Linden Cornerer III: With a Vengance - 43rd & Upton

[TroyGBiv]

I couldnt bekieve how silly that post was on Linden-hills.com - but then I saw that author and I realized I knew him!
What a bunch of nonsense - Democracy in Action! This is a great example of how out of balance how neighborhood review and imput process is - we are letting our city be mediocre'd to death! I absolutely see the value of neighborhood input - but this is embarressing!
I live in Whittier and we have the same self defeating dynamic here. We confuse democracy with socialism with capitalism...

[min-chi-cbus]

You gotta admire these people though.....this is the biggest travesty in their lives!

[Archiapolis]

I couldnt bekieve how silly that post was on Linden-hills.com - but then I saw that author and I realized I knew him!
What a bunch of nonsense - Democracy in Action! This is a great example of how out of balance how neighborhood review and imput process is - we are letting our city be mediocre'd to death! I absolutely see the value of neighborhood input - but this is embarressing!
I live in Whittier and we have the same self defeating dynamic here. We confuse democracy with socialism with capitalism...

The "neighborhood input" system is totally broken.

[mattaudio]

Speaker during public comment referenced garyschiffspeech.com

[David Greene]

The "neighborhood input" system is totally broken.

How, pray tell, would you fix it?

Neighborhood input is valuable. Neighborhood obstruction is not. But people often have different ideas of what those are. One person's obstruction really is another's effort to make something better happen.

[TroyGBiv]

Two things: The first is "Garyschiffspeech.com" THAT IS FREAKIN' Hilarious! I searched it but it doesn't actually exist! (SAD FACE) I have no idea exactly what that site would have on it... but I love the idea of it!

The other thing is I do have a couple thoughts about improving the neighborhood process... I was a Minneapolis city public arts commisioner in the early 1990's. We were doing "neighborhood gateway" public art - where neighborhood groups would submit applications to be considered based on who/what they felt the neighborhood was, what location they would like to have considered and what distinguished their community. When the neighborhoods and the artists for each round ( 2 per year) for a total of one art project for each of the 13 wards in the city. The problem that occurred was that after the work was designed and reviewed by the neighborhood to meet their specific creative briefs the work would then go into production (which is a very complex process) but - the neighborhood would not let go and even after the 6 month neighborhood review process they would want to change and start over with each and every new step... people complained that they didn't have enough input, that they didn't have enough public meetings, that they didn't like the artist or some specific new rendering or color or whatever. There is a time for constructive community input and impact - but it took a ton of constant process education, re-education and conflict navigation and resolution. And nobody ever seemed to be very happy and no one wanted to stand up and tell their neighbors "enough" "stop nit-picking" and let the artist's work (that they chose) have some creative integrity. When the process / neighborhood failed - their installations were truly horrible and many never got completed...

The process failed the community because it asked too much from them, allowed too much date/review chaos and the "committee effect" ended up taking the project far away from the original creative brief (the NRP/ or Small are plan), it gave individuals a say in matters that they had no training in (architecture, materials, land usage, traffic management and a myriad of other factors that affect the quality and success of projects) and finally asked people to commit a lot of time and I consistently heard individuals say that the process went on too long and took too much of their time... and that they really didn't understand what their role was and how they could positively contribute and affect necessary change ...

OK so here is what I think is a solution... keep the process simple - better define roles and what actual feedback that they could submit and when it is time to move the project to the next phase. Neighborhood members should have the opportunity to suggest design features that they would like to see in their community... like this is an art deco neighborhood, a craftsman cottage, a brick facade neighborhood... general heights for each type of building and zones that they feel are the best fit for these types of buildings. BUT - this should all be in alignment with city zoning and planning guidelines... if they are outside of those parameters they should then go through a city review process to determine if they are reasonable or not... Design codes can't be a veto per se - but the city could be able to take those neighborhood suggestions/guidelines/design preferences into consideration... but there has to be a a clearly and tightly defined process with clear delineated roles, defined areas of input and a definitive statement that puts limits and end points to each phase of the process.

I've lived in Whittier for most years since 1985 and have owned a house here since 1998. This neighborhood is it's own worst nightmare... the battle with renters versus home ownership, affluent versus low income, old timers and new interlopers... more often Whittier has chased most positive change away... and yet at every community meeting people complain that we are not getting the investment and city upgrades that the uptown or other neighborhoods get. Eat Street happened by more by outsiders then by locals - they saw the opportunity of the street.

I know this has been a bit of a rant... sorry for that - I have sat in city hall meeting rooms and neighborhood community rooms for almost 30 years and we are still making the same mistakes and defeating ourselves in the same old ways. Inclusion/inclusive processes can be great in terms of giving voice and community involvement - but too much and expecting too much from dozens (hundreds) of individual voices does not in anyway build consensus. I am not sure I have ever heard of a anyone being very satisfied in these types of processes... The model may be better to think about actual neighbors on your street - I may not like the house painted yellow - but I shouldn't assume that I get to veto their decisions... If they want to build a big addition (or have chickens) I do have a defined role that gives me a limited say in that process.

Just my two (five hundred and two) cents...

[FISHMANPET]

The person with the most free time shouldn't dominate the conversation. And those 10 or so old white people were the only ones that spoke at that public hearing. And they're going to think that there is zero support for the project because nobody in support physically made it to the meeting to speak in support. And they'll be wrong. But they've insulated themselves in their own bubble where the world revolves around them.

I agree, the neighborhood role needs to be clearly defined so they understand what their input is actually for.

Sent from my phone

[FISHMANPET]

More thoughts, now that I'm off the train:

There needs to be someone moderating these community groups. They're just sitting over there in Linden Hills having meetings and discussions amongst themselves and whipping themselves up into a furor.

In a more radical world, I'd say abolish small area plans and the zoning code as it currently stands. The community doesn't own this lot, yet they think they have final say over what does and doesn't get built there, and I think the small area plan enables that. (And maybe I'm wrong about that, maybe a small area plan has been used for good in other places, I don't know). And we're having this fight over a 4th or a 5th story like if you build it that tall the world is going to end, and man I don't know. But somehow zoning code as it is allows you to get quite far in the process proposing a 4 or 5 story building here. Maybe we need to tighten up the zoning code to make a 5 story building in a C1 zone as difficult as a 500 story building. Maybe use based zoning is worthless and there should be a form based code here instead, that would put a stop to this nonsense.

All that being said, the neighborhood has won this fight again and again and again, I don't know why each subsequent developer thinks this time will be different. Someone just build a turd of a 3 story building with a parking lot in front so we can all move on with our lives.

[Archiapolis]

The "neighborhood input" system is totally broken.

How, pray tell, would you fix it?

Neighborhood input is valuable. Neighborhood obstruction is not. But people often have different ideas of what those are. One person's obstruction really is another's effort to make something better happen.

I've laid it out in other threads (along with ideas from other smarter people); I go off-topic enough so I'll leave it at that. I honestly can't remember where it is anyway...

[FISHMANPET]

And the gary schiff speech is real: http://garyschiffspeech.com

[David Greene]

it gave individuals a say in matters that they had no training in (architecture, materials, land usage, traffic management and a myriad of other factors that affect the quality and success of projects

I agree with a lot of what you say, but this here I do not. It is *imperative* to give "outsiders" a look to check the work of the experts. Suburban development was created by "experts." People are experts about their own communities and their own needs.

'Tis a very difficult balance between allowing community input and making progress. I agree that defining roles is really important, but at the same time we shouldn't unnecessarily limit roles.

More and more I think there ought to be a requirement that community input processes reflect the makeup of the neighborhood. This avoids the "too much free time" problem Peter mentions and also allows historically underrepresented groups to have an equal say. I do not think the answer is limiting community input. The answer lies in upping the quality of the input.

[TroyGBiv]

I agree with you, David - I want people to have more understanding and input into tge aechitecture etc. I guess my thought here was more the idea that this process shouldnt be turned into a pick your mix at Ikea - it is better have have neighborhood direction that allows the design professionals to consider the feedback.
This latest Whittier kerfluffle over the Stevens and 26th 5 story residential building is a peefect example. i am getting a bunch of resolutions and petitions sent to me at WhittierNeighborhood.com that gets into design minutiae and wants to jump all around the process. That is where the community runs amuck

[twincitizen]

This was approved by the Planning Commission on Tuesday: http://minneapolismn.gov/meetings/plann ... S1P-148642

Get ready for the inevitable appeal to the City Council, as some of these people have limitless time and money to burn trying to stop this thing.

Given that the City Council (unanimously?) approved the previous 4-story proposal on this site, it seems like a given that this project won't meet any resistance. I'm guessing the appeals will fall flat at the Z&P committee.

[grant1simons2]

A little risky using Larry as a source, but I bumped into him in front of the former Star Tribune building and just had to talk to him about this project. If anyone watching the Z&P Committee meeting today, you saw that he was kind of at a loss for words in a good way. He said he has met with the developer, and has worked with them to make the building more attractive and fitting. He told me later today that they've changed from those black panels, to brick and copper colored tiles, like how other buildings are in the neighborhood. He told me that he really came to the realization that it's not the cities fault, but the fault of the neighborhood for just attacking the developer instead of talking to them in a peaceful matter. All in all, he's a really interesting dude.

[MNdible]

Larry who?

[Didier]

Most likely Flynt.

[grant1simons2]

Larry: https://youtu.be/duMBWMn3ksM?t=4m40s

[HiawathaGuy]

Development nearing for Linden Hills Famous Dave's site
http://www.startribune.com/development- ... 330292241/

[LakeCharles]

Interesting write-up on the appeals process:

http://www.southwestjournal.com/news/de ... 43rd-upton

[Wedgeguy]

According to this weekends Strib edition this is now apartment. Is this just Strib 3rd rate journalism or have they switched out from Condos to apartment when I was not looking??