district, as is the Kraus Anderson proposal)

[grant1simons2]

http://www.journalmpls.com/news-feed/gr ... ntown-east

The Downtown East project would consist of two towers, one for the upscale apartments and one for the boutique hotel, on top of a podium with parking and retail space. The site is controlled by Graves' partners, the Kharbanda family, under 811 Washington LLC.

Graves said it was too early to comment on details like the building's height or the amount of parking. The project is currently in the schematic design phase, but Graves said they hope to get something in front of the city by the end of the year. Ideally the company would break ground early next spring.

[Wedgeguy]

Parking podium already has me scared of bad design. I'm one that thought Graves name would never be associated with tacky low budget accommodations. The architect better know how to hide a parking podium. The the words parking podium has me having bad nightmares on how this will look.

[MNdible]

Does the city have any recourse to convince the developer to respect the historic ROW? I know in other cases (the Pillsbury A Mill site and the senior living project off of Third come to mind), the city has owned the site, or gave approvals as part of a larger PUD, and this gave them some leverage to maintain the ROWs. Assuming that this project is basically as-of-right, what can the city do? Does the HPC have any say?

[Wedgeguy]

I think the city or the county own that ROW. I'm sure the city can have some say on how tat area is used or ignored!! We don't want a long blank wall along it. Especially a parking garage wall.

[David Greene]

I think we're all forgetting the business travelers who will be frequenting the new WF towers, alongside the stadium.
We are a Big City guys - sure there may be a proposal that doesn't happen... but planning for the future, and the need that will be there.

Rick, is that you?!?



j/k

[twincitizen]

I think the city or the county own that ROW. I'm sure the city can have some say on how tat area is used or ignored!! We don't want a long blank wall along it. Especially a parking garage wall.

No, they don't. Information easily verifiable by clicking on the Hennepin County property map shared earlier in the thread. Please do an ounce of research before blindly wandering in to every conversation on the forum. It's extremely tiresome.

[Wedgeguy]

prey tell, who owns it then?

[amiller92]

prey tell, who owns it then?

Let me click the link for you:

TIMESHARE PROPERTIES INC
8 PLEASANT LAKE RD W
NORTH OAKS MN 55127

[Wedgeguy]

Thanks you much

[aeisenberg]

Thanks you much

WOOSH.

[FISHMANPET]

Thanks you much

The point is, this data exists publically and is pretty simple to find. Instead of posting unendingly trying to debate facts or ask questions about facts, you can just look them up yourself.

[HiawathaGuy]

Conversely, in clicking around on the property map, it looks as though Sherman Associates owns the corner parcel of 3rd & Chicago, across the street from the apartment portion of his development. Strange.

[MNdible]

It would also be interesting to know the historical weirdness that created the little 128 sf sliver of a lot that's owned by Timeshare.