Arby’s Island

Calhoun-Isles, Cedar-Riverside, Longfellow, Nokomis, Phillips, Powderhorn, and Southwest
David Greene
IDS Center
Posts: 4651
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 11:41 am

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby David Greene » February 12th, 2018, 7:48 pm

Oh I misread. Maybe Lake could work as three lanes with one reversible and a two lane Lagoon. Or a three lane reversible Lagoon.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk


Multimodal
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 118
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby Multimodal » February 12th, 2018, 10:48 pm

Well I suppose if the problem is too much (car) traffic on Lake & Lagoon already… then we can just add a lane each to Lake & Lagoon and that would solve the problem.

And then we just keep adding lanes as they fill up.

xandrex
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1168
Joined: January 30th, 2013, 11:14 am

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby xandrex » February 13th, 2018, 11:33 am

David Greene wrote:
February 12th, 2018, 7:25 pm
Better sidewalks on Lagoon west of Hennepin are desperately needed. East of Hennepin less so but would be nice.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Not that Lagoon's sidewalks west of Hennepin are great by any stretch of the imagination (they're terrible), but I've gotta believe east of Hennepin is at least as urgent based on foot traffic. In the evening, you literally have to walk into the street to get around bar lines or people milling about.

Ideally, of course, we'd widen them all (and maybe throw in a bike lane to boot).

twincitizen
Moderator
Posts: 5856
Joined: May 31st, 2012, 7:27 pm
Location: Standish-Ericsson

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby twincitizen » February 13th, 2018, 12:50 pm

Put me on team "the current one-way pair configuration actually works really well for the area, but fewer lanes and wider sidewalks and bumpouts and trees would be terrific improvements"

That said, I could support relatively minor changes to the geometry at the Lake/Lagoon/Dupont intersection, to make it better for pedestrians and enlarge the Arby's Island parcel a bit.

A wilder idea I had was to make WB traffic take a hard right on Dupont (instead of the curve), then use a roundabout for the Dupont to Lagoon movement. Or some kind of dual roundabout setup for the whole thing maybe?

jtoemke
Metrodome
Posts: 61
Joined: March 5th, 2015, 8:04 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby jtoemke » February 13th, 2018, 8:04 pm

Maybe its just me but I think of roundabouts, atleast in the way Americans typically build them, as just so NOT urban. They suck for pedestrians and take up a lot of space.

thatchio
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 172
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 6:49 am

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby thatchio » February 13th, 2018, 11:09 pm

I have a whole cache of old one-way/two-way/contraflow files on Lagoon/Lake from the 80s/90s. They're from Public Works' files, including references to saving the files for the next time someone brings the topic up. If anyone's interested, I can try to figure out how to share them.

User avatar
Bob Stinson's Ghost
Metrodome
Posts: 60
Joined: January 20th, 2018, 11:36 pm

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby Bob Stinson's Ghost » February 13th, 2018, 11:59 pm

jtoemke wrote:
February 13th, 2018, 8:04 pm
Maybe its just me but I think of roundabouts, atleast in the way Americans typically build them, as just so NOT urban. They suck for pedestrians and take up a lot of space.
It's a good place to put a statue you don't like very much. You only have to look at it when there are no trucks or buses in the way.

Multimodal
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 118
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby Multimodal » February 15th, 2018, 12:11 pm

Thatchio, if it’s not too much work, that’d be very interesting to see.

Multimodal
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 118
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby Multimodal » February 16th, 2018, 7:12 am

In defense of my—apparently crazy—plan for pedestrianizing Lagoon and putting a monumental building and statue/plaza at each end: this is straight out of Jane Jacobs’ playbook.

In Chapter 19 (“Visual Order: Its Limitations and Possibilities”) of “The Death and Life of Great American Cities”, she has sections starting with “Streets provide the principal *visual scenes* in cities” (p378 of my paperback 1992 edition); “Landmarks, as their name says, are prime orientation clues” (p384); “Eye-catchers… have an importance in city appearance out of all proportion to the physical space the occupy” (p388).

In the “visual scenes” paragraphs, she talks about Europeans disliking America’s monotonous street grids that go on forever. “Therefore, a good many city streets (not all) need visual interruptions… celebrating intense street use by giving it a hint of enclosure and entity.” She talks about two main ways of adding irregularities to the street grid. The first is adding streets to make the grid smaller and more walkable, something Lagoon itself does. The second is interruptions to the grid: “Occasional large buildings (preferably with public significance) can be placed across straight streets at ground level. Grand Central Terminal in New York is a well-known example” with “the street itself divided around a square a plaza forming the interruption.” She then lists some pitfalls, including blocking pedestrian flow, which is one reason I thought connecting Lagoon to the Greenway could be a good idea.

(I’ll talk about her landmarks paragraphs and eye-catcher paragraphs in Chapter 19 in the next post.)

Multimodal
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 118
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby Multimodal » February 16th, 2018, 7:26 am

In the landmarks paragraphs, she says that landmarks “emphasize… the diversity of cities” and “we badly need more, not fewer, city landmarks—great landmarks and small.” “The absence of any visual climax or dignifying objects says Unimportance.” “…an effective landmark in such a place usually needs to be overtly uncommercial.” The library at Hennepin is certainly a landmark (as is the old one, although it’s now commercial), but it’s in the center of Lagoon and doesn’t “enclose” it.

In the paragraphs on eye-catchers, she says “…eye-catchers… are eye-catchers because of precisely where they are, and these are necessary to consider as a deliberate part of city design.” “By taking care with the relatively very few spots that are inevitable eye-catchers, much character, interest and accent can be given to a whole scene by suggestion…”.

You could even argue that Arby’s large, iconic sign itself acted as this landmark/eye-catcher that defined the eastern edge of Uptown. You saw it when you entered & exited the area, and it helped define what and where Uptown was. How sure am I about this? Well, people held a vigil for the sign, and many wanted to save & protect it.

thatchio
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 172
Joined: August 2nd, 2012, 6:49 am

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby thatchio » February 17th, 2018, 11:08 pm

In case you are interested, I did place some historical files on the Lake/Lagoon one-way pair. I believe most of these came from a file that the traffic division at the City of Minneapolis maintained that I photocopied back in the early 2000s.
I am not the best at figuring out how to share files now a days, so I opted for Dropbox. https://www.dropbox.com/sh/5efftqhjfl3m ... DbfJa?dl=0

EOst
Capella Tower
Posts: 2101
Joined: March 19th, 2014, 8:05 pm
Location: North End, Saint Paul

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby EOst » February 18th, 2018, 10:29 am

Thanks for all this! Very interesting reading.

BigIdeasGuy
Landmark Center
Posts: 230
Joined: March 27th, 2013, 8:22 am

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby BigIdeasGuy » February 18th, 2018, 5:55 pm

Multimodal wrote:
February 16th, 2018, 7:26 am
In the landmarks paragraphs, she says that landmarks “emphasize… the diversity of cities” and “we badly need more, not fewer, city landmarks—great landmarks and small.” “The absence of any visual climax or dignifying objects says Unimportance.” “…an effective landmark in such a place usually needs to be overtly uncommercial.” The library at Hennepin is certainly a landmark (as is the old one, although it’s now commercial), but it’s in the center of Lagoon and doesn’t “enclose” it.

In the paragraphs on eye-catchers, she says “…eye-catchers… are eye-catchers because of precisely where they are, and these are necessary to consider as a deliberate part of city design.” “By taking care with the relatively very few spots that are inevitable eye-catchers, much character, interest and accent can be given to a whole scene by suggestion…”.

You could even argue that Arby’s large, iconic sign itself acted as this landmark/eye-catcher that defined the eastern edge of Uptown. You saw it when you entered & exited the area, and it helped define what and where Uptown was. How sure am I about this? Well, people held a vigil for the sign, and many wanted to save & protect it.
This pretty well sums up my concern about this slight becoming affordable housing. This truly needs to be a landmark site that signals the entrance to Uptown. Something that is immediately recognizable and is full of energy and life.

It's not that affordable housing can't be a landmark and attention grabbing but I can't think of in MSP that has been built recently, one could argue Ceder-Riverside but it's my understanding that was built as market rate/luxury housing. I also find it highly unlikely that the government would be able to justify the additional costs to building a landmark building compared to something very standard and basic.

To be clear I'm not anti-affordable housing, we need more of honestly and I hope MSP builds more it everywhere but in this location having a landmark is super important in my opinion.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1405
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby amiller92 » February 19th, 2018, 9:35 am

BigIdeasGuy wrote:
February 18th, 2018, 5:55 pm
This pretty well sums up my concern about this slight becoming affordable housing. This truly needs to be a landmark site that signals the entrance to Uptown. Something that is immediately recognizable and is full of energy and life.

It's not that affordable housing can't be a landmark and attention grabbing but I can't think of in MSP that has been built recently, one could argue Ceder-Riverside but it's my understanding that was built as market rate/luxury housing. I also find it highly unlikely that the government would be able to justify the additional costs to building a landmark building compared to something very standard and basic.

To be clear I'm not anti-affordable housing, we need more of honestly and I hope MSP builds more it everywhere but in this location having a landmark is super important in my opinion.
Call me crazy but housing people can afford > a recognizable landmark. Like, I don't think that's even debatable.

Also call me crazy that affordable housing =/= government-owned housing.

Regardless, it will be up to the property owner what goes here. Hopefully they have some ambition and don't just convert the existing structure to a Starbucks.

User avatar
VacantLuxuries
Rice Park
Posts: 470
Joined: February 20th, 2015, 12:38 pm

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby VacantLuxuries » February 19th, 2018, 10:35 am

Whatever goes on this spot should be an ambitious development. But many of us here expect that from any development proposed in tight markets. I really don't understand why suddenly this site needs to be Minneapolis' Arc de Triomphe otherwise it's a waste. Not to mention the emphasis on the necessity of a landmark over the actual, real need for affordable housing is confusing at best.

MNdible
is great.
Posts: 5276
Joined: June 8th, 2012, 8:14 pm
Location: Minneapolis

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby MNdible » February 19th, 2018, 10:59 am

Because Jane Jacobs.

Multimodal
Nicollet Mall
Posts: 118
Joined: March 4th, 2016, 7:55 am
Location: Oh, no, the burbs!

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby Multimodal » February 19th, 2018, 1:17 pm

Affordable housing is important & necessary. You might even say it’s a crisis.

But if every chunk of land becomes affordable housing, why would anyone want to live there?

Uptown is a popular destination and place to live precisely because it is *interesting*. Sure, less so that it used to be, in that interesting places like Intermedia Arts are probably going away. A victim of its own success.

But Uptown is still walkable, with shopping, work, food, drink, arts, library, parks, recreation, entertainment, etc. all right within the neighborhood.

If, every time a piece of land is redeveloped (including Arby’s and even Intermedia Arts), it is made into affordable housing, then there will be nothing left to go to Uptown for.

The art of planning is helping to encourage the creation of a fun, interesting, arty, edible, livable area. Affordability is one goal among many, and it’s certainly more important than many, but if you make it the goal to the exclusion of all else, you have lost whatever it is that will make people want to live there.

And, yes, Jane Jacobs talks about this. Her 3-banks-on-the-corner example.

User avatar
VacantLuxuries
Rice Park
Posts: 470
Joined: February 20th, 2015, 12:38 pm

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby VacantLuxuries » February 19th, 2018, 1:22 pm

We're reaching "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded" territory now

Chef
Landmark Center
Posts: 259
Joined: June 3rd, 2012, 7:33 pm

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby Chef » February 19th, 2018, 10:02 pm

I think this would be a great place for a park or a plaza. It is in the middle of a prime commercial district and it is only a matter of time before it is surrounded by midrises on all sides. In Europe that would be a classic place to put a square or piazza. It would be a public space where people would genuinely hang out. Since we don't do piazzas in Minnesota a park would be the next best thing.

amiller92
Wells Fargo Center
Posts: 1405
Joined: October 31st, 2014, 12:50 pm

Re: Arby’s Island

Postby amiller92 » February 20th, 2018, 10:06 am

Multimodal wrote:
February 19th, 2018, 1:17 pm
But if every chunk of land becomes affordable housing, why would anyone want to live there?
We aren't adding much affordable housing at all, and I can't think of any new affordable housing in Uptown at all (don't follow that closely so I might not be up to speed).
If, every time a piece of land is redeveloped (including Arby’s and even Intermedia Arts), it is made into affordable housing, then there will be nothing left to go to Uptown for.
Two (or more) new affordable developments will make Uptown not "walkable, with shopping, work, food, drink, arts, library, parks, recreation, entertainment, etc. all right within the neighborhood?"


Return to “Minneapolis - South, Southwest, and Uptown”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests