Page 9 of 10

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 1:32 pm
by SuburbanTroll
So suburban sprawl would have been a better result? I'm thoroughly confused as to this line of argument. Westminster has been a downtown institution for 150 years, but you'd prefer that they relocate to Carver, or build additional classrooms and event space in Carver while maintaining a downtown presence? Why the love for the office building? Westminster's plans will better provide a front porch to the mall and the greenway.

As for the increased parking, it's underground. Why is that even an issue?

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 1:38 pm
by amiller92
Mdcastle wrote:What would be a better outcome that still results in the church getting the event space they need?
Building something mixed use in addition to it.
I'm assuming that if it was possible to remodel the office building they would have thought of it and done so.
I wouldn't make that assumption. Reading between the lines, I'd assume they wanted something that looked appropriately stately.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 1:43 pm
by amiller92
SuburbanTroll wrote: Westminster's plans will better provide a front porch to the mall and the greenway.
The mall and greenway don't need a "porch." They need people. The collective result of Westminster's actions is to reduce the number of people working and living in proximity to the mall and greenway. They're expanding low-intensity institutional uses exactly where we need to be going in the opposite direction to leverage all that existing public investment.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 2:04 pm
by SuburbanTroll
Let's agree to disagree. That office building (like many Class B/C) was woefully underutilized. I'd much rather take a "porch" than an abandoned house on the mall. Despite what you may think, Westminster isn't in use only on Sunday mornings.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 2:14 pm
by mattaudio
Friend of False Choices.

I'd love to see adaptive reuse of a woefully underutilized office building in Carver for Westminster. Don't forget the front porch. Hwy 212 really needs a front porch.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 2:48 pm
by MNdible
I know for a fact that the reason the office building was underutilized was that they've been telling prospective renters for years that they may kick them out and tear it down, and they also stopped investing in improvements a long time ago. That's a recipe for an empty building.

I've defended the actions of the church for a long time -- you can search through the thread for proof -- assuming that they'd pull together something really special that aligns with their progressive leanings to replace what they tore down. This plan, while architecturally interesting, is a net loser. Too bad.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 2:50 pm
by SuburbanTroll
Seems like a irreligious statement on your part -- which is ironic, give than Westminster has more SJWs per square foot than all of south Minneapolis. Irreligious or classist? What's your poison (pen)?

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 2:53 pm
by Tyler
huh

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 3:03 pm
by amiller92
SuburbanTroll wrote:Despite what you may think, Westminster isn't in use only on Sunday mornings.
I'm sure there are, and will be, tens of people inside its facilities at nearly all daytime hours. Facilities that will occupy an entire city block.

Heck, if there was anything other than internet criticism standing in their way, they might even try to quantify just how heavily used it will be on non-Sundays (okay, no they wouldn't, because the numbers would look pathetic). Good thing they are spared the burden.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 3:18 pm
by FISHMANPET
SuburbanTroll wrote:Seems like a irreligious statement on your part -- which is ironic, give than Westminster has more SJWs per square foot than all of south Minneapolis. Irreligious or classist? What's your poison (pen)?
This is an unfunny gimmick you've got going here, I'd recommend finding a new one.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 3:23 pm
by SuburbanTroll
Apoligies, Tyler. My response was to mattaudio's "Then take your ball and move to Carver" position. Call and response got lost in the tubes of the Internet.

Fishmanpet, not sure what the "unfunny gimmick" is. Please enlighten. . .

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 3:46 pm
by mplsjaromir
What is a sjw?

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 3:48 pm
by SuburbanTroll
Social justice warrior.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 6th, 2016, 7:40 pm
by grant1simons2
Just gonna point out the username here real quick so we can end this silliness.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 7th, 2016, 7:21 am
by mullen
non-descript stunted 80's glass box torn down for refined building and garden spaces fronting our busiest pedestrian street. it's a win and no loss.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 7th, 2016, 7:32 am
by mplsjaromir
Tearing down affordable housing so you can hold more decadent weddings is not social justice, even those who are tepid proponents of SJ could see this.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 7th, 2016, 8:07 am
by acs
That's why they're called "limousine" liberals. Do as I say, not as I do. Unfortunately this congregation includes some pretty big DFL power brokers so there was no way this was getting stopped in this city.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 7th, 2016, 12:00 pm
by amiller92
mullen wrote:non-descript stunted 80's glass box torn down
I don't think anyone is lamenting the loss of the building in particular, just the office space it contains.
garden spaces fronting our busiest pedestrian street
We have lots of nearby garden spaces already. We need pedestrians.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 7th, 2016, 2:37 pm
by SuburbanTroll
acs wrote:That's why they're called "limousine" liberals. Do as I say, not as I do. Unfortunately this congregation includes some pretty big DFL power brokers so there was no way this was getting stopped in this city.

Isn't much more that I can say on this, other than that Westminster built more affordable housing than it tore down. In addition, a portion of the addition will be given over to a "community partner." This from the Westminster website:

In addition, 25% of the building is reserved for an on-site, direct service community partner. The building will demonstrate environmental leadership with ecological, responsible design.

May I suggest that you change your online avatar to the Monopoly Millionaire game piece (with the appropriate slash through it) and then wait to see what the future brings. I'm out.

Re: Westminster Church

Posted: July 8th, 2016, 1:18 pm
by DTSB
Silophant wrote:That's probably true. Care to alleviate our ignorance?
Details from the Downtown Journal:
http://www.journalmpls.com/news/develop ... expanding/